- Oct 18, 2013View SourceI would say that times have changed since it really made a lot of sense to bring all of that stuff into your house. Now, there are services out there that are really professional and reasonably priced. (Yes, there are also some cheap options, but they need to be avoided!)Finding the local services that you need is not trivial, but it can be done, if no other way, than digging them out with Google and sending small jobs to each of them to see what they can do. Most of the big photo printers also do art printing (example: BayPhoto, north of Santa Cruz). For example, they offer print-to-metal that looks really interesting for astro images:We saw some of these in a gallery in Los Gatos and they were amazing, including a few with star trail photos.The bottom line that I would recommend would be to work toward getting the processing done right on a calibrated monitor, and then work with a regional-level printing house, using the color models for _their_ calibrated printers (by whatever process, from paper to transparencies to metal!).On Oct 18, 2013, at 12:40 PM, d.malleo@... wrote:
I enjoyed your talk at AIC.
Perhaps a good topic (or part of it) for the next AIC might be hardware for processing and rendering?
I'm thinking of monitors, printers and even commercial services that produce digital transfers to transparencies such those exhibited at AIC.
I find it a shame that after all the attention (we) put into capturing multimegapixel images at 16 bits with the utmost attention to preserving the smallest gradients in signal... most images end up visualized as 8-bit jpegs on cheap "throw-away" monitors...
---In firstname.lastname@example.org, <email@example.com> wrote:I've done desktop publishing for many years. I have a 'color-critical' NEC monitor, 24" (older model, don't have the number handy as it's in New Mexico and I'm in Seattle). It is _spectacularly_ good for image processing.You begin to realize how poorly most monitors handle the full range of brightness levels and colors when you use such a monitor.Keep in mind that such monitors are typically run much darker than conventional monitors, in part to allow them to maximize the range of brightness levels they provide. Many even come with hoods in case there is overhead lighting. Their purpose is to get color and brightness rendered accurately; that's not quite the same as what you would want pretty much any other activity. For example, games or even text editing are not as effectively done on these types of monitors because they are run less bright.But for the specific tasks of creating accurate color, revealing subtle details with tiny differences in brightness, and just enjoying high-quality astro images, they are really really good.On Oct 18, 2013, at 9:26 AM, d.malleo@... wrote:
Hello,although I would consider a monitor a key tool for image processing, this message *might* be considered OT, if so, please forgive me and just ignore the message.I'm looking for a good monitor to process my images (my old panel died on me) and I've been considering the "SpectraView" line from NEC - specifically their 27" model (http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop-monitors/pa271w-bk-sv)I'm well versed on the topics of calibration and color spaces, and I would like to know if any astrophotographer here has direct experience with this monitor model or another from the same line.Thanks,Daniele==