Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Colour Management => Topic started by: mrazster on January 11, 2010, 06:23:04 pm
-
Hi folks...this my first post here, I haven been hangin around and reading for a while thou.
Compared to you guys I´m new to digital photography and especially colomanagemnet.
I´ve been spending the last couple of weeks reading and trying to atleast get some sence about colomanagent.
Recently I got my self a Spyder 3 Elite and Dell 2209WA (22" LCD with e-IPS) and ofcourse dived in to the calibration ASAP.
But I´m having trouble with getting a slight "warm" tone or colorcast or what ever you want to call it.
It´s like applying a "warm photo filter" in Photoshop.
When I calibrate I just follow the "onscreen walk thru" with Spyder3 software provided from DataColor.
I ofcourse make sure I have the latest version downloaded from there site.
My calibration settings have been 6500k,2.2 / 6500k,native...I have tried monitors presets, I havet tried using the RGB sliders
and aiming for 6500k "manually". I have also tried other whitepoints and gamma settings.
I have accses to other monitors to so I have tried Acer AL16W (low budget TN panel), Eizo ColorEdge CG222WK (s-PVA panel)
I have my Photoshop CS4 set to AdobeRGB, and I usually do my B&W conversions with PS B&W.
I have tried to convert my files to "grey scale"...to be sure to kill any colorinformation... but still the same.
I have also tried different kind of raw converters, picture viewers...I have my EOS 5D set to AdobeRGB
Bottomline is...no matter what setting I use or what monitor I try, as soon as the calibration software loads the profile, my photos gets a warmer tone.
Somehow it leads me to belive it has some thing to do with the calibration it self, either hardware or software.
Although it is a very slight warmtone, in a "colored picture" it´s practicaly undetectable....B&W is much more sensitive to colorcast and it´s enough to make it feel like it´s not pure B&W.
I fully understand it´s difficult to give some advice and get some sence in whats been going on....but if anyone have any ideas or can point me in any direction...it would be much apreciated.
-
This is a color issue on the display not the output right?
Why not use a cooler target white point? Does the software allow you to enter custom white point or provide more presets? Did you try D65 instead of 6500K assuming that’s an option. I don’t know this software. I’d imagine they would provide a way of altering the WP.
-
This is a color issue on the display not the output right?
Why not use a cooler target white point? Does the software allow you to enter custom white point or provide more presets? Did you try D65 instead of 6500K assuming that’s an option. I don’t know this software. I’d imagine they would provide a way of altering the WP.
Yes it´s an issue on the display....
I can see why you recommend me to use a cooler whitepont target...I have thought of that..and I´m going to try it.
But somehow it feels like masking the problem...if it infact is a problem...does anyone else experience anything similar?
If I use a cooler whitepoint target, isn´t that gonna affect my images when it comes to printing?
-
But somehow it feels like masking the problem...if it infact is a problem...does anyone else experience anything similar?
If I use a cooler whitepoint target, isn´t that gonna affect my images when it comes to printing?
Its not masking the problem. What makes 6500K (which is a range of colors you’ve specified unlike using a Standard Illuminant) right? In fact, if you had more than one software package and asked for identical calibration aim points, more than likely, you’d end up with different results. Yes, I know that’s not supposed to be the case but it is. Also, the only way to truly get D65 or even 6500K out of your display would be to heat it to the point it would produce this (assuming it reacted like a true black body radiator) and you’d end up with a pool of molten plastic on your desktop. The right values you insert are those that produce the proper print to screen matching. You say the results are too warm, so up the values until you get the results you expect. And no, the display calibration and profile have zero effect on your printing.
-
Its not masking the problem. What makes 6500K (which is a range of colors you’ve specified unlike using a Standard Illuminant) right? In fact, if you had more than one software package and asked for identical calibration aim points, more than likely, you’d end up with different results. Yes, I know that’s not supposed to be the case but it is. Also, the only way to truly get D65 or even 6500K out of your display would be to heat it to the point it would produce this (assuming it reacted like a true black body radiator) and you’d end up with a pool of molten plastic on your desktop. The right values you insert are those that produce the proper print to screen matching. You say the results are too warm, so up the values until you get the results you expect. And no, the display calibration and profile have zero effect on your printing.
