Really?! You don't need to calibrate your screen not even for printing

[abennettphotography]

I was gobsmacked when I read this. Goes against everything I've seen and read. Anyone else any opinions?
https://mattk.com/i-finally-decided-on-a-monitor-for-my-2022-macbook-pro/

[Mike Farley]

If you think that strange, Brooks Jensen of LensWork reckons using the sRGB profile for printing works every time regardless of whatever paper or printer is used. His article is behind a paywall so I cannot link to it. I have not tried this for myself but Jensen has had a long career in publishing so I am inclined to believe there is some merit to the idea.

Other than the goofy picture of him on his website, I know nothing of MattK. Back in the day of CRT monitors, regular calibration was a necessity as colour accuracy deteriorated over the life of the tube. These days, higher end monitors are well calibrated out of the factory and less susceptible to change in use. Which is just as well, as the Apple XDR screen he bought cannot be calibrated with a standard bit of kit such as a ColorMunki. Mind you, for that kind of money, perfection should be the least of expectations.

What MattK does not mention is the effect of ambient conditions. Professionals work in rooms illuminated only by daylight balanced lighting, walls painted 18% grey and hoods on the monitors to ensure colour accuracy. Try putting a monitor without a hood against a wall painted a vivid magenta in a room lit by a tungsten bulb and colour perception will be all over the place. The same principle equally applies to viewing prints. Calibration takes only a few minutes and can run unattended, so personally I would not skip it before working on a portfolio print. Aside from the cost of ink and paper (or lab costs), getting everything right takes time and effort. Why take the risk?