Ideal Monitor Brightness for Photo Editing.

[Wayne Fox]

How does a 5 year old thread get resurrected? 

[Schewe]

How does a 5 year old thread get resurrected?

People with way too much time on their hands? Just guessing...

[BobShaw]

That makes absolutely zero sense...
Monitor white should match paper white

I would reply with that makes absolutely zero sense.
Every paper is a different white.
Are you saying that you recalibrate you monitor for every paper? What if you don't print at all?

Anyway as just pointed out this is past use by.

[D Fosse]

Every paper is a different white.

Yes, and that's why it's so useful to keep several calibration targets for different papers and scenarios. Not all calibration software lets you switch between them easily, though.

But even so, you can with little effort hit a "generic" paper color that is way better than simply punching in D65 and some arbitrary brightness value that someone says will work.

If you don't print, paper white is still the only realistic reference. Some advocate D65 in this case, but I don't agree with that, mostly because different sensor/panel combinations will produce different visual results. Everyone who has tried to match two different make/model monitors can confirm this. You need different numbers to match them.

Targeting paper effectively bypasses this potential problem.

[digitaldog]

Every paper is a different white.
Are you saying that you recalibrate you monitor for every paper?

Yes, the papers whites are different and yes, you need to produce a WP calibration and if possible, contrast ratio  for each paper! And that's why having software like SpectraView and a smart display system that allows one to load a calibration and it's associated ICC display profile on the fly for soft proofing paper A rather than paper C is so useful.

[BobShaw]

LOL. Printer profiles correct for different papers. That is why we have them.
Please keep doing what you are doing though if it works for you.
I however will continue to calibrate my monitor to correctly display as best it can what the RGB values say.
That is what a monitor profile does.

[digitaldog]

I however will continue to calibrate my monitor to correctly display as best it can what the RGB values say.

What do RGB values say? They being just piles of numbers.

[howardm]

Yes, the papers whites are different and yes, you need to produce a WP calibration and if possible, contrast ratio  for each paper! And that's why having software like SpectraView and a smart display system that allows one to load a calibration and it's associated ICC display profile on the fly for soft proofing paper A rather than paper C is so useful.

Andrew,  are you referring to the Multiprofiler ability to load a paper profile into the monitor to set the entire display as one big softproof?  If so, how well does that work vs. PS's softproof feature?  I must admit I've not explored that piece of NEC functionality.

[digitaldog]

Andrew,  are you referring to the Multiprofiler ability to load a paper profile into the monitor to set the entire display as one big softproof? 

Nope, SpectraView, multiple calibrations and profiles for differing paper's whites and contrast ratio's.

[TylerB]

not for the sake of argument, but for the sake of discussion and information.. I'd like to know how setting monitor calibrations for paper specifics differs from using the paper white and black point soft proof options, pros and cons. Also, using both together?? I've asked this, and seen it asked by others, but little in depth discussion.

[D Fosse]

Printer profiles correct for different papers.

Profiles just remap white to white.

Note the different white and black points in the attached screenshot. These different targets can be switched with a single click. This is how you deal with different papers.

[digitaldog]

not for the sake of argument, but for the sake of discussion and information.. I'd like to know how setting monitor calibrations for paper specifics differs from using the paper white and black point soft proof options, pros and cons. Also, using both together?? I've asked this, and seen it asked by others, but little in depth discussion.

There's lots of differences. Take contrast ratio. Your display is fixed and huge compared to the print. Calibrating various contrast ratio's eliminates this and further, when you do soft proof, the burden and ugliness of the simulation for paper and ink upon the profile, (which should be on), is lessened and tuned. The GUI elements undergo the ratio via calibration in the panel and don't look too bright. 

[Jeff-Grant]

Andrew, have you written anything on profiling for different papers? I currently use D50 and 0.3CD for soft proofing B&W which work pretty well. I also set my screen colour to paper white of the paper that I am using. If I knew a way to profile each paper, I would do it in a flash.

[digitaldog]

Andrew, have you written anything on profiling for different papers? I currently use D50 and 0.3CD for soft proofing B&W which work pretty well. I also set my screen colour to paper white of the paper that I am using. If I knew a way to profile each paper, I would do it in a flash.

IF it matches and you're happy, you're all set.

[BobShaw]

Profiles just remap white to white.

No. Totally wrong.
Every colour is remapped and every device combination has a different map to the device independent LAB space in the computer. There is no direct relationship between monitor and printer.
Quoting from Les Walkling - "The first requirement of colour management is therefore to have an accurate description of how each device in a colour managed workflow reproduces colour. This description is called a profile."

They will all then just work together.

[TylerB]

There's lots of differences. Take contrast ratio. Your display is fixed and huge compared to the print. Calibrating various contrast ratio's eliminates this and further, when you do soft proof, the burden and ugliness of the simulation for paper and ink upon the profile, (which should be on), is lessened and tuned. The GUI elements undergo the ratio via calibration in the panel and don't look too bright.

so, just to clarifiy.. as with printer setups and consequent profiling.. the less work the profile conversions have to do because the hardware is close.. the better the result?
I don't believe either display profiling apps I have give contrast ratio options.

As a side not to that issue, my most problematic dispaly to print mismatches are near neutrals, like pastels and important skin tones, I think there remains a problem with only a single axis white point adjustment, but I've heard little mention of that over the years.

[D Fosse]

Every colour is remapped and every device combination has a different map to the device independent LAB space in the computer.

Profiles could remap white to something else, and some special profiles probably do. As you say it does go through Lab where everything is assigned absolute values.

But they usually don't.

Try for yourself - open a file with pure white, and convert to various printer or monitor profiles. Read the white area, it usually comes out 255/255/255. It does with all my profiles here, monitor or printer.

As for the calibration targets, the white point affects overall tonal balance. Gray neutrals all the way down are adjusted to the same chromaticity as the white point.

[GWGill]

As you say it does go through Lab where everything is assigned absolute values.

Well - no. ICC uses XYZ or L*a*b* to encode the device characteristic, but what comes out of a CMM can be any tri-stimulus value, depending on how it is constructed and configured, and it might be white relative or absolute depending on the intent. And L*a*b* is more naturally a relative space - one of the inputs to the conversion to/from L*a*b* is the white point.

[digitaldog]

so, just to clarifiy.. as with printer setups and consequent profiling.. the less work the profile conversions have to do because the hardware is close.. the better the result?

Depends. First of all, the preview seen in the soft proof, from the printer profile is a separate table from that which the converted data is sent to the printer. Are they in sync? Can that preview table produce the best soft proof possible without the use of display calibration in the mix? All this stuff on paper is supposed to work but of course, often doesn't (just look at the discussion of white point mapping!).
In the old old (OS9) days, we had good tools to edit just the preview portion of an ICC profile if necessary. Useful to produce a really excellent visual match.

[BobShaw]

LAB is device independant and encompasses the entire spectrum, including colours outside human vision. It scientifically specifies a colour. Not just in photography but in a wide range of industries like automotive and household paint, dyes, textiles, plastics etc.

An ICC  profile connects a device to the device independant LAB which is called the profile connection space. So camera profile converts to LAB values and monitor profile displays them as RGB and the printer profile prints them. The various profiles do not relate to each other at all.