Author Topic: Monitor Calibration for Stock Photos (Read 25333 times)

Stu49 · « **Reply #50 on:** December 06, 2009, 09:55 »

Quote from: simsi on December 06, 2009, 08:36

what about ebay?
http://shop.ebay.co.uk/i.html?_nkw=huey+calibrator&_sacat=0&_trksid=p3286.m270.l1313&_odkw=huey&_osacat=0

i do go home (=austria) for christmas...i could maybe help you out.

They're still £80+ even on there ! Maybe u could drop one out of the plane as u go over ! ;-)

Or maybe bring with u and send to me from Austria, so no customs problems or our VAT !!?
Just kidding ! ;-) but thanks for the offer :-)

Stu49 · « **Reply #51 on:** December 06, 2009, 10:11 »

Is this one any good ??

PANTONE COLORVISION Spyder Pro

Anyone use it ? Is it an old model and no longer much use ?

Any help appreciated :-)

eyeCatchLight · « **Reply #52 on:** December 06, 2009, 11:05 »

I think Spyder is not Pantone, the company is Colorvision. And then you need to know the version of the Spyder also. Spyder 2 is older, but sold still for the express version, and Spyder 3 is the new one. I bought a Spyder 2 express. The software is not good, but you can use coloreyes trial version which is very good.
in my opinion this is not good - where did you find it?

Stu49 · « **Reply #53 on:** December 06, 2009, 11:28 »

The company is Pantone/Colorvision, they obviously combined ar some point.
I think it's version 1 of the spyder and says it's for up to Win 2000, so must be old ;-)

PixelBitch · « **Reply #54 on:** December 06, 2009, 16:42 »

I've noticed this difference in appearance of images on each site...all my images are done with a calibrated monitor and using Adobe RGB profile...I think each site has it's own file processing standards...which are inconsistent with each other.

I've heard that the best approach is to assign each image the sRGB profile then they will look more consistent across the micro sites...does anyone do this?

Quote from: etienjones on December 04, 2009, 16:26

RT wrote:

Take a shot of a popular subject and upload it to any agency, then go to that agency and do a search so that your image shows up amongst many similar others, if your colours look OK you're done, if not adjust your monitor.

You are right . . . after getting the calibration reasonable corrected. What drives me crazy is that each site presents the images a little different. It seems to me that images on SS have slightly more contrast then IS, and DT kicks up the sharpening which brightens the image . . . . or am I seeing things?

E

Stu49 · « **Reply #55 on:** December 06, 2009, 16:54 »

Quote from: PixelBitch on December 06, 2009, 16:42

I've noticed this difference in appearance of images on each site...all my images are done with a calibrated monitor and using Adobe RGB profile...I think each site has it's own file processing standards...which are inconsistent with each other.

I've heard that the best approach is to assign each image the sRGB profile then they will look more consistent across the micro sites...does anyone do this?

Quote from: etienjones on December 04, 2009, 16:26
RT wrote:

Take a shot of a popular subject and upload it to any agency, then go to that agency and do a search so that your image shows up amongst many similar others, if your colours look OK you're done, if not adjust your monitor.

You are right . . . after getting the calibration reasonable corrected. What drives me crazy is that each site presents the images a little different. It seems to me that images on SS have slightly more contrast then IS, and DT kicks up the sharpening which brightens the image . . . . or am I seeing things?

E

Always !!

I thought it was general practice to ONLY upload jpegs with sRGB !?

I read it was the thing to do as images are always viewed on monitors, not printed. In fact, I thought the agencies insisted upon it, or at the least requested it !? If the client wants he can always shift it to another colour space. ??

KB · « **Reply #56 on:** December 06, 2009, 17:09 »

I used to upload adobeRGB ("aRGB" for brevity) to IS and sRGB to everyone else.

Then someone here (I think) a few months ago mentioned they upload aRGB to all sites.

