Damien Symonds

Oh shit, you have to ditch Millers. Millers/Mpix print to a different (warmer) standard than the rest of the world, for some unknown reason.

It means that your screen is naturally a bit cold, as is quite common with laptop screens. Yes, it's better if your screen's native temp is closer to 6500, but there's nothing you can do about that.

Gee, it might be hard to buy them any cooler than that. But try for a 5000 if you can. No higher than that.

This is one of the reasons I don't like lamps - the positioning is really difficult. It has to be close enough to cast enough light, BUT it can't be anywhere in your field of vision because it will mess with your perception, AND it can't be anywhere that will reflect glare on your screen, AND it can't be anywhere that it casts shadows on your screen. I don't know what to tell you specifically. You'll have to play around with positioning and see what is the least worst position. Not necessarily. If the existing bulbs aren't too old, hopefully you'll be able to find some printing on them to tell you what temp they are?

Right. So your lamps are too dim, but the right colour. The overhead lights are nice and bright, but the wrong colour Any chance of changing the bulbs in the overhead lights? If not, we'll just have to persevere with the lamps.

Do you understand the point of my question, though? Is your interior lighting the same as daylight?

No, I mean if you have to go to D50, it suggests your lighting is too warm. I know this can be a VERY hard question to answer, but if you took your computer outside, would the screen still be too cool compared to the prints?

This suggests that your lighting is too warm?

Yes please. No, bright light is GREAT! Your office light should be the same as indirect sunlight, as near as possible. But of course you turn the light off during the actual calibration process, to be safe.

Wow. And you're dead sure that you have a perfectly accurate print match with that? With those stupid lamps I would have expected your screen to be brighter than your print at 100.

@tessag, let's do this here. When you calibrate with your i1, what luminance target do you use?

Great. You can't. It's fundamental mathematics. The required crop shape is different from the native photo shape.

Oh darn. This problem seems to appear in every update. I can't remember the fix, sorry. But if you google for the problem, you'll get a gazillion hits.

Hi @Melissalile, I hope you're doing well. I'd love to see some of your photos in the Raw Class.

Did you confirm that the photos are allowed to be portrait orientation? 1920x1080 is very specifically a screen resolution, and screens are traditionally horizontal. It's possible they might want all the photos to be cropped to landscape? I'm probably wrong, but I thought I should raise it just to be safe.

Perfect.

Hi @Nems, I've moved your post into Ask Damien, since it's not a class-related matter. Of course it cropped! Those dimensions (like all web dimensions) are much smaller than full resolution. So the issue is not "whether it crops". The issue is all about you controlling the crop. So, when you said ... How did you enter them, exactly? If you entered them in the Image Size or Canvas Size dialogs, that's bad. The correct way to do it is with your Crop Tool.

https://www.damiensymonds.net/act_web.html

Can you clarify these two statements? They seem to contradict each other.

Hi @enrique.h, as far as I am aware, your ColorMunki Photo should work fine with a wide-gamut screen.

Hi @Twyla Hall, this is one I've struggled with many times. There's no perfect way to do that I know of. But you might find that Filter>Noise>Median helps a little bit?

In Preferences>Performance, turn off Graphics Processor and see if the problem goes away.

Great! Then yes, the process you describe sounds fine.

@Aubrey?

I'm afraid I've only ever used wet labs, so I'm not really in a position to compare, sorry.