Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: tshort on January 12, 2006, 06:47:59 pm
-
I just read a little item about the Pantone Huey monitor calibration product - $89.95 MSRP. Was wondering if anyone knows about this, and how it compares to, say, the Eye One (which I just bought for about $250...).
-
I had an e-mail from Pantone this morning and this is what they replied when I asked if I needed to use Spyder as well:-
'The Huey is a separate instrument for calibrating your monitors. You will not need to use the Spyder.
Details are on our website:
http://shop.colourconfidence.com/index.php' (http://shop.colourconfidence.com/index.php')
Monique
-
From my experience with Beta versions of the Huey, it is an inexpensive, decent-quality monitor calibrator, with the unique feature of continously reading in ambient room light and adjusting your screen color to compensate. I sit facing windows on two sides of my office, and espescially in winter, go from pitch black through sunrise, midday and sunset daily. Not ideal color-viewing conditions, I admit, but it really does make a big difference to have your monitor adjust for these shifts throughout the day.
There is a seminar running in the US in Canada starting this week called "Color Control Freak." Attendees receive the Pantone/GretagMacbeth Huey as part of their seminar toolkit. See http://www.graphintel.com/controlfreak (http://www.graphintel.com/controlfreak) for more details. The event cost is $299, but there is an early bird code floating around until this Thursday (1/19/06) of "toucan" that knocks off $30.
-
My Huey just arrived today. Took 10 minutes from opening the package to completing calibration. I have to say I do like the results but I'm still struggling with the whole end-to-end color-calibration process.
The screen now looks more like I remember the scene, but the Pixma 8500 prints still seem too vivid. Perhaps the printer has dreams of Sensia film...
-
Having had an opportunity to play with the software, I'm a bit perplexed at one thing: it does NOT prompt you to adjust the brightness of your display using the hardware controls on the display. Which leads me to believe that it must do it in the LUT, bad juju
for LCD users, or for anyone for that matter.
I don't see this as being a serious tool for serious work.
-
Thanks for your information, I have an lcd screen and for the moment will continue to use the Spyder which I find constant and reliable.
Regards,
Monik
-
In my opinion both EyeOne LT ($120) and Spyder2Express ($80) give you better value for your money. First of all both of them use the same colorimeters as in highend packages from the same venders (only bundled with very basic software), second of all they give you an option to upgrade to a more professional software bundle in the future if you realize you need it. You can even upgrade them to Coloreyes software if you want to be geeky about color.
[edit] Oh, the reviews of all mentioned packages (except Coloreyes):
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews.html (http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews.html) - written by Keith Cooper
-
Having had an opportunity to play with the software, I'm a bit perplexed at one thing: it does NOT prompt you to adjust the brightness of your display using the hardware controls on the display. Which leads me to believe that it must do it in the LUT, bad juju
for LCD users, or for anyone for that matter.
I don't see this as being a serious tool for serious work.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65068\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No, it just defines the current luminance. And lets not forget who the product was designed for (designers who wouldn't know a profile from a pixel). The product is for someone who's not even considering Adobe Gamma (which is a good thing). For even a serious amateur photographer, move directly to the Eye-One Display. If you have clients who have a fear of color management, huey is the perfect first baby step for them.
-
No, it just defines the current luminance. And lets not forget who the product was designed for (designers who wouldn't know a profile from a pixel). The product is for someone who's not even considering Adobe Gamma (which is a good thing). For even a serious amateur photographer, move directly to the Eye-One Display. If you have clients who have a fear of color management, huey is the perfect first baby step for them.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65146\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Andrew what does the Huey's 'roomlight compensation' do then? Adjust for changes in color perception due to ambient lighting conditions?
-
Andrew what does the Huey's 'roomlight compensation' do then? Adjust for changes in color perception due to ambient lighting conditions?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65182\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'll double check with the product manager but I think it does do some minor adjustments from the base luminance it targets to, probably by messing with the LUT. Without something like DDC, I don't know how it would "control" the physical backlit of say an LCD.
-
The ambient light adjustments are made to the LUT; just got conformation from the PM.
-
Andrew, you should put a bug in their ear for them to update the software so it can target luminance before it profiles. I bet the hardware is capable of it.
-
Andrew, you should put a bug in their ear for them to update the software so it can target luminance before it profiles...
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=65438\")
...and to openly state the various targets they use for Illuminant and Gamma while you're at it...
