Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques => Topic started by: dwdallam on May 17, 2006, 04:25:53 pm
-
Can someone tell me the steps I need to take to "correctly" calibrate my monitor? I don't need the technical information, just the steps so I don't miss something. For example, last night I changed my color temp on my monitor to 6500K. Now what? I'm prepared to buy a spider also if that is needed. I can get the ColorVision Spyder2 for around 130.00 if that is adequate for the job. The pro is a little out of my range right now.
Also, in PSCS2, I have changed the working profile to Adobe RGB 1998 (Is this correct?). I'm printing on a Costco Noritsu. My Costco has informed me that they are upgrading their printer within the next two months to the newest Noritsu printer.
Most importantly, I want to see on my monitor how the print will look on the Costco Noritsu. I've recently compared the print to my monitor, and the color was not the same. It was much less saturated and ther were some color shifts. It's worse and better depending on the image, sun, colors, exposure, etc.
I save the files in tiff in Adobe RGB 1998 for output. If this is NOT the prefered choice, which?
Thanks again.
PS--I cannot access Dry Creek photo for some reason. Seems their website is having problems. If I need that profile for the Costco Printers, can someone link me to it here? Thanks.
-
Steps for LCD:
1. Reset the display to factory defaults
2. Run calibration software
3. When asked, adjust brightness. Adjust nothing else.
4. Done
The ideal settings to calibrate to would be a native whitepoint, a native gamma, and a 120cd/m2 luminance. If however any of those settings are unavailable or the display is not 6500K natively, then aim for the following: 6500K, 2.2 Gama (1.8 Mac), 140cd/m2 max luminance. If you do web-graphics and are on a Mac, I'd recommend you calibrate to a 2.2 gamma to avoid color surprises in the websites you make (I mention this only since there are some web-monkies at these forums).
Steps for CRT"
1. Run Calibration software
2. Follow all the steps and calibrate to 6500K, 2.2 Gama (1.8 Mac), 94cd/m2 max luminance
3. Done
Don't skimp on the calibrator. With the Spyder v.1 the non-pro model did not calibrate the black-point leaving you to eye-ball it. Not very good. I'm not sure about the v.2 but make sure whatever you get it will measure blacks.
a AdobeRGB tiff works. If you are working 16-bit, then you might want to consider ProPhoto to give you some more elbow room when printing.
The Costco profiles are here (http://www.drycreekphoto.com/icc/)
-
I ahve a few question perhaps you can help calrify for me.
If I'm printing on the Noritsu, should I also convert from 16 to 8 bit? You mention using Pro Photo, but won't that throw off what it looks like on screen from the Noritsu, which I believe cannot print that many colors anyway?
If I calibrate my monitor at 9300K, will that NOT give me a correct color calibration? I mean why 6500K?
I just ran Adobe Gamma, and I had it measure my current color temp. I ran that aspect of it four times, since it is eyeball, and I came up with 7500K each time, even though my monitor is set at 6500K. So I used 7500K for cal, not 6500 thinking that my monitor is drifting from what it displays is 6500K. I guess I could keep fiddleing with the manual color temp on teh monitors adjustments untill I can measure it at exactly 6500K in Adobe Gamme, if you think that would help.
You said set set 94cd/m2 max luminance. Where is this setting?
Last, will a hardware calibration method, such as the spider, do all of this without eyeballing it?
-
If I'm printing on the Noritsu, should I also convert from 16 to 8 bit? You mention using Pro Photo, but won't that throw off what it looks like on screen from the Noritsu, which I believe cannot print that many colors anyway?
The point in using ProPhoto is to allow you to better control the conversion from ProPhoto to the printer profile in Photoshop. Due to ProPhotos size, there are few printer profiles that don't fit fully within it. This means you can utilize the full range of the printers gamut whereas a smaller color space such as sRGB or even AdobeRGB will not fully encompass the printer gamut due to differing shapes of the gamuts.
If the printer can take a 16-bit image then give it one if you are letting it do the color conversion for your. If not, then there won't be a big benefit. If your image started off as a 8-bit/channel image, then there is no point whatsoever in converting to 16-bit/channel as you won't gain anything.
If I calibrate my monitor at 9300K, will that NOT give me a correct color calibration? I mean why 6500K?
