Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Monitor Profiling  (Read 15844 times)

KeithR

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 759
Monitor Profiling
« on: June 25, 2009, 05:45:48 pm »

After a few years of profiling my monitors with the Monaco Optix(DTP-94) and the Monaco software, I felt something just wasn't right. The combo did a fair job when I had a CRT, but since I now use an LCD I didn't trust the software(it's not supported as it once was) so I downloaded ColorEyes. I'm just looking to get any hints or tips I may want to use when profiling the lcd monitor. Ambient lighting? The monitor is located next to a north facing window. Should I close the blinds when I profile? Anything special I should be aware of with ColorEyes?
Logged
The destination is our goal but it’s the journey we experience

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #1 on: June 25, 2009, 06:09:14 pm »

You shouldn't have daylight being cast on your monitor at any time you are doing imaging work.

WHen you place the Optix XR on the display, tilt the display back so the Optix rests on the display without you exerting ANY pressure on it. If you exert pressure on the display by holding the Optix down on the display with your hand, it will generate false colours and wreck your profile.

With ColorEyes you only need to set three parameters (white point, black point and gamma and let the program do the rest. The one wrinkle is whether your display and video card allow DDC (Direct Data Channel) to operate. If they do you are all set; if they don't, before you start profiling you need to equalize the RGB channel values of the display by manually using the controls on the display. This is assisted with a Color Eyes menu called "Monitor White" under the Monitor Pre Calibration section on the left side of the Color Eyes interface. Click and follow instructions.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Ethan_Hansen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 114
    • Dry Creek Photo
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #2 on: June 25, 2009, 06:57:32 pm »

ColorEyes allows calibrating to a range of gamma options. Which one performs best depends on your monitor and on personal taste. Try calibrating with gamma set to L* and 2.2. View a sample of images, checking for shadow detail and resistance to banding. If your monitor, video card, and operating system combination permit DDC to work, L* will probably be the way to go. Checking a few synthetic images is a good idea as well. Our site has a set to check overall grayscale linearity and smoothness, luminance sensitivity, and black point settings.

Running the measurement with the blinds closed is a good idea. This minimizes the amount of stray ambient light corrupting the readings. As for "anything special" about ColorEyes, well, it seems to either work exceptionally well or quite poorly depending upon the hardware in your system. Experiment with the software, view the guided tour (there actually is a pile of useful info in there), and good luck!

One other potential gotcha with the DTP-94 that pertains to any monitor calibration software package is that the puck is not optimized for wide gamut displays. If you see strange behavior in highly saturated colors, this points to the DTP-94 not being able to accurately read the full range of your monitor output. For more typical displays, the Optix/DTP-94 remains the overall best choice of any standard monitor measurement hardware that we have characterized in terms of accuracy (particularly in shadow areas), repeatability, and sensitivity. If you are using a wide gamut LCD display the Spyder3 is a better choice for measurement hardware.

KeithR

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 759
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #3 on: June 25, 2009, 09:12:57 pm »

Quote from: MarkDS
You shouldn't have daylight being cast on your monitor at any time you are doing imaging work.

WHen you place the Optix XR on the display, tilt the display back so the Optix rests on the display without you exerting ANY pressure on it. If you exert pressure on the display by holding the Optix down on the display with your hand, it will generate false colours and wreck your profile.

With ColorEyes you only need to set three parameters (white point, black point and gamma and let the program do the rest. The one wrinkle is whether your display and video card allow DDC (Direct Data Channel) to operate. If they do you are all set; if they don't, before you start profiling you need to equalize the RGB channel values of the display by manually using the controls on the display. This is assisted with a Color Eyes menu called "Monitor White" under the Monitor Pre Calibration section on the left side of the Color Eyes interface. Click and follow instructions.
Thanks for the reply Mark. Actually, the window is behind and off to one side of the monitor, so no direct light falls on the monitor screen, but I think I'll do my next calibration later at night and with the shades closed. Ironic, this room used to be my darkroom and the windows were made light tight. It was nice to get the daylight back in the room. Looking outside, just now made me realize that I have to wash the windows.  
I checked and my card(nVidia 7600GT) is not DDC, so I'll have to do the "Monitor White" setup.
Logged
The destination is our goal but it’s the journey we experience

