« Supermoon Rising | Main | An Extra Port Magically Appears »

Friday, 18 October 2024

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Display lighting is a critical, and under-appreciated and under-discussed, factor in optimizing a fine print. Thanks for bringing it up, again*. My worthy fine prints aren’t final, at least for my own viewing, until display lighting is taken into account. This includes considering any cover glass, which can also affect subtle and important tonalities and textures. It can be the difference between a nice print and one that ‘sings.’


* (I also commented here)…
https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2022/11/the-worst-exhibition-lighting-i-ever-saw.html

I have been taking part in international Print Exchanges for the last 20 years. Because my prints will be viewed in all sorts of lighting conditions, I always print for viewing in Daylight, the only consistently common light available across the world!

"The picture is best viewed on a calibrated monitor under subdued room light."

So, Mike, what would be the best way to view a print of it?

[Depends on the print. --Mike]

Some time ago I had already written my comment on the appropriate lighting strength for viewing images / photos, but perhaps these are also helpful here in this context, especially as I would like to add:
a few years ago I met with an “actually” very experienced photographer to discuss the technical quality of my black and white enlargements, as I was planning to open a professional lab.
That evening turned out to be a disaster.
To my credit, I have to say that I have decades of experience in the darkroom, both privately and professionally.
To make a long story short, the photographer insisted on having a 1000 watt lamp hanging above the viewing table, about 2 meters away, to “see everything”.
His main criticism was that all my enlargements were not really black, but only gray in the depths.
I said what was technically right and necessary, but it was hopeless.

Fast forward:
A few months ago, I took my incident light meter to various museums and galleries in Berlin and also to private homes to measure the average, diffuse light level during the day.
In my opinion, these real-life light levels are the real benchmark for adjusting the brightness and contrast of photos.

- Museum of Photography Helmut Newton Foundation, fall 2023:
6 EV and mostly 7.2 EV and ditto
- Museum of Photography Helmut Newton Foundation, August 2024: 5 EV to 5 ½ EV
- Public museum, KUNSTFORUM: new, modern lighting design!: 5 EV - 6 EV
Professional photo gallery (F3): Walls 5 EV , if spotlight lighting:
in the center: 8 EV, at the spot edge: 7 EV
- Private apartments: mostly 4 EV to 6 EV
- Reproduction specialist / Graphic Arts, viewing desk (JUST):
half power: 8 ½ EV (most used), full power: 9 EV
(this last positions are far to bright!)

I think you are well advised to adjust new photos on average so that they look good with a viewing light in the range of 5 EV to 6 EV.

A couple years back, I made an enthusiastic trek to Louisville to see a Meatyard exhibition at Louisville's Speed Art Museum. On exhibit were a series core to saving Kentucky's wild and beautiful Red River Gorge from becoming a reservoir. The Gorge is in a rather impoverished region of central Appalachia, and in retrospect, it is miraculous that the grass roots effort built enough momentum to prevail.

The prints were towards the high contrast side, and the gallery was darkened to supper club level. Sadly, it was difficult to see anything. Even after 15 minutes acclimatizing, there was little I could discern. Just awful and disheartening.

There has to be a reasonable path around this issue. I know it isn’t difficult to produce a modern LED light with virtually nil UV and IR output, and timing the amount of ‘on’ time, either with motion detectors or timers is also feasible.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Portals




Stats


Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007