(the targets seem to be as described at the bottom of this review:
[a href=\"http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/pantone_huey.html]http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews...tone_huey.html[/url])
-
...and to openly state the various targets they use for Illuminant and Gamma while you're at it...
(the targets seem to be as described at the bottom of this review:
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews...tone_huey.html (http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/pantone_huey.html))
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65442\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Here are the numbers behind the descriptions:
1) Gaming
-----------------------------------------------------
Color Setting: Neutral
Contrast Setting: Low
2) Web Browsing & Photo Editing
-----------------------------------------------------
Color Setting: Neutral
Contrast Setting: Medium
3) Grafic Design & Video Editing
-----------------------------------------------------
Color Setting: Neutral
Contrast Setting: High
4) Custom: Warm, low contrast
5) Custom: Warm, medium contrast
6) Custom: Warm, high contrast
7) Custom: Cool, low contrast
8) Custom: Cool, medium contrast
9) Custom: Cool, high contrast
…with:
Cool = 7500K
Medium = 6500K
Warm = 5000K
…and:
Low contrast = 1.8
Medium contrast = 2.2
High contrast = 2.5
They decided to describe the settings rather than to offer the technical background, simply because huey is targeting a customer segment that is not familiar with colormanagement terms, they might not even know what an ICC profile is.
-
Excellent information. But what's "neutral"? Is it "native" or 6500K? <edit> Northlight Images suggests it's D65...
-
Excellent information. But what's "neutral"? Is it "native" or 6500K?[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65454\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
CCT 6500K
-
CCT 6500K
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65460\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thank you. So I guess it's not D65 even though the profile name implies it. Obviously I don't know the difference in the first place.
-
Thank you. So I guess it's not D65 even though the profile name implies it. Obviously I don't know the difference in the first place.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65466\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No I doubt it. GMB doesn't use standard illuminants like D65 (although I've asked them to) but instead use correlated color temperature values. There is a difference. D65 is an exact color of white and 6500K is a range of colors. Not that we know setting either in a software package is producing that color (in actuality, neither is possible). But at least when we ask for D65, we're asking for an exact color and when we ask for 6500K, its anyone's guess what color of white is being used for that target because 6500K could be anywhere within a range of colors.
-
No I doubt it. GMB doesn't use standard illuminants like D65 (although I've asked them to) but instead use correlated color temperature values. There is a difference. D65 is an exact color of white and 6500K is a range of colors. Not that we know setting either in a software package is producing that color (in actuality, neither is possible). But at least when we ask for D65, we're asking for an exact color and when we ask for 6500K, its anyone's guess what color of white is being used for that target because 6500K could be anywhere within a range of colors.
a CCT is NOT a range of colors. The relation between color and temperature is mathematically defined and can be shown as a curve called the planckian locus. (I believe you call it the black body radiator curve in your book). A cct by definition is a point ON the planckian locus or BBRC. If you ask for 6500K you are asking for a well defined point ON the planckian locus.
-
a CCT is NOT a range of colors. The relation between color and temperature is mathematically defined and can be shown as a curve called the planckian locus. (I believe you call it the black body radiator curve in your book). A cct by definition is a point ON the planckian locus or BBRC. If you ask for 6500K you are asking for a well defined point ON the planckian locus.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65478\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
If we were referring to a true black body then yes, that point would be an exact point on the plankian radiator curve. Since virtually no device behaves this way, using CCT 6500K we define is a range of colors running perpendicular to that black body curve; the lines of correlated temperature. By using CCT, as you point out, I'm referring to a point on that line (the exact point isn't defined). But clearly one point on either end of that line of correlated color tempature isn't the same color of white. The illustration from the book is enclosed.
-
If we were referring to a true black body then yes, that point would be an exact point on the plankian radiator curve. Since virtually no device behaves this way, using CCT 6500K we define is a range of colors running perpendicular to that black body curve; the lines of correlated temperature. By using CCT, as you point out, I'm referring to a point on that line (the exact point isn't defined). But clearly one point on either end of that line of correlated color tempature isn't the same color of white. The illustration from the book is enclosed.
Nope, you're using reversed logic. The entire point of the exercise is exactly that: matching a light-source to its equivalent color-temperature. The color-temperature BY DEFINITION is ON the planckian locus.
The lines you call "lines of correlated temperature" are usually referred to as "iso-temperature" lines.
A CCT is not somewhere on these "iso-temperature lines", it is the exact point where the iso-temperature line crosses the planckian locus.