I started doing that recently. It's easier not needing to create separate versions. They look different on some sites, but it isn't a big deal. (As mentioned here already, I noticed even the sRGB images looked different on some sites.)

123RF (I think it was them; if not, then BigStock) even suggest UL'ing in aRGB in their contributor's instructions. As does IS, of course.

Most sites do seem to (and should) convert aRGB to sRGB for proper displaying in non-color-managed browsers (e.g., IE).

steheap · « **Reply #57 on:** December 11, 2009, 12:39 »

Wow - as the originator of this thread, this has covered a lot of ground. I carried on doing my own research and finally decided to buy the ColorEyes Display Pro software to go with my EyeOne calibrator and spent last night calibrating both my monitors. Before I started, one monitor was quite dark (I had set it at 90 cd/m2 in the past and I noticed some deep red blocking in fall foliage pictures) and the other was bright. The software is a bit complex but gives lots of information on the screen about what they are looking for and it supports multiple monitors with a different profile for each. I decided to up the luminance a bit to 110 cd/m2 and I'm happier with that for on-screen editing.

At the end, I have two monitors where the photos look great. If I have an image in Lightroom on one and Photoshop on the other, the images are visually identical, and my "blocking" problem has gone.

I've been getting a few rejections from IS for "artifacts at full size", and hopefully I will be able to see those now...

Thanks for all your comments - I'm sure someone will say that stock photography will never pay for a $175 piece of software, but I think it will be a good investment!

Steve

oldmoozy · « **Reply #58 on:** December 11, 2009, 21:18 »

Quote from: KB on December 06, 2009, 17:09

I used to upload adobeRGB ("aRGB" for brevity) to IS and sRGB to everyone else.

Then someone here (I think) a few months ago mentioned they upload aRGB to all sites.

It's not a good idea to upload AdobeRGB files. You can't assume that a customer or a viewer will treat your AdobeRGB files properly. Use sRGB instead to avoid problems with over or undersaturated colors in the image. Some stocks even specify it explicitly. This rule also applies to all images shown on the web.

KB · « **Reply #59 on:** December 11, 2009, 21:55 »

Quote from: 7fttallrussian on December 11, 2009, 21:18

Quote from: KB on December 06, 2009, 17:09
I used to upload adobeRGB ("aRGB" for brevity) to IS and sRGB to everyone else.

Then someone here (I think) a few months ago mentioned they upload aRGB to all sites.

It's not a good idea to upload AdobeRGB files. You can't assume that a customer or a viewer will treat your AdobeRGB files properly. Use sRGB instead to avoid problems with over or undersaturated colors in the image. Some stocks even specify it explicitly. This rule also applies to all images shown on the web.

And some stocks sites explicitly specify to upload AdobeRGB files, so what's a photog to do?

I'm not positive, but I think most (if not all) of the major sites now process ULs to convert them to one colorspace (be it adobeRGB or sRGB). They also create sRGB thumbnails. So, in theory, it shouldn't matter which colorspace we use. Though I agree sRGB is definitely the safer choice.

oldmoozy · « **Reply #60 on:** December 11, 2009, 23:03 »

let me add my 5c+5c+5c+5c+5c = 1 quarter to the topic:

5c. If you post your images on the web , print and especially sell you images you need to be sure that the others will see your colors exactly as you plan them. That's why you need to calibrate your monitor and use color management aware software.

5c. Even if you can't get your hands on the hardware calibrator, you can use a free software one. It is a part of Windows 7 and Mac OSX. Win XP users can get QuickGamma. The quality of such calibration is up to your eyes. I did that before. It's pain in the butt, but better than nothing. Finally I gave up and bought Spyder2.

5c. Be sure to use color-managed (CM) software. Photoshop is CM, MS Paint is not.
Use CM web browsers: Safari or Firefox >=3.5. Bad news for all-in-one Opera guys and Chrome speed junkies, they are not for photographers. Check Gary Ballard's CM tutorial, if you don't know what I'm taking about.

