Digital BW, The Print

on 8/30/2002 12:10 PM, DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com at
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com wrote:

> Message: 9
> Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 11:20:21 -0500
> From: Jerry Olson <jerryolson@...>
> Subject: Re: Time to dive in
> 
> I have a Mitsubishi with a trinitron tube, and I have always used 1.8
> gamma. If I used 2.2 I'd have to reprofile everything, no?
> 
> What would be the advantage to using 2.2?
> 
> Jerry

I keep my monitor set to 2.2 for two reasons:

1. when editing video, it displays an image closer to tv gamma.
2. when viewing on the web, I assume most images are done at 2.2 gamma.


Of course it's kind of a moot point for photography and printing as
photoshop automatically converts from the working space to the monitor space
on the fly, making images in 1.8 working spaces look the same as images in
2.2 spaces on both 1.8 and 2.2 monitors.

The main difference is the way in which the curves controls (and others) in
photoshop effect an image.  The same curve will effect a 1.8 workspace image
in a different way than a 2.2 workspace image.

I learned this lesson converting working spaces with adjustment layers not
yet rendered and the  conversion changed the look of the image on screen.  I
now flatten before conversions.

So Jerry, if you changed your monitor to 2.2 you wouldn't need to reprofile
anything at all, except your monitor. The monitor profile is not in the loop
for printing from photoshop, just the working space (source profile) and the
printer space (destination profile).


-Bruce

Visit my website at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~smthopr