-
A CCT is not somewhere on these "iso-temperature lines", it is the exact point where the iso-temperature line crosses the planckian locus.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65519\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes, agreed. The point is the exact color, no question. The question becomes, when a software product (or a color meter as an example) tells us we have 6500K, WHERE on that line does the point lie? If we get the chromaticity values, this is now defined. Without, it's a *possible* range of colors. My terminology (CCT6500 is a range of colors) wasn't well written.
-
when a software product (or a color meter as an example) tells us we have 6500K, WHERE on that line does the point lie?
I'm with you on that one. I would very much like the software to give me 2 options:
1. Use Exact Color, or
2. Use Daylight Equivalent (which for all practical purposes is the CCT).
That way I can measure my viewing-booth lights and be assured the software uses the exact color of the lights as opposed to using some daylight equivalent which most likely doesn't match the color of the viewing booth lights.
I presume this is what you are referring to?
-
I'm with you on that one. I would very much like the software to give me 2 options:
1. Use Exact Color, or
2. Use Daylight Equivalent (which for all practical purposes is the CCT).
That way I can measure my viewing-booth lights and be assured the software uses the exact color of the lights as opposed to using some daylight equivalent which most likely doesn't match the color of the viewing booth lights.
I presume this is what you are referring to?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65541\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I don't know that we'll ever see this in the huey software (nor is it really appropriate for this audience). In Eye-One Match, you can specify any xy chromaticity values but I wonder how many users would do this. You can measure the light box/viewing conditions and build that into the profile in Eye-One Match and ProfileMaker Pro. For the later, it's a pretty serious audience so it's a good feature to have.
-
For those who want to read more about color temperature, see Doug Kerr's excellent article: http://doug.kerr.home.att.net/pumpkin/Color_Temperature.pdf (http://doug.kerr.home.att.net/pumpkin/Color_Temperature.pdf)
Herman
-
For those who want to read more about color temperature, see Doug Kerr's excellent article: http://doug.kerr.home.att.net/pumpkin/Color_Temperature.pdf (http://doug.kerr.home.att.net/pumpkin/Color_Temperature.pdf)
Herman
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65563\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Doug's articles are excellent (does he hang here?).
The part to zoom in on (in relation to this discussion):
"Does every chromaticity have a color temperature? Strictly speaking,
no. Only chromaticities falling on the Planckian locus (chromaticities
that could actually be emitted by a blackbody radiator) have true color
temperatures.
However, for chromaticities falling near the locus, but not on it, we
may usefully state a related property called the “correlated color
temperature”. This is the color temperature of the point on the
blackbody locus that is “closest in appearance” (chromaticity-wise) to
the chromaticity of interest".
Karl Lang (my tech editor) is even more 'brutal" when speaking of color temperature expressed in Kelvin/CCT. He calls it an "obsolete method of defining white illuminants"
-
> (does he hang here?)
Formerly RG I believe.
-
I don't know that we'll ever see this in the huey software (nor is it really appropriate for this audience). In Eye-One Match, you can specify any xy chromaticity values but I wonder how many users would do this. You can measure the light box/viewing conditions and build that into the profile in Eye-One Match and ProfileMaker Pro. For the later, it's a pretty serious audience so it's a good feature to have.
Here's what I want:
We already have monitors with adaptive lighting tech. Why not combine that with adaptive profiles, based on live measurement of the ambient light?
-
For those who want to read more about color temperature, see Doug Kerr's excellent article: http://doug.kerr.home.att.net/pumpkin/Color_Temperature.pdf (http://doug.kerr.home.att.net/pumpkin/Color_Temperature.pdf)
Herman
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65563\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks for the link. It all makes sense now.
So to set a D65 when it's not explicitely available I can put x0.3127 y0.3290 from what I understand (not in Huey obviously). I was wondering why I get a closer match in two monitors when I target xy values rather that the K number. Excellent. I guess D stands for daylight and it's on a daylight locus and not on a blackbody locus.
I suppose I can just forget the reciprocal megakelvin part...
-
Optix XR Pro software lets the user choose either between 6500K or D65. Which one should I be using?
-
Thanks for the link. It all makes sense now.
So to set a D65 when it's not explicitely available I can put x0.3127 y0.3290 from what I understand (not in Huey obviously). I was wondering why I get a closer match in two monitors when I target xy values rather that the K number. Excellent.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65613\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not sure. The idea is first of all, when a software product asks for D65 versus 6500K, at least with D65, we know what illuminant it's aiming for.