While you will get a correct color calibration, 9300K is not a good choice because it is very very blue and that will have an effect on your adjustments. Your images will appear cool and that can cause you to compensate unnecessarily. 6500K is the best choice since that is close to actual daylight* and our eyes function best at that range. For those reading this with a LCD display that is 9300K native, then calibrate it to 6500K anyway. The negative effects of a monitor that is too cool will outweigh any negative effects from calibrating to a different color temp. People with CRTs don't have to worry about image degradation when adjusting color temp since the adjustments are analog adjustments to the CRTs RGB ray guns.
*I'll as a little side-point here that 6500K isn't a specific color, but a range of colors. Daylight is a very specific characteristic of light called D65. Ideally, you'd calibrate the display for D65 but there are few programs that do so.
AdobeGama is worthless. Since it depends on your eyes, which are easily fooled, you can have a very different interpretation each time you calibrate with them. The hardware calibrator will do the calibration and measure for you and be a billion-trillion times more accurate.
Your will be able to set the display to 94cd/m2 when calibrating with a hardware calibrator.
-
Excellent information Dan. Thanks much. I guess I'll buy the hardware calibration equipment today or when I get this information back. If you have one you recommend, or if others can recommend with reasons why, please let's discuss that hardware/software package.
PS--I believe the Noritsu can only print in 8 bit mode. When I forget and give the operator the disk (always in tiff) to use in the machine itself--not the kiosk--it says, "No Data Found." If I then resubmit the images (in tiff) at 8 bit, it has no problem. On the other hand, given that information, I believe that the Noritsu system automatically reduces the bit depth to 8 bits when I use the kiosk. I believe this because the kiosk will process the 16 bit tiff images. For that reason, I usually convert them myself to see if there is any color shift I need to deal with before printing, instead of letting the Noritsu system do it. Do you see any logical problems with my method here?
Last, when I hit your link to the profiles above, I get a "Forbideen access" server message. I can't even acess the dry creek home page. It comes up as a blank page.
-
I would suppose Costco Noritsu assumes your images are sRGB. Also the results may shift if you didn't request turning auto adjustments off...
If you use a newish LCD chances are it's already close to 6500K and 2.2, so first try to make sure your workflow is correct before you buy a colorimeter. There are many colorimeter packages out there (from $80 to $325). What's your budget? Spyder2 is reasonably good for a single monitor system.
Setting 6500K in the monitor menu does not mean it actually is 6500K though. To know what it is you need a colorimeter. 6500K is what looks "white" to most people so you can use it unless it doesn't look white to you.
I think on contemporary macs 2.2 is closer to their native gamma, just like on PCs.
Technical note:
When used as targets in calibration software both D65 and 6500K refer to specific chromaticities (6500K is 0.314, 0.324 CIExy and D65 is 0.313, 0.329 CIExy). However theoretically an infinite number of chromaticities have CCT 6500K, which does not matter for this discussion.
-
Do you see any logical problems with my method here?
Nope. If you are sending the printer a image converted to its color space then you won't benefit much at all sending it a 16-bit/channel image. You will benefit however, if the printer is doing a color conversion.
Last, when I hit your link to the profiles above, I get a "Forbideen access" server message. I can't even acess the dry creek home page. It comes up as a blank page.
The site is working just fine on my end. I'll bet that either your ISP (Internet Service Provider) is blocking the domain, you have some internet filtering software blocking it or DryCreek's server for whatever reason is blocking an IP address range you just happen to fall into. If you don't have filtering software on you computer, then give your ISP a call.
DryCreek's e-mail is web_info@drycreekphoto.com if you need to contact them.
I would suppose Costco Noritsu assumes your images are sRGB. Also the results may shift if you didn't request turning auto adjustments off...
[...]
I think on contemporary macs 2.2 is closer to their native gamma, just like on PCs.
[...]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65939\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The Costco printers do assume sRGB but it it's converted with their custom profile it won't do any conversion.
Current Macs are still 1.8 gamma. The Intel Macs may be different, but I can't check since I haven't got one.
I use a Eye-One Display 2 which works quite well. Manaco is another good brand. The Spyders are good but you get what you pay for and they come up short in measuring highlights when compared to the other two companies (which are now one company since Manaco bought GretagMacbeth). Also, if you buy a Spyder, make sure it measures blacks. I know with previous generations only the pro model did so.