KeithR

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 759
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #4 on: June 25, 2009, 09:19:55 pm »

Quote from: Ethan_Hansen
ColorEyes allows calibrating to a range of gamma options. Which one performs best depends on your monitor and on personal taste. Try calibrating with gamma set to L* and 2.2. View a sample of images, checking for shadow detail and resistance to banding. If your monitor, video card, and operating system combination permit DDC to work, L* will probably be the way to go. Checking a few synthetic images is a good idea as well. Our site has a set to check overall grayscale linearity and smoothness, luminance sensitivity, and black point settings.

Running the measurement with the blinds closed is a good idea. This minimizes the amount of stray ambient light corrupting the readings. As for "anything special" about ColorEyes, well, it seems to either work exceptionally well or quite poorly depending upon the hardware in your system. Experiment with the software, view the guided tour (there actually is a pile of useful info in there), and good luck!

One other potential gotcha with the DTP-94 that pertains to any monitor calibration software package is that the puck is not optimized for wide gamut displays. If you see strange behavior in highly saturated colors, this points to the DTP-94 not being able to accurately read the full range of your monitor output. For more typical displays, the Optix/DTP-94 remains the overall best choice of any standard monitor measurement hardware that we have characterized in terms of accuracy (particularly in shadow areas), repeatability, and sensitivity. If you are using a wide gamut LCD display the Spyder3 is a better choice for measurement hardware.
Thanks for the tips Ethan! As for the guided tour, I have read through all of it, but was disappointed that there was only one video(out of I think, five) available. The rest said that they would be coming soon. Lot of good that does. And thanks for the links to your site. I'll use them once I get up to speed. As for my monitor, I know it's not a wide gamut type, but until I win the lottery I'll have to make do with what I have. At least it's a 24" wide screen!
Logged
The destination is our goal but it’s the journey we experience

howardm

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1984
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #5 on: July 01, 2009, 10:01:39 am »

since coloreyes wants you to generally calibrate the puck by putting it on a black surface, I found a very black cloth and now use that
to cover the monitor (tilted back) & puck during calibration, otherwise do calibration at night.

jjlphoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 467
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #6 on: July 01, 2009, 10:54:17 am »

Quote from: Ethan_Hansen
One other potential gotcha with the DTP-94 that pertains to any monitor calibration software package is that the puck is not optimized for wide gamut displays. If you see strange behavior in highly saturated colors, this points to the DTP-94 not being able to accurately read the full range of your monitor output. For more typical displays, the Optix/DTP-94 remains the overall best choice of any standard monitor measurement hardware that we have characterized in terms of accuracy (particularly in shadow areas), repeatability, and sensitivity. If you are using a wide gamut LCD display the Spyder3 is a better choice for measurement hardware.

How is it with the i1Pro?
Logged
Thanks, John Luke

Member-ASMP

KeithR

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 759
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #7 on: July 01, 2009, 08:39:49 pm »

Quote from: howardm
since coloreyes wants you to generally calibrate the puck by putting it on a black surface, I found a very black cloth and now use that
to cover the monitor (tilted back) & puck during calibration, otherwise do calibration at night.
My daughter had a book done of our Caribbean cruise and gave me a copy for fathers day. I love what she did, but the added bonus is the hardcover of the book is a very black cloth that works great for calibrating the puck!. Added to that, the calibration of the monitor was done at night, blinds and door closed. This room used to be my darkroom, and if the monitor hadn't been on, I wouldn't have seen a thing, even after letting my eyes adjust.
Logged
The destination is our goal but it’s the journey we experience

hassiman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 156
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #8 on: July 02, 2009, 12:35:20 pm »

I have a MacPro 2.66GH running Leopard.  The monitor is an Apple 23"cinema display and the video card is the ATI Radeon X1900 XT and I was wondering if this setup can be used with DDC in Coloreyes?  I know that Coloreyes has a specific plugin for the Mac monitors.
Logged

Bill Koenig

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 361
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #9 on: July 02, 2009, 03:51:02 pm »

Quote from: howardm
since coloreyes wants you to generally calibrate the puck by putting it on a black surface, I found a very black cloth and now use that
to cover the monitor (tilted back) & puck during calibration, otherwise do calibration at night.

I use the Monaco Optix(DTP-94) and the Monaco software, in regards putting the puck on a black surface, I just set it on my desks Formica desk top, which is more of a brown black color, as well as being some what reflective, is this wrong? Or should I be setting it on some scrap black rag mat?
The instructions said to just set it on the desk top, so with the lights off, I just set behind my monitor so there is no direct light hitting it.
Logged
Bill Koenig,

KeithR

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 759
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #10 on: July 02, 2009, 09:34:36 pm »

Quote from: Bill Koenig
I use the Monaco Optix(DTP-94) and the Monaco software, in regards putting the puck on a black surface, I just set it on my desks Formica desk top, which is more of a brown black color, as well as being some what reflective, is this wrong? Or should I be setting it on some scrap black rag mat?
The instructions said to just set it on the desk top, so with the lights off, I just set behind my monitor so there is no direct light hitting it.
Anything dark would do. There's a foam "gasket" around the puck. As long as that's not damaged so light could leak in you'll be fine. In looking at the tech forum on the CE site, this same question was asked and the response was that "you're over thinking this".
Logged
The destination is our goal but it’s the journey we experience

neil snape

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1447
    • http://www.neilsnape.com
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #11 on: July 03, 2009, 02:59:48 am »

I use a black velvet make up cover from photo shoots > the i1 D2 goes inside the little pouch and when I do the black count zero, I simply place the puck on it.

The idea is the puck is calibrated by setting the value with noise to zero. If the surface allows light to reflect or enter it will raise the black photon count above the minimum level that it should be set to.
Logged

Andrew Fee

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 87
    • http://
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #12 on: July 03, 2009, 03:44:59 am »

You really don't have to be so concerned about the black calibration for the sensor. You just need to put it flat on a desk, no matter the colour (just as long as it isn't glass ) and initialise it. If you want to be ‘safe’ maybe do it on the underside of your desk or cover it with a cloth when doing this. As someone already mentioned, there's already a foam/rubber seal around the DTP-94 that should block out any light when on a flat surface.

I'd actually recommend against covering the screen/sensor with a cloth (though it would be best to try and block out any direct light from hitting the screen if you can) as that's almost certainly going to cause it to heat up.

The whole reason for the black calibration is to account for noise caused by thermal drift in the sensor, so if it's covered and heating up, you're not going to have the most accurate profile. (particularly because ColorEyes works from white down to black so it'll have changed the most from the black calibration at that point)

While the DTP-94 is supposed to be thermally compensating, it doesn't do a great job of it. As far as I know, the only (inexpensive) colorimeter that doesn't suffer from thermal drift is the X-Rite Chroma 5. (which sadly isn't supported by ColorEyes) That said, I don't know how the Spyder 3 is affected, if at all.

If you're like me and keep the your sensor stored in a cool dry location (I have it in a hard case with a desiccant to prolong the filter's life) you should also leave the sensor hooked up to your computer resting on the monitor for 20–30 minutes to acclimate to the room/monitor temperature to avoid thermal drift throughout the calibration process. It's not just colorimeters that are affected by this—you need to do the same thing with an i1Pro.

This is why it's critical that you initialise the sensor every time before taking measurements (previously, it only did it when you connected the sensor if I remember correctly) and that you actually start the process right after initialisation.

