# Adaptive display screens and online photography



## Firefenex (Apr 5, 2018)

If you have a galaxy s8 you probably arent that familiar with amoled, basic, and adaptive screen settings unless you dived into google searches or are very curious about what your phone can do. These are all different setting that change your color temp, saturation, shadows, etc.  By default this phone and most likely future phones will default to adaptive display, which increases vibrancy beyond the normal threshold for most screens. 

My question is how do other photographers feel about this setting and their editing decisions based off this fact?

Essentially you can be editing for future galaxy products exclusively until this trend picks up universally, or you can ignore galaxy products. The easy answer for most is universal norm over potential trend, but this can also effect social media and potential business so its conflicting.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Firefenex (Apr 5, 2018)

Firefenex said:


> If you have a galaxy s8 you probably arent that familiar with amoled, basic, and adaptive screen settings unless you dived into google searches or are very curious about what your phone can do. These are all different setting that change your color temp, saturation, shadows, etc.  By default this phone and most likely future phones will default to adaptive display, which increases vibrancy beyond the normal threshold for most screens.
> 
> My question is how do other photographers feel about this setting and their editing decisions based off this fact?
> 
> ...


This also includes settings like "blue light filter." Sorry I forgot to include that.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Overread (Apr 5, 2018)

I don't think this will have an effect on many photographers. 

First up most won't be editing their photos on galaxy screens; the majority of photographers will be using computers at home if they do any editing. Of course casual snapshots taken with the unit will likely be edited on the unit itself but they are likely to be more in the realm of snapshots than close to art or "photography" (although this dividing line is one of those tricky things to establish so its best left as a very general concept)

Secondly the settings are not unique to galaxy in the least. In fact every screen (even the big old CRT ones) had those settings and modern LCD screens in phones, tablets, pcs and TVs are all generally set to be high contrast, bright and vivid colours. It's why photographers will purchase 3rd party calibration hardware to calibrate their screens to a more sensible and fixed default value (that I personally find also takes a huge amount of the glare people complain about, out of LCD screens)


----------



## snowbear (Apr 5, 2018)

Like any other screen, I can only control the "appearance" of my own, through calibration.  Since I mainly shoot for myself, I'm not really worried about it.


----------



## Firefenex (Apr 5, 2018)

Overread said:


> I don't think this will have an effect on many photographers.
> 
> First up most won't be editing their photos on galaxy screens; the majority of photographers will be using computers at home if they do any editing. Of course casual snapshots taken with the unit will likely be edited on the unit itself but they are likely to be more in the realm of snapshots than close to art or "photography" (although this dividing line is one of those tricky things to establish so its best left as a very general concept)
> 
> Secondly the settings are not unique to galaxy in the least. In fact every screen (even the big old CRT ones) had those settings and modern LCD screens in phones, tablets, pcs and TVs are all generally set to be high contrast, bright and vivid colours. It's why photographers will purchase 3rd party calibration hardware to calibrate their screens to a more sensible and fixed default value (that I personally find also takes a huge amount of the glare people complain about, out of LCD screens)


Not editing on a phone, but displaying on a phone screen.  One thing I've noticed is that phones tend to bump them up and alter the photo to undesirable settings.  Especially colors in skin tone.  Edit on a computer and then compare them side by side and you should see in your different phone settings. But if no one cares then that the answer I'm looking for.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Overread (Apr 6, 2018)

It's not that no one cares its that unless you are making a photo for a specific mobile phone display, then there's really no way to edit photos to look "perfect "on every single screen out there. So a standard calibration (often set for print standard) is what most photographers use. It works generally well on most screens and shows good on theirs.


----------



## AlanKlein (Apr 6, 2018)

My Galaxy S7 has a plastic sheet from the phone case that protects it.  So I don't think I see the best colors or lighting from the cellphone itself.  Does anyone notice the difference?  Most of these things are pushed by the manufacturers to differentiate themselves from their competitors so they can sell their products.  Most people looking at their phones don't even notice and can't tell one from the other unless they line two phones next to one another.  Otherwise they all look the same.    It's all hype.


----------



## espresso2x (Apr 6, 2018)

I agree Alan, eyes adjust. I edit on a large iMac screen and even though it's uncalibrated, my pictures look great on any decent display IMO, including the Samsung tablet i use.


----------



## ac12 (Apr 7, 2018)

Standard industry problem.
You cannot control the color setting of the monitor (monitor, tablet, or phone) that people use.
TV settings are bright and vivid to make you want to buy the TV, not for color accuracy.
And like TVs the default setting of most monitors is very likely different than a calibrated monitor.  They want the colors to be vivid, not realistic.

But even then there can be differences.
I calibrate my monitor, but at a lower brightness than the calibration program specifies.  
This is because I use my monitor for a LOT of other things than photo editing.   When I look at a white window, such as this forum, or a MS WORD screen, it would look like looking at a light bulb, tooooo bright for comfortable viewing.  So I have to lower the brightness to a tolerable level, then run the color calibration.
Unfortunately I have not found a current monitor that has a "bright" button, so that I can have 2 brightness settings; 1st bright for photos and video and 2nd dimmer for everything else.  My old Sony CRT monitor had that button, and it was nice.


----------