Well...OK then....a cooler whitepoint target it is...I´m going to play around with it.
However I still think the behaviour is strange...that it ads a color cast after calibration.
I tried one thing... I went for the manuall setting of RGB and target whitpoint of 6500k/gamma 2.2...and when the software was reading my whitpoint to 6512K, my luminace as desired and everything else was set accordingly, I pulled up PS with a B&W conversion in "grayscale", looked at it closely, it feelt just the way I want it to..no color cast nor warm nor coold. I then clicked the "next" button in the spyder3 software so that the calibration started reading and measureing. When everything was done and my profile was active, I pulled up the exact same image and there it was...a sligth warm tonality in the greysacles.
-
I'd say that the temperature IS a color cast. Try putting a 4000K display next to a 9000K display. One is very, very warm. The other is very, very cool.
We typically can compensate for this automatically (automatic biological white balance), but if you have mixed lighting conditions this may have something to do with the problem.
It sounds like the problem may be your screen's color temperature vs your ambient lighting. If I'm using tungsten lighting everywhere, my screen is going to look very cool.
Also, perhaps the initial color cast was cool - and your calibration fixed this.
-
Thnx alot guys...your help is much apreciated.
My ambientlight is kind of tungstenish, so that might have a small part of it, and as Neuffy said my monitor might have had an colorcast to begin with.
Althou it wasn´t cooll, it feelt sligtly yellow/greenish kind of...
Looks like I´m gonna be spending som time here testing and calibrating...
Anyway...thnx again for your words....always a pleasure to get help from the pros.
-
My ambientlight is kind of tungstenish, so that might have a small part of it, and as Neuffy said my monitor might have had an colorcast to begin with.
I thought you said the issue was the display alone, not the print.... You could view the display in a dark room but if you detect a “cast” on the display and that’s your issue, lets fix that if possible. Note, you may want to contact the people who made the calibration package about this.
-
I thought you said the issue was the display alone, not the print.... You could view the display in a dark room but if you detect a “cast” on the display and that’s your issue, lets fix that if possible. Note, you may want to contact the people who made the calibration package about this.
Yeah it is a display issue..
I think that is what Neuffy is talking about to. If you have a very warm(tungsten) ambient light...it might affect how you experience the colors on your monitor.
Anyway...I´m going to do a recalibration with a cooler target whitpoint and make sure there´s no other light affecting the monitor.
-
Yeah it is a display issue..
I think that is what Neuffy is talking about to. If you have a very warm(tungsten) ambient light...it might affect how you experience the colors on your monitor.
If anything, I would expect that to make the colors on the screen appear cool, not warm.
-
What you're experiencing is normal. Displays are generally manufactured with a very cool native whitepoint, sometimes higher than 9000K. You've gotten used to interpreting that being "neutral". Now that you've calibrated to 6500K, it looks "warm" in comparison, but it really isn't. You're simply seeing a reasonable display whitepoint (not excessively cool) for the first time and it looks warm in comparison. After using your calibrated display for a few days, you'll get used to it.
BTW, its also normal to see colors change when the monitor profile loads. It's how you know it's working...
-
Yeah it is a display issue..
I think that is what Neuffy is talking about to. If you have a very warm(tungsten) ambient light...it might affect how you experience the colors on your monitor.
Anyway...I´m going to do a recalibration with a cooler target whitpoint and make sure there´s no other light affecting the monitor.
If you have access to another colorimeter (an i1 display 2, for example), calibrate and profile using that one.
If the results look good, then you will know that the problem was due to your Spyder.
-
OK...thnx alot for all your input.
I went for the digitaldog advice with cooler whitepoint target, and I got the result I wanted...however the behavior is still there.
Now, I recently got a good deal on a 27" iMac in the local store, and I have a friend who was very interested in buying my computer, so I went for the switch.
My first mac...absolutely love it. Haven´t done any calibrating yet...but I suspect the same thing here..I havet go for a lower white point target.
-
OK...thnx alot for all your input.
I went for the digitaldog advice with cooler whitepoint target, and I got the result I wanted...however the behavior is still there.
Fine. But what about trying another colorimeter and comparing the results? Let me repeat that your present colorimeter may be defective. It wouldn't be a first with Spyders.
-
Fine. But what about trying another colorimeter and comparing the results? Let me repeat that your present colorimeter may be defective. It wouldn't be a first with Spyders.
