- Joined
- Sep 23, 2023
- Messages
- 454 (1.04/day)
im kind of confused regarding this for video editing. as a pro stills phhotographer, I have never calibrated my screen. I used the internal OS calibration. its always minor differences andit never matters since 1-people cant tell what proper color is and people dont care and the eye will adjust to any color cast or weird color in any image you may show them. notice how when you view one image the first time, it may get one reaction. view it again after 1 minute, you adjust to it and think its ok? the eye adjusts things to middle level.
2- theres too many differences between the different screens that what I see on mine most certainly wont look correct on anything they may view it on. and hardly anyone uses a device with "accurate" colors. even my own laptop and phone and 2 other screens they all look different. even between the 3 cameras I use, the color science is different since nikon has changed them over the years/models. you can easily tell. people dont care if theres differences. if you show them 1 image blue color casr with 6000K and the same shot with 3500Kelvin theyll notice but it wont even bother the person.
makes no sense to calibrate imo. for me I just buy a decent brand, decent specs and tune it with OSD to the target I like. I know from prints how the images look from the camera and with editing I know how to edit based on feedback/experience over the years. I also worked in a film lab developing and printing for some time, so I can see color differences easily
so my question is for video editing and davinci resolve and color grading. was directed that a color grading level monitor is tons of money.
1-why is it different then any other monitor you can get? I understand that some show the spectrum more correctly then others but still, video color grading is nowhere near as important as stills. with video there is motion and audio that disorientates the mind vsstills where there is more time to judge image by image.
2-yes, I feel that there should be a good level monitor but I feel getting something decent would do the job just as well as one costing twice as much.
my point is why is it so crucial when a decent screen that has decently accurate color levels/gamut wouldnt do the job?
adding to all this what I say that it wont matter how accurate your screen is, that almost certainly, the persons viewing screen will be so off yours it makes no difference if its "off" by a smidge. I feel its diminishing retrurns on an expesnive screen and one that has decent reviews will suffice.
maybe im missing something here?
2- theres too many differences between the different screens that what I see on mine most certainly wont look correct on anything they may view it on. and hardly anyone uses a device with "accurate" colors. even my own laptop and phone and 2 other screens they all look different. even between the 3 cameras I use, the color science is different since nikon has changed them over the years/models. you can easily tell. people dont care if theres differences. if you show them 1 image blue color casr with 6000K and the same shot with 3500Kelvin theyll notice but it wont even bother the person.
makes no sense to calibrate imo. for me I just buy a decent brand, decent specs and tune it with OSD to the target I like. I know from prints how the images look from the camera and with editing I know how to edit based on feedback/experience over the years. I also worked in a film lab developing and printing for some time, so I can see color differences easily
so my question is for video editing and davinci resolve and color grading. was directed that a color grading level monitor is tons of money.
1-why is it different then any other monitor you can get? I understand that some show the spectrum more correctly then others but still, video color grading is nowhere near as important as stills. with video there is motion and audio that disorientates the mind vsstills where there is more time to judge image by image.
2-yes, I feel that there should be a good level monitor but I feel getting something decent would do the job just as well as one costing twice as much.
my point is why is it so crucial when a decent screen that has decently accurate color levels/gamut wouldnt do the job?
adding to all this what I say that it wont matter how accurate your screen is, that almost certainly, the persons viewing screen will be so off yours it makes no difference if its "off" by a smidge. I feel its diminishing retrurns on an expesnive screen and one that has decent reviews will suffice.
maybe im missing something here?