Views
226
Replies
1
Status
Closed
I have wrestled for a year with trying to use LCDs with CS3. Calibrating with either a Monaco Optixx or a Spyder 2 yields excellent color matches but prints that are at least two stops too dark. I have work-arounds, involving arbitrary adjustments to brightness or curves just prior to printing, but this is not the what-you-see-is-what-you-get experience I used to have with CRTs.
In fact I hooked up a slightly dim but formerly high quality CRT to a machine running CS2, calibrated the thing, and by Jiminy judging brightness on the CRT yields that ideal WYSIWYG experience: a nearly perfect print. Would a device like the Spyder 3 with an ambient light meter yield better results?
Unless I can buy, which I can’t, an uber expensive dedicated graphics panel am I doomed to work-arounds because LCDs are so frigging bright that even a calibration sensor cannot adjust for their brightness?
Is off-axis light fall off from the LCD fooling my failing eyes? That should not be a factor for calibration . . .
In fact I hooked up a slightly dim but formerly high quality CRT to a machine running CS2, calibrated the thing, and by Jiminy judging brightness on the CRT yields that ideal WYSIWYG experience: a nearly perfect print. Would a device like the Spyder 3 with an ambient light meter yield better results?
Unless I can buy, which I can’t, an uber expensive dedicated graphics panel am I doomed to work-arounds because LCDs are so frigging bright that even a calibration sensor cannot adjust for their brightness?
Is off-axis light fall off from the LCD fooling my failing eyes? That should not be a factor for calibration . . .
Master Retouching Hair
Learn how to rescue details, remove flyaways, add volume, and enhance the definition of hair in any photo. We break down every tool and technique in Photoshop to get picture-perfect hair, every time.