5c. When you post your photos on the web make sure they are in sRGB and have sRGB profile embedded. That's the best we can do for our non-CM fellas to save them from seeing the saturation problems. This is the rule, by the way. The same holds for your microstock portfolio, unless the stock mentions its color space requirements explicitly.

5c. Finally, if you are a proud owner of a multi-monitor setup on a Windows system, be sure you color management works fine on both monitors. Because if you don't have a separate video card per monitor, most probably it does not. Long story short, make sure you edit and proof images on you main (in windows terms) screen.

eyeCatchLight · « **Reply #61 on:** December 19, 2009, 11:36 »

Quote from: 7fttallrussian on December 11, 2009, 23:03

5c. Finally, if you are a proud owner of a multi-monitor setup on a Windows system, be sure you color management works fine on both monitors. Because if you don't have a separate video card per monitor, most probably it does not. Long story short, make sure you edit and proof images on you main (in windows terms) screen.

actually that's a question I have....without 2 video cards, I can get only one monitor right, isn't it? I am working on two monitors but with one card and have not found a solution for this under Windows (haven't tried any other OS).

simone

oldmoozy · « **Reply #62 on:** December 20, 2009, 05:53 »

Quote from: simsi on December 19, 2009, 11:36

actually that's a question I have....without 2 video cards, I can get only one monitor right, isn't it? I am working on two monitors but with one card and have not found a solution for this under Windows (haven't tried any other OS).

simone

The short answer, calibrate both, rely on the main monitor.

It all depends on your setup. Some advanced video cards can work as two separate cards, but these are rare and I never tested one myself.
On Win XP I don't think it's even possible to calibrate the monitors to different gammas. Here is a simple test: assign a profile to you secondary monitor. Then assign a different profile to your main monitor, doing that will change gamma on both screens, instead of main only.

On Win 7 I was able to assigned different profiles to different monitors. It might be fine with non color managed applications, but not for the applications that use ICC profiles, like Photoshop. From my tests, Photoshop relied only on the main monitor profile to convert colors, which makes running it on your secondary monitor useless.

Stu49 · « **Reply #63 on:** December 20, 2009, 06:05 »

Quote from: simsi on December 19, 2009, 11:36

Quote from: 7fttallrussian on December 11, 2009, 23:03

5c. Finally, if you are a proud owner of a multi-monitor setup on a Windows system, be sure you color management works fine on both monitors. Because if you don't have a separate video card per monitor, most probably it does not. Long story short, make sure you edit and proof images on you main (in windows terms) screen.

actually that's a question I have....without 2 video cards, I can get only one monitor right, isn't it? I am working on two monitors but with one card and have not found a solution for this under Windows (haven't tried any other OS).

simone

Download 'WinColor.exe' from MS. It's free and will let u assign different profiles to each monitor. Read the info that comes with it.

sam100 · « **Reply #64 on:** January 12, 2010, 12:54 »

I recently purchased the Huey-Pro calibration tool and must admit it gives much better results then the Colorvision spyder 2 pro. I'm working with a HP LP2475w (S-IPS panel) monitor.

Like Lisa mentioned before on for the Huey, smooth color gradients and more accurate colors where the Colorvision would saturate the colors more.

For comparison and review on both devices :

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/pantone_huey.htm
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/spyder2express.htm

And for the monitor :

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/hp_lp2475w.htm

Regards,

Patrick H.

eyeCatchLight · « **Reply #65 on:** January 13, 2010, 11:41 »

Quote from: patrick1958 on January 12, 2010, 12:54

I recently purchased the Huey-Pro calibration tool and must admit it gives much better results then the Colorvision spyder 2 pro. I'm working with a HP LP2475w (S-IPS panel) monitor.

Like Lisa mentioned before on for the Huey, smooth color gradients and more accurate colors where the Colorvision would saturate the colors more.