-
Well - so there you go. First try to convert files to sRGB before printing. Next - try converting to the profile downloaded from drycreek when they get their act together (I've noticed some problems accsessing their site as well). Next step is to get a colorimeter package - it's often more involved than what you'd expect.
And I don't know why you'd think current macs are 1.8...
-
And I don't know why you'd think current macs are 1.8...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65975\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
What would make you think otherwise? If Apple has switched to 2.2, they did so incognito. I have not been able to find any credible (or non-credible for that matter) information indicating such a switch has been made anywhere on the internet or on Apples support site.
-
Well - so there you go. First try to convert files to sRGB before printing. Next - try converting to the profile downloaded from drycreek when they get their act together (I've noticed some problems accsessing their site as well). Next step is to get a colorimeter package - it's often more involved than what you'd expect.
And I don't know why you'd think current macs are 1.8...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65975\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I assume saving with the Costco profile will do the conversion to sRGB as to eliminate the need to also convert to sRGB?
Let's hope the new Noritsu printer they are getting uses Adobe 1998, or even PhotoPro.
I am now able to reach dry creek.
-
After others chime in and you all agree on calibration methods, we should also put together the steps for Adobe Photoshop settings, including the use of profiles. Then, I think this information should be a sticky. It is very important.
As a thanks to the website owner, the document can be signed by those who participated, on behalf of Luminous Landscape, and we can post it to newsgroups and other forums.
-
Current Macs are still 1.8 gamma. The Intel Macs may be different, but I can't check since I haven't got one.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65969\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Still 1.8 (silly but for so called legacy reasons, Apple has suck to 1.8).
The only thing I've found screwy about the Intel Mac is it isn't working properly with version 4.0 ICC display profiles.
On this site (http://www.color.org/version4html.html) V4 profiles on the Powerbook show all four quadrants correctly but not on my iMac. Even if I drag the V4 profile from the Powerbook over to the iMac, it's not working as it should.
-
Still 1.8 (silly but for so called legacy reasons, Apple has suck to 1.8).
The only thing I've found screwy about the Intel Mac is it isn't working properly with version 4.0 ICC display profiles.
Yeah, it's the freaking byte-ordering on intel. The entire ColorSync processing requires meticulous byte swapping. (Ask me if I'm happy, one button Universal Binaries, my a**!). For sheer fun you could try Get Info on Safari and check "Open using Rosetta". It will then run in emulated mode, but it will correctly display the image.
-
For sheer fun you could try Get Info on Safari and check "Open using Rosetta". It will then run in emulated mode, but it will correctly display the image.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=66016\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Cool, that does work (now Safari previews that page correctly). It also runs dog slow <g>.
Neat trick. Now we just need Apple to fix this (and the other ColorSync bugs).
-
Neat trick. Now we just need Apple to fix this (and the other ColorSync bugs).
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=66020\")
Make sure you file a [a href=\"http://www.apple.com/macosx/feedback/]bug report[/url] on that. They may know about the issue, but you never know.
-
What would make you think otherwise? If Apple has switched to 2.2, they did so incognito. I have not been able to find any credible (or non-credible for that matter) information indicating such a switch has been made anywhere on the internet or on Apples support site.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=65989\")
The place I heard it last is Xrite Monaco Optix video tutorial on the Xrite site. I'm sure I could find more references to it in other places...
[a href=\"http://www.xritephoto.com/product/optixxr/demo.asp]http://www.xritephoto.com/product/optixxr/demo.asp[/url]
-
The place I heard it last is Xrite Monaco Optix video tutorial on the Xrite site. I'm sure I could find more references to it in other places...
http://www.xritephoto.com/product/optixxr/demo.asp (http://www.xritephoto.com/product/optixxr/demo.asp)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=66050\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
In that tutorial they state "it's common to use 2.2" not that it actually is 2.2.
-
In that tutorial they state "it's common to use 2.2" not that it actually is 2.2.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=66055\")
It actually is probably neither. It may be close to one or the other (plus, there are three compponents to it). 2.2 is used because it's close to the native state of modern systems.
Here's some paper from Apple site describing how wonderful their cinema display is (it seems to be written by a third party) that states that the default state is close to 6500K 2.2. You can check it yourself if you have an EyeOne Display2 apparently, since that's what they used in that article.
