Luminous Landscape Forum

Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: Raw shooter on October 04, 2006, 08:06:12 pm

Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: Raw shooter on October 04, 2006, 08:06:12 pm
After trying to determine the best product for monitor hardware profiling, I am stuck.  There seems to be several"improved" new versions of these products.
The ones I saw were listed were:

ColorVision Spyder2  
GretagMacbeth Eye-One Display 2 + Eye-One Match 3.2a software
Monaco Optix XR Pro (integrated package)  
ColorEyes Display 3.10 (with Monaco XR/DTP-94 sensor)  

The products seemed rated best were from best to worst:
1) Color Eyes
2) Monaco
3) Gretag
4) Colorvision

Is Color Eyes the best product?  Is this opinion broadly based by the pros on this site?
Any feedback would be appreciated.
Thanks
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: michael on October 04, 2006, 09:14:36 pm
I have the latest version of Coloreyes and plan and testing it shortly. I found the previous version to be excellent.

Michael
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: Hermie on October 05, 2006, 01:47:22 am
Please note that the Optix/DTP-94 will be discontinued per december 1st.

See http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....showtopic=12330 (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=12330)

Herman
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 05, 2006, 10:12:10 am
Note there are two products, ColorEyes and basICColor display and the other day, I asked Karl Koch the differences on the Colorsync list. From his post, I think you want to investigate basICColor.

The ColorEyes guys always gave me a headache anyway <g>

Quote
Hi Andrew,

up to version 3, the technology behind both products was the same 
(ICS). Version 4 is new from scratcth, different calibration and 
profiling algorithms, similar, but still different UI – made with 
different programming tools. In the U.S. version we do not have L* 
calibration any more (patent issues), rest of world we still offer 
this option. But after the implementation of CIECAM02 mechanisms in 
basICColor display 4 and its derivates, L* is history! L* is based on 
30 years old technology, CIECAM02 was defined in 2002, you figure ;-)
You can download and try basICColor display 4 and find the 
differences for yourself
www.basiccolor.de
I bet, you´ll like it. 4.1 is due for release end of October, please 
contact me off list, if you want to try the beta.

Regards,

Karl

Am 03.10.2006 um 18:32 schrieb Andrew Rodney:

> On 10/3/06 10:24 AM, "Karl Koch"  wrote:
>
>> And, please don´t confuse ColorEyes and basICColor display – two
>> completely different animals!
>
> Can you clarify the differences because it's not clear to me.
>
> Andrew Rodney
> http://www.digitaldog.net/ (http://www.digitaldog.net/)
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: 32BT on October 05, 2006, 10:19:11 am
I really look forward to that CIECAM02 behavior calibration. That finally makes sense. Didn't I also read about some sort of synchro between monitor and viewing booth? That's certainly would be a great feature as well...
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 05, 2006, 10:36:47 am
Quote
Didn't I also read about some sort of synchro between monitor and viewing booth? That's certainly would be a great feature as well...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79194\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes but it's a specific model of booth (not all). Can't recall which but it was a Just Normlicht box. They are nice (nice and expensive). I hope the boys at GTI get their boxes working with this company too.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: Raw shooter on October 05, 2006, 08:09:23 pm
Quote
Yes but it's a specific model of booth (not all). Can't recall which but it was a Just Normlicht box. They are nice (nice and expensive). I hope the boys at GTI get their boxes working with this company too.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79195\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Digital Dog,

I tried lookiing for the product basICColor display on the Integrated Color website and I did not see it.
They seem to have three products:
1) ColorEyes Display
2) ColorEyes 20/20
3) PhotoMatrix

What am I missing on product offerings?
You seem to really get this subject matter.  What would you buy now, for accurate monitor profiling?
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: msbc on October 05, 2006, 09:29:06 pm
Quote
Note there are two products, ColorEyes and basICColor display and the other day, I asked Karl Koch the differences on the Colorsync list. From his post, I think you want to investigate basICColor.

The ColorEyes guys always gave me a headache anyway <g>
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79190\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Quote
But after the implementation of CIECAM02 mechanisms in
basICColor display 4 and its derivates, L* is history! L* is based on
30 years old technology, CIECAM02 was defined in 2002, you figure ;-)

Andrew,

I'm a little confused about this info regarding L* calibration. Hasn't this been touted as the best calibration method? ICS recommend it!

I use display 4.02 on my ACD's with the L* setting. The alternative would be Gamma 2.2??

