OP
OP
Best screen resolution for RAW files
-
D
- Thread starter Nikon 2
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Canon 28mm f/3.5 LTM plus finder in case
- Started by Steve Goldstein
-
Want to Buy Durst Printo / or any Table Top Processor
- Started by juniejun
-
Want to Buy LF/WTB: Ilex No. 5 Shutter
- Started by Jurgen Estanislao
-
Want to Buy WTB Nikon F3 HP
- Started by Joe Jesus
-
For Sale Roll of Seal MT5 Dry Mount Tissue
- Started by Beevo
Forum statistics
MattKing
Moderator
Wow…
For fun, I copied your image, then re-sized it for uploading, and am now posting it again in the thread.
Whether or not it looks similar is almost a matter of chance.
It is the same with every image displayed here or any other place on the internet - there are so many intermediaries that can affect the results, it is like throwing the dice.
Anyways:
OP
OP
If all you are doing is viewing your own photos on your own computer, and if you like what you see, then forget about calibrating your monitor.
If you have been getting prints made, or are printing at home with an inkjet printer, and if you are happy with your prints, then forget about calibrating your monitor. (hey, it could happen. ;-)
If you are sharing your photos online, you may or may not want to calibrate your monitor, depending on how fussy you (and your viewing audience) are. The idea of color management is that both you and your viewer should see about the same thing. For example, when I view your photo (post #22) on my calibrated monitor, it looks a little bit dark (lacking in shadow detail), and a little bit "warm" (too yellow). But for all I know, that was your intention when you edited it, so I would never have said so unless you asked. I'm guessing most people on social media do not think much about color casts and shadow detail.
If you feel like you need to calibrate your monitor, there is software calibration, and hardware calibration. Hardware calibration requires buying a device that objectively reads the colors and tones as they are reproduced by your screen. Software calibration depends on the ability of your eyes to read what your monitor is doing -- so it's free, but more subjective (less accurate).
I believe your iMac came with software for calibrating your monitor. There are instructions for how to use that software here:
https://www.lifewire.com/use-mac-display-calibrator-assistant-for-accurate-color-2260919
I think I got pretty good results using Apple's software calibration back when using CRT monitors, but after iMacs switched to LED monitors, I think the process got harder, and my results were not as good. Now I calibrate my iMac monitor with a hardware device -- which cost me about $150(US) when I bought mine back in 2020.
If you have been getting prints made, or are printing at home with an inkjet printer, and if you are happy with your prints, then forget about calibrating your monitor. (hey, it could happen. ;-)
If you are sharing your photos online, you may or may not want to calibrate your monitor, depending on how fussy you (and your viewing audience) are. The idea of color management is that both you and your viewer should see about the same thing. For example, when I view your photo (post #22) on my calibrated monitor, it looks a little bit dark (lacking in shadow detail), and a little bit "warm" (too yellow). But for all I know, that was your intention when you edited it, so I would never have said so unless you asked. I'm guessing most people on social media do not think much about color casts and shadow detail.
If you feel like you need to calibrate your monitor, there is software calibration, and hardware calibration. Hardware calibration requires buying a device that objectively reads the colors and tones as they are reproduced by your screen. Software calibration depends on the ability of your eyes to read what your monitor is doing -- so it's free, but more subjective (less accurate).
I believe your iMac came with software for calibrating your monitor. There are instructions for how to use that software here:
https://www.lifewire.com/use-mac-display-calibrator-assistant-for-accurate-color-2260919
I think I got pretty good results using Apple's software calibration back when using CRT monitors, but after iMacs switched to LED monitors, I think the process got harder, and my results were not as good. Now I calibrate my iMac monitor with a hardware device -- which cost me about $150(US) when I bought mine back in 2020.
OP
OP
OP
OP
OP
OP
Looking back at the images, they now seem more vibrant…
Just for a point of comparison since it doesn't seem like you ar taking advantage of the flexibility of RAW files, have you looked at jpeg files produced by your camera? Most cameras today allow you to personalize an amount of color saturation and sharpness, plus will have landscape, portrait (the actual subject matter, not orientation) and neutral settings that can be applied, all done in-camera allowing you to get results that please you without having to do any post-production on the images. They also offer film simulations that sometimes even look like the characteristics of certain film stocks.
Interestingly, it looks a bit muddy and not like the screen shot you posted earlier.
OP
OP
Did you made adjustments to the photo after you calibrated your monitor? Are you happy with the result? If so, you need not do anything else. Just keep shooting, that's the point.After calibration…
OP
OP
OP
OP
OP
OP
The image looks more colorful, with more contrast and color shading…
This calibration rivals Kodak Ektar 100…
You can't view a RAW file. It contains unprocessed (raw) data captured by your camera. You will need to demosaic the data and apply other transforms to turn it into an image.
The resolution is irrelevant since a decent digital camera has more pixels than the best monitor. As others suggested you need a calibrated monitor made for graphics design to edit your photos. They are more expensive but you are not likely to replace it in many years. The resolution on these monitors is enough to comfortably work with your images.
The best way to view your images is to print them and hang on a wall in a good gallery.
The resolution is irrelevant since a decent digital camera has more pixels than the best monitor. As others suggested you need a calibrated monitor made for graphics design to edit your photos. They are more expensive but you are not likely to replace it in many years. The resolution on these monitors is enough to comfortably work with your images.
The best way to view your images is to print them and hang on a wall in a good gallery.
OP
OP
MattKing
Moderator
I need to buy a gallery first…
A bit of free space on a wall works fine!
Lots of good examples in this thread: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...-photographs-on-the-wall.188716/#post-2498694
High resolution screen is desirable but not as important as good color rendition. You can view only part of the image at a time.
OP
OP
Ok, I get it that I can’t view a RAW file.
I’m viewing images shot in RAW from the MD 262 on my computer screen…
I’m viewing images shot in RAW from the MD 262 on my computer screen…
OP
OP
The color got much better after the calibration…
You do need to calibrate but a screen with wide gamut and doesn't change the color and brightness with viewing angle is better. I found screen with hardware calibration are better than those can only support software calibration.
MattKing
Moderator
Don't forget that if you adjust your monitor settings in a way that causes a digital file to render with brighter colour and saturation, if and when you edit that file to your taste and then share that file with someone else, their monitor settings may render it with less bright colour and saturation.
For calibration to make a positive difference with shared work, both ends of the shared transaction must be calibrated to the same standards.
That is the advantage of hardware calibration aids - they take out much of the variability between different systems.
For calibration to make a positive difference with shared work, both ends of the shared transaction must be calibrated to the same standards.
That is the advantage of hardware calibration aids - they take out much of the variability between different systems.
OP
OP
The only cravat is the reason I went digital was not to spend money on development…
After the calibration, all the colors became more saturated…
MattKing
Moderator
That merely affects how they appear to you on your computer. It is like seasoning to taste a recipe that only you will eat from.After the calibration, all the colors became more saturated…
Do you have a trusted friend who you share image files with? If so, how do the results edited to your taste and then shared with them appear to them?
Don't forget that it would be useless to share RAW files. They need to be saved in a format like tiff, jpeg or other display format before sharing.
OP
OP
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |