On Tue, 3 Apr 2007 16:34:06 -0700, in rec.photo.digital "MarkČ"
<mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote:
>I'm curious to discover what people's monitors are registering/not
>registering in terms of shadow details and highlight details.
>
>Please indicate a whether you can read the text in each of the following:
>
>Dark image sample:
>http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/76619046/original
>Light image sample:
>http://upload.pbase.com/markuson/ima...28594/original
>
>This becomes significant when discussing some aspets of photos that are
>shared here.
>
>Thanks for you input...and...no cheating!
The first question to ask is what you want us to view this in as most all
web browsers are not color managed. Do you want them viewed in one's
browser or dl'd and viewed in a color managed app for your course of
discussion?
--
Ed Ruf (Usenet2@EdwardGRuf.com) http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photog...ral/index.html
Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!) wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Apr 2007 16:34:06 -0700, in rec.photo.digital "MarkČ"
> <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote:
>
>> I'm curious to discover what people's monitors are registering/not
>> registering in terms of shadow details and highlight details.
>>
>> Please indicate a whether you can read the text in each of the
>> following:
>>
>> Dark image sample:
>> http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/76619046/original
>> Light image sample:
>> http://upload.pbase.com/markuson/ima...28594/original
>>
>> This becomes significant when discussing some aspets of photos that
>> are shared here.
>>
>> Thanks for you input...and...no cheating!
>
> The first question to ask is what you want us to view this in as most
> all web browsers are not color managed. Do you want them viewed in
> one's browser or dl'd and viewed in a color managed app for your
> course of discussion?
I'm interested in both, but the relevance for shared image viewing revolves
around browsers...so that's the first question. While it's true that most
browsers aren't color-managed specifically, a calibrated monitor will also
have a positive impact on web-viewing color/brightness/etc. as well.
In any event... All three of my calibrated monitors see the text within
color-aware apps...but also in I.E. and Firefox.
Any comments are welcome. I'm really trying to get a feel for what people
are seeing...or not seeing.
In article <LvBQh.90622$ZA5.34574@newsfe15.phx>,
"MarkČ" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote:
> I'm curious to discover what people's monitors are registering/not
> registering in terms of shadow details and highlight details.
>
> Please indicate a whether you can read the text in each of the following:
>
> Dark image sample:
> http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/76619046/original
At first I couldn't see anything in this, while I was waiting for PS to
start up I started discerning something but not enough to read it.
However I adjust my screen, I can' read that. Only PS lets me adjust it
enough to read.
> In any event... All three of my calibrated monitors see the text within
> color-aware apps...but also in I.E. and Firefox.
>
Hang on...
I can't read the text in the light image when viewing in a non
colour-aware application. It has sRGB embedded. If I open it in
photoshop and allow PS to convert the image from sRGB to aRGB, then I
can see it.
But I'm struggling to see how this relates to anything useful, as that's
surely just more to do with the way colour conversion engine used by
Adobe in PS works, than any measurement of monitor qualities.
"MarkČ" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote:
> I'm curious to discover what people's monitors are registering/not
> registering in terms of shadow details and highlight details.
>
> Please indicate a whether you can read the text in each of the following:
>
> Dark image sample:
> http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/76619046/original
> Light image sample:
> http://upload.pbase.com/markuson/ima...28594/original
>
> This becomes significant when discussing some aspets of photos that are
> shared here.
>
> Thanks for you input...and...no cheating!
Hehe. Nasty test. Thanks for putting those up: it got me thinking about how
to test my printer.
Without cheating, I can't see either.
With cheating (looking at the values), I don't see any problem with not
being able to see either.
Rambling follows, but feel free to flame or comment.
In Zone System terms, anything under 10% luminosity is pure black (your
black image is 5%), and anything over 90% luminosity is pure white (your
light image is 99%).
(The Zone System divides the world into nine Zones, zones I to IX, with zone
V being 18% gray. This maps directly onto luminosity percentages in a gamma
correct image as 10% to 90% with 50% being 18% gray. Very convenient. Less
convenient is using a 5 (or is it 7?) stop gray scale recommended for
digital imaging by this guy's books: http://www.spotmetering.com/)
Getting 9 zones (10% to 90% luminosity in 10% steps*, Doh!) on a print is
the holy grail in the Zone System, and expecting more than that is a tad
unreasonable. (I need to make test patterns with various numbers of zones to
see how well my printers do.)
*: Looking at things this way, the +/- 5% band around each of the 10% to 90%
points are the nine zones of the Zone System. Well, not really. A region of
an image that you intend to place on a given zone should have an average
luminosity of that zone.
frederick wrote:
> MarkČ wrote:
>
>> In any event... All three of my calibrated monitors see the text
>> within color-aware apps...but also in I.E. and Firefox.
