D'Oh! (Two Little Extra Notes)

Just two little extra notes to the foregoing about monitors...I feel rather like a dope, but I'm going to mention it, just in case anyone out there doesn't know it already. The downward-facing ports on the back of my NEC monitor were really hard to see and even harder to get at with the monitor set up in its usual position. Which bothered me. Until I realized, while watching a video tonight, that the monitor turns to a portrait orientation. Once turned, the ports are all on the side, and become easy to see and easy to access.

Ahem. Now you know, in case you didn't.

And secondly, if you are interested in the Datacolor SpyderX Pro Colorimeter so you too can experience the joys of a calibrated monitor, it's on sale at Amazon for $40 off. At B&H too. I assume by "Holiday Savings," they mean Thanksgiving, Homer said sternly!

Homer Mike

Comments

[Stephen Scharf]

Yep, er, um...the portrait orientation feature is described in the manual. ;-)

Cheers.

(I owned that same display...)

[Francisco Cubas]

I'm following the discussion on monitors from a very distant point now.

I absolutely get it. People with an educated eye will enjoy seeing their work in a professional monitor (I know a did).

I2 years ago I run a little fine printing service. I used a colorimeter and suffered countless hours of doubt and anxiety about color spaces, profiles, and matte vs lustre vs glossy papers.

I no longer make serious printing of my work. Is hard to preserve paper in the tropics, and in the third world (and I live in the outskirts of the third world) is pretty hard to sell prints, so you usually end up storing them for yourself.

And I just stop caring too much about the exact look of digital files. You upload them to the web and there are just too many devices (or services) in wich your public will see them. It's impossible to control that.

But even with prints, your post about the museums just shows that an author can never control the final experience of the public. I also remember all the photo books I read in my youth, how many of them were really worth of the original prints? And how few people in the world has put eyes in an original print of Ansel Adams? Must of us just know him by second rate reproductions.

¿So why keep on obsessing about it? I know, I know, is part of this game that we love. But at this stage of my life I just don't loss sleep about that particular point.

The perfect experience without noise between an author and the public is a very elusive thing, maybe impossible must of the time. I just buyed an OLED tv, and watch the last version in 4k of Apocalypsis Now Final Cut, made directly from the original negative. The photography is glorious. But how many people has seen it like that in the last 40 years? Must of the viewers around the world in his time, with bad copies, old projectors and bad screens surely never had the full experience.

And I will not open the Pandora's box of music, because you know much more than me about it, but it's a similar tale (maybe worse).

So there you have it. Not a clear point at all, but some messy musings about the subject. A lot of noise for sure.

[Not THAT Ross Cameron]

Hi Mike,
On a slightly related tangent, I remember seeing an article about how the original colour modelling (I may have the incorrect term) was incorrect. I remember reading a little further, and there was some discussion about it not being as big a fuss as first made out - joys of the academic pressure to get published.
Can the global TOP Fact Checkers confirm if there was anything in it, or if no real practical impact.
Apologies if there has already been a thorough post-mortem of the entrails of this topic.
https://scitechdaily.com/schrodinger-was-wrong-new-research-overturns-100-year-old-understanding-of-color-perception/amp/

[Scott Marriott]

In response to Francisco Cubas, I would like to say I agree with you completely. I live in Latvia and we are not so far apart when it comes to income levels. Thank you for your perspective.

[Pak]

There is a certain *feeling* or sensation you are trying to convey here. It's like the last 15 or so years trying to shoehorn digital color photography into a mono workflow has finally clicked. As in, you can't. I suspect you'll be discovering things new again.

It's a good feeling isn't it?

Pak

[Thomas Mc Cann]

I'm in agreement with Francisco Cubas. For years I chase the perfect combination of monitor and printer before I realised it was all a waste of time and what was the point. No one saw my prints except me.
Did the same with wi fi. I have an excellent setup based on a Linn Sondek LP 12 but haven't played anything on it in years. Headphones and Spotify now. Plus I'm now slightly deaf.
Oh the joys of old age

[Ken Lunders]

The Datacolor SpyderX Pro Colorimeter is shown at $40 off, not 40%. Quite a few cups of coffee difference.

[D'oh!! Fixed now. --Homer]

[Dean Johnston]

Hi.

Sweet, thanks for the US Amazon link.

Even with shipping to Japan, it works out the equiv. of US$60 cheaper than the cheapest I can find it here (Amazon JP) & US$80 cheaper than from the cheapest in-store price I can find. Happy now.

Peace, and all that good stuff,
Dean