Shutterstock Photographer Forum :: View topic

jatrax · Joined: 07 May 2011 Posts: 242 Location: Pacific Northwest

Recently I have been getting a few rejections for "underexposed". They look fine on my monitor, maybe even a little too bright. My monitor is calibrated using Spyder3.

So I was wondering if there are any recommendations for monitor settings for stock, maybe brighter than what Spyder recommends?

I am using a gamma of 2.2 and brightness of 120. I don't know if those are standard numbers or if every calibration system uses something different. I cannot say I know a whole lot about this, just followed the instructions.

Anyway, just looking for any comments or suggestions on how to get my monitor at its best.

hansenn · Joined: 10 Feb 2009 Posts: 827 Location: netherlands

Maybe its because of the time of the day you are processing your images.
Sometimes, when i do my processing in daylight, i check the images later that day when its pretty dark. Often i notice some underexposed images, who seems to be ok earlier that day.

tacna · Joined: 11 Feb 2006 Posts: 2156 Location: always new

I had power saving settings on previous laptop. Compare - old images were more dark.

rinder99 · Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 3:52 pm

I process in a very dark room. I find that if I don't it doesn't work as well.And I have a big hood on my Monitor.

jatrax · Joined: 07 May 2011 Posts: 242 Location: Pacific Northwest

Thanks for all the comments.

I use a fairly dark room as well, and the light has not changed there and I usually work at night so it should be consistent. The Spyder3 has a gizmo that monitors ambient light and adjusts for changes if any.

I do not know much about monitor calibration and have followed Spyder's recommendation. I guess I was wondering if folks used non-standard settings to get more consistent images for stock. The recommended settings have always seemed fine, just starting to get "under-exposed" rejections for some reason.

So any comments on how to setup the monitor would be appreciated.

jirsak · Joined: 14 May 2008 Posts: 37

I was told that norm is 100 candela (cd) for LCD brightness (not only for stock photography but in general). But it depends on ambient light too. And how do your eyes "like" more or less brighter LCD.

whughes98144 · Joined: 26 Apr 2010 Posts: 500 Location: Seattle, WA

You know, besides posting them to see if others agree, I think this is really just one of the 'random rejection reasons'.

LCV, lighting, etc are just what they punch when they don't like it. Seen it too often, whatever.

I'd punch them up +.25EV in PS and resubmit with a note if you think they're worth fighting for. Otherwise I wouldn't start worrying about your monitor, etc.

One thing you might do is borrow someone's Macbook and look at your shots there. Just to see if you see any big differences. But beyond, just drive on.

Your port looks really solid to me. Nice colors, great brightness. I doubt there's really anything wrong with your setup.

Will