Confused,
Mark
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 05, 2006, 09:54:35 pm
Quote
Andrew,

I'm a little confused about this info regarding L* calibration. Hasn't this been touted as the best calibration method? ICS recommend it!

I use display 4.02 on my ACD's with the L* setting. The alternative would be Gamma 2.2??

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79257\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The new CIEcam stuff is supposed to be cutting edge (based on appearance models).

I just downloaded a beta to check out but I need to spend more time looking it over. But the manual and UI look pretty nice. Tomorrow I'll hook up a few devices and see how it does on a few LCDs and maybe a hard to profile CRT (one with an extended Adobe RGB (1998) gamut).
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: jclacherty on October 05, 2006, 11:40:12 pm
I've just downloaded 4.02 and did a monitor calibration.  Picked their photography preset (L*, D50).  I was previously using EyeOne Match 3.6 and had used native white point.  D50 seems a bit warm.  What should I be using?

Also, it's much brighter with basICColor as they recommend setting the brightness and contrast to the factory default.

Andrew, have you used their rgb printer profiling?  If so, how does it compare to EyeOne Match?

Justin.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 06, 2006, 09:27:43 am
Quote
I've just downloaded 4.02 and did a monitor calibration.  Picked their photography preset (L*, D50).  I was previously using EyeOne Match 3.6 and had used native white point.  D50 seems a bit warm.  What should I be using?

Also, it's much brighter with basICColor as they recommend setting the brightness and contrast to the factory default.

Andrew, have you used their rgb printer profiling?  If so, how does it compare to EyeOne Match?

Justin.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79265\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Haven't tried any of their stuff in years (expect the beta we both have).

One feature I saw which I really like is the ability to set a contrast ratio (which I could do on the Artisan). You might need to play with target values for luminance instead of a preset. On an LCD, I'm going to try Native (as soon as I get past a slight beta issue seeing my EyeOne).
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 06, 2006, 01:42:20 pm
Did a bit of testing with the OPTIX. Used an iMac LCD. The software has some rough UI edges I'd like to see addressed. But the subsequent calibration and profile look very nice. I asked for a Native white point and for luminance I asked for 120cd/m2 and a contrast ratio of 450:1. The results are that assigning this profile to a black doc and doing the old levels trick, I can see separation at 3 which ain't bad (the same device using EyeOne Match didn't show separation until level 6 and the brightness seems too extreme compared to this profile). I might do a 500:1 contrast ratio since this is closer to the target of my usual output (ink jet prints). Neutrality is very good.

Assigning profiles to a black to white gradient. Just a little banding in one area of the darker regions that is also a tad green. But pretty smooth. When I assign the other OPTIX profile, I see more banding on the gradient, less tonal separation but pretty darn neutral all the way. So EyeOne Match isn't bad in some respects and to be fair, I'd have to target both products to identical target calibration aim points. Both profiles are LUT based.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: Stephen Best on October 06, 2006, 06:38:16 pm
Quote
Haven't tried any of their stuff in years (expect the beta we both have).

One feature I saw which I really like is the ability to set a contrast ratio (which I could do on the Artisan). You might need to play with target values for luminance instead of a preset. On an LCD, I'm going to try Native (as soon as I get past a slight beta issue seeing my EyeOne).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79310\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Just a warning about "Native" in basICColor display 4.02. This doesn't flatline the video LUT (as Match does) but merely uses what's loaded. As such, it's profiling only. There's a lot to like in display but I get better results (cleaner, more neutral, gray ramps) with the latest Match. I'll give the coming version a try to see how they compare then. I also came to the conclusion that ColorEyes wasn't any better, though probably worth a look if you have an Eizo (or similar) that supports hardware calibration. It only partly worked with my NEC 2090.

Somebody was asking about dropRGB. I tried this and the generated Perceptual tables were abysmal, nor did the output match the soft-proof results. I didn't get much further with it. It's very easy to use though ... just feed it the file from ProfileMaker's MeasureTool (LAB not spectral data). It's free to try.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 06, 2006, 06:59:36 pm
Quote
There's a lot to like in display but I get better results (cleaner, more neutral, gray ramps) with the

That's exactly what I'm seeing so far. The ramp is smoother but there's a good 15% of one area of the ramp that's decidedly greenish.