[a href=\"http://images.apple.com/pro/pdf/AppleReport2005_rc1_051214.pdf]http://images.apple.com/pro/pdf/AppleRepor..._rc1_051214.pdf[/url] see page 13.
Of course then they go ahead and change it to D50 1.8, but you know what that means...
-
Spyder2 pro (and I suppose Display2) gives you gamma curves for Uncalibrated (3 curves obviously), Target, Calibrated and Correction. You can easily see what your native gamma is close to.
-
Again, you misinterpreting information. The pdf you refer to is talking about calibrating and not what Macs run at natively.
Another point you are overlooking is the fact that gamma is determined by the video card LUTs and not the monitor.
-
It is corrected through videocard LUTs (<edit> Don't know about DDC case). It is probably determined by the combination of two.
The paper states that prior to calibration the default state is 6500K and Gamma 2.2. They tested it on Machintosh so can't blame the videocard.
If you have a mac (I don't) just look at your native gamma curves. On my PC LCD monitors it's very close to 2.2 except where I had to mess with buttons on one of them to match the White Point to the other one (I am aware of what it means).
-
Gamma is set by the video card. Nothing else. You can calibrate (CRT) or profile (LCD) for something else if you desire, but the card is where the native gamma is determined.
And to hopefully conclude this conversation since its starting to run in circles, I use a Mac, and I can assure you. It's a gamma of 1.8.
-
I'm not convinced whatsoever as you can imagine.
OK, Dry Creek to my rescue!
"...While we're at it, get rid of the gamma 1.8 default for Mac monitors. This made sense for the original monochrome Mac displays. It does not now. My suggestion for a default is D65/2.2 gamma."
Thank you Ethan Hansen
http://www.drycreekphoto.com/Learn/monitor...ng_software.htm (http://www.drycreekphoto.com/Learn/monitor_profiling_software.htm)
-
How much more authority do you need? Xrite, Apple, Dry Creek... I can't get a Steve Jobs quote on the subject unfortunately...
Plus, just look at the curves...
-
I bught the Spyder2 Suite. The hardware is the same for all three version. After calibrating and using the dry creek profile to proof, I get an exact replica of what I will see when printed. But I do hate sRGB. That is really a crappy color space--flat, dull, etc., compared to Adobe RGB 1998. I hope the new Noritsu printers will print with Adobe 1998 color space, if that is possible.
My question has to do with the calibration process. After I calibrated my monitor, I have noticed that the brightness is turned up to a point where my black screen looks like it is glowing in a dark room. I was always told to keep the brightness at a point where it is just below that glow you get using a black background. It seems that the Spider two wanted my to turn up the brightness (to show all of the blocks Ina black to white series.
Is this common? It seems to work, since the onscreen proof is exactly how it prints, but it just seems like the brightness is blazing. I mean I'm impressed. When I hold up the printed picture next to the proof using DC's profile, it looks almost like two perfect copies.
-
My question has to do with the calibration process. After I calibrated my monitor, I have noticed that the brightness is turned up to a point where my black screen looks like it is glowing in a dark room. I was always told to keep the brightness at a point where it is just below that glow you get using a black background. It seems that the Spider two wanted my to turn up the brightness (to show all of the blocks Ina black to white series.
Is this common? It seems to work, since the onscreen proof is exactly how it prints, but it just seems like the brightness is blazing. I mean I'm impressed. When I hold up the printed picture next to the proof using DC's profile, it looks almost like two perfect copies.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=67836\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes. You aren't supposed to work in a completely dark room and so what you are seeing is normal. There should be some light in the room, around 30-50 lux.
-
OK thanks Daniel. I do keep some light on in the room and do not see the glow aat all while working. It's only when I shut all my programs and look at my bare black desktop that I can see it. It's not a bother. I jsut wanted to make sure I did the calibration correctly. From my prints, it seems like it is very close.
Thanks
Yes. You aren't supposed to work in a completely dark room and so what you are seeing is normal. There should be some light in the room, around 30-50 lux.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=67859\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Dan,
In your first reply, in relation to MAC calibration, you wrote that if going Native isn't available as an option, then choose 6500k, 1.8 Gamma and 140 luminance.
Why, if not going Native, does the luminance go from 120 to 140?
Many thanks.
D.
-
I meant 140 if any of the others were not available. In other words, of you can't get the display down to 120 (which happens with some displays) then 140 is as bright as you want it to get before the brightness becomes a problem.