Getting two monitors to match would involve not only aiming for the white point but also the luminance. You need to measure both and set them the same.
-
Getting two monitors to match would involve not only aiming for the white point but also the luminance. You need to measure both and set them the same.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65641\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I know that.
x0.3127 y0.3290 are the coordinates for D65, aren't they? Is there another component to it?
From what I understand D65 is a better choice because it gives you more consistent results - it attempts to achieve the same chromaticity ("color" minus luminance) of white. While 6500K allowes many different chromaticities that are on 6500K "iso-temperature line" if I understand it correctly. D65 is one of the points on that line so if you aim for it every time you calibrate the results are more consistent.
<edited by poster> Just wanted to make a note that later in this thread the above paragraph about D65 and 6500K as targets is proven to be completely wrong.
-
From what I understand D65 is a better choice because it gives you more consistent results - it attempts to achieve the same chromaticity ("color" minus luminance) of white. While 6500K allowes many different chromaticities that are on 6500K "iso-temperature line" if I understand it correctly.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65681\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That's my take on it.
-
That's my take on it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65682\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That's what you said the first time, actually. But it was hard to understand without further reading...
-
While 6500K allowes many different chromaticities that are on 6500K "iso-temperature line"
There is no ambiguity in using 6500K as a data entry. The ambiguity arises when you tell software to calibrate a monitor to native white and it returns for example 5500K as the CCT. In this particular case the question becomes whether the software will use the actual color (thus R=G=B=max for white), or the true Blackbody co-ordinates for 5500K (thus max RGB will be adjusted).
If you are requested to enter a temperature as is then there is no such ambiguity because the software will use the exact blackbody co-ordinates. The difference between blackbody co-ordinates (the planckian locus) and daylight co-ordinates is negligible for practical purposes. So D65 and 6500K are practically identical.
-
Let's defer to an excellent post by Bruce Lindbloom (with permission I quoted this in my book and point e is of interest in the context of our discussions):
a) D65 is a spectral power distribution (a certain amount of energy at each wavelength across the visible spectrum).
D65 is a tristimulus value; the D65 spectrum, when viewed by the CIE standard observer, produces an XYZ triplet (or xyY if you prefer).
c) 6500K blackbody radiator is a spectral power distribution.
d) 6500K is blackbody tristimulus value; the 6500K blackbody spectrum, when viewed by the CIE standard observer, produces an XYZ triplet—similar to, but slightly different from, the one found in (.
e) Correlated color temperature takes a color's chromaticity coordinate (x,y) and finds the particular blackbody temperature whose chromaticity coordinate (d) is closest to it. Note that there are many different colors that have the same correlated color temperature. So a spectrum is very precise and unique. Its xyY is less precise and unique. Its CCT is even less precise and unique.
D65 is a unique SPD (there exists only one). A color whose CCT is 6500K is not unique (there are infinitely many different xyY and SPDs that share it).
-
x0.3127 y0.3290 are the coordinates for D65, aren't they? Is there another component to it?
Looks like it yes. Optix XR Pro shows x=.313 and y=.329 and a CCT of 6504.
-
x0.3127 y0.3290 are the coordinates for D65, aren't they? Is there another component to it?
You'll find the same chromaticity values for all the working space white points defined as D65 as well in Photoshop's custom RGB dialog (select sRGB, Adobe RGB etc).
-
There is no ambiguity in using 6500K as a data entry. ...
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=65697\")
Do you mean to say that 6500K as a calibration target actually specifies the coordinates of the blackbody 6500K, as a point on the planckian (blackbody) locus? Spyder2 Pro specifies it's coordinates as x0.314 y0.324 for instance. Not the same as D65 but a close point. I can't tell how close and if it's perceptibly different.
But in that case using either one as a target is OK I guess. In that case I suppose the only difference is if it's a point on a blackbody or a daylight locus (on the intersection with a 6500K iso-temperature line). If it's negligible for practical purposes (like Oscar said) you can use either one.
<edit> OK, here's from Colorvision's website, don't know if others use the same exact coordinates. So both are used as points it seems:
"...6500K is 0.314, 0.324 CIExy and D65 is 0.313, 0.329 CIExy..."
[a href=\"http://support.colorvision.ch/index.php?_m=knowledgebase&_a=viewarticle&kbarticleid=385&nav=0,16]http://support.colorvision.ch/index.php?_m...id=385&nav=0,16[/url]
-
Do you mean to say that 6500K as a calibration target actually specifies the coordinates of the blackbody 6500K, as a point on the planckian (blackbody) locus?
Yes, that is correct.
The daylight co-ordinates are positioned slightly above the planckian locus in the xy diagram, which means you should expect a slightly higher y value for daylight.
Would you see the difference between D65 and 6500K? Yes and no.
Yes, because it really is a 10 degree observer problem as opposed to the usual 2 degree observer upon which most theory and calculations are based. In addition it is on the neutral axis. We are extremely sensitive to comparative differences in the conditions above.
However, no, because there is no comparative difference. Your screen is either set to one or the other and you will immediately chromatically adapt to the difference. Even if there is something like an absolute perception, as a hypothetical equivalent to absolute hearing, you would not be able to discern the difference temporally.
More over, it is my experience that the stability of the measurement device in combination with the stability of LCD near white is simply not precise enough to measure the differences required to find the exact white point. This may explain why you get better results with one value as opposed to the other. The minute difference between the target whites may give a relatively significant difference in the graybalance after calibration.
With this in mind I would advice the following:
If you have a choice between D65 or 6500K, use the value that gives you the most pleasing, stable, and or comfortable result subjectively.
Have a slight preference for D numbers, because the ICC internals may have fixed values for these. For example, the ICC internals are based on a fixed D50 illuminant. Providing the exact same values for your device white will allow a CMM to skip Chromatic Adaptation calculations.
PS. The "experience" mentioned above is based on the original i1-display and relatively old LCD technology. The results may be different for a quality colori/spectrometer and a state-of-the-art, high-end eizo for example.
-
Hi, gang,
This is mostly an excuse to say hello! I just joined this floating crap game!
Please be patient while I learn how to function in this joint!
Looks like it yes. Optix XR Pro shows x=.313 and y=.329 and a CCT of 6504.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65701\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
x=.313, y=.329 explicitly defines a chromaticity. That chromaticity (presumably, from what you say) has a CCT of 6504K, as do an infinite number of other chromaticities.
So the CCT is not another coordinate, but merely a "property" of the chromaticity that is completely defined by the x and y coordinates (conveniently delivered to us by that program, evidently).
As has been well covered in this thread, the CCT does not define a unique chromaticity, nor is it needed (in conjunction with x and y) to define one.
Best regards,
Doug
-
A cct by definition is a point ON the planckian locus or BBRC.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65478\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Actually, a CCT is just a number. It is not a point on the x-y plane, on the Planckian locus or otherwise.
But if you "ask for" the chromaticity whose CT (not CCT) is that CCT value, then you have a particular point on the Planckian locus (and thus a specific chromaticity).
If you ask for "something" whose CCT is that value, you get an iso-temperature line.
Best regards,
Doug
-
Thanks for that article. It is very informative.
What's important for calibration purpouses is that both D65 and 6500K when used by calibration software as white point targets refer to specific cromaticities, with defined coordinates.
However if you get a Native white point of a monitor and want to calibrate another monitor to the same target you do need to use the x and y CIE coordinates and not the K number, which corresponds to infinite number of chromaticities like you said.
-
Hello Doug,
Welcome to the forums.
Actually, a CCT is just a number. It is not a point on the x-y plane, on the Planckian locus or otherwise.
But if you "ask for" the chromaticity whose CT (not CCT) is that CCT value, then you have a particular point on the Planckian locus (and thus a specific chromaticity).
If you ask for "something" whose CCT is that value, you get an iso-temperature line.
With all due respect, but do you really think that this nitty-gritty word-game is a useful contribution to the discussion? I believe that Serge's conclusion clearly shows his understanding of the concepts and the corresponding ambiguities.
And again, you are also reversing the logic:
[geek warning on]
If you have a chromaticity of a selective radiator that is not equal to any of the chromaticities of the blackbody radiator, then the CCT is defined as the temperature of the blackbody radiator whose perceived color most closely resembles the perceived color of the selective radiator.
This is almost verbatim from Wyszecki & Stiles, which I presume is still the reference for this subject.
[geek warning off]
In normal language: if you have a color close to the planckian locus, then the CCT is the closest color ON the planckian locus. PERIOD.
Obviously, no software (or scientist) is going to ask for a CCT as opposed to a CT, and then pick a random color on the iso-temperature line. Although given the wildly varying results of current software offerings, one would be inclined to think they actually do pick a random number... (joke).
-
Hello Doug,
Welcome to the forums.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65881\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thank you, Oscar. This looks like a really good place.