• Home
  • About

Crafting Photographs

Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Choosing the right light for viewing your prints

September 3, 2009 by Rich Seiling

Making hard proofs (a proof on the same paper and device you will use for final prints) is a central part of my approach to fine printmaking. Therefore, the light sources I use to view proofs are also very important, because not all light sources are accurate for my needs. If I can’t view the print accurately, then I can’t use them as guides for making changes to improve my prints.

 

To choose a good viewing light for your proofs, you need to understand there is no light source that will make your prints perfectly match your monitor. I know this is contrary to many marketing claims. You can get really close, but a perfect match to your monitor is impossible because of the monitor itself, and the light sources. Like most things, the differences can only be bridged by experience, not technology (or money!)

 

Since I can’t have a perfect light source for every purpose, what I have to settle for is a light source that is a good simulation of a given environment.

 

In my world, there are two separate environments I’m interested in simulating: the monitor, and gallery lighting. Each one of these environments needs a different light source to achieve my goals.

 

Simulating a Monitor:

To simulate the monitor, I use SoLux 4700K bulbs. SoLux bulbs provide what I believe to be the most accurate color for monitor simulation, and they also happen to be the least expensive solution. A 4700K SoLux MR16 bulb costs just $7.95 each and works in standard track lighting fixtures. 

 

I believe these bulbs are far more accurate for comparing prints to a monitor than any other light source. I base this belief on their spectral distribution curves. My experience is that the fluorescent proofing lights used in the offset printing world (costing thousands of dollars) are not as accurate as SoLux bulbs. But you don’t have to take my word for it, as SoLux bulbs are used by a long list of major galleries and manufacturing companies for evaluating critical color.

 

At West Coast Imaging, it’s very important for us to be able to simulate the monitor, since we are often matching prints to chromes and original artwork. We also need to critically evaluate color tests of new papers and profiles, and SoLux 4700K bulbs perform this function better than any other light source. Using SoLux bulbs lets us have confidence that we are viewing accurate color from our prints, and lets us evaluate if our monitors are doing the same thing. Not using an accurate viewing light is one of the most common causes of customers thinking their prints don’t match their monitor.

 

Simulating a gallery environment:

In my personal work I emphasize the simulation of a gallery environment more than I do matching the monitor. (This assumes that I have an accurate and well profiled monitor as a starting point.)  When I look at a proof of my own work, I really don’t care if it matches my monitor. I care if it will express my artistic intent on the gallery wall, which means I need to use lighting that simulates the gallery environment where my work will be shown.

 

Why is this so important?

 

It’s because there is a vast difference in the way prints look in 4700K light, and the way they look in the 3000K-3200K light that is used in most galleries. Gallery light is warmer, and that affects how colors in a print are perceived. Warmer light tends to make warm colors richer, and cool colors less vibrant and less cool. For example, reds, yellows and oranges may have more depth and vibrancy in gallery lighting, while rich blues will be dulled by the “yellow” quality of the light. 

 

The color temperature of the light also affects very light colors and paper white. This is especially evident in B&W prints, which look substantially different under 3200K light than they do under 4700K light. The warmer gallery light will always make light colors and paper white look warmer than it does under cooler light.

 

Therefore, my methodology when I am evaluating a proof, is to look at it in gallery lighting conditions, since that is the lighting my audience will see it in. I want to make printing decisions so the print looks “right” in that light.  I don’t care if it matches the monitor if it doesn’t convey my message in light used in galleries and homes.

 

The good news is that if you make a print look as good as it can under 4700K light, or on a D65 calibrated monitor, it generally looks as good as it can under 3200K light, and vice versa. But there can still be differences, so I choose to use 3200K to evaluate my proofs, and I save the 4700K light for special occasions when I need to check the performance of my monitor, or evaluate color tests.

 

For gallery lighting, you don’t need to get any specific make or model of bulb. The standard MR16 bulbs sold at the big box home improvement stores are the best simulant of galleries because that is the same light they are using. They probably even buy their bulbs there, too!

