• A Graphic Artist or 3D modeller should opt for is 1360 x 768. However, recommend going for 1920 x 1080.
• Architects, Animators, or Game Developers, should go above 1920 x 1080.
• Video Editors, recommend 1920 x 1080 as a minimum, with 4K video, then go for a screen resolution of 3840 x 2160.
• PHOTOGRAPHERS, recommend going for the highest resolution you can afford. A camera that takes 21-megapixel photos is actually capturing images at 5,104 x 4,092 resolution. The higher the resolution of the screen, the better (and more accurately) your photos will appear.
One problem is that even if you and the Judge were using the same monitor; you could easily see different colours. It depends on your eyes and the wiring of the brain; it also could be determined in part by social factors. How the room is lit will also have an effect. There is also a debate out there whether purple is actually a real colour ''Scientifically, purple is not a color because there is no beam of pure light that looks purple. There is no light wavelength that corresponds to purple.'' Then again what about blue; there is a significant variation of hues that correspond to blue. I would be very surprised if a judge rejected your image on the grounds it is not blue; unless the rule stated that that everything in the image was blue.
well..if you go to the image page, there is the section 'Colors'...clicking on the shade of blue ( R167, G167, B253 ) which is listed there will show similar images..most of the images will be with clear blue sky..which is correct, the chicory flower imitating exactly that shade of blue..so the culprit might be the color space of the mobile phone
Computers aren't color blind, they can be out of calibration. And the camera may not pick up certain colors. A small camera may not see the purple in a flower, or a red may be too red. You will need to calibrate to see the color properly, that color above looks blue to me with a hint of purple. Resolution shouldn't make a difference if its your own monitor.
Resolution has nothing to do with color, only detail. If you shoot, always use RAW so you get all the colors, but also buy a calibrator.
Https://rgb.to/167,167,253 that link is blue, but it leans to purple. I would say its a pale lilac. On my phone, the camera anyway, its blue. And loading the link on my phone, it looks the same as my monitor but its much lighter. And on my other monitor that has always leaned to red, it looks like a light purple. Which is why I don't use it for graphics any more, it was always too warm.
This thread turned out to be more useful than was intended. Color calibration is an issue.
What I've noticed is that usually mobile devices are not so accurate in displaying the color gamut.
In the given example here, the FAA already has identified the shade as rgb(167,167,253)...which imho is correct to that chicory flower (I have also some imagery with that flower, but not uploaded)..and the problem is from displaying that shade.
This event gives me a lot to think, how potential clients might miss some artistic aspects of the artworks, for the simply fact that they are viewing the images from uncalibrated devices.
That site also provides a color check on printscreens. (https://www.rapidtables.com/web/color/color-tester.html)
I'd suggest a three way comparison. Shoot a picture, look at what comes straight out of the camera on your computer screen, look at the edited version and then compare them to a printed version. If FAA is your standard, buy one of those and adjust your screen or do a home print and make adjustments. A single, universal color balance doesn't happen in the real world for a variety of reasons, but if you do the comparison, then at least the "errors" are predictable.
I use a Mac Pro laptop, which has a wonderful screen, but, even with that, the color balance needs to be compared to a real world standard AND, is different depending on whether I have the power supply plugged in or are using the battery.
By the way, what I see on my screen looks like the color of a chicory flower.
When I look at it on my newest iPad that has all kind of fancy color technology I can't remember the name of, the flower is more purple with soft violet highlights at the bottom and moves through a gradient to bluer purplish tones at the top with blue highlights. At a glance, I would say I saw a blue flower.
I am not near as tech-savvy as some here, but I know what I see when I look at it.
I have 10-12 computers here, some are laptops, and some are desktops. I have an iPhone and a couple of iPads.
I have most of the laptops hooked up to an external monitor. NONE of the laptops monitors, none of the iPhones or iPad give me the same colors as my HP 25vx external monitor. Not even close.
I print out dozens of prints a month myself and have others printed at professional printers. The colors are dead on with what I see on my HP external monitor. I would never even attempt to upload images using my laptops, iPhones, or iPad without proofing them on the external monitor first.
That's my experience. I am sure there will be people that use a laptop or phone and report great results.
The chicory flower is a traditional example of 'blue' flower...and your capture is amazing..and it is also blue...the color code associated by FAA is also a shade blue. So anyone who sees it violet, has some colorspace issue.
There is a hint of violet at the base of the petals, when the light is shining through the petal multiple times...that is an optical effect, you can witness that even with a white sheet of paper (chromatic dispersion)...just fold a sheet of paper many times and look to a light source trough it...
Intrigued by what I've read here , I've checked and compared some images on different mobile devices running Android...they all suck.I seldom use mobile devices to view artistic imagery, so did not pay too much attention to this color gamut issue. So what I would advise is do NOT use mobile device displays to evaluate artistic imagery. The manufactureres (except camera makers) seemingly don't care about this aspect. The colorspaces are not accurate and coversions are crap.
(for the discussed blue shade issue, forget about the flower..just compare the Facebook logo on different mobile displays...there are no two the same)
Flowers are notoriously difficult in the field of color reproduction, especially blue ones, because they contain dyes with what might be called distinct spectral reflectance curves. Objects with artificial dyes can pose similar problems. I've struggled with it for practically my whole life with blue (roughly) columbine flowers, which actually show a range of hues. Hunt writes about all this in his classic book "The Reproduction of Color".
Your camera is not necessarily going to reproduce all colors the way your eye sees them, and it will definitely make a difference what display device is used. The biggest problems are going to occur with highly saturated colors, and those that lie near the primary colors (R,G, and B).
The entire technology of color reproduction is actually amazing in that it works as well as it does. How something appears will depend on the adaptation state of the viewer as well as what's called the "surround", the context. Movie theatre pictures (dark surround) are quite different from looking at a reflection print in a well lit (by daylight) room.
The one thing you've got going for you is that color memory is generally not very precise, and people who have not seen the original object tend to be forgiving and will accept a range of colors as being "correct".
Color memory is indeed very tricky. I find I have the hardest time with green, especially dusty greens. If I bought a throw pillow in a department store to match a sage green couch in my living room you can bet I'd get it wrong.
I have the opposite issue. I have difficulty getting accurate photos of my purple and orange acrylic paintings. The purple appears blue on screen. I have to tweak the photo upping the red in order to get the purple to look purple instead of blue.
> On a 1360 x 768 resolution, the colour is BLUE. > But on a much higher resolution, the colour of the flower is different.
As others said, this shouldn't happen. But accepting what you say at face value, you could have a device that doesn't work correctly.
Every solid state display has a native, fixed resolution. Changing to a different resolution requires all the R, G, and B pixel values to be re-mapped on their way to the display. If this isn't done right the colors can change and become resolution dependent, as you seem to be experiencing.
I'd check with the manufacturer. It could either be a flaw in the hardware (the graphics chip/card), or it could have a firmware/software cause. Hope for the latter, as then it might be something that can be fixed.
I'd call it blue-violet. But there are really very few truly blue flowers so it isn't out of the ordinary 'blue' spectrum for flowers. Sometimes our brain interprets a color differently based on what it thinks the color should be rather than what it actually is.
Please login before posting a reply to this message. If you do not have an account on Fine Art America, click here to create one!