For comparison and review on both devices :

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/pantone_huey.htm
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/spyder2express.htm

And for the monitor :

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/hp_lp2475w.htm

Regards,

Patrick H.

Is that when you use it with the Spyder software? I am using it with ColorEyes Display Pro, is it the same problem?

sam100 · « **Reply #66 on:** January 13, 2010, 13:29 »

Quote from: simsi on January 13, 2010, 11:41

Quote from: patrick1958 on January 12, 2010, 12:54
I recently purchased the Huey-Pro calibration tool and must admit it gives much better results then the Colorvision spyder 2 pro. I'm working with a HP LP2475w (S-IPS panel) monitor.

Like Lisa mentioned before on for the Huey, smooth color gradients and more accurate colors where the Colorvision would saturate the colors more.

For comparison and review on both devices :

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/pantone_huey.htm
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/spyder2express.htm

And for the monitor :

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/hp_lp2475w.htm

Regards,

Patrick H.

Is that when you use it with the Spyder software? I am using it with ColorEyes Display Pro, is it the same problem?

Like i said, i use the Huey pro hardware with its own software and it does a better job than the Spyder 2 pro.

Patrick.

leaf · « **Reply #67 on:** January 15, 2010, 04:13 »

Quote from: RacePhoto on December 01, 2009, 21:44

Calibration means adjusting to a standard, so everyone else in the world can see the image the same. Does that make sense?

If you want to do printing and selling, you can set up your software to use different profiles. One for the world and one for your personal printer. But that's not calibration of the monitor it's color profiling.

I disagree - you should first calibrate your monitor to 'the standard' using a calibration tool (like you mentioned) and then create a profile for your printer to match what you see on the screen. You adjust the printer to the screen, not the screen to the printer.

lisafx · « **Reply #68 on:** January 15, 2010, 18:06 »

I know I was singing the praises of the Huey earlier, but it seems to have gone bad or something.

Tried calibrating my monitor with my new computer and the picture came out greenish. Did it several times always with the same result.

I also tried calibrating a new monitor with my old computer - the one the Huey had worked on. That also came out looking green.

After some research, turns out that there is a hardware issues with the Hueys. They have a tendency to give a magenta or greenish cast.

Don't know why it worked for me in the beginning and now stopped...?

After reading a boatload of reviews I ended up getting the Eye-One Display 2. Hopefully will have better luck with that.

My monitor is quite good even without calibration, but I will feel a lot more comfortable editing images when I know it's properly calibrated.

donding · « **Reply #69 on:** January 15, 2010, 18:47 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 15, 2010, 18:06

I know I was singing the praises of the Huey earlier, but it seems to have gone bad or something.

Tried calibrating my monitor with my new computer and the picture came out greenish. Did it several times always with the same result.

I also tried calibrating a new monitor with my old computer - the one the Huey had worked on. That also came out looking green.

After some research, turns out that there is a hardware issues with the Hueys. They have a tendency to give a magenta or greenish cast.

Don't know why it worked for me in the beginning and now stopped...?

After reading a boatload of reviews I ended up getting the Eye-One Display 2. Hopefully will have better luck with that.

My monitor is quite good even without calibration, but I will feel a lot more comfortable editing images when I know it's properly calibrated.

I didn't know that about the Huey's , Thats what I use. I always notice the colors being on the warm side but never gave it much thought. SO maybe my eyes were working right.

Stu49 · « **Reply #70 on:** January 15, 2010, 19:02 »

I bought a Huey recently and it seems fine (more or less as I had it, to be honest) No sign of any cast though !?

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Monitor Calibration for Stock Photos (Read 25333 times)

Stu49

Stu49

eyeCatchLight

Stu49

PixelBitch

Stu49

KB

steheap

oldmoozy

KB

oldmoozy

eyeCatchLight

oldmoozy

Stu49

sam100

eyeCatchLight

sam100

leaf

lisafx

donding

Stu49

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors