ohsnaphappy wrote:
iMac guy since 2009. If I buy an Eizo for a ton of money and edit wedding pics, will the pics look correct on my bride's iPhone? That's really all that matters in my industry. Editing on an iMac the colors are identical to the iPhone and brides are always happy.
I think the best metric to go by, is to have a monitor that is absolutely accurate. Other peoples' screens will most likely be off - they'll be too warm, too cold, too contrasty, to dark, too bright...
The thing is we don't know what other monitors truly look like, so the best strategy is to have images correct on a totally neutral monitor.
A quality monitor has no character, no quirks, doesn't make a picture "look good." It merely displays the whole contrast range without artefacts or tonal imperfections. It will be stable all day long and the screen will be even all over both in colour and brightness with a very low delta performance. It will show at least the gamut range which we deliver in and it will be colour accurate.
We use calibration hardware to check colour accuracy because it is rare to find a monitor which is truly accurate out of the box. (Even the same brand of panels will perform differently from each other and they have a knack of drifting).
By matching to another flawed device like an uncalibrated iPhone invites all sorts of problems. And not every iPhone looks the same. And what of the people who view on different screens, or what about getting quality prints done?
It is a curse that everyone's screen looks different. When I had a music studio 30 years ago it pained me that someone may listen on a cassette in their car which sounded awful. So forget about matching different clients' screens. Best just deliver accurate versions of your carefully created work.
