Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] Re: Cleaning your monitor...



I agree with you.  My digital lab area is lighted with a 300 watt
halogen torch lamp, using reflected ceiling light.  I use a AR coated
monitor, and the lighting overall is above the monitor position so the
"down lighting" doesn't interfere with the image. When I am doing print
comparisons, I haul in my daylight full spectrum fluorescent lighting.
The only time I ever work in nearly complete darkness is when I am
setting up Adobe Gamma, which requires it to determine the true maximum
black of the monitor, and when I am scanning 3d objects with the flatbed
scanner lid open.

Not only is it a bad idea for your eyes to have only one plane of focus
available to them for long periods because it fatigues the muscles (as
would be the case in a darkened room where only the monitor were
illuminated), but it also causes "color poisoning" to the cones, meaning
within about 10 minutes your color perception is completely off, as they
attempt to compensate to the dominant screen color bias.

Further, you get incorrect densities, because color CRTs are not
designed to be viewed in complete darkness meaning their density scales
are off when viewed in that manner, and your pupil is not provided
adequate lighting to contract, meaning any UV and other harmful to
vision radiation coming off the screen surface is more damaging to the
lens and retina, since more is allowed in.  Further, your depth of field
is limited due to the pupil being increased in size.

This may be OK for people who are younger, but as we age the loss of
flexibility of the lens and weakening of the muscles which flex it, make
it more difficult to focus properly at monitor distances, and having a
smaller iris aperture keeps more in depth in focus and for monitor
distances means you will likely have better acuity.

This may explains why Anthony sometimes misses things in his scans like
Newton rings.  IMHO, the lighting set up Anthony suggests is contrary to
everything I have read about computer ergonomics, my knowledge of human
physiology of the eye, my understanding of the design of CRTs, and my
own personal experience.

Art


Shunith Dutt wrote:

> Shouldn't there be more ambient lighting around? I always thought that the
> important thing was *not* to have any direct light falling on the monitor...
> hence monitor hoods, etc... but it's not advisable to work in *near*
> darkness as the CRT makes images look brighter than they actually are...
> etc. etc... i work in a room with daylight.... as well as tungsten light...
> but with no direct light falling on the monitor... meaning a tungsten light
> source is always on to my upper right... the main problem is in looking at
> the slides or prints one is trying to match... for that i use a light box
> and/or a table lamp fitted with (as near to) daylight corrected bulbs.
>
> Arthur, i realise your comment was ajoke... reply more directed at Anthony
> :)
>
> All the best...
>
> SD
>


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.