Quote from: jjlphoto
How is it with the i1Pro?
The i1Pro should be much better than any of the colorimeters with wide gamut displays. (or any display really, from my experience)

To keep a long story short, a colorimeter is a filter-based device, so it's basically ‘tuned’ for a specific gamut with coloured filters over sensors. The further away from that ideal gamut a display's primaries are (over or under-saturated) the less accurate colour measurements will be. They may only be slightly off, or they may be quite far off. Even some of the more high-end colorimeters (like the X-Rite Hubble) are not very good at colour accuracy on a wide range of displays. A spectrophotometer like the i1Pro should be much more accurate as it measures colour in a totally different way. The only gotcha with the i1Pro when it comes to colour is that it can only measure in 10nm increments, and RGB LED displays (white ones are probably ok) may have sharper peaks than that. (though the i1Pro is still probably better than most colorimeters even in that situation and is about as good as you can get without spending 10x that)

Colorimeters are much faster, and much better at reading lower light levels though, and are pretty good for greyscale measurements. The i1Pro is really only good down to about 0.5cd/m² at a push which means it's not that accurate right down near black on higher contrast displays. (though ColorEyes doesn't seem to make adjustments right near black now anyway, which is a good thing in my opinion)
Logged

Ethan_Hansen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 114
    • Dry Creek Photo
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #13 on: July 03, 2009, 03:45:15 pm »

As Andrew notes, the i1Pro does a decent job. It covers the full range of any wide gamut monitor I have measured, and I have not seen much weirdness arising from spectral resolution limitations. Where the i1Pro comes up short is in shadows. If you have a monitor that offers exceptionally good shadow detail -- a magically preserved Sony Artisan would top the list, although Eizo's best come close -- calibrations made with the i1Pro will show less shadow detail, more posterization, and sometimes color crossovers in darker shadows that are absent if the DTP-94 is used instead. A Spyder3 also outperforms the i1Pro in shadows, but not by as much as the DTP-94. This is particularly apparent if your display is of sufficiently good quality to use the Absolute Black calibration rather than Relative Black. Eizo's CG series are the only ones I have had success with here.

We have an entire fleet of colorimeters and spectrophotometers available for in-house measurement. For wide gamut displays such as the Eizo CG221, HP LP2480, and Samsung XL24 we find the Spyder3 outperforms the i1Pro when used with ColorEyes Display. This is based on both qualitative visual evaluations and quantitative measurements using an RPS 380 spectroradiometer. On both the Samsung and HP displays, the most saturated midtone and highlight greens, yellows, and oranges are more accurate and have smoother tonality when the i1Pro is used for measurements. This is offset by poorer shadow detail and artifacts that are not present in the Spyder3-generated profiles and calibrations.

The color filters in the DTp-94 are evidently tunable, and this would probably give the best results of any instrument. Unfortunately, X-Rite has not seen fit to provide a wide-gamut optimized model. They are instead pushing the i1 Display 2, with models specifically tuned for NEC displays among others. Unfortunately the tuning does not compensate for the overall poor performance both in terms of accuracy and repeatability of the i1 Display compared to the DTP-94 or Spyder3.


A tip for using any colorimeter in monitor calibration is to plug the puck in and leave it sitting on your desk for five minutes before starting the profiling process. Powering up the device for a while eliminates most of the internal heating drift that would otherwise take place.

KeithR

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 759
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #14 on: July 03, 2009, 05:49:33 pm »

Quote from: Ethan_Hansen
A tip for using any colorimeter in monitor calibration is to plug the puck in and leave it sitting on your desk for five minutes before starting the profiling process. Powering up the device for a while eliminates most of the internal heating drift that would otherwise take place.

