I'm just currious how many out there use a MacBook Pro to edit on, and what your experiences with it are?

I normally keep the LCD brightness up around the max (which is very bright on the new LED backlit MacBook Pros) but I am starting to realize that it's throwing off my perception of the levels in my photos.

For instance in the last photo in this set http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/594474 I am now realizing (I'm at work with a different LCD) that the photo is extremly dark, and at home on my MacBook Pro it looks significantly better.

Would calibrating my monitor with one of the tools out there fix my issue (like the ColorVision Spyder2 for instance)?

Thanks!

Yes, take a look at this article:

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-8741-9027

One thing to keep in mind. All devices in the calibration chain have their own characteristics. In RG's article he states that he liked the old MacBook display over the new display. I think it's human nature to like what we already know. So changing to a different device might initially be problematic, until it's part of your regular day-to-day workflow and you slowly learn the new device.

I recently purchased a MacBook Pro for shooting tethered in the studio. I don't like how the LCD displays reds. I do my color correction on a crt where the reds are more pleasing to me. Additional differences between my crt and laptop lcd, the laptop has a slight bit more contrast, the crt has slightly better color.

Calibration will fix a majority of the problems but slight device variance will probably still be visible...

designguy wrote:
In RG's article he states that he liked the old MacBook display over the new display.



I don't think you read the whole article. This is what he had to say:

"The inescapable conclusion is this: calibrated and profiled as described above, the screens in the older 15-inch and 17-inch MacBook Pros don't quite cut it, but the new MacBook Pro 15 inch model with LED backlighting displays colour that's pleasingly close to the mark. And while the new laptop has the same tight viewing angle as the older models, it's less of a problem in reality because of the aforementioned near-elimination of colour oversaturation problems."

If you read his calibration technique, you might be able to get rid of your color cast.

designguy wrote:
One thing to keep in mind. All devices in the calibration chain have their own characteristics. In RG's article he states that he liked the old MacBook display over the new display. I think it's human nature to like what we already know. So changing to a different device might initially be problematic, until it's part of your regular day-to-day workflow and you slowly learn the new device.

I recently purchased a MacBook Pro for shooting tethered in the studio. I don't like how the LCD displays reds. I do my color correction on a crt where the reds are more pleasing to me. Additional differences between my crt and laptop lcd, the laptop has a slight bit more contrast, the crt has slightly better color.

Calibration will fix a majority of the problems but slight device variance will probably still be visible...
Good point Designguy, after years working with CRT displays...when i finally had to get an LCD i initially did not like it, but now im used to it and love it.

I've always used a crt, still do, but it's clearly trying hard to die. I have to recalibrate about every third day now. If I never shut it off it stays calibrated better but turning it off seems to set some evil genie in motion that likes the color pink.
So if you were in need of a new monitor and thought you would like to try an LCD what would you buy?

shoeless wrote:
I normally keep the LCD brightness up around the max (which is very bright on the new LED backlit MacBook Pros) but I am starting to realize that it's throwing off my perception of the levels in my photos.


Maximum brightness is not a good idea. Firstly it is too bright to work with for long periods. Secondly, it wears out the light source faster. Thirdly, it's like reading books in the bright sun without the aid of sunglasses. Fouthly, it loses all sense of reality whenever you compare it with any other device or print.

The recommended brightness is around 100 Cd/m2. Maybe a little brighter if it is farther away from you. That gives a reasonably bright white that corresponds nicely with what you'd see on a white part of a print in normal white lighting.

Would calibrating my monitor with one of the tools out there fix my issue (like the ColorVision Spyder2 for instance)?


Absolutely ! Consider it compulsory for all digital photographers.

Your computer lets you work on image files, but displaying the images is different from storing or working on them. The display part is prone to translation errors due to incorrect or no calibration and profiling. You can give the file to anyone and they all have the same thing, but it's their monitors that show them what the contents look like. Only if their monitors are calibrated and profiled can they all expect to see the same thing as everyone one else from that identical image file.

You must not edit your file to suit your screen or your printer output. Otherwise the result will only look right on your system and nobody else's. You should get the screen and printer right and then you edit the file to suit your artistic intent, knowing that it will be shown correctly on your system (screen or print) and on mine too (because mine is also calibrated and profiled).

- Alan