Hi Mark,
Thanks for the reply. Last night I made a couple of new profiles, only this time I went with 140 cd/m2 and a contrast ratio of 300. I also made another at 120cd/m2 with the same contrast ratio, now with the same file everything looks just like it did on my old CTR monitor, even the greens looked correct, I decided to take another look at my first profile that didn't look right at all
(Photo edit target- 100cd/m2 CR of 500-1)
and to my surprise the greens look correct this time. I'm not sure what's going on here, its like there was some kind of error that some how corrected its self.
It was getting late so I shut down for the night, but tonight I need to go back and look at a couple other files, also, I need to tale another look at my settings to see if I changed something, but one thing for sure, what I was getting out of the box was way off the mark.
Thanks for the link, I loaded my 140 target and I could see all of the numbers, even down to the "Number 1" that was just visible. Then I loaded the 120 target, I could just make out the "Number 1" this time, but it was night and the room was quite dark. All of my profiles were made in a dark room with no lighting on, I haven't tried the ambient measurement yet.
BTW my shadows have opened up now, and pretty much look correct, but I need to do more testing.
I've read (digital dog) that out of the box anything lower that 120cd/m2 isn't recommended until the back lite has had time brake its self in. I didn't see anything in the manual in regards to this, but then they recommend 140cd/m2 as a starting point.
In regards to the greens, the first image I looked at was taken in early spring, the marsh grass was less than a week old, and at that stage has a lighter more yellow look to it. When I viewed this image with my first profile the grass had a very cyan look to it and seemed over saturated, very unnatural. One of the reasons I loaded that image was to see how well it would render the color of this grass.
All seems well now, but I'm really bothered by my initial results, something wasn't correct, I wish I knew what it was.
Mark, what settings are you using? Also, have you tried making a profile using the 52 step target? I tried that last night, but after 20 minuets I canceled it as seemed like it was locked up, maybe it just takes a very long time to make a 52 step target, probably over kill for what I'm doing anyway.
I do agree, the Spectraview software is a dream to use.
Thanks for your comment about the new calorimeter, I didn't even know about this when I ordered my Spectraview kit. The B&H bundle was out of stock, so I just bought the monitor from them, and the Spectraview kit from Buy.com for $300, but I did get the new calorimeter.
Tonight I'll make my first test prints on my 3800.