Are these pictures too dark or ok?

[rgrebby]

Im using a new monitor (dell 24") and how no clue if images are displaying correctly. They look fine to me but feedback is very welcome.



http://www.richardgrebby.co.uk/pictures/nature/nature-20.jpg

http://www.richardgrebby.co.uk/pictures/nature/nature-21.jpg

http://www.richardgrebby.co.uk/pictures/nature/nature-22.jpg

http://www.richardgrebby.co.uk/pictures/nature/nature-23.jpg

http://www.richardgrebby.co.uk/pictures/nature/nature-24.jpg

http://www.richardgrebby.co.uk/pictures/nature/nature-25.jpg

http://www.richardgrebby.co.uk/pictures/nature/nature-27.jpg

http://www.richardgrebby.co.uk/pictures/nature/nature-28.jpg

[DStanic]

They do look a bit dark, hard to see details in the shadows. Most LCDs are too bright by default, huge difference once I calibrated mine with Spyder2 express.

[PhotosGuy]

I can see detail in the shadow side of the rhino, so it looks OK to me in in color managed Firefox3. It's too dark in IE.

[JeffreyG]

They are dark.

[asty80]

They all do look a bit dark...

[Wilt]

Dark. Go to dpreview.com and look at one of the camera tests (e.g. Canon 5D2)...at the bottom of the first page they show a grayscale step wedge and tell you to adjust your monitor to view almost the entire grayscale and also be able to discern one step from another. That puts you not only 'in the ballpark' but very close.

[Perry Ge]

Yeah dark. And oh man, I could recognize that 70-300 IS bokeh from a mile away :lol:.

[srsuser]

slightly underexposed.

[René Damkot]

Yep, dark.

[SkipD]

I agree with the underexposed analysis.

You really need to use a calibrated monitor. When a monitor is properly calibrated, it is calibrated both for brightness range and color.

[Wilt]

For sake of emphasis about what you can do very rapidly...
Go to dpreview.com and look at one of the camera tests (e.g. Canon 5D2)...at the bottom of the first page they show a grayscale step wedge and tell you to adjust your monitor to view almost the entire grayscale and also be able to discern one step from another. That puts you not only 'in the ballpark' but very close.

[Hermeto]

http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/common/grayscale.gif

[Wilt]

Hermeto's step wedge seems to be reproducing more darkly than the one on dpreview.com
(I just checked side by side.) But it is merely that the one on dpreview is on a midtone background and his is on a white background...optical illusion!

[borism]

Dark to me

[jrm27]

Is that the DEll 2408wfp? I have the 2208wfp and am strugglign with how bright a screen it is!

[snowyowl13]

Hermeto's step wedge seems to be reproducing more darkly than the one on dpreview.com
(I just checked side by side.) But it is merely that the one on dpreview is on a midtone background and his is on a white background...optical illusion!
On the dpreview wedge, I can easily see from C to Z so i guess i must be in the ballpark at least. Nice reassurance.

[blissonearth]

they're a bit dark especially #4.

[Wilt]

On the dpreview wedge, I can easily see from C to Z so i guess i must be in the ballpark at least. Nice reassurance.

That is indicating your monitor is turned up too bright! which explains why your photos are too dark.

[SamClarkPhotography]

Dark

[rgrebby]

Is that the DEll 2408wfp? I have the 2208wfp and am strugglign with how bright a screen it is!


Yes it is this monitor.
I'll have a look at the Dpreview site. As for the lens, all these were taken with the Sigma 70-300 APO lens not my new Canon 70-300 IS :)

Looking at that graph of greyscale, I can see all the different shades anyway.

brightness is 35
contrast 50

[Wilt]

Yes it is this monitor.
I'll have a look at the Dpreview site. As for the lens, all these were taken with the Sigma 70-300 APO lens not my new Canon 70-300 IS :)

Looking at that graph of greyscale, I can see all the different shades anyway.

brightness is 35
contrast 50

dpreview instructions, "Dpreview use calibrated monitors at the PC normal gamma 2.2, this means that on our monitors we can make out the difference between all of the grayscale blocks below. We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally also A, B and C."

[PhotosGuy]

(I just checked side by side.) But it is merely that the one on dpreview is on a midtone background and his is on a white background...optical illusion! Good point. That is why I don't use a white mat for prints. Take a look at POST #30 near the bottom: The gray bar at the center is the same density all the way across.
A few Car Lighting Tips (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=70290)

And, people should state what browser they're using to evaluate the scale. My post above: I can see detail in the shadow side of the rhino, so it looks OK to me in in color managed Firefox3. It's too dark in IE.

[HappySnapper90]

Yes it is this monitor.
I'll have a look at the Dpreview site. As for the lens, all these were taken with the Sigma 70-300 APO lens not my new Canon 70-300 IS :)

Looking at that graph of greyscale, I can see all the different shades anyway.

brightness is 35
contrast 50
Is your monitor calibrated? Probably not. It'll be a big help since monitors are generally set to be higher in brightness and contrast as default settings because the average computer user likes that "look".

And you should be minding the image histogram. Learning it and using it as a big judge of image exposure/brightness will guide you alot. Some of your posted photos are at least 1.5 stops under exposed.

You should also be checking your histogram while taking the pictures to help you properly record as much light as possible.

[SaraEmily]

I do like slightly under/over exposed images, they can have almost a surreal feel to them. Some of your shots look cool the way they are, but for the most part they do need more light to them.

[purd002]

close, but a little too dark for me