Shrug. It's probably something I learned when I was shooting film eons ago. You didn't get to review your images until they were developed. Unless you developed them yourself there was always a lag.
Editing really needs to be done on a monitor that is color calibrated. At a minimum you should have a known color temperature of the monitor set. Some of the Apple laptops are good enough to edit on. Apple really specializes in this. The bulk of the rest are not calibrated and most can't have the color settings adjusted very much.
You can get a device called a
spyder that will simplify calibration on your monitor if you want to get good. The spyder reads the colors and can be used to calibrate the monitor to be accurate. Anyone earning a living from their work is editing on color calibrated equipment in a controlled lighting environment. This lets you get the most accurate view of the image and prevents "color shift" when you output the image on media.
I had a printing company for 10 years when I grew tired of IT consulting. Printing is slightly different in that you are usually working with pantone colors. However it's nice to print something and have it look like you saw it and how it appeared on the computer. How you saw it can and often is manipulated to create a more attractive image, but nonetheless. Nothing is worse than printing an image and having the colors shift from what you saw on the computer.
To get accurate color reproduction you need a color calibrated display for editing and a decent printer that has the right ICC profile loaded for the inkset in use. Every inkset has slightly different behavior.