I have a lot more playing around to do.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: Mark D Segal on October 06, 2006, 11:54:42 pm
Quote
The ColorEyes guys always gave me a headache anyway <g>
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79190\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

What's the headache? - I used it with the Monaco OPTIX XR (Same as DPT94) on a CRT and now using it on my Lacie 321 LCD. It works like a charm, couldn't be easier, with an appropriate luminance setting (low) delivers reliable soft-proofing for both luminosity and colour balance to the extent possible given inherent differences between direct and reflected light. The only headache I've come accross is to insure that the video card is one of those on their list of recognized cards if you want the software to operate DDC. But if it can't there is a workaround. From my experience Integrated Color is very supportive - i.e. they help when asked.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: Raw shooter on October 07, 2006, 10:06:45 am
Quote
What's the headache? - I used it with the Monaco OPTIX XR (Same as DPT94) on a CRT and now using it on my Lacie 321 LCD. It works like a charm, couldn't be easier, with an appropriate luminance setting (low) delivers reliable soft-proofing for both luminosity and colour balance to the extent possible given inherent differences between direct and reflected light. The only headache I've come accross is to insure that the video card is one of those on their list of recognized cards if you want the software to operate DDC. But if it can't there is a workaround. From my experience Integrated Color is very supportive - i.e. they help when asked.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79395\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Mark,

Thanks. that is what I was looking for - someome who had success with one of the products.
Anything to look for when using ColorEyes - the UI or presets that you used?
Thanks in advance
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 07, 2006, 10:22:04 am
Quote
What's the headache? -

Not the software (necessarily) the company!

Short of some minor tweaking, they didn't really wrote any code (that's good ol' Franz and Dan from ColorBlind days). I haven't checked but I assume they are still with ICS writing the real code.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: Mark D Segal on October 07, 2006, 11:08:16 am
Quote
Mark,

Anything to look for when using ColorEyes - the UI or presets that you used?
Thanks in advance
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79415\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Not much really - it is truly quite straightforward. When you first use it, you must do both calibration and profiling. Their menus take you through the procedure step by step. You need to be sure to select the Profiling and Calibration path to begin with, and you need to be sure that you have correctly selected the kind of monitor you are using (LCD or CRT). From there, the only discretionary settings you need to make before the process takes-over are gamma, luminosity and white balance. For gamma they recommend L* which I use successfully, for luminance I set it to 110, because my LCD is otherwise too bright relative to the Enhanced Matte that comes out of the printer; for white balance I use 6500K, because this setting on the monitor corresponds best for the human visual system when we look at prints under D50 illumination. Don't ask me why, but it works. Once you've made those three choices, the software does the rest. Once it finishes there is a profile verification option which I always activate; it measures another fifteen patches and gives you a Delta-E readout for both grayscale and R,G,B. This gives you a clear indication of the profile's reliability. The program automatically makes the new profile your default monitor profile, but it is always good to double-check this in you video card driver advanced colour settings tab.

It is important to make sure when you start the procedure that you do a good reading of the black patch as they suggest (no stray light and the correct kind of black material) and that no ambient light is getting in between the colorimeter and the patch on the monitor where you place the instrument.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: Mark D Segal on October 07, 2006, 11:17:39 am
Quote
Not the software (necessarily) the company!

Short of some minor tweaking, they didn't really wrote any code (that's good ol' Franz and Dan from ColorBlind days). I haven't checked but I assume they are still with ICS writing the real code.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79416\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Andrew, I'm sorry, but this is rubbish. I don't care whether their Mothers-in-Law wrote the software. The important thing is whether it works properly and whether the company provides an appropriate level of support, and from my experience the answer to both of these issues is YES.

As an internationally recognized author on the subject of colour management I think you have an added burden of responsibility in how you handle issues that could be commercially-sensitive - and believe me - I have no relationship with any of these companies - it is a generic principle.

Cheers,

Mark
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 07, 2006, 11:28:46 am
Quote
Andrew, I'm sorry, but this is rubbish. I don't care whether their Mothers-in-Law wrote the software. The important thing is whether it works properly and whether the company provides an appropriate level of support, and from my experience the answer to both of these issues is YES.

As an internationally recognized author on the subject of colour management I think you have an added burden of responsibility in how you handle issues that could be commercially-sensitive - and believe me - I have no relationship with any of these companies - it is a generic principle.

