I get the point… but I would counterargue, perhaps facetiously, that if one needs a professionally color calibrated screen to notice the difference, then it is really not something that would matter for mere mortals.

▲

prox 6 days ago | parent | next [-]

Without hyperbole I could give people a badly calibrated CRT from the 90s and it doesn’t matter to some. Some people just don’t see anything wrong with pictures, and don’t even know what to look for or what it’s called.

The inverse are the professional photographers who work with pictures day in and out, they see everything.

▲

Quarrel 6 days ago | parent | next [-]

I am amazed at the eye professional photographers have. A shot of a building that is suddenly really interesting, versus my shot of that building. Colour. Angle. etc.

I just don't have the eye for it, despite having a decent amateur setup.

BUT, yes, lots of people might look at a random photo on their phone and not notice skintones, or the fisheye etc. If you then give them a pile of 10 photos from a pro, versus 10 from an amateurs phone, they'll notice. Particularly if they're blown up a bit on a print or a decent screen.

It might not matter if you are just flicking through 20 shots on your phone, but as the article implies, we have perception of these things, even when it is the subconscious.

▲

throw0101c 6 days ago | parent | next [-]

> I just don't have the eye for it, despite having a decent amateur setup.

Checkout this book by the late† Bryan Peterson, where he shows photos taken by his students as well as his own of the same location, and explains the differences in techniques/settings:

* https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/54228164-bryan-peters...

His Understanding series of books are also good (Exposure is worth checking out if you know nothing about camera settings):

* https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/82078.Bryan_Peterson

† April 2025: https://www.crottyfh.com/obituaries/bryan-peterson

	▲	lb1lf 6 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Oh, I am saddened to hear of Peterson's passing. Way back when, I bought a couple of his books, probably on the recommendation of someone or other in an online photography forum - 'Understanding Exposure' and 'Learning to see creatively'. The latter in particular was wonderful for someone who had the technical aspects of photography more or less sorted, but was - ahem - deficient in the artistic department. Anyway, I felt his style was incredible - down-to-earth, but not afraid to go into a bit of background if needed - so I sent off a brief letter of thanks through his publisher. Lo and behold, got a very nice letter back, thanking my for the kind words and encouraging me (I had mentioned that I shot both film and digital, seeing as at the time, a wonderful film camera like the F5 could be had for a fraction of what even an entry-level APS-C DSLR cost) to experiment A LOT using the DSLR, as the instant feedback provided would help my analog hit rate progress leaps and bounds. I was already thinking a bit along those lines, but became a lot more conscious about trying to improve my skills using the DSLR upon his encouragement - and my photos improved a lot over the following years as a result. Thanks, Bryan.
	▲	Quarrel 6 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Thanks, that looks great.

▲

amelius 6 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Perhaps the amateurs have an internal network in their brain that corrects for badly shot photos.

The professionals have learned to shut off that network.

▲

1718627440 6 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I mean we are used to completely different colour profiles in reality also. You don't perceive the colors compared to the room light, you perceive them relative to the other colors on the screen, so the screen doesn't really matter.

▲

josephg 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Do those photos look similar to you? Those color differences are huge to me. And some of the stylistic choices the image processing has made make them look like photos of different people.

▲

ubercore 6 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't think the point was to say you need the calibrated monitor to notice, rather that it's _even more stark_, and clearly points to the issues raised in the article.

And to be fair, the thrust of the article was "Why don't you see printed and frame iPhone photos", and these things that might be a bit subtle on an un-calibrated screen are going to be a big deal if you professionally print it.