Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Colour Management => Topic started by: loganross on March 29, 2018, 10:33:33 am
-
Hi,
I have a BenQ sw320 monitor that I calibrate with an i1 display pro. When making a profile I have the option of Matrix, or 8bit or 14bit LUT, as the file type. I cannot find any documentation on which to use. Can anyone explain the difference? Thank you.
-
If the software is doing it's job correctly, LUT. In theory higher bit equals more 'precision'. Personally I'd build one each way and run some tests. This synthetic is useful to detect banding in the display path:
http://digitaldog.net/files/10-bit-test-ramp.zip
-
Thanks. What is the difference between LUT and Matrix? I wonder why BenQ would have set the default to be Matrix? Even if I select Matrix, as part of the profile process, it says writing "LUT"
If the software is doing it's job correctly, LUT. In theory higher bit equals more 'precision'. Personally I'd build one each way and run some tests. This synthetic is useful to detect banding in the display path:
http://digitaldog.net/files/10-bit-test-ramp.zip
-
LUTs are Look Up Tables; more complex descriptions than simple matrix profiles. For example, look at the differences between the size of a display profile made to be a matrix profile and one made to be a LUT. Some software products may have issues with LUTs but that's very rare these days hence the possible options for matrix. See: http://www.colorwiki.com/wiki/Monitors_Part_Two (http://www.colorwiki.com/wiki/Monitors_Part_Two)
IF the calibration takes place electronically in the panel, like my SpectraView, Matrix is fine; all the heavy lifting is happening inside the display.
-
LUTs are Look Up Tables; more complex descriptions than simple matrix profiles. For example, look at the differences between the size of a display profile made to be a matrix profile and one made to be a LUT. Some software products may have issues with LUTs but that's very rare these days hence the possible options for matrix. See: http://www.colorwiki.com/wiki/Monitors_Part_Two (http://www.colorwiki.com/wiki/Monitors_Part_Two)
IF the calibration takes place electronically in the panel, like my SpectraView, Matrix is fine; all the heavy lifting is happening inside the display.
Yep. Max. quality (high res LUTs are in the monitor) and speed/compatibility which matrix profiles provide.
-
Thanks. So which do you recommend? What is the technical difference between them if all is implemented in the monitor?
Yep. Max. quality (high res LUTs are in the monitor) and speed/compatibility which matrix profiles provide.