natural/artificial light

Just curious if any of you are able to get consistant prints/screen images when processing/printing and viewing your screens in natural light.

By chance, my prints seem to be pretty consistant, although i do tend to do this in the late evenings {under artificial light}, although in winter i sometimes print earier in the day {as it gets dark early}.

I find that i do get problems in natural light, and i suspect my computer is not sited in an ideal room/situation for a level of consistancy that i am happy with {as i do get sunlight/reflections etc in this room}. If, for instance, i have two consecutive/near identicle frames, and process one of them in morning light, and the other frame in the evening {using my eye for judgement}, there may be a small difference in the final prints.

Obviously i could darken the room and turn the light on, but i would prefer to use natural light where possible {especially as it doesn't get dark till late, during summer etc}. I'm thinking of relocating my computer to another room, which has little sunlight, although the natural light-levels will still fluctuate to a certain extent.

I'm also wondering if any of you 'judge' your processing of images for screen viewing and/or printing purely by eye, or whether you have developed some sort of PS 'action' that removes any variations from the 'eye' judgement method.

In my 'wet darkroom' days, i often used a gadget called a 'comparator' to achieve consistant print density from various negs/slides irrespective of the natural light variations when viewing the prints {after zero'ing the gadget to a master print/template}. Not sure what the nearest digital equivelent to my 'comparator' is {maybe levels/curves }, but i really need to get to grips with this area of my workflow. I guess having a 'master' print on my computer would get me in the ball park, if the natural light falling on my screen was variable, but this seems very primative {by todays standards} and far from the accuracy that digital processing should achieve.

I would be interest to know how any of you who use natural light for processing ensure a high level of consistancy {if you care to share your secrets}.

thanks

Alan

Basically, I don't... for the final cut I use no light other than that of a monitor ( which has also been calibrated in the dark) so the dark room days are still with us. I find this particulary important when dealing with the highlights.

I am not saying that this is correct or even effective so I would be interested in what others do as well cause I am more than willing to change this part of my work flow.

Hi I am with tom I calibrated my monitor in the dark with my spider and I process all my images in the dark if possible if I am working during the day on my images I make sure all my blinds are close and my monitor is shielded with my home-made shield out of cardboard.

Phillip.

I tend to use what ever light is available when I'm printing.
Monitor(s) are calibrated and the printer prints what's on the screen. My laptop has the annoying habit of dimming or brightening its screen to adjust to the ambient light, as does it's keyboard backlighting (pain at best) so I tend to print with the lights on, unless it's daylight.
As to adjusting images for colour etc, well I tend to leave well alone here as I trust implicitly what comes out of the camera....have to on account of being colour blind).

The majority of prints I do are from shots other ppl have taken and they've done all the colour and levels adjustments before the shot is emailed to me anyway.
I must admit that I've never been to a printing factory yet that has folk sitting in the dark examining monitors, I'm sure they might exist, but I've not stumbled on them yet. Most places I've visited are normally lit with these hellish flurescent lights that constantly flicker.

Cheers
John


PS I can't begin to imagine what my wife or daughter would say if I were to ask them to switch the lights off so that I could do some photo editing............Get a life maybe

Thanks for that Tom and Phillip,

I'm only having small problems, but sometimes the small differences between prints that should be very similar/identical are enough for me to have to reprint..

Unfortunately my computer screen is positioned near a window {due to the plug sockets}, and although the screen is positioned with its back to the window, the light seems to fall on my shirt {which tends to lower the screen contrast due to its reflection in the screen}. Because of the lower contrast effect, i think i have been boosting the image contrast, when they don't really need it. My present room doesn't have curtains {just blinds, that are not light proof}

I think i shall take your advice and move to another room with curtains, and start from scratch.

Thanks

Alan

Thanks John {you must have posted while i was writing},

You make a good point: it must be possible to use natural light to a fairly consistant level, so maybe my problem is mainly down to secondary reflections on the screen, rather than ambient light.

My sister sent me a screen that clips over the front of the computer screen, which is 'supposed' to help with reflections etc {similar effect to a polarising filter}, but i found it to be absolutely useless for photographic work, as it throws all colour corrections/white point settings etc out of the window.

