Quote:
Originally Posted by jase
Slightly off topic, but I should bring to light a conversation had with event organisers. As this was the first year of submitting electronic images online for judging, it was reported that some images submitted were extremely dark, and/or had colour balance issues. Given David's critical eye, it would not surprise me that some images were let down due to the lack of attention given to monitor calibration.
There is plenty of resources online to assist those in need.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/ARTS.../CALIBRATE.HTM
http://www.imagescience.com.au/kb/qu...or+Calibrators
I don't like the thought of people working so hard to collect and process data, only to find the end result does not look correct on other peoples monitors.  For the general populous, this is unavoidable, but you can be assured that David and the other judges would be evaluating images on correctly calibrated monitors. So the effort you put in is not to waste. 
. |
Perhpas a good argument for going back to entering prints then ie what you see your end is always exactly what the judge will see. Obviously the logistics are easier using electronic entry but entering actual prints was something that made DM's real I recon and removed the issue of only being able to send low res (2000 X 2000) jpeg files that could be judged on any number of moniters and using any number of viewing programs..?
Mike