This is something I have not read about before. I do leave the monitor on for a while(I read somewhere that it should be on for an hour)before I calibrate. Now I'll leave the puck plugged in for a spell as well before calibrating. Thanks for the tip!
Logged
The destination is our goal but it’s the journey we experience

Scott Martin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1315
    • Onsight
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #15 on: July 03, 2009, 06:52:56 pm »

I too have an entire fleet of colorimeters and spectrophotometers to play with on a large variety of displays and have found the Spyder3 device to be excellent and often preferable to others in a wide variety of situations. I wrote a brief article last December including software bundle recommendations that one can read at:

http://www.on-sight.com/2008/12/08/updated...ation-packages/
Logged
Scott Martin
www.on-sight.com

Andrew Fee

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 87
    • http://
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #16 on: July 04, 2009, 01:40:05 am »

Quote from: Ethan_Hansen
As Andrew notes, the i1Pro does a decent job. It covers the full range of any wide gamut monitor I have measured, and I have not seen much weirdness arising from spectral resolution limitations. Where the i1Pro comes up short is in shadows. If you have a monitor that offers exceptionally good shadow detail -- a magically preserved Sony Artisan would top the list, although Eizo's best come close -- calibrations made with the i1Pro will show less shadow detail, more posterization, and sometimes color crossovers in darker shadows that are absent if the DTP-94 is used instead. A Spyder3 also outperforms the i1Pro in shadows, but not by as much as the DTP-94. This is particularly apparent if your display is of sufficiently good quality to use the Absolute Black calibration rather than Relative Black. Eizo's CG series are the only ones I have had success with here.

We have an entire fleet of colorimeters and spectrophotometers available for in-house measurement. For wide gamut displays such as the Eizo CG221, HP LP2480, and Samsung XL24 we find the Spyder3 outperforms the i1Pro when used with ColorEyes Display. This is based on both qualitative visual evaluations and quantitative measurements using an RPS 380 spectroradiometer. On both the Samsung and HP displays, the most saturated midtone and highlight greens, yellows, and oranges are more accurate and have smoother tonality when the i1Pro is used for measurements. This is offset by poorer shadow detail and artifacts that are not present in the Spyder3-generated profiles and calibrations.

The color filters in the DTp-94 are evidently tunable, and this would probably give the best results of any instrument. Unfortunately, X-Rite has not seen fit to provide a wide-gamut optimized model. They are instead pushing the i1 Display 2, with models specifically tuned for NEC displays among others. Unfortunately the tuning does not compensate for the overall poor performance both in terms of accuracy and repeatability of the i1 Display compared to the DTP-94 or Spyder3.


A tip for using any colorimeter in monitor calibration is to plug the puck in and leave it sitting on your desk for five minutes before starting the profiling process. Powering up the device for a while eliminates most of the internal heating drift that would otherwise take place.
Unfortunately their support forums with the information are down right now, but the people at SpectraCal (you could say that their CalMAN software is the equivalent to ColorEyes for home theatre calibration)  have done extensive testing on all the meters they support, which includes things like testing for thermal drift. For all the (inexpensive) contact colorimeters they support, the only one where thermal drift is not a concern is the X-Rite Chroma 5.  This is NIST certified,  uses glass filters unlike most of the cheaper colorimeters out there, and has far better thermal drift compensation.

I own one of these, but unfortunately ColorEyes doesn't support it. SpectraCal reckon it can measure down to 0.05cd/m² accurately, at least when using their algorithms—they have sophisticated noise reduction, rather than simply averaging in their software package, which is an order of magnitude better than the i1Pro.

Anyway, their recommendation for the majority of sensors is to have it connected to the computer and left on the display (since it's generally going to be warmer than ambient temperature) for 20–30 minutes before doing any calibration.

Furthermore, their software actually warns you when it is time to recalibrate the meter. (as HT calibration is done by hand and you often have 9-point gamma controls, colour management systems to tweak etc. it can be quite time consuming)  The DTP-94 needs a black calibration every 10 minutes.The i1 Display 2 can go 20 minutes between black calibration, however it is far more sensitive to thermal drift, and as such many people consider it to be unsuitable for Plasma displays (or others that produce a lot of heat)


It's unfortunate that the i1Pro is really the only spectro that is available (and supported by profiling packages) at a reasonable cost. The i1Pro is getting pretty old at this point. Sure there have been revisions to improve its reading speed, but it would be nice to see a more accurate, affordable spectro. (rather than a cost-reduced one like the ColorMunki)

