Re: PAW 2006 - 37 - GDG
If there was no incitement meant, why do you insist on continuing
with this sneering, 'holier than thou' bullshit?
- "How you present your work is certainly your choice."
- "Didn't mean to make you so defensive."
The fact of life is ... I don't care what people use to look at stuff
on the web. That's their choice ... or problem as the case might be.
What I post on the web is known to be a low-rez rendering of a high
quality print. It is properly adjusted, converted to sRGB colorspace,
and tagged with a profile to give the maximum possible chance of
looking good, but no amount of fussing or fiddling will ever make it
look perfect on all systems, all monitors. Why waste the time?
There's so much variability in monitors and browsers, unless you're
on Apple equipment, that it doesn't matter what kind of tweaking you
do to make things look good on your test system. It will look
different on every other Windows system unless it is set up
identically to yours.
The fact that you would even bring up this kind of picayune nonsense
as a comment on someone's photographs is what is irritating. This is
a photography list theoretically for enthusiasts who understand a
tiny bit about computers and photography. It is well known to people
on this list that what you see in a web browser is only a reflection
of the reality. It's kinda like looking at 1960s Life magazine
issues ... the print quality is crappy as all hell, but you can see
the beauty of the photographs regardless if you suspend the belief