Aardenburg monitor checker--would appreciate a little help

[DougJ]

I use LR and PS CC on a Windows 7 machine, working on images on a Wacom Cintiq 12wx, and printing to an Epson R3000.  I am calibrating the Cintiq with a Spyder4Pro (but the controls on this legacy Cintiq don't make adjustments easy).

This arrangement has worked well for me for years and is still working well: my prints are neither too dark nor too bright; the tonal range of the prints looks A-OK to me; and, at first blush, the print and the image on the Cintiq look close--close enough that I am not prompted to look more closely to see just what, if any problem, might be present.

Then, along came Mark's post about the Aardenburg monitor checker.  Well, why not, I thought.  So I downloaded it and checked the Cintiq.  Here's what I found:

1.  Gamma squares: of the six, the first and last squares are blended; the other four show distinct halves, that I would judge to be close but no cigar.  If I add a curves adjustment layer and adjust the L-layer, those halves are easily made to blend.

2 & 3.  Blackpoint & Whitepoint clipping: I'd say these are both OK.  I need "to find" the X; the Z is more easily found.

4. Lateral adaptation: the horizontal L=50 band does not show any ripling.

5. Color checker: I don't have a color checker.

My question is: where in my set up do I make what adjustment to attempt to make the inner four gamma squares blend?

Using the Cintiq's "controller," I can adjust brightness, contrast and backlight of the display.  Is it the contrast setting that I need to adjust to achive a better blend of the gamma squares?

I have color (within the display GUI) wherein I have the display set for 6500K.  I notice there, that RGB values are set at 252, 236, and 250 respectively.  I assume that the Cintiq software has set those values; let me put it this way, I have no recollection adjusting the RGB values to those.

So, back to my question: How do I go about trying to make a better blend in four of the gamma squares.

TIA for any comment, advice, instruction.

Ciao,

Doug

[Tim Lookingbill]

I use LR and PS CC on a Windows 7 machine, working on images on a Wacom Cintiq 12wx, and printing to an Epson R3000.  I am calibrating the Cintiq with a Spyder4Pro (but the controls on this legacy Cintiq don't make adjustments easy).

This arrangement has worked well for me for years and is still working well: my prints are neither too dark nor too bright; the tonal range of the prints looks A-OK to me; and, at first blush, the print and the image on the Cintiq look close--close enough that I am not prompted to look more closely to see just what, if any problem, might be present.


Ciao,

Doug

First if things are working with screen to print match, I wouldn't be concerned, unless you're editing for high end advertising content and industrial design and other color critical work.

You're working on a Wacom tablet as a display is not the best tool for color precision work. You might set it to factory defaults and adjust brightness of white and white balance neutrality to match your print viewing brightness appearance of white paper and run the SpyderPro4 again.

The indication that you can't really make out the 'X' in the densest shadow test suggests the Wacom doesn't have a standard gamma shaped curve most likely influenced by other custom settings you've applied which the factory defaults may correct.

[DougJ]

Thanks for your reply, Tim.

I'll hold off doing a reset for the time being since my set up is working well for me right now--to be clear, I don't do any work that comes close to high end advertising or truly color critical work. 

However, I remain curious about what adjustment is possible with a superior calibration system that would cause the gamma halves to blend.  My hunch--and it is nothing more than a hunch--is that some where there is a contrast curve that needs to be adjusted.  If I'm right, I just don't where I find that curve I need to adjust.

You may be right about the Wacom display not being the best tool.  Years ago I was on an Alaska cruise that had Vincent Versace, Moose Peterson, Dave Cross as instructors and tour leaders for the off-shore ventures.  Versace was using a 21-inch Cintiq and I became attracted by the notion of working right on the image--but, could only afford the 12-inch Cintiq.  I have to say that it has served my needs well.

Anyway, I appreciate your comments/suggestions. Thanks.

Doug

[Dale Villeponteaux]

Quote from Mark at Aardenburg imaging in the original thread: "Lastly, don't expect pure perfection in the gamma square layer, but on a high-end monitor it's going to be really really close when you back away far enough from the screen so as not be able to resolve the interlace lines in the target"

Regards,
Dale

[DougJ]

Thanks for reminding me of Mark's caution--It seems I may have suddenly heard and become entranced by the Sirens' song of pure perfection.

Best,

Doug

[Tim Lookingbill]

Quote from Mark at Aardenburg imaging in the original thread: "Lastly, don't expect pure perfection in the gamma square layer, but on a high-end monitor it's going to be really really close when you back away far enough from the screen so as not be able to resolve the interlace lines in the target"

Regards,
Dale

And just to add, my LG LED 27" display I paid $300 at Best Buy calibrated with a Colormunki Display passed the gray raster square test if that gives any indication as to what's considered a "high-end" display.