>
>------------------------------
>
>From: Winsor Crosby <wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [OM] Color temperature
>Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 20:56:57 -0700
>
>
>I am afraid that is just incomprehensible to me without an explanation.
>Why is the world would you color correct your image on a 6500k monitor
>in order to get what you want in a print viewed under 5000k light?
>
>
>Winsor
>Long Beach, CA
>USA
>On Jun 4, 2004, at 8:33 PM, Stephen Scharf wrote:
Winsor,
If you need a detailed answer from a pro, it would be best to post in
Rob Galbraith and ask Ethan that....but, my understanding is that
this is the recommended procedure because it is, empirically, and not
theoretically, what most people find give the best results most of
the time; people find that when they use 6500K on the monitor that
gives the best match to a print from an RGB output device (asssuming
the correct profile is used) when viewed at 5000K; unless of course,
one is outputting to CMYK on a U.S. press, where, as I've said
previously, one often uses 5000K for the color temperature.
Here is what Bruce Fraser, Fred Bunting, and Chris Murphy of "Real
World Color Management", amongst the world's leading experts in color
management, have to say about it:
"The three of us unaminously recommend that you calibrate your
monitor to 6500K even though many people think 5000K as the standard
viewing white point in graphic arts. Here's why. The eye has a
tremendous ability to adapt to different white-point environments.
However, the eye works best when it's operating in a white point
closest to that environment most familiar to it through millions of
years of evolution-namley daylight. So the discussion quickly reduces
to which of the two most commonly used daylight standards, D50 (5000K
correlated color temperature) or D65 (6500K correlated color
temperature), is best. If you have a D50 viewing booth, this might
tip the scales towards setting your monitor to 5000K so that your
monitor and print viewing environments have identical white points.
But long experience has told us that this doesn't work the way the
theory would seem to predict. A second factor is that many
uncalibrated CRT's, especially older CRT's models, are pretty darn
blue, with a color temperature closer to 9300K, though the better
current CRT's have a native white point closer to 6500K. In either
case, to move the to 5000K, we have to limit the output of the
display's blue channel, lowering the overall brightness and dynamic
range. This is why so many poeople (including us) often find 5000K
monitor to be a bit too dim, dingy, and well....too darned yellow.
So, instead, it's worth remembering the sentence that started off
this explanation. The eye has a tremendous ability to adapt to
different white-point environments. The eye takes a little bit of
time to adjust to a change in brightness, but it has little trouble
in looking at a color image in a 6500K monitor then moving to view
the same image printed out and mounted in a viewing booth. It's the
relationship *within* the image or page that you're evaluating. As
long as you give the eye a good adaptation environment, and both
environments are of approximately equivalent brightness, then you
should have no problems."
-Stephen
--
2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic!
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|