Yeah I have arranged that...going to borrow a friends i1 Display2 tomorrow and try it...I have also bought ColorEyes Display Pro software.
So I´ll give it a whirl in the next couple of days..I´m going to try both colorimeters with Dipslay Pro.
-
Yeah I have arranged that...going to borrow a friends i1 Display2 tomorrow and try it...I have also bought ColorEyes Display Pro software.
So I´ll give it a whirl in the next couple of days..I´m going to try both colorimeters with Dipslay Pro.
Please let us know how it turns out.
-
OK then...first run was done with Spyder 3 Elite and Display Color Pro...I went for whitepoint D65, gamma 2.2, luminance 130cd/m and blackpoint set to ABSOLUTE..everything else set accordingly.
The result was ridiculus...a heavy yellow tint/cast...there is no way in haven that could be "normal" after a calibration.
Second run with same hardware but whitepoint set to native...and now we´re getting some where. My B&W look much better...when I open up an image in PS and convert it to "gray scale"...the image acctually is grayscal/B&W ...no imidiate cast or tint or anything else. The contrast on the other hand feels a little bit on the low side...but not an exctent where I can´t live with it, color feels also little weak.
That´s what I got so far....Display Pro is an absolut wonderful application to work with.
I´m gonna do some more testing.
-
OK then...first run was done with Spyder 3 Elite and Display Color Pro...I went for whitepoint D65, gamma 2.2, luminance 130cd/m and blackpoint set to ABSOLUTE..everything else set accordingly.
The result was ridiculus...a heavy yellow tint/cast...there is no way in haven that could be "normal" after a calibration.
Maybe you have a defective Spyder3 puck. I used a Spyder3 puck from a Spyder3 Pro system... Same monitor, CEDP software, D65, gamma 2.2, 120cd/m2 luminance, relative/minimum black point. Did not touch any monitor controls except Brightness, which fell to 10%. Resulting profiles had no color cast as you describe, but the profile validation reports from within CEDP showed widely varying inaccuracies in deep gray tones. Black point was measured to be 0.27cd/m2.
I replaced that puck with another from a Spyder3 Express package. My profiles are now consistent, and the reported deltaE max and avg are very low. Still no color cast. I have no problem with "weak" color, contrast, or shadow detail. My B&W prints from my HP printer are excellent, whether I'm printing a standardized test image or my own photo. I get a good print match to my softproofed images in Photoshop.
BTW... The Spyder3/CEDP combo measures the native white point of my Dell 2209WA, factory default settings, to be about 6420K (measured at approximate center of the display). When the computer starts up and the profile loads to the video card LUT, I don't get much color change at all. This test review showed the color temperature of the the display to be 6151K at factory settings:
http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/review/2009...09wa-part9.html (http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/review/2009/review-dell-2209wa-part9.html)
-
Second run with same hardware but whitepoint set to native...and now we´re getting some where. My B&W look much better...when I open up an image in PS and convert it to "gray scale"...the image acctually is grayscal/B&W ...no imidiate cast or tint or anything else. The contrast on the other hand feels a little bit on the low side...but not an exctent where I can´t live with it, color feels also little weak.
Native WP is quite useful for less than good display systems. The LUT adjustment the combo is making sucks and you’re letting the color managed app’s do the heavy lifting here instead.
-
OK then...first run was done with Spyder 3 Elite and Display Color Pro...I went for whitepoint D65, gamma 2.2, luminance 130cd/m and blackpoint set to ABSOLUTE..everything else set accordingly.
The result was ridiculus...a heavy yellow tint/cast...there is no way in haven that could be "normal" after a calibration.
Second run with same hardware but whitepoint set to native...and now we´re getting some where. My B&W look much better...when I open up an image in PS and convert it to "gray scale"...the image acctually is grayscal/B&W ...no imidiate cast or tint or anything else. The contrast on the other hand feels a little bit on the low side...but not an exctent where I can´t live with it, color feels also little weak.
That´s what I got so far....Display Pro is an absolut wonderful application to work with.
I´m gonna do some more testing.
Great, but no word yet of comparative results using the i1 Display 2.
-
Second run with same hardware but whitepoint set to native...and now we´re getting some where.
