Digital BW, The Print

Yes, and what industry is that? Signage, Fine art, placemats? I think this
list is a fine art dedicated list. There may be some that are general use
but for the most part, the B&W printers asking and answering questions here
are sounding to me as if their prints will be hanging in an office, home or
museum. I find it most unlikely to place industry standards from another
industry, even if closely related, to this one. One certainly needs to be
able to work to the best available workflow, but I think that some are
missing the point that just because the calibration systems have 5000, 6500,
and 9300 that somehow we should be working there. There may be limitations
to our equipment due to a lack of vision by the manufacturers or our
acceptance of them. 

 

You can not have a fair evaluation of a print unless you look at it in the
intended lighting conditions and that includes not only color temperature
but also the amount of light falling on the piece. There are few artists
that have the control over that aspect of their work. It may be a bit much
to include a short blurb about the appropriate light to view your art but it
will none the less inform the buyer how it should be viewed and any changes
to that are entirely up to them. 

 

 

Professional photolabs have for years used light boxes for viewing their
prints to ensure the customer that it meets the labs standards. Those
standards may not mean much if the photographer hasn't made an adjustment to
their customers intended lighting conditions or at least their own standard.
The people that need to be dragging their collective behinds from one
lighting condition to another are the ink manufactures, paper manufacturers,
.  to provide printers with a set of products that don't look so so
different from lighting A to lighting B. Printers need to keep in mind OBAs
are nice if you are after blazing whites when your paper is under
appropriate conditions. You can profile all day long but the real world
always wins and that is not to say that profiling and standards are a waste
of time, they only help get the crowd looking at a tighter circle of light.


 

 

Eric Neilsen Photography

4101 Commerce Street

Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226

http://e.neilsen.home.att.net

http://ericneilsenphotography.com

Skype ejprinter

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
CDTobie@...
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 8:45 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Light source for evaluating prints?

 


In a message dated 1/29/07 7:39:49 PM, e.neilsen2@worldnet
<mailto:e.neilsen2%40worldnet.att.net> .att.net writes:

> I view my prints in the studio which has
> several lighting stations; daylight bulbs both tungsten and florescent,
> tungsten track lighting, the hallway outside the studio which can offer
open
> shade and direct sun. To balance a print to a standard that NO ONE lives
in,
> or displays their prints in is crazy. 
> 

Discussions of a viewing box don't relate to cross checking your prints
under 
varying lightsources (which is certainly appropriate) they relate to using a

broadspectrum light source that renders all colors well, with a medium color

balance, so that you can see what you are doing effectively. And while you
are 
at it, if you use a color temperature that matches the standard for the 
industry you work in, then what you see in your box will be a pretty good 
representation of what others see in theirs. So yes, view your prints by the
bathroom 
skylight and the bedroom nightlight as crosschecks of what lots of blue or
lots 
of yellow will do to your paper and inks, but don't assume that this 
eliminates the need of something approximating an industry standard viewing
box.

C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision Business Unit
Datacolor Inc.
CDTobie@colorvision <mailto:CDTobie%40colorvision.com> .com
www.colorvision.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]