Digital BW, The Print

Hi

I was just trying to figure out how to do that with my Eye One.  The problem
is you don't want to take an illuminated reading just a luminance reading.
I can't figure out how to get my Eye One to take a spot luminance reading.
I was also just reading an Apple technical brief on their LCD monitors and
one of their arguments for LCD is exactly the issue you raise - CRTs reflect
light off the glass.  Another way to compare your display is to get its
(albeit marketing guff) contrast ratio.  Apple says their 23inch LCD has a
brightness (best white point) of 270cd/m2 and a contrast ratio of 400:1
meaning the black point is 0.6cd/m2 - not far from the actual measured by my
Eye One.  (By the way, my Eye One includes and ambient light test.  The
issue is not too much light but too little in my case ie the ambient light
is not enough to match my display white point of D50. Light reflection on
the face of an LCD is almost a non-issue.)

Someone out there must be able to convert 0.4cd/m2 into a density figure.
That's my black point.

I agree with your feelings re glass.  There is no glass in front of any of
my prints in my house.

Steve


> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>

> 
> Steve,
> 
>> ...
>> The unfortunate reality is that the paper isn't as white
>> and the black isn't as black.
> 
> I'm sure there will always be less than a perfect match between monitor and
> paper print.  However, I'd be curious to see what the real world differences
> are.
> 
> If you have a good spot meter, put a full screen image on your monitor that
> is half 100% black and half 0% white.  With the room lights set as you
> usually work, and wearing the clothes that you'd usually wear, measure with
> your photographic spot meter the white and black halves of the image.  I'd
> be curious what values you find.
> 
> What I've found with my CRT is that just like the glass over my prints, the
> reflections off the monitor significantly reduce the dynamic range that is,
> in the real world, accessible to me.
> 
> LCDs have a brighter white that will make them, as a class, brighter.  What
> happens to the other end of the range, however, is not clear to me.
> 
> Additionally, try the same spot-metering experiment with real world prints
> in typical viewing environments.  What I've found is that my monitor and
> print ranges are not that different.
> 
> Our spectrophotometers' and other instruments "perfect" lighting and
> "viewing" conditions exaggerate the actual viewable ranges of many media.
> That is, I believe, why many say matte prints with a dmax of 1.65 often look
> better than a glossy print with a 2+ dmax.  In the real world the
> reflections wipe out the blacks we work so hard to achieve.  (Thus my
> no-glass display preference, but that is another story...)
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>