Cheers,

Mark
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79425\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Mark, I don't know how to make this any clearer to you. I had NO problem with the software, I had problems with the ColorEyes people who represented the software.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: Raw shooter on October 07, 2006, 11:29:03 am
Quote
Not much really - it is truly quite straightforward. When you first use it, you must do both calibration and profiling. Their menus take you through the procedure step by step. You need to be sure to select the Profiling and Calibration path to begin with, and you need to be sure that you have correctly selected the kind of monitor you are using (LCD or CRT). From there, the only discretionary settings you need to make before the process takes-over are gamma, luminosity and white balance. For gamma they recommend L* which I use successfully, for luminance I set it to 110, because my LCD is otherwise too bright relative to the Enhanced Matte that comes out of the printer; for white balance I use 6500K, because this setting on the monitor corresponds best for the human visual system when we look at prints under D50 illumination. Don't ask me why, but it works. Once you've made those three choices, the software does the rest. Once it finishes there is a profile verification option which I always activate; it measures another fifteen patches and gives you a Delta-E readout for both grayscale and R,G,B. This gives you a clear indication of the profile's reliability. The program automatically makes the new profile your default monitor profile, but it is always good to double-check this in you video card driver advanced colour settings tab.

It is important to make sure when you start the procedure that you do a good reading of the black patch as they suggest (no stray light and the correct kind of black material) and that no ambient light is getting in between the colorimeter and the patch on the monitor where you place the instrument.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79421\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Mark,
Thank you for such a complete answer to my question.  I do appreciate the detail and the important settings you have listed.  You are clearly a great asset to this site.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: Mark D Segal on October 07, 2006, 11:42:39 am
You are welcome. Pleased to help.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: Mark D Segal on October 07, 2006, 11:46:54 am
Quote
Mark, I don't know how to make this any clearer to you. I had NO problem with the software, I had problems with the ColorEyes people who represented the software.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79427\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Fine, but I have had no problems dealing with them - in fact quite to the contrary. I don't know what your problems were and whether the kinds of things you wanted from them differ from the kinds of things I wanted from them, so let us  leave it at that - not a productive side-discussion for a chap who just wants to know what software will provide a properly calibrated and profiled montor.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 07, 2006, 12:03:45 pm
Quote
Fine, but I have had no problems dealing with them - in fact quite to the contrary. I don't know what your problems were and whether the kinds of things you wanted from them differ from the kinds of things I wanted from them, so let us  leave it at that - not a productive side-discussion for a chap who just wants to know what software will provide a properly calibrated and profiled montor.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79431\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Agreed although my initial post also mentioned the new capabilities in the ICS software and the bits about the two companies (apparently) going their separate ways (not sure about the ramifications of the patent issues). The new CIECAM stuff is also interesting.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 07, 2006, 12:52:14 pm
Quote
That's exactly what I'm seeing so far. The ramp is smoother but there's a good 15% of one area of the ramp that's decidedly greenish.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79367\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Just tried using D65 versus Native (other settings the same). Prefer Native, at least on this one LCD (nothing fancy, a 20" iMac).
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: jackbingham on October 07, 2006, 05:16:30 pm
Quote
Mark, I don't know how to make this any clearer to you. I had NO problem with the software, I had problems with the ColorEyes people who represented the software.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79427\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Just so we all have our history correct.......   Coloreyes and Basiccolor up to version 3 were all entirely created by Integrated Color Solutions of San Diego. So I guess it could be said that Karl didn't write any display code either! ICS made the decision to grant exclusive rights to their display product to Integrated Color Corp who sells it as Coloreyes. And no we did not write any of it either. I'm not sure why that matters. The fact is ICS does not want to market any stand alone display products and we were chosen to did it, much to our pleasure.
Basiccolor 4 is now entirely Karl's product although it should be noted that the interface was intially developed by ICS and was to be Coloreyes 4 as well. Since it is now Basiccolor you will soon be seeing an entirely new ColorEyes.
As for Mr Rodney, Integrated Color Corp shares the same warm feelings toward him. That in no way reflects on the service we provide our CUSTOMERS.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 07, 2006, 05:21:45 pm
Jack, welcome back. I see it's been since June 05 that you posted here. I figured if I mentioned ColorEyes you'd eventually show up. Where you been bud?

Quote
Basiccolor 4 is now entirely Karl's product

Thanks for clarifying that. On to more testing.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: jackbingham on October 08, 2006, 07:00:38 am
I've been working on a new Display!
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: jackbingham on October 08, 2006, 02:50:14 pm
"not sure about the ramifications of the patent issues). The new CIECAM stuff is also interesting."