As for a native white point, it usually works well, because it requires less vcgt adjustments to profile the display effectively (meaning, the adjustments, contained in the monitor profile's own vcgt tab, to the RGB curves that modify the CPU's video card's output table), thus avoiding the loss of too many of the 256 tonal levels, hence with a lower chance of visible banding.
Also, human vision is adaptive, which means that the white point on the screen will appear neutral to you after a short time needed for your vision to "reset" itself to the new white balance, and as long as there are no other light sources in your work environment's field of vision whose brightness exceeds and overpowers that of your monitor.
On the other hand, if your monitor is used in combination with a daylight viewing booth next to it for comparative viewing, then you cannot use the monitor's native white point: instead, you will have to modify the monitor's white point to match that of the booth, otherwise, for example, one may look bluish and the other yellowish. That would be because your vision, faced with two mismatched white points, would no longer know which one to adapt to.
Besides their white points, the brightness levels of the two devices will also have to match, making it preferable to have a booth with a dimmer, since it's easier to match the booth's brightness to that of the monitor than the other way around, within limits, of course.
So, long story short: in the absence of a viewing booth, a native white point is very useful and serviceable.
-
As for the sorrounding ambient light, I have med sure I don´t have any light sources disturbing with colorcasts e.t.c.
I´m done testing the Spyder 3 now...and I had to go all they way up to 8000k,130 luminance and 2,2 gamma to get the result i want...this seemes very odd to me.
I´m fully aware that I have to let my eyes adjust to my newly calibrated system...and that it mabye should feel "alittle" warmer....but so far it has affected my B&W(wich is my main work/consern) in a way so that I dont feel like I´m getting a pure grayscale, in an image I know I have as pure black and as pure white as you can get out of it, it doesnt feel B&W....it feels lik a monochromatic picture with a color tint, photofilter, color cast....or what ever you call it.
And that is simply just not acceptable...I need to feel that my pictures are B&W when I want them to.
So..moving on to the i1 Display 2....I´ll be back
-
AND THERE IT IIIISS !!!!!!!!!!!
i1 Display 2...first run D65, lumin. 130, gamma 2.2 ...not perfect but astronomicly better the the spyder.
So I guess...it´s a pretty safe assumtion that my spyder is some how defected ???
-
AND THERE IT IIIISS !!!!!!!!!!!
i1 Display 2...first run D65, lumin. 130, gamma 2.2 ...not perfect but astronomicly better the the spyder.
So I guess...it´s a pretty safe assumtion that my spyder is some how defected ???
Gotta say, the Spyders were no good when I first used them in 2000 (I had ordered five of them for use at the company I worked with at the time: four out of five were severely defective, and the fifth one was a little less defective, but still no good), and they still seem to fail far more often than would be fair to expect.
I never recommend them to anyone who asks me for advice.
-
Yeah that might be...colormanagement is pretty new to me so I was just following the recomendations I recived.
Anyway...thanks so much for all your inputs and ideas...much apreciated.
It was still a smidge off...so I went for 6700K, 130cd/m, gamma 2.2, blackpoint at absolut rendering....and it´s all there.
It´s working fine even with the colors e.t.c
-
Gotta say, the Spyders were no good when I first used them in 2000 (I had ordered five of them for use at the company I worked with at the time: four out of five were severely defective, and the fifth one was a little less defective, but still no good), and they still seem to fail far more often than would be fair to expect.
I never recommend them to anyone who asks me for advice.
Marco, my record with Spyder products (Spyder2 and Spyder3) is slightly better than yours. Two out of five were bad. The good ones were VERY good. I had an excellent Spyder2 Pro which I used for two years. I continue to use the puck from a Spyder3 Express kit and I'm very happy with it. I would still recommend the Spyder3 Elite as an option for "experienced" users with a wide gamut LCD, with the caveat that if you think you may have a defective device, don't waste your time and emotional energy trying to make it work. Return/exchange it immediately.
-
It was still a smidge off...so I went for 6700K, 130cd/m, gamma 2.2, blackpoint at absolut rendering....and it´s all there.
When you say it was "still a smidge off", do you mean compared to what, exactly?
-
Compared to what I belive is black and white...with any colortints or colorcasts...and after making sure there is as little sorrounding light affecting my monitor as possible.