 

What about different lighting situations? 

 

If I’m viewing proofs in light that is not one of these carefully chosen light sources, I don’t try to make critical color decisions, and I am very suspect of my perceptions. This is especially true of the fluorescent lights used in businesses and homes for task lighting. Typical fluorescent light is the worst light imaginable for judging color, and can show huge magenta or green shifts! 

 

Setting up accurate lighting to evaluate your proofs and prints isn’t hard, but it is a very important part of crafting expressive photographs.  Just remember, friends don’t let friends view prints in bad fluorescent light!


Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments

4 Responses

  1. on September 3, 2009 at 3:41 pm Ben Edwards

    Agreed, wholeheartedly! I’m in the process of designing SoLux lighting for my prints in the house. It makes a print “come to life” the way it can on a good monitor (or better yet, projected from a slide, which is my gold standard).


  2. on September 15, 2009 at 7:54 am Rhoda Maurer

    Thanks for sharing this information. I will definitely look into the SoLux lighting for my home office.


  3. on October 22, 2009 at 4:59 pm Roy Sablosky

    I’m confused . . . call this a newbie question if you like . . . what is the purpose of the SoLux lamps? To make the proof look like it’s on a computer screen? Why?

    I understand wanting to make the screen look as close as possible to the proof; that’s called calibrating the monitor. I understand wanting to see how the proof will look in a gallery. That’s common sense. But making the proof look like it’s on a screen — that I don’t understand.

    I’m not saying it’s a bad idea, only that I quite literally do not understand it.


  4. on October 22, 2009 at 6:07 pm Rich Seiling

    Thanks for the question Roy.

    The purpose of 4700K SoLux lamps is so you can hold the print next to the monitor and compare the screen to the print.

    Prints look different under different light, and images on monitors look different depending on the whitepoint that they are calibrated to.

    Check out the COLOR RENDITION DEMONSTRATOR http://www.gtilite.com/color-rendition-demonstrators.htm from GTI for a great demonstration of this. You can find these units at many Lowes Home Improvement stores for comparing paint samples if you want to see it in person…it’s a very dramatic demonstration.

    Therefore, if you want to hold a print next to your monitor to compare the two, you have to have similar color temperatures for the light on the print and the whitepoint of the display. If you don’t do this, you can’t trust your eyes, even if they appear to match. In other words, if you have standard florescent lighting or standard incandescent lighting on your print, you can’t trust what you see. (And they probably won’t match anyway.)

    If you want to trust what you see, you need to light the print with 4700K SoLux when holding it next to the monitor. Even then, it’s not perfect, but it’s much closer than any other solution.



Comments are closed.

  • RSS

    RSS Feed

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • Recent Posts

    • EXAMPLES – The Making of a Photograph: Black and White Printing Overview
    • EXAMPLES – The Making of a Photograph: Mono Lake Sunrise
    • Thought of the Day
    • Making Printing Simple
    • Examples – The Making of a Photograph: Cottonwoods, Autumn, June Lake Loop, California
  • Archives

    • February 2010
    • November 2009
    • October 2009
    • September 2009
    • August 2009
    • June 2009
    • March 2009
    • February 2009
    • January 2009
  • recent tweets

    • Pentax 645D 40MP digital announced at $9,400US, aimed specifically at landscape and outdoor photographers. http://bit.ly/9OPWZV~~~~~~~~~~~~3 hours ago
    • Photograph 300,000 Daffodils at Daffodil Hill in Amador County, California http://www.amadorcountychamber.com/Historic/daffodil_hill.html~~~~~~~~~~~~2 days ago
    • Sierra Foothill Flower Report: Lupine, Bush Lupine and Shooting Star at 1000' elevation~~~~~~~~~~~~3 days ago

Blog at WordPress.com.

Theme: Mistylook by Sadish.