PC v's Mac editing comparison

[KevinJackson]

Ok, I just loaded CS3 on my Macbook Pro and thought I'd edit the same image there, and on my PC using CS2 to compare.

The Mac has the non-glossy LCD and my PC monitor is high end CRT by iiyama. I've reconfigured my Macbook LCD's Gamma setting to 2.2 from the default setting of 1.8 as that seems to widely recommended for viewing images across to PC's.

The images were both adjusted for levels and slight noise reduction, and one of them had some sharpening done to the high-res version before resizing. Both were converted from RAW to TIFF files, edited, then saved as Jpegs.

The image edited on the Macbook had tons of detail in the darker areas of the F-117s but after transferring it to the PC monitor it looked much darker with far less shadow detail. I then edited another version from scratch on the PC and adjusted the levels so that looked similar compared to the one on my Mac's LCD next to it. So obviously one of these is better than the other but I'm not sure which, so I'd like people's opinions based on what they look like on their screens!

I'm trying to work out if my Macbook's screen is up to editing accurately?

I'm not going to tell you which is which yet, so just give me your opinion on which looks more accurate to you. You could always click on the image but I'd rather you didn't pre-judge!

Edit A:


Edit B:


All input is welcome, I'm always wondering what my edits look like on others monitors, especially when I read comments on other shots saying they look dark or light and they look fine to me! If you adjust the levels in PS, does that give you a accurate image whatever it views like?

[skippyscage]

"A" looks miles better to me - "B" is far too light for my tastes

I've given up even trying to edit on a laptop (in the field) - the screens are far too small to tell what is going on - and I hate those new shinny screens - yuk!

I would guess the Mac book will suffer from the same constraints as a laptop?

A better comparison would be a Mac book to a laptop or a PC to a Mac... but them again I have no idea about anything to do with Macs 

(oh - and I'm viewing on a widescreen "non shinny screen" Dell laptop - as my main PC needs a kick up the a%* - non calibrated)

looked again on my Dell PC with widescreen monitor - still prefer "A" - but they are noticeably different with regards to lightness/darkness - more detail in "B", but there will be as it is overall a lighter edit. (calibrated)

HTH

[RomeoCharlie]

I like A also. It seems like there less noise in A compared to B.

[M.M.]

On my uncalibrated desktop LCD monitor, B looks too light -- the F-117s are bordering on dark grey rather than being black.  The cyan sky looks unreal, too.

"A" looks too dark when both images are viewed at the same time, but when seen by itself it's just about right.

-M.M.

[Comet]

On my system, which has been calibrated, offering B looks better than A.  I see more detail in the planes from the nose to the midsection, whereas in A, there is very little detail. 

[Roger]

On my calibrated monitor I think somewhere in between A and B would be perfect   A looks too dark, but B looks to bright.  The sky in B looks good, but the blacks aren't black.  The sky in A looks to dark gray.

Of course I wasn't there, so I don't know what the real conditions looked like.

Roger

[UK_Tomcat_Fan]

a looks better in my view.. but then again my screen isnt calibrated any way all in all....

Good shot

[Tonyz]

I have both Mac and PC side by side, both running PS.  I think it really comes down to the monitor more than anything else.  

I much prefer the Mac overall, but the PS environment is virtually the same.  (Both machines hook to the same monitor and I switch them back and forth.  I tried an edit on the Mac and pulled it over to the PC.  They look the same on the same monitor.)

T.

[KevinJackson]

Thanks for the feedback gents, much appreciated. I'll recalibrate my monitor, and also try hooking the Macbook up to it as Tony does to see what happens then.

Those shots were shot just after sunset so are not probably the best examples to compare, although my Mac LCD screen does seem to bring out much more detail without washing out the sky. Here's a standard sunlit shot, with the first edited on the Mac screen and the other on the PC. I know which one looks better to me but I'm interested in the consensus of other viewers.

Again, nothing done except a tweek in levels, more so with the PC version, and then resized to view.

Macbook LCD screen:


PC CRT:


Which one looks natural, and if you run them though PS yourself, do they need a big dose of Levels for your screen???

[RomeoCharlie]

I have to agree with Roger, I would think somewhere in the middle would be the best.

[M.M.]

With the F-16, I'd go with the PC version.  The upper photo is dark and the landing gear looks light grey, not white.  The lower seems a tiny bit too bright on this monitor but is probably just right on a CRT.

-M.M.

[Comet]

I'm interested in your comments once both systems are calibrated.  I do know that the gamma defaults should be different between the 2 systems.  I wouldn't change the native gamma of the mac screen. calibrate it from the default gamma and you should have a better chance of receiving results you can compare in print, or both shots on one system or the other.

[Roger]

Kev,

Of those last two, I like the PC edit the best, although the sky seems to be too bright.  The plane looks good though.

Roger

[IcecreamLtDan]

I was getting ready to ask myself if your screens are both calibrated.  I've edited pictures on both my laptop and PC and while the pictures look the same on each system, when I swapped them to the other computer there were obvious differences.  After calibrating both screens, which are both LCD's by the way, the same picture looks almost the same on each screen.  My desktop monitor is an NEC Multisync 90GX, which has the bright coating on it, while the Acer has a typical laptop screen so that's the difference in mine.

[Bieg]

How are you calibrating your monitors?  Unless you use a sensor on them (such as a Spyder, etc...) all bets are off.  Trying to ask us to judge when we don't know what the original file is supposed to look like is sort of pointless.  Take a perfectly exposed picture of a McBeth Color Chart and post that and we would have some sort of reference.  Too many variables right now to make any sort of judgement.