dan_k6 Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 If this is in the wrong forum, please move it to the appropriate one. I'm assuming this is basic knowledge but I notice that my D200 pics look one wayon the D200 LCD and they look similar when they are printed. These pics however don't look the sharpest on my monitor. They actually looksofter. I have one of those $300 Dell Widescreen's that came with my PC. Do you guys view your work on a special type of monitor? My screen size is 1024x768 When I'm transferring these pictures to my computer and viewing them, sometimesI get disappointed because what I see on the screen does not make me happy. When I go to print them, they look spectacular though. Also, I've been foolishly editing a lot of my pictures using this monitor. What do I buy or do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonybeach Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 If you are viewing your images oddly sized, the application may be messing up your images. Specifically, viewing images should be done at 25%, 50% and (of course) 100% to evaluate how they will appear in print or after being properly resized. Tonality is often not properly displayed in programs like Adobe Bridge or Capture One although I have not seen issues with this using View NX. It is also essential to buy calibration hardware and calibrate your monitor regularly. Pay attention to viewing angle on LCD screens, and avoid excessive ambient light when viewing your images. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwhite3.0 Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 The image on your D200 LCD is for one smaller and the LCD itself has less pixels than your monitor so it could easily look sharp on one but not the other. Even if you shoot RAW/NEF the image on your D200 LCD is a preview of what a JPEG would look like using your camera settings. When you look at your file using a specific program there can be a disconnect esp if it is not Nikon Capture which applies your camera settings to the image. Or you could have custom settings set to zero sharpening. Most digital images require some sharpening so are you applying any? Your Dell monitor isn't terrible though the resolution isn't amazing either. But worry about that later when you have funds for a higher resolution monitor. The best advice I can give is reading about color calibration of monitors and googl'ing the difference between different color spaces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christoph_hammann Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 You could acquaint yourself with sharpening solutions, be they built into your image editing software or as a plugin or a standalone solution. Your images need to sharpened differently for printing and for web / screen presentation. I find PK Sharpener very versatile. Christoph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy_doda Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 What software are you using to view? I have noticed pictures look better if I open in View or Photoshop. If I preview in Bridge they look terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas_fiege Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 hi daniel I have looked at the dell page and the widescrren monitor all have a resulution of 1680 x 1050. so have a look if you are running yours with the wrong setting. it must be in the higest setting to get sharp pictures on the screen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjt Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 Anthony Beach has some great advice - all of it. one of the most important things you can do is to CALIBRATE your monitor (sorry for yelling). concerning the LCD on the back of the D200 (or any body for that matter) - you should ONLY be using it for validating composition and exposure (using the histogram). you should NOT be using the rear LCD to validate IQ. if you are SERIOUS about your photography and your bank account allows it, you should invest in a (minimum) 92% gamut monitor. you dont want to get a monitor that's "good enough for now" then move to the next best monitor, and then finally to your dream monitor. bypass all the middle-man monitors. i recommend the dell "3007wfp-hc" monitor - yes, the price hovers around $1,000 USD, but it's an unbeatable LCD ... 30" and is a 92% gamut monitor - check its specs and i'm sure you'll agree (dont look at the "non HC" version). my first foray into a large, serious monitor is the 30" Cinema (Apple), then tried the 3007wfp-hc and never looked back (i actually use 2 3007-hc's). Lacie's are awesome, but financially out of the reach of many folks. what's most important is calibrating your monitor, then using the native resolution of that monitor (which you might not be running at). many folks do not run their monitor at the native resolution, which can exhibit less than optimal results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwhite3.0 Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 MJ, where did you get this Dell LCD for $1000? It's showing up as $1900 at Dell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjt Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 go to google and use this string, "3007wfp-hc" (non-quoted). the top 2 hits show, "DELL UltraSharp 3007WFP-HC 30-inch ... $1,189.00 - Dell Small Business" when i bought the last one, Dell had a "$250.00 USD" instant rebate, so after tax and shipping, the total was around $1200 USD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjt Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 hey John ... you might also consider ordering it through Jellyfish and get a 2% discount: http://www.jellyfish.com/products/offerings/4082/7872016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_mudama1 Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 my guess is the OP's monitor is not configured to run at the panel's native resolution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_warn Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 Why didn't anyone consider MONITOR MAGNIFICATION? Come on guy's. get back to the basics. 