The diminishment of the value of L* by basiccolor might give you a clue about that.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 08, 2006, 03:15:41 pm
Quote
"not sure about the ramifications of the patent issues). The new CIECAM stuff is also interesting."

The diminishment of the value of L* by basiccolor might give you a clue about that.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79565\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Karl already summed it up:

Quote
On 10/3/06 10:50 AM, "Karl Koch"  wrote:

>  But after the implementation of CIECAM02 mechanisms in 
> basICColor display 4 and its derivates, L* is history! L* is based on 
> 30 years old technology, CIECAM02 was defined in 2002, you figure ;-)

Do you have anything to add to the patient issues OR the two technologies?

For others, just noted that this beta runs Native on an Intel (nice).

Did a profile using the OPTIX on a Powerbook with the beta and MonacoOPTIX (not the same target aim points but close as possible but using CIECAM on BasICColor). Two profiles produce pretty similar results when assigning both to a black to white gradient and switching the profiles (toggling back to Photoshop). The OPTIX profile is showing much better black calibration (I can actually see a difference between level zero and 2). With the BasICColor profile, zero and 5. But that profile is a bit smoother on the gradient. Again, green area in about 10-15% of dark tones as mentioned above.

It's still somewhat of an apples to oranges comparisons with slightly differing targets. OPTIX doesn't provide the option for Native gamma or of course the newer CIECAM stuff.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: msbc on October 08, 2006, 09:59:15 pm
Andrew,

The more I read of this thread the more confused I become.

L* is a setting for the Tonal Response Curve in basICColor display 4.0.2 - the other options being Gamma 1.8, 2.2 or Linear.

CIECAM02 is a setting for the Chromatic Adaptation.

So, how can CIECAM02 be a replacement for L*?

I'm obviously missing something here.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 09, 2006, 10:35:48 am
Quote
So, how can CIECAM02 be a replacement for L*?

I'm obviously missing something here.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79614\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The CIECAM stuff (options) are in the area of the beta where you are asked to select "Tone Lumanice Curve". You have the option of four gamma settings (one a field you can enter anything you wish) or three CIECAM options. No L option in this beta. What the ramifications are, I can't say as the PDF manual isn't up to date on these new options.

Even in the UI, there's text that mentions L* but no option to select that and no text discussing the CIECAM options. Again, its a beta so this is to be expected. But it looks clear that L* is gone, CIECAM options are here.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: Mark D Segal on October 09, 2006, 11:56:42 am
Quote
The CIECAM stuff (options) are in the area of the beta where you are asked to select "Tone Lumanice Curve". You have the option of four gamma settings (one a field you can enter anything you wish) or three CIECAM options. No L option in this beta. What the ramifications are, I can't say as the PDF manual isn't up to date on these new options.

Even in the UI, there's text that mentions L* but no option to select that and no text discussing the CIECAM options. Again, its a beta so this is to be expected. But it looks clear that L* is gone, CIECAM options are here.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79657\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It's quite obvious therefore that there's no point speculating on the preference of the one versus the other in respect of L* or no L* because both the documentation and the comparative testing are inadequate for a user to determine independently what's being achieved.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 09, 2006, 12:21:22 pm
Quote
It's quite obvious therefore that there's no point speculating on the preference of the one versus the other in respect of L* or no L* because both the documentation and the comparative testing are inadequate for a user to determine independently what's being achieved.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79671\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well Karl made it quite clear which options were going away (L* is gone) and how it's being replaced by a newer and more robust technology. Their math not withstanding, using the most modern color science based on appearance models should provide the next step forward in display calibration technology.

There appears to be a split developing between the two products, the point of most of this discussion.

I also very much like the ability to set contrast ratio in this product. I don't know if that's new or not but its a much needed capability.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: Mark D Segal on October 09, 2006, 12:35:40 pm
Quote
Well Karl made it quite clear which options were going away (L* is gone) and how it's being replaced by a newer and more robust technology. Their math not withstanding, using the most modern color science based on appearance models should provide the next step forward in display calibration technology.

There appears to be a split developing between the two products, the point of most of this discussion.

I also very much like the ability to set contrast ratio in this product. I don't know if that's new or not but its a much needed capability.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79678\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Commercial claims by product developers are one thing, independent sighting of practical results another. As I said, it's not judgment time yet.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: jackbingham on October 12, 2006, 08:24:33 am
"Well Karl made it quite clear which options were going away (L* is gone) and how it's being replaced by a newer and more robust technology."

