What light do you print for?
- Thread starter Barney
- Start date
- Messages
- 12,337
- Edit My Images
- No
To be honest, none.
I never thought about the viewer's lighting in any of the several thousand prints I made. Nor, I'm pretty sure, did any of the other photographers I knew.
I never thought about the viewer's lighting in any of the several thousand prints I made. Nor, I'm pretty sure, did any of the other photographers I knew.
- Messages
- 2,049
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
You have a good point. I normally view my prints the next day by daylight at a north facing window. As many may be entered into club competitions, they will be viewed on a light box with daylight balanced light. My system is calibrated for this output so I usually only print once without the need for any test prints. One of the things about viewing them the next day is that you may see something you missed in the editing.
Dave
Dave
OP
- Messages
- 4,119
- Name
- Wayne
- Edit My Images
- No
Are we on the same page Dave, this is a print from a negative in the darkroom. What do you mean by editing? Dodging and burning?
OP
- Messages
- 4,119
- Name
- Wayne
- Edit My Images
- No
Peter B
Double Numpty
- Messages
- 6,231
- Name
- Peter
- Edit My Images
- Yes
When I was printing regularly many years ago, it was only at weekends as I was working. I would pin my favoured version of the prints on a pegboard in the kitchen, where I could pass them each day in both natural and artificial light. If there was obviously something that didn't work as it should, I'd make notes and reprint the following weekend. If you intend hanging them on the wall, it's best to view them behind the glass or perspex in the frame before doing the final print.
OP
- Messages
- 4,119
- Name
- Wayne
- Edit My Images
- No
Thanks for those great tips Peter.
This exercise has totally changed how I look at my photography, walking past your print must make you realise why we do this hobby. I have digital prints on the wall which I pass on the stairs several times each day and there is no connection except for "I took those pictures" Printing from the negative takes the "digital " aspect out almost entirely there is, for me a far more satisfying connection to the reason I took the shot in the first place. Looking at the photo with a purpose must be a lovely feeling.
ancient_mariner
Moderator
- Messages
- 28,308
- Name
- Toni
- Edit My Images
- No
I would tend to print just a little lighter (a very little lighter) than instinct called for in the darkroom, and my prints have generally held up well in almost every light. It's important your eyes are settled with the light level you're working at, and after that provided the light source isn't weird (note that some LED bulbs are VERY VERY weird with extremely unbalanced light output) then all should be well.
If I were to be intentional then I'd probably pick a daylight incandescent bulb, but failing that a cool white or daylight LED with a full spectrum.
If I were to be intentional then I'd probably pick a daylight incandescent bulb, but failing that a cool white or daylight LED with a full spectrum.
- Messages
- 4,776
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- No
Your eyes adapt to both colour and brightness, so it's tricky to print for specific viewing conditions. Our perception of colour is affected by the amount of light reflected from the print as well as the colour of the light.
The "professional" approach is to start with a consistent workflow, ideally using a viewing booth to assess the print. These have fairly bright lighting (to better see differences in colour and tone) and a standard colour temperature of D50 or D65 (roughly 5000k and 6500k), but D50 is the most used.
Product range of color matching devices | JUST-Normlicht
Discover all JUST products for visual color matching with standard light D50 and D65 in our web shop.
www.just-normlicht.com
Having established a standard workflow, you would then modify the print (if considered important) for specific viewing conditions.
If you know that your sitting room is poorly lit, then do tests to see how much brighter you need to make your prints. If printing on a computer, you can save a preset called "sitting room" that contains a curve with the mid-tones lifted to suit the sitting room, and apply this to a "printing" layer. This is what I do in Capture One, but more to fix differences between the screen brightness and the print brightness.
Colours are more difficult, partly because your eyes adapt to different colour lighting, and partly because the colours in most environments aren't constant.
You might think that prints for an exhibition in a daylight-lit foyer of an art gallery might be better assessed at D65 in a viewing booth (rather than D50) but the colour temperatures of the light illuminating the prints will vary throughout the day and change with the weather.
So, in practice, I think you need a standardised workflow, so you have a known starting point, and then add minor modifications to print density when you know the specifics of where the prints are being viewed. This would be worthwhile if you know the viewing conditions will be especially dull or bright.
For colour, except in exceptional circumstances, I would print for D50 lighting and rely on the eye/brain adapting to viewing in different colour temperatures.
Although, this is a bit of ramble, most of this video by Keith Cooper is probably worth watching.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,049
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Sorry, I had failed to notice that it is a darkroom thread. It is a long time ago now but I used a colour analyser and filters to get the balance right. Of course, I would not have been competing with digital then so precise accuracy was probably not essential but I still viewed the prints the next morning using a north facing window. Yes, editing in the darkroom usually meant dodging and burning but you could also replace skies if you wished.
Dave