Really sorry for being weird, but during voting I happened to look at my 'best of' entry on another monitor and I was absolutely mortified.. It wasn't a case of looking a bit more darker or slightly lighter.. It looked like complete and utter rubbish.. all pixelated and brightened.. looked like it was taken from a mobile phone from the 90s.. I almost pulled my picture out..
I have absolutely no problems about my average, just wanted to know if it really looks like that for everyone.. am I the one whose monitor is set up all wrong..
Right now I am on the worst monitor, as far as graphical resolution and representation, of all my computers and it looks fine. None of what you described.
Really sorry for being weird, but during voting I happened to look at my 'best of' entry on another monitor and I was absolutely mortified.. It wasn't a case of looking a bit more darker or slightly lighter.. It looked like complete and utter rubbish.. all pixelated and brightened.. looked like it was taken from a mobile phone from the 90s.. I almost pulled my picture out..
I have absolutely no problems about my average, just wanted to know if it really looks like that for everyone.. am I the one whose monitor is set up all wrong..
My monitor has been recently calibrated with a Spyder3 and overall, the levels & tones look fine, just seems a bit harsh/too sharp. We easily want to sharpen up a lot in our images, but our brain can play tricks on us in that a softer image can look sharper and more natural. I often will apply a soft focus filter then resharpen. We really don't see as well as our images often look on a monitor in front of us. I have been recently skewing my editing to the softer look, often done simply during resizing using Bicubic smoother or Bicubic, rather than Bicubic Sharper.
Take a look at the before & after here:
-----------Original-------- -------------Edit------------
Open each in a new window, then switch between them in the task bar to see changes.
All I did was to open yours, add a warming filter to shift & richen the tones, then applied a soft focus filter lightly in a new layer via copy (light pass of gaussian blur can do the same), faded it back to suit, then bumped the contrast slightly. Was about a 2 minute process.
Really sorry for being weird, but during voting I happened to look at my 'best of' entry on another monitor and I was absolutely mortified.. It wasn't a case of looking a bit more darker or slightly lighter.. It looked like complete and utter rubbish.. all pixelated and brightened.. looked like it was taken from a mobile phone from the 90s.. I almost pulled my picture out..
I have absolutely no problems about my average, just wanted to know if it really looks like that for everyone.. am I the one whose monitor is set up all wrong..
My monitor has been recently calibrated with a Spyder3 and overall, the levels & tones look fine, just seems a bit harsh/too sharp. We easily want to sharpen up a lot in our images, but our brain can play tricks on us in that a softer image can look sharper and more natural. I often will apply a soft focus filter then resharpen. We really don't see as well as our images often look on a monitor in front of us. I have been recently skewing my editing to the softer look, often done simply during resizing using Bicubic smoother or Bicubic, rather than Bicubic Sharper.
Take a look at the before & after here:
-----------Original-------- -------------Edit------------
Open each in a new window, then switch between them in the task bar to see changes.
All I did was to open yours, add a warming filter to shift & richen the tones, then applied a soft focus filter lightly in a new layer via copy (light pass of gaussian blur can do the same), faded it back to suit, then bumped the contrast slightly. Was about a 2 minute process.
wow! There is so much stuff, I've never considered before..I'm off to bed now.. but will come back to re-absorb.. *turns into a sponge*