The only thing Karl has made clear is that he can no longer use L*
There is no proof that his approach will be any better, or even better for the bulk of users. He has stated L* is old technology and he has a shiny new bridge to sell you. However it is unclear what can be proven since you can't do a side by side comparison and we won't be leaving "old" trusted and proven technology for the uncharted just yet.
I'm more than happy to see him make the case but Andrew perhaps you should wait until he has.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 12, 2006, 09:33:46 am
Quote
"Well Karl made it quite clear which options were going away (L* is gone) and how it's being replaced by a newer and more robust technology."

That's what I said Jack. L* is going away. In his product. Which is what I was referring to!

Quote
He has stated L* is old technology and he has a shiny new bridge to sell you.

Not that you're here to sell anything... OK, so tell us why L* is better, different cheaper/faster.

Why would someone pick one product over the other?
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: jackbingham on October 13, 2006, 07:37:56 am
I'm merely making the point that it is way to early to judge. He may well be on to something but L* is tested and proven technology. Shiny new bridges are just swell, but not until a lot of traffic has gone over them....
I do indeed have something to sell, which is why I am concerned about Karl feeding you a line and you taking it so easily. You being a world renowned color expert and all, who people listen to for advice. Now we'll all have customers thinking L* doesn't work which is silly. All of us who make monitor profiling thank you for your diligence.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: 32BT on October 13, 2006, 08:24:47 am
Quote
Now we'll all have customers thinking L* doesn't work which is silly.

Huh? How do you figure that? People tend to be quite color-savvy on this forum and don't jump to any conclusions based on Andrew sharing some information as a "user". (At least, that's how I interpreted his comments).

Besides, I get a distinct impression that this needs to be taken "outside" (= off-line).
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: Mark D Segal on October 13, 2006, 09:39:35 am
Quote
Huh? How do you figure that? People tend to be quite color-savvy on this forum and don't jump to any conclusions based on Andrew sharing some information as a "user". (At least, that's how I interpreted his comments).

Besides, I get a distinct impression that this needs to be taken "outside" (= off-line).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=80210\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Oscar - all kinds of people at different levels of knowledge, experience and interests (commercial or otherwise) read this site, and it is perfectly sensible for Jack Bingham to make the points he has been making. It would be an injustice to ColorEyes and to all readers of this thread if such comments were confined between Andrew and Jack after Andrew came public with notions that he himself would not appear to have yet conclusively tested and demonstrated. I am quite active on Luminous-Landscape but I make it a matter of quite stricy policy not to pass judgment on equipment or processes with which I have not had or directly seen myself first-hand experience. It is simply not responsible to do otherwise, and when it happens it is quite correct that an affected party should respond in the same forum where the matter was raised.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 13, 2006, 09:48:06 am
Quote
Now we'll all have customers thinking L* doesn't work which is silly. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=80207\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I never said anything to give customers that impression? You're very sensitive.

To Jack's customers. I have nothing against L* nor think it doesn't work. Jacks older shiny bridge is stable to walk or drive across.

Karl is working on getting some information about the new CIECAM stuff which if it's OK with Jack, I'll post as soon as I hear anything.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: Mark D Segal on October 13, 2006, 10:00:51 am
Quote
I never said anything to give customers that impression? You're very sensitive.

To Jack's customers. I have nothing against L* nor think it doesn't work. Jacks older shiny bridge is stable to walk or drive across.

Karl is working on getting some information about the new CIECAM stuff which if it's OK with Jack, I'll post as soon as I hear anything.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=80217\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Andrew I have only two comments about this sarcasm:

(1) If a bridge is shiny and gets me from point A to Point B I don't care how old it is. When a DEMONSTRABLY better mouse-trap comes along that gives me better still, I'm all for it.

(2) Instead of being a post-office for Karl, why don't you put your own value-added into this by doing comparative testing once CIECAM is in a final version so you can then advise people first-hand about what has been accomplished in a comparative sense. That is the kind of thing your readers would expect of you, respect you for and find more useful.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 13, 2006, 10:05:54 am
Quote
Andrew I have only two comments about this sarcasm:

Only two? Jack?

Quote
(1) If a bridge is shiny and gets me from point A to Point B I don't care how old it is. When a DEMONSTRABLY better mouse-trap comes along that gives me better still, I'm all for it.

