Author Topic: Monitor Calibration (Read 10418 times)

berryspun · « **on:** October 23, 2006, 17:36 »

For monitor calibration, I am using Adobe Gamma, but would like to get at least another independent comparison check-up without having to pay for another software. I googled 'monitor calibration', and found quite a few pages of free calibration, so there is a good support for this topic. Would you know which ones are the most reliable and practical ? Any advices I should be aware of ? Thanks. madeleine

Striker77s · « **Reply #1 on:** October 23, 2006, 17:43 »

The cheapest way to get excellant calibration is by Colorvisions Spyder or GretagMacbeth Eye-One. They are both around $150-$200. Every other method that is software only isn't going to work well because they are dependent upon the human eye. Before you rant on how expensives those products are realize that they are actually ground breaking. Before they came around the only way to get good color calibration was to spend $10,000 or more on a system that tooks hours to calibrate.

I've used both and feel that the differences are so small that either system will work well.

Mark

Greg Boiarsky · « **Reply #2 on:** October 23, 2006, 18:19 »

The Spyder2Express is only $70 U.S., similar to Pantone's Huey.

Keefo · « **Reply #3 on:** October 23, 2006, 20:08 »

I picked up the Spyder 2 (non-express) for about $85 on ebay.

yingyang0 · « **Reply #4 on:** October 23, 2006, 20:21 »

I use the Huey and it seems to work great, prints are accurate and no rejections due to anything monitor related. I especially like how the screen's brightness automatically adjusts to the ambient lighting with the Huey.

leaf · « **Reply #5 on:** October 24, 2006, 00:59 »

i used the spyder and i suppose I am happy with it. It is a little like being led in the dark.

phildate · « **Reply #6 on:** October 24, 2006, 10:12 »

I recently used a Spyder 2 on my Apple 20" CD and was unhappy with the results. Used what was supposedly superior software than that which comes with it. There were too many user-defined variables to be set to allow me to trust the result.

I really need an expert to spend a day with me talking color management and profiles/gmauts etc... but can't find one in Singapore.

Pixart · « **Reply #7 on:** October 24, 2006, 10:54 »

Quote from: phildate on October 24, 2006, 10:12

I really need an expert to spend a day with me talking color management and profiles/gmauts etc... but can't find one in Singapore.

My pro lab charges a little less if they don't have to colour correct, and per their recommendation I purchased a Monaco (about $CDN200) thinking that it would eventually pay for itself. I also do a lot of photoshopping (sports collage, business promos etc) and the lab doesn't have the leaway to tweak the creative stuff much. The calibrator has helped a bit. I too could really benefit by an expert spending a day with me. The biggest problem I find is the step in the calibration process when I'm to adjust the brightness of my monitor. The brightness of the monitor can make or break the photo!

Come to think of it, supposed to calibrate once a month... lets see... how many months has it been now?

Striker77s · « **Reply #8 on:** October 24, 2006, 11:54 »

Quote from: Pixart on October 24, 2006, 10:54

I too could really benefit by an expert spending a day with me. The biggest problem I find is the step in the calibration process when I'm to adjust the brightness of my monitor. The brightness of the monitor can make or break the photo!

The concept of color management is quite simple, the application of color management is a nightmare. I've read many many articles on color management and I still get confused on how to get great results. The problem with color management is the fact that it is only recently become a widespread concern and software and OSs have only recently began to address the issue. Most of the implementation of color profiling and etc has been a hack job and each software program is doing it differently. This wasn't a problem before because in the commercial industry where they have been worrying about it for a long time because they only used it a specialized setup and only one setup or process. Software was developed to output consistent colors for a single streamlined process.

Now with digital cameras and photo quality printers it is becoming a widespread issue, and it needs to work across many applications and devices. You might get your color management setup for photoshop and your printer only to find out that if you view the images in your web browser the colors are off. Or you update your printer drivers or change paper and your color profiles are screwed up. Each program handles the coloring profiling differently and keeping track of it all is a nightmare. This is true for both MACs and Windows, although MAC has done a slightly better job. MS is promoting their new color management system in their upcoming Windows Vