Spyder2 & Samsung 275T?

[Eldor]

Hello everyone!  This is my first post here and I hope my question is appropriate in this section...

I just switched to using a Spyder2 (after several years with the original Spyder) and I’m stumped about how to adjust one of my LCD monitors…

The monitor is a Samsung 275T and I have it connected in analog mode (for some reason the display was unstable with the digital connection).  Anyway, the adjustments on the monitor seem to be more advanced than other monitors I’ve used, and instead of a simple RGB adjustment, there are Saturation and Hue adjustments for Red, Green, Blue, Magenta and Yellow.

After playing with this for almost an hour I’m no closer to getting the monitor calibrated and profiled.  No matter what I do, I can’t seem to get the RGB adjustment lower than the .5 they suggest (it’s like 1.5!!!).

Does anyone here have experience with such a monitor and Spyder2?  Can you please offer some advice?

I didn’t have any trouble adjusting another Samsung 941BW monitor I have, or the built-in LCD on my notebook.

Thanks for any help…

Eldor

[digitaldog]

I don't know what they are suggesting you do but I'd reset the display back to factory settings (there should be some OSD or ON screen Display to do this). Then set the luminance to something like 120-150cd/m2, Native gamma and white point if the software allows this, then don't touch ANY of the OSD's since they do more harm than good.

[Eldor]

I don't know what they are suggesting you do but I'd reset the display back to factory settings (there should be some OSD or ON screen Display to do this). Then set the luminance to something like 120-150cd/m2, Native gamma and white point if the software allows this, then don't touch ANY of the OSD's since they do more harm than good.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164036\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks very much, Andrew.

This monitor (as advanced as it's supposed to be) is really giving me frustration.  That, and my inexperience with this, are combining to drive me up the wall!

There is a Reset in the on-screen display but it seems not to affect the contrast or brigntness settings.  Gamma is set to +0 (guess that's the native gamma) but I don't see anything to adjust the luminance or white point settings.  Are those done with contrast and brightness settings?  

The settings on the monitor are: MagicColor: OFF, Color Tone: Normal, Gamma: +0, and under the 6-color setting I have Saturation and Hue for Red, Green, Blue, Magenta and Yellow.  And a reset (which only seems to affect saturation and hue settings).

Anyway, I produced a profile for this but I'm not convinced that it's a correct one.  I've opened some PS files that I corrected earlier (after having profiled with the original Spyder) and used on several profiled systems and they don't look quite right to me.  But that's purely an opinion and I have no way of confirming it.

Thanks for your help...

[digitaldog]

Only ONE of the buttons is going to actually alter anything physically in the display, the intensity of the backlight where you'll set Luminance. It might be called brightness, it might be called something else but see if you can figure out which single control that is, and alter only it when the software asks you to adjust the brightness for setting luminance.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

It would be a better world if

1. LCD monitor makers all used the same name for the luminance control, and
2. They omitted all the other controls (or else put them in a separate panel labeled "for color-blind amateurs only").

[Eldor]

It would be a better world if

1. LCD monitor makers all used the same name for the luminance control, and
2. They omitted all the other controls (or else put them in a separate panel labeled "for color-blind amateurs only").
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164211\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm not quite sure what you're suggesting but I resent the implication that I'm a color-blind amateur simply because I can't do the color calibration and profiling for one one of my montors with the Spyder2.  I'm new with the Spyder2 but not new with anything else.

Have a happy new year

[kcannon]

After playing with this for almost an hour I’m no closer to getting the monitor calibrated and profiled. 

Eldor, I'm wrestling with the same problems with a 275T and both a Spyder2 and Spyder 3.  Did you ever work it out?  Anything you can share?
Thanks!

Kelly
Oakland, CA
kcannon@yahoo.com

[ARD]

Any adjustments you are not sure of just leave alone. The Spyder will make the necessary adjustments to the profile it creates

[jackbingham]

You know it's long past time we stopped believing that native is the only way lcds can work. The truth of the matter is that native and using monitor settings are a both a compromise and you should choose the one that works best for you. If you need a good match between monitor and print under a reasonable viewing light, there's a really good chance that native won't cut it. No doubt many monitor osd's just plain suck. Assuming you can interpret them you can hit a specific color temp target and get a good screen to print match. Yes. it's true you can't change the color of the backlight, but you can alter the data sent to the backlight and that can work just fine. I've got a long list of manual lcd's in the office that I use for testing and they all work fine calibrated to something other than native. Is it ideal, no, but the compromise in my mind is better than no color match.

[digitaldog]

You know it's long past time we stopped believing that native is the only way lcds can work. 

Yes. it's true you can't change the color of the backlight, but you can alter the data sent to the backlight and that can work just fine.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=170210\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

For those who find this confusing, what Jack should be saying is you should stop believing that Native is the only way CCFL LCD's SHOULD be set even though you can't physically alter their native behavior. As for working fine, well that's rather vague. It highly depends on the display. Depending on the display (the vast majority being 8-bit), you trade off banding for what may be preferable color appearance, mostly outside ICC aware applications (the compensation in Photoshop is applied in 21 bit precision).

As for OSD's sucking, well yes, they can. But as long as you have enough options to set something and have it visually match the print, it doesn't matter if it says D55 or D65; you're not getting either anyway. Fortunately most LCD's correlate pretty well to D65 and a D65 to D50 off a good GTI light box usually provides a good starting point for determining screen to print matching.

Start with a Native White point and view the results using images in Photoshop and prints on your light box. If they provide acceptable matching, great. You've got a lot less banding to account for.