We can attribute the Bridge comments back to the salesman (Jack). I'm only bouncing his comment back in context.

Quote
(2) Instead of being a post-office for Karl, why don't you put your own value-added into this by doing comparative testing once CIECAM is in a final version so you can then advise people first-hand about what has been accomplished in a comparative sense.

That's my intent. And since there are other beta testers commenting here AND it's OK with Karl (I wasn't asked to sign an NDA, he asked for folks on a public forum to email him for the beta), there's nothing wrong with us discussing this product. In fact, until Jack showed up, we WERE on topic. I suggest we continue please.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 13, 2006, 10:43:09 am
Quote
Karl is working on getting some information about the new CIECAM stuff which if it's OK with Jack, I'll post as soon as I hear anything.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=80217\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Here's a start

Quote
L* calibration is based on a linear relation between RGB values and 
monitor luminance in L*(a*b*)
CIECAM02 calibration takes some other factors of human vision into 
account, the most important of which (in our implementation) is the 
ambient light in the viewer´s environment. So far, we have 3 discrete 
steps, "dark" which is up to 32 lx, "dim" 32 - 64 lx and "average" 
which is > 64 lx. The release version will have the option to measure 
ambient light in order to define the correct setting. The calculation 
of the calibration curves is being calculated with the CIECAM02 
algorithms.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: ato on October 13, 2006, 11:05:06 am
will the "new CIECAM stuff" reproduce a better shadow as L*??
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: standard_observer on October 14, 2006, 02:42:55 pm
Quote
Here's a start
>> The release version will have the option to measure ambient light in order to define the correct setting. The calculation of the calibration curves is being calculated with the CIECAM02 algorithms. <<
Could it be that CIECAM02 calibration will produce a difference between the calibrated & measured tone curve and the TRC tag of the resulting monitor profile?  Thus, applying a visually effective tonal boost on the shadows, like with a tone curve in PS, rather than being a purely descriptive approach for the calibrated state?

Anyway, I would also be pleased to learn which of the newer products offers the setting ‘Native gamma’, or, allows to upload the TRC tag from any icc profile as the target for calibration (like with old optical 3.7.8)?

Thanks!

--
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 14, 2006, 07:10:22 pm
Quote
Anyway, I would also be pleased to learn which of the newer products offers the setting ‘Native gamma’, or, allows to upload the TRC tag from any icc profile as the target for calibration (like with old optical 3.7.8)?
--
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=80388\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

EyeOne Match supports Native Gamma in the last version. The BasICColor product being discussed does too.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: standard_observer on October 16, 2006, 08:54:40 am
Quote
EyeOne Match supports Native Gamma in the last version. The BasICColor product being discussed does too.
That’s good to hear.

For me the basic question is:  why should I want to calibrate away from the native gamma, or any suited target curve closest to this native state?  Given that it’s desirable to avoid any work for the video card.  And further given that any ‘gamma’ is invisible in an icc-aware application…

However, I see that this is probably the wrong thread to go further into this subject
- though your comments are always appreciated !

--
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on October 16, 2006, 09:26:30 am
Quote
However, I see that this is probably the wrong thread to go further into this subject
- though your comments are always appreciated !
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=80658\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

On an LCD, you want it whenever possible. But do a search as this has been discussed here in detail.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: Dinarius on November 01, 2006, 01:15:20 pm
Slightly off topic..............but.........

I use PC. I know zip about Macs.

I want to calibrate a friend's desktop iMac.

Is it possible to adjust brightness, contrast and RGB channels seperately?

If so, where are they to be found.

Thanks.

D.

Needless to say, he knows less about Macs than I do! ;-)
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: 61Dynamic on November 01, 2006, 01:34:16 pm
Quote
Slightly off topic..............but.........

I use PC. I know zip about Macs.

I want to calibrate a friend's desktop iMac.

Is it possible to adjust brightness, contrast and RGB channels seperately?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=83255\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

On an iMac, no. It would be like the ACD displays where only brightness is adjustable; just as it should be.

The iMacs, just like the ACD displays are able to dim to 95cd/m2, well below the optimum luminance.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: Dinarius on November 01, 2006, 02:04:07 pm
Daniel,

Thanks for that.

1. He actually has a couple of iMacs. Not being able to find any controls, I ran Eye-One Match on Easy mode. At the end, one Mac had Gamma 2.2./7300K/132Lum. The other was 2.8/6800/92.