-
No one is preventing you from making a set of profiles for various monitor brightness and room lighting conditions, and choosing what you feel most comfortable with.
Here's a nice tutorial about screen calibration
http://photoworkshop.com/GMB_ColorCorner/index.html (http://photoworkshop.com/GMB_ColorCorner/index.html)
Edmund
-
Edmund,
Thanks for the link.
I take your point. 140 is much too bright for me. That's why I wanted clarification.
Most of my colour correction involves correcting an image of a Gretag CC, so I may as well be using a black and white monitor anyway! ;-)
D.
Edited: Curiously, in the chapter headed 'Advanced Mode' in the above tutorial, under LCD Luminance, he recommends opting for the LCD recommended level of 140.
In my copy of 3.6.1, 120 is the LCD recommendation.
-
Edited: Curiously, in the chapter headed 'Advanced Mode' in the above tutorial, under LCD Luminance, he recommends opting for the LCD recommended level of 140.
In my copy of 3.6.1, 120 is the LCD recommendation.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=83188\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
If I'm not mistaken, the EyeOne software used to recommend 140 for LCDs but the ISO spec for color correction recommends 120.
-
Daniel,
Just worked out what it is.........
On my PC LCD the recommended is 120.
However, I just loaded the software on a MAC today and the default LCD recommendation is 140.
D.
-
Here's a nice tutorial about screen calibration
http://photoworkshop.com/GMB_ColorCorner/index.html (http://photoworkshop.com/GMB_ColorCorner/index.html)
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=83183\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I watched the tutorial and was surprised to learn that PhotoShop will only display correct color on the Primary display in a 2 display setup even if both displays are calibrated and profiled! Is this just a Windows issue (the tutorial was run on XP) or does it also apply to OSX as well?
I have 20" and 23" ACD's with the 20" as the Primary (I assume this is the one with the OSX Menu bar?) but do my adjustments with PS, Aperture and LightZone on the 23".
-
I watched the tutorial and was surprised to learn that PhotoShop will only display correct color on the Primary display in a 2 display setup even if both displays are calibrated and profiled! Is this just a Windows issue (the tutorial was run on XP) or does it also apply to OSX as well?
I have 20" and 23" ACD's with the 20" as the Primary (I assume this is the one with the OSX Menu bar?) but do my adjustments with PS, Aperture and LightZone on the 23".
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=83337\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Photoshop will display correctly for two displays on OS X. At least in theory. For windows entirely contained on one display. Using two displays is always a headache though, because of various video card issues that affect profiling, and then even if everything is working right you still need to get the whites and the luminance matched or else you're in trouble when working.
Although many people use an additional palette monitor, I would recommend against it if you are not well-matched, because the false white reference will really damage your color perception if you are full-screen on the calibrated monitor and have white or grey on the other. Also, intensities are even harder to match, because consumer-grade monitors drift. I recommend you move your menus to the big screen, and please reprofile after doing so !
Edmund
-
Although many people use an additional palette monitor, I would recommend against it if you are not well-matched, because the false white reference will really damage your color perception if you are full-screen on the calibrated monitor and have white or grey on the other. Also, intensities are even harder to match, because consumer-grade monitors drift. I recommend you move your menus to the big screen, and please reprofile after doing so !
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=83347\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have to disagree on that. If talking about mis-matched temperatures, then you are correct but otherwise it can work. As long as one takes care to ensure the brightest elements on screen do not appear on the brighter pallet monitor then you will be fine since the eye calibrates itself to the brightest whites it can come across.
Display size, shape and position also can effect this too. For example I notice since my displays are both 15:9 it places the second display further to my right than it would be if both were 4:3 leading it to be less noticeable than if it were closer. That combined with the fact I do not place bright content on the second display, it has no negative side effects on my color work.
If I were to place something white on the second display, then by all means it has an effect on what I see on the primary display.
-
Daniel,
If you feel that your screen-print match is good, then of course all is well ! Everything depends on the eyes and the experience of the beholder ...
To choose an extreme example, if Jane User's boss has just added a bright blue LCD to her dim reddish CRT then Jane's boss may expect surprises at print time. However, I know experienced photographers who use this selfsame type of setup, carefully matched, to good effect, each display used to its advantage.
Edmund
it has no negative side effects on my color work.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=83386\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]