One of the bigger problems for me with calibration is the length of time the monitor is on, once the it has been on and warmed up I really don't have much of a problem and a week without calibration is not a problem
May 18, 2023
439
-
-
And the issue that most people ignore is keeping the viewing conditions constant.
-
same, its a nightmare shooting 7 lights with various diffuses, coloured costumes. ambient outdoor light . led ambient studio ceiling lights, transparency film gobos i make and project through 40 y/old 35mm slr cameras. 🤔 you know the best calibration/ wb tool ever invented ? the latest 2023 ACR subject masking tool 😄😆
-
exactly . i will give it away (the other member was getting frustrated finding info) the best site to find this information is www.eizo.com/products/coloredge/cg2420/
if i could afford one i would buy one but i cant 😌
great read and they dont hide what they do to over come the problem of calibration. -
What would you say is the best WB.
A lot of time people that have problems with the colors they produce have very little to do with WB
-
Oh, you mean "raw data as provided by the camera", no?
That's what I get for jumping into such a morass of discourse..
-
Not sure of that is always true but it seems the safe way to bet.
So....on topic...I was on DPR the other day and a guy said that he will not be buying the Z8 because it does not have a raw histogram. Is that where we are today? It almost seems like they just made their best camera ever for most and people turn their nose up at it for this? It's like people haven't been getting proper exposures for the last 20 years.
-
"Proper exposure" refers to the exposure that makes a capture look "normal" in "normal viewing conditions", with default conversion. The reason people want raw histograms is because proper exposure isn't necessarily the best compromise between exposure and clipping, and a raw histogram could reduce the guessing as to how to get the most exposure without losing highlight detail.
Proper is not the same as "best". Some folks at some times aim for "better than proper" exposure.
-
Really? Because no Nikon, Sony or Canon has raw histogram.
-
Same reason I'm not buying Hubble.
-
I think 'proper exposure' is the result of jargon panic. People like to use jargon for various reasons, but if they get the usage wrong it makes them look that bit less expert. In the days of film, 'correct exposure' had quite a closely defined meaning dating from Hurter and Driffield, who coined the term originally and whose work included marked-up HD diagrams showing exactly what they meant by 'correct exposure' (which was essentially, keeping the range of exposures so far as was possible on the most linear part of the negative's characteristic). Most people nowadays know nothing of that usage, but still like to use the term - however they get picked up on what they mean by it - so they'll fudge a bit by saying 'proper exposure'.
-
Yeah, I think he is just waiting until someone offers it. His prerogative I guess but it seems pretty nitpicky.
-
Elsewhere, I coined an acronym "SPV" (Standard Photographic Vague) to indicate such or similar talk.
Aah ... Hurter and Driffield ...
-
I can see the point of it. As a DSLR user who uses UniWB and a customized Picture Control to evaluate my Raw exposures, I would find using those to see a scene intolerable and even counterproductive. Since I have an OVF I have the option to view the framing of the shot through that. I just pulled the trigger on a lightly used (under 15,000 shutter actuations) D850 and I'm looking forward to using its Live View on my T/S lenses, so it will be interesting to see how that works in coordination with the aforementioned WB and Picture Controls (I should note here that while they aren't too bad on my D800, for whatever reason, the settings on my D500 that best reflect the Raw exposure are ghastly).
-
I too admired the principle of UniWB and installed it a la Guillermo Luijck on a Sigma SD10. Sadly, I found it difficult to interpret with the dim non-live 1.8" LCD and that horrible "Sports" OVF (pentaprism from their previous 35mm film camera with the outside greyed out to a 1.7 crop).
Mirror-less Live-View is so helpful these days. eh?
-
When working with T/S lenses I have found the D800 Live View helpful, the D500 much more so, and it's one of the reasons I'm looking forward to the D850.
-
You really should define what you mean by exposure and proper exposure because they clearly mean something different to you when compared to what they mean to me.
Nowadays proper exposure for many people means an image lightness they desire.
But I can output my desired image lightness without using the proper exposure* if less than optimal raw data for the image is acceptable.
The proper exposure* for me is putting as much light on the sensor as possible within my dof and blur requirements without clipping important highlights.
This maximises the quality of the raw data resulting in minimising visible noise in the final image.
I then set the proper image lightness in post.
* exposure - amount of light that struck the sensor per unit area while the shutter was open.
-
Without defining latitude?