Presumably, there's not much I can do to bring them closer together?

2. If I can persuade him to buy another Mac for imaging only, which of them is fully adjustable?

Many thanks.

D.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: 32BT on November 01, 2006, 02:21:37 pm
The monitor should easily be adjustable. Either use the sunny-symbol keys (F1, F2 ?) or go to the Apple Menu -> System Prefs -> Monitor Panel and adjust the slider accordingly. I prefer the sunny symbol keys as they allow a stepped setting. This way you can reduce the brightness whenever useful and return to a known brightness state whenever critical.

The gamma difference seems rather excessive. You may also want to check whether the Universal Access is switched off. Universal Access has a short cut for monitor contrast which happened to conveniently(not!) co-incide with some Photoshop shortcut. Therefore some people would find their monitor state changed after using photoshop or even get a calibration error.

Universal Access can be switched off in Apple Menu -> System Prefs -> Keyboard & Mouse. Go to the Keyboard Shortcuts tab and switch off Universal Access.

Quote
Daniel,

Thanks for that.

1. He actually has a couple of iMacs. Not being able to find any controls, I ran Eye-One Match on Easy mode. At the end, one Mac had Gamma 2.2./7300K/132Lum. The other was 2.8/6800/92.

Presumably, there's not much I can do to bring them closer together?

2. If I can persuade him to buy another Mac for imaging only, which of them is fully adjustable?

Many thanks.

D.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=83265\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: 61Dynamic on November 01, 2006, 07:38:21 pm
Dinarius,

Don't calibrate in Easy Mode. Use advanced and set things at specifically 6500K/2.2 or Native WP/Gama depending on his needs.

The imacs should have touch-senitive controls on the side or back (I'm thinking of newer models, don't know about the swivel-head or half-egg variety) for brightness from what I remember. Using the keyboard isn't as accurate for setting brightness as the touch-controls (don't know about laptops which seems to be what OPGR is thinking of. F14 and F15 are for brightness adjustment on non-laptops).
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: jackbingham on November 10, 2006, 09:00:58 am
A couple of comments. From research I have been given from ICS it appears that L* might well be required in order to make ciecam2 work properly. Having a linear base to build on seems to be at the core of making ciecam produce the results it promises. Second, ciecam really comes into play when considering not just the monitor profile but critical viewing conditions. So while it may well promise a new day in accuracy all users will need to upgrade their viewing environments to get the benefit. We're not just talking about a display profile here. Viewing booths, paint colors, ambient light levels........... Therein lies the shiny new bridge.
As for native white point and gamma, I think this point is being driven by the most technical among us and does not necessarily apply to the bulk of users. Secondly LCDs with high bit internal luts make the native white point argument mute since there is no correction being applied in the video lut. For many monitors this is also true for tone curves. Certainly there are monitors that are sold as high end imaging displays that should have internal controls in order to meet that description, that do not. And native gamma and white point for these may be the only way.
Title: Monitor Profiling -New Products**
Post by: digitaldog on November 10, 2006, 09:55:29 am
Quote
Second, ciecam really comes into play when considering not just the monitor profile but critical viewing conditions. So while it may well promise a new day in accuracy all users will need to upgrade their viewing environments to get the benefit. We're not just talking about a display profile here. Viewing booths, paint colors, ambient light levels........... Therein lies the shiny new bridge.

Ciecam or not, those should always be bridges users should consider for best screen to print matching. You can have a $20K spectroradiometer and anyone's best software product and if you don't have viewing conditions nailed, you're not going to get optimal screen to print marching. It will NEVER be anything close to 100% anyway. If you get the mid 90% range, fantastic. When we work with prints that emit light, lets talk. Otherwise, just the huge gamut mismatch in display versus output, the differences in dynamic range of the two (and the poor tools we have to soft proof paper white in an image editor) make this even more difficult.

Quote
As for native white point and gamma, I think this point is being driven by the most technical among us and does not necessarily apply to the bulk of users.

Only if you don't care about the degree of data loss and banding on most LCDs.

Quote
Secondly LCDs with high bit internal luts make the native white point argument mute since there is no correction being applied in the video lut.

It's still an 8-bit system in and out. We don't have the OS level and hardware level support for true high bit viewing. 8-bit to 12 bit to 8-bit is mildly useful. It's much more useful if you sell displays!