I think i will use a constant artificial light source from now on, and if i still get problems i shall try complete darkness and see how i get on.

cheers

Alan

Hi Alan,

As far as I'm aware my prints and print to screen match appear pretty consistant.I certainly havn't noticed otherwise.

I have my computer/monitor,etc in the corner of a room and right next to, and at a 90 degree angle, to a 5ft south facing window.
I generally do most of my printing during the evening and usually during the Winter months when it's dark outside,so natural light spilling onto the screen isn't an issue at this time.
I tend to have just my ordinary ceiling light on which is fitted with a standard household 60 watt bulb.
This works well for me and is the type of light and conditions I prefer to have when editing images,it's also what I'm used to,so I guess although they may not be the 'optimum' conditions for a digital darkroom for some peolpe,I seem to have gotten quite used to them.

I don't compare the resulting print to screen image in this light though, as obviously the light intensity is a lot lower than the ideal viewing conditions,it would also be quite a lot warmer in colour temperature too.
I generally prefer to have a better look at the print during the daytime using available natural daylight.
Although saying that,I very rarely bother comparing the two now, as I'm quite confident my screen to print match is accurate and consistent,at least accurate enough for my needs anyway.

I do find myself occasionally working on images in the daylight hours,if the weather is cloudy I find the light is fine in my room with some light coloured,unlined curtains drawn.If however,the sun is shining I find it a real pain,even though I have the curtains shut,and a couple of sheets temporaily hung over the window,I find the ambient light too bright and rather annoying.
I'm seriously considering getting some 'black out' blinds to completely elliminate the light in these conditions.
They come in a whole range of colours and should hopefully cut out all unwanted light.

The thought of being in a darkened room during daylight hours editing images is something I'm not enthusiastic about to say the least,but pulling a blind down,is I guess,preferable to having to stop editing every time the sun comes out.

I used to work with some 'mushrooms' as we called the lads in the design dept. - they kept the metal shutters firmly closed to keep the daylight out. They where after a constant ambient light - no direct light or reflections from anything.

I think the key thing you need to look for is consistency of lighting, and getting to know what results to expect under those conditions. If you're getting different results between shots taken close together, then it may actually be something different - do you use Auto-white balance on your camera, or do you leave it set to one of the 'fixed' white balances? If you're using auto, then you might like to try shooting with it set to manual and set it to sunny or some such setting. You should get more consistant results out of camera then - any further differences will definitely be introduced by your own editing .

If you feel the differences are being caused by your computer/monitor and lighting, then you should try and set it up so that there is as little reflection as possible on the screen itself (get rid of the anti-glare filter!!), and that the area you do your editing in is a relatively neutral colour - no strong colours or contrasts as they affect how your eye percieves colours and saturation.

For examining prints during the evening and winter a daylight balanced bulb might help you to judge what the print will look like in daytime - you should be able to get a bulb from an art shop, and they fit in place of a normal bayonet mount or edison screw light bulb. While they're not 100% accurate, and aren't an accurate colour temperature - at least you're not paying a small fortune for a fixed temperature flourescent tube or light bulb or proofing box!

Thanks Justin/Nick,

Generally speaking the vast majority of my prints seem to be fine, and pretty close to the screen version. I think it must be the reflection of my shirt in the screen that is the culprit when sunlight is streaming through the window, as i haven't noticed any problems when processing under artificial light.

With regards to camera settings, i'm still shooting as if using film, and have my D70 wb set to 'flash' exclusively {as this is very similar to using a warming/81A filter, which i tended to have permanently attached to my lens's when using my prefered films}. I find this to give the most pleasing results under the majority of lighting conditions with my particular camera.

Its possible that the way i arrange my prints in my photo albums make any slight differences in overall brightness/darkness between prints more noticable, and if two very similar shots from the same sequence are placed on facing pages, any slight difference is immediately noticable. If i look at those two prints completely individually {or seperate them within the photo albums pages}, i wouldn't notice any difference at all.

Its possible i am being a bit too fussy, as any variations are only slight, but it can be annoying. As these differences are only slight, i think/hope it is simply down to screen reflections. I shall re-locate to another room at the weekend, and see if this does the trick

Thanks

Alan