It would be great if ColorEyes or some other calibration package supported some form of meter profiling. What CalMAN lets you do is measure the display primaries/white-point with the i1Pro, measure them again with your colorimeter and create a profile. As long as you do not move the position of the RGB primaries (note: greyscale adjustment is not moving the primaries' position) you then get readings with the colorimeter that have the accuracy of the spectro with the speed/low-light capabilities of the colorimeter. (this is why I own both the Chroma 5 as well as the i1Pro)



SpectraCal are soon to be releasing a hardware calibrated Spyder 3 colorimeter for HT calibration which is supposed to be closer in accuracy to the Chroma 5 than any of the others. I wonder if this would work with the standard calibration packages like ColorEyes. If it does, that might be the best compromise for now. It should be more accurate than a standard Spyder 3 for colour, but also have the benefits of better low-light handling. As they are only just supporting the Spyder, they haven't released information on how well it copes with thermal drift etc.

I'll send them an email and ask if it would be suitable for use in other calibration packages, and how well it handles thermal drift.


I'm surprised you found the Spyder 3 to be more accurate than the i1Pro on some displays though. SpectraCal did a test a while back, and even the $4000 X-Rite Hubble colorimeter was (in my opinion, significantly) less accurate than the i1Pro for gamut measurements, being roughly the same as all the other colorimeters (they were generally equally inaccurate) when compared to a newly calibrated Minolta CS-200. It would be great if they could do another test including the Spyder 3 and one of the reference spectros they sell. (Photo Research PR-655 or Orb SP-100) Their recommendation is that if you are going to use a colorimeter, it needs to be profiled off a spectro for each display you use it with for the best accuracy. Even if the colorimeters generally agree, it's often an equal inaccuracy rather than necessarily meaning that the i1Pro is wrong.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2009, 01:42:02 am by Andrew Fee »
Logged

jackbingham

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 205
    • http://www.integrated-color.com
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #17 on: July 06, 2009, 12:53:05 pm »

Mac monitors are not ddc capable but they do have the option of auto brightness adjustment. Coloreyes takes advantage of that feature but needs to make all the color adjustments in the video card.
Logged
Jack Bingham
Integrated Color Corp Maker

ChasP505

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 114
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #18 on: July 06, 2009, 02:25:55 pm »

Excuse me for jumping in...  I just purchased ColorEyes Display Pro which I'm using with a Dell 2209WA monitor and an nVidia 9500GT video card on a PC system.  While the monitor is DDC capable, I made the mistake of assuming that the nVidia 9500GT was also DDC compliant, but it's not.  What drawbacks are there to using a non-DDC capable video card with ColorEyes besides a brief extra step to white balance the display before calibrating?

Secondly, I'm using a Spyder3 puck.  Does the issue about calibrating the puck on a dark surface apply to the Spyder3 hardware?
Logged
Chas P.

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Monitor Profiling
« Reply #19 on: July 06, 2009, 05:06:34 pm »

Quote from: ChasP505
Excuse me for jumping in...  I just purchased ColorEyes Display Pro which I'm using with a Dell 2209WA monitor and an nVidia 9500GT video card on a PC system.  While the monitor is DDC capable, I made the mistake of assuming that the nVidia 9500GT was also DDC compliant, but it's not.  What drawbacks are there to using a non-DDC capable video card with ColorEyes besides a brief extra step to white balance the display before calibrating?

Secondly, I'm using a Spyder3 puck.  Does the issue about calibrating the puck on a dark surface apply to the Spyder3 hardware?

Can't answer about Spyder 3 because I don't have one, but I do use ColorEyes Display and I have a DDC issue as well, eventhough my display is also DDC capable. So I used the Monitor Precalibration/White Balance portion of ColorEyes Display to do the manual white balance and proceeded to calibrate and profile with that program. While the lack of DDC functionality is a nuissance procedurally, the resulting profile is fine and serves it purpose very well.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up