>>
> Hang on...
> I can't read the text in the light image when viewing in a non
> colour-aware application. It has sRGB embedded. If I open it in
> photoshop and allow PS to convert the image from sRGB to aRGB, then I
> can see it.
> But I'm struggling to see how this relates to anything useful, as that's
> surely just more to do with the way colour conversion engine used by
> Adobe in PS works, than any measurement of monitor qualities.
No, I take that back. Although I could read it in PS, and thought that
I couldn't read it in my web browser, if I looked more closely then I
could read it just as well in my web browser. The difficulty reading it
was more to do with my eyes than monitor or application used to view
it. You've just got to look closely.
Incidentally, the colour conversion from sRGB to aRGB results in the
same displayed value for the text - 253/253/253.
"Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!)" <egruf_usenet2@cox.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Apr 2007 16:34:06 -0700, in rec.photo.digital "MarkČ"
> <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote:
>>Please indicate a whether you can read the text in each of the following:
>>
>>Dark image sample:
>>http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/76619046/original
>>Light image sample:
>>http://upload.pbase.com/markuson/ima...28594/original
>
> The first question to ask is what you want us to view this in as most all
> web browsers are not color managed. Do you want them viewed in one's
> browser or dl'd and viewed in a color managed app for your course of
> discussion?
Color management shouldn't make a difference: these are B&W images. What
should make a difference is gamma (there used to be a Mac/peecee difference
here).
David J. Littleboy wrote:
> "Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!)" <egruf_usenet2@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Apr 2007 16:34:06 -0700, in rec.photo.digital "MarkČ"
>> <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote:
>
>>> Please indicate a whether you can read the text in each of the
>>> following: Dark image sample:
>>> http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/76619046/original
>>> Light image sample:
>>> http://upload.pbase.com/markuson/ima...28594/original
>>
>> The first question to ask is what you want us to view this in as
>> most all web browsers are not color managed. Do you want them viewed
>> in one's browser or dl'd and viewed in a color managed app for your
>> course of discussion?
>
> Color management shouldn't make a difference: these are B&W images.
> What should make a difference is gamma (there used to be a Mac/peecee
> difference here).
>
> David J. Littleboy
> Tokyo, Japan
Calibrating a monitor should take contrast and brightness into account,
though, which will definitely effect this image.
Issues have come up where some people are seeing no shadow detail in
someone's images...while others do. This is why I'm curious to see how
sensitive people's monitors are...
David J. Littleboy wrote:
> "MarkČ" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote:
>> I'm curious to discover what people's monitors are registering/not
>> registering in terms of shadow details and highlight details.
>>
>> Please indicate a whether you can read the text in each of the
>> following: Dark image sample:
>> http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/76619046/original
>> Light image sample:
>> http://upload.pbase.com/markuson/ima...28594/original
>>
>> This becomes significant when discussing some aspets of photos that
>> are shared here.
>>
>> Thanks for you input...and...no cheating!
>
> Hehe. Nasty test. Thanks for putting those up: it got me thinking
> about how to test my printer.
>
> Without cheating, I can't see either.
>
> With cheating (looking at the values), I don't see any problem with
> not being able to see either.
>
> Rambling follows, but feel free to flame or comment.
>
> In Zone System terms, anything under 10% luminosity is pure black
> (your black image is 5%), and anything over 90% luminosity is pure
> white (your light image is 99%).
>
> (The Zone System divides the world into nine Zones, zones I to IX,
> with zone V being 18% gray. This maps directly onto luminosity
> percentages in a gamma correct image as 10% to 90% with 50% being 18%
> gray. Very convenient. Less convenient is using a 5 (or is it 7?)
> stop gray scale recommended for digital imaging by this guy's books:
> http://www.spotmetering.com/)
> Getting 9 zones (10% to 90% luminosity in 10% steps*, Doh!) on a
> print is the holy grail in the Zone System, and expecting more than
> that is a tad unreasonable. (I need to make test patterns with
> various numbers of zones to see how well my printers do.)
>
> *: Looking at things this way, the +/- 5% band around each of the 10%
> to 90% points are the nine zones of the Zone System. Well, not
> really. A region of an image that you intend to place on a given zone
> should have an average luminosity of that zone.
>
> David J. Littleboy
> Tokyo, Japan
Hehe... I should have expected you to start throwing numbers around. I
always enjoy you input.
It's just interesting to me...since some claim other's posted images either
lack...or include detail that others do/don't see. Obviously there will be
wide ranging differences via internet viewing, since most monitors aren't
calibrated at all...but for those who do calibrate...it's an interesting
exercise.
What does your monitor show you? 
Linear Mode