3800 divided by 1000 equals 3.8. Now take a tape measure to the horizontal display area of your monitor. Suppose it's 12 inches. That means that a 100% zoom is showing part of a 25 x 38 inch image. So, you'll have to make a print at least that large before you'll see a level of "softness" that matches what your seeing on your monitor. BTW, if you really do have a widescreen monitor, running it at 768 x 1024 is contributing to the softness that your seeing. 768 x 1024 is a setting that is only directly applicable to a 4:3 monitor. On a typical 16:10 widescreen computer monitor your setting up a situation where the image has to be "stretched" horizontally in order to fill the screen. Which will just further degrade the sharpness of the screen. Get out your literature for your system and and see what the native resolution of your screen is. Setting it to that resolution will result in a real improvement of your on screen image because LCD monitors do not display as well as a CRT when used at a non native resolution. As for all the suggestions for calibrating your monitor, that is not an absolute must. Many newer systems are now pretty good at producing a WYSIWYG display that is close to what a printer will produce. It doesn't mean that a monitor shouldn't be calibrated for critical work, however it does mean that it's not essential for occasional use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fraczekp Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 most likely the problem is with your monitor resolution. Set it to "native" resolution (1024x768 is not the one you want). Unless your video card resolution matches the monitor native resolution your viewing sharpness will suffer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwhite3.0 Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 Thanks MJ, I think my eyes were tired and I missed the 1 in front of the 8. I'll be in the market for a new computer in the next couple of months and will be looking at monitors so this info helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnw63 Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 "if you really do have a widescreen monitor, running it at 768 x 1024 is contributing to the softness that your seeing. 768 x 1024 is a setting that is only directly applicable to a 4:3 monitor. On a typical 16:10 widescreen computer monitor your setting up a situation where the image has to be "stretched" horizontally in order to fill the screen. Which will just further degrade the sharpness of the screen. " That's what I was thinking. Mess with your monitors resolution AND the refresh rate, before looking for a better screen. Make your's the best it can be, before spending loads of cash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kari v Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 "Dell Widescreen --- 1024x768" ...and you haven't noticed anything is wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjt Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 as an update to my recommendation on the Dell 30" monitor, the 3007wfp-hc ... i noticed in my "Computer news" that Dell has a new 30" monitor out, the 3008wfp-hc (notice the '8'). this 30" now supports 117% color gamut!! (versus 92% on the 3007wfp-hc), so maybe the higher price John saw is because he was looking at the price for this NEW monitor. http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,2243995,00.asp?kc=ETRSS02129TX1K0000532 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_k6 Posted January 7, 2008 Author Share Posted January 7, 2008 Well then what setting do I use if 1024x768 is wrong? I don't know what native resolution is. Should I go to 1152x864? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy_doda Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 1680 x 1050 as pointed out by Thomas above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwhite3.0 Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Daniel, if using Windows XP just right click on your desktop > hit properties > settings > push the screen resolution tab all the way to the right and to the right of resolution make sure your color quality setting is at highest. Sorry if this was obvious. Good luck, if we can rule out monitor setting then we can suggest other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_k6 Posted January 7, 2008 Author Share Posted January 7, 2008 Thanks to John and everybody. It does make a noticeable difference. I guess the only reason I didn't do that before is that it makes my text, icons, etc. very small. It makes my eyes hurt. Is it weird if I keep the resolution at maybe 1152x864 for other tasks but go up to 1680x1050 for photos? Thanks again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy_doda Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Go to your diplay settings. Under the appearance tab click advanced settings and you can change the size of fonts, menus, ect. You can also go to dispaly:advanced and under the general tab change the DPI setting. This will just increase the size of everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now