[jackbingham]

x. If they provide acceptable matching, great. You've got a lot less banding to account for.

And if they don't then you should consider that a little banding is a fair compromise for a good print to monitor match.
Suggesting that you can make a print under a d50 booth match a monitor set to native that could be 6000, 6500, 7000 or god know what is just not true. You can use the osd to set color temperature and you can make images match print to monitor with minimal banding. I do it every day, I have countless clients that do it every day and the only difference between this and NEC or Eizo is a high bit monitor lut. The osd still does the same thing, alter the data sent to the monitor. Good  monitor profiling software should provide some smoothing to counter banding anyway. It won't be perfect but we disagree that choosing native is the only option.

[digitaldog]

And if they don't then you should consider that a little banding is a fair compromise for a good print to monitor match.

Perhaps yes.

Suggesting that you can make a print under a d50 booth match a monitor set to native that could be 6000, 6500, 7000 or god know what is just not true.

There's really no such thing as a D50 light box any more than we have D50 (or D65) displays. We have varying correlated color temperatures, in this case coming from an illuminate that can't possibly produce either (Fluorescent lights). None the less, lots of people can set their displays to Native, or D50 or D55, or D65 and have a screen to print match. The substraight plays a role too.

You can use the osd to set color temperature and you can make images match print to monitor with minimal banding.

I don't know what minimal really means. I do know that past display technology allowed us direct electronic, physical control over this with not a lick of banding. As I said, start with Native, you might very well see the print to screen match. The native white point of most LCD's (again using Fluorescent illumination) often correlates well to D65 and D65 often correlates good matching to a Fluorescent "D50" light box. But it might not. YMMV. Last week at a client using a NEC 2690, we started with Native but, using the specific Epson papers used and under a GTI Fluorescent box, D55 was a better match. That's what we used.

I do it every day, I have countless clients that do it every day and the only difference between this and NEC or Eizo is a high bit monitor lut.

You'll notice I mentioned the "vast majority" in my post, they don't use high bit luts.

The osd still does the same thing, alter the data sent to the monitor. Good  monitor profiling software should provide some smoothing to counter banding anyway. It won't be perfect but we disagree that choosing native is the only option.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=170369\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I agree. And I didn't say never use anything but Native. I said use Native first.

[digitaldog]

Anyway, I produced a profile for this but I'm not convinced that it's a correct one.  I've opened some PS files that I corrected earlier (after having profiled with the original Spyder) and used on several profiled systems and they don't look quite right to me.  But that's purely an opinion and I have no way of confirming it.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There are a few ways you can test this. For one, download and view some images that are of known reference quality such as:

[a href=\"http://www.digitaldog.net/files/Printer%20Test%20file.jpg.zip]http://www.digitaldog.net/files/Printer%20...%20file.jpg.zip[/url]

http://homepage.mac.com/WebObjects/FileSha...st%20Images.zip (this is a big image, 50mb).

Or

http://www.pixl.dk/Download_documents/Pixl...age2002_RGB.jpg

View them in Photoshop with the profile you built.

There's also this:

http://www.ppmag.com/reviews/200412_rodneycm.pdf

It appears from your posts that you're not as yet concerned with screen to print matching, you just want to know if this new display is being properly calibrated and profiled. We can worry about soft proofing and prints later.

[jackbingham]

"There's really no such thing as a D50 light box any more than we have D50"

Having not suggested that a d50 booth is specifically d50 but rather it is frequently referred to as such I don't understand the point.

"I don't know what minimal really means. "
and I don't know what "Fortunately most LCD's correlate pretty well to D65" means either.

[digitaldog]

"I don't know what minimal really means. "
and I don't know what "Fortunately most LCD's correlate pretty well to D65" means either.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=170398\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

correlate
     adj : mutually related [syn: correlative, correlated]
     n : either of two correlated variables [syn: correlative]
     v 1: to bear a reciprocal or mutual relation; "Do these facts
          correlate?"
     2: bring into a mutual, complementary, or reciprocal relation;
        "I cannot correlate these two pieces of information"

What it means is, while the actual illuminate SPD from the display and the light box are NOT D65/D50 a native white point of most LCD's and the actual illuminate of a Fluorescent light box often closely match when you set one to D65 while the other is supposed to describe D50. As I said, neither is producing either.

IOW, often, Native = D65 which correlates to D50 box resulting in screen to print match.

As for not knowing what "minimal" means, you used it below when you said minimal banding. I have no idea how much or little that is, for me, its too much. I'd like to know when I view an image if the banding results from the image data or not. When a display produces banding, I don't if this is within the image or the display or how much of each. Banding is an undesirable attribute of a display.  

For that reason, starting with a Native WP, as I've said now for the third time, is a smart starting point, especially when the OP has an 8-bit LUT driving the display.

[LA30]

Here is a link to the manual found on Samsungs site.

http://org.downloadcenter.samsung.com/down...0565D-04Eng.pdf

Ken

[jackbingham]

Gee thanks for the definition of correlate but the problem I was having were the words pretty well.

[jackbingham]

Looks to me like the only tool you might be able to use is saturation, but without fussing with it I can't be sure. You might be just as well off reseting this thing to it's defaults and then letting the video card do the work.
After a full reset try measuring the white point while adjusting saturation and see how the monitor responds. Be sure to check the saturation settings after a reset. If they are at 50% make all your adjustments downward. this may well be a fools errand but if you have a little time to fiddle.....

[digitaldog]

Gee thanks for the definition of correlate but the problem I was having were the words pretty well.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=170565\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

English a 2nd Language?