Flashlight tint discussions

Candle Power Forums

Help Support Candle Power:

sp5it

Enlightened
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
297
City & State/Province
Poland
Hi. I was reading a lot posts with beamshots, led tint compare, people commenting photos showing different led colors and I'm curious how many of you have your computer screen calibrated, that colors are shown as good as monitor color space is.
Mike
 
Probably a minority of people have their screens calibrated rather a larger amount may actually be running a color profile which is correct for their display (which doesn't guarantee color calibrations).

But consider this. Most of the beamshots of different tints are nothing like what you would see in real life anyway. Either the photographer used the Auto White Balance setting, in which case every tint is skewed in one way or another to all look about the same, or they used a specific color temperature setting for pictures across multiple color temperatures which would highlight or reduce the impact of certain colors as well based on the color temp of the LED.

So just as much as comparing two LEDs side by side is a very subjective thing (ie: compare a cool and a neutral led for a while and then switch and compare a neutral and a warm led - your eyes will trick you into thinking that the neutral led is much cooler than it is), comparing pictures of LED beamshots is generally a crap shoot.
 
The variables begin at the digital camera's filters. Every digital camera has a color-agnostic sensors. These sit behind an IR filter and a grid of RGBG filters (Two green, one red, one blue, much like the human eye). The RGB filters may not be the same for all cameras.

Next, the camera's computer compresses the output of these sensors to create (something like) a RAW file, a list of information about brightness at each pixel (1 RGBG group of sensors). This is later processed into a .jpg file by a computer, possibly edited by a person on a monitor, then compressed for web uploads. Then it's downloaded and displayed on a screen.

My Dell monitor came with calibration data, all sorts of R-this and gamma that, but I have no idea what it means. Mine were different from my coworker's, though. Crap, I don't have line breaks. In short, cameras emphasize differences between the CCT of the white balance and that of each source. This also emphasizes CCT differences AND tint differences between lights in the same picture. Who knows what two monitors do to the photo?
 
Yeah, end-to-end color control is an issue that CPF clearly can't get its collective head around. Beamshots for color, tint, CRI, contrast, whatever are definitely for amusement value only, they cannot be relied upon to convey good data. I was a repo photographer and then a color photographic printer for years. There's too many ways to make a photo lie on purpose and an even larger number of ways to make it lie on accident. Getting people to buy a puck and calibrate their own monitors would be just a start, there's many other issues everyone would need to agree to handle in the same way before this stuff could be reliable.
 
I've never seen anyone complain that the tint new light they bought "didn't look like the photo XYZ took in his/her review".

Jus' sayin'.
 
Get off the calibration kick...all the lights I ordered were the same color posted here I have ordered them & no problem.
 
That just shows you guys aren't that picky about color. Perception of color varies somewhat from person to person. I've bought 2 lights in the last 6 months where I've been unhappy with the light they made when they showed up. Properly done photography with end-to-end color control would have enabled me to rule them out without ordering them. They didn't match the pictures posted online at all but, then again, I didn't expect them to since I don't expect anyone to do the technical things that would be required to make such pictures color accurate.
 
As stated earlier, it's tough to capture the tint on camera correctly. I wouldn't worry about calibration.

I recently got my first cool white in months, turned it on and thought "wow, this is nice and white!". Then I turned on my Nitecore EA4W and realized the coole white was in fact a flat bluish color. Either light would be fine in real life use as long as you're not comparing side by side.
 
At the end of the day I know what tints I like. I will buy any host with any tint as long as I know that I can crack it and re-flow to my preference leds and tints.
 
As most of the stuff referred to as tint is talking in terms of color temperature, which only applies to white light anyway...I think people have already calibrated their eyes and brains to their screens and their own lights.

IE: The people who like warm lights, look for a yellow beam, and so forth. I don't think anyone is so concerned with HOW yellow past a certain point that they need a calibrated monitor to choose, or else they would simply NEVER be able to choose. (IE: The cameras, programs, and the host sites, and this site's own band width restrictions, etc...far outweigh any variables due to monitor calibration inconsistencies. Most just look for a tendency towards a particular hue/intensity and guess based upon a comparison a a range of pics. If they are OK if its not green, and posters say its not green, and it doesn't LOOK green, they're good to go. If it LOOKS green, and the poster says its NOT, its just the way the pic looks, they can deal with that, and so forth.
 
I like comparison shots taken by the same person at the same time because they give a general idea of what to expect. It's even more helpful when the poster says something like "the difference shown is greater than in person" or "the wall is yellow and brown with orange polka dots, not bright white." However, I've known since the beginning that they are to be taken with a grain of salt.
I have 2 monitors on my desk (1 newish Dell, 1 older HP.) I do not have a calibration "puck", but they both have a calibration feature. Whatever that's supposed to mean. After running it, they were more off than before. I adjusted one to get what looks good and real to me. Then I spent 1/2 hr trying to get the other to match. They do just fine for text, but my red Mustang looks great on one, but a little light on the other. When I get the red closer to "right" the grass goes haywaire...
I've purchased several lights based on beamshots, and several others based on mfr's claims of emitter tint and CRI. None of my neutrals, warms, or Hi CRI's match - but I like 'em all better than the few cool's I have left.
Comparing them by eye, all of them have some tint, coloration, shift, rings, or some artifact which makes them less ideal (under most conditions) than sunlight. All are an improvement over darkness!
Used on their own, to actually light things, every last one of 'em is wonderful in its own way.

Even if there was a way to control light-to-monitor end-to-end color rendition, there's still the Tint Lottery to contend with. If you're uncomfortable with a little variance, find a local dealer who will let you try everything before you buy or prepare to get very comfortable with the marketplace...
 
That just shows you guys aren't that picky about color. Perception of color varies somewhat from person to person. I've bought 2 lights in the last 6 months where I've been unhappy with the light they made when they showed up. Properly done photography with end-to-end color control would have enabled me to rule them out without ordering them. They didn't match the pictures posted online at all but, then again, I didn't expect them to since I don't expect anyone to do the technical things that would be required to make such pictures color accurate.

Would it not easier to just send the lights back than to calibrate everything?
 
Would it not easier to just send the lights back than to calibrate everything?

For me? No, going to the UPS store takes more effort than maintaining the color correct system I already have. For someone starting from scratch? Of course it's easier to just play the tint lotto and send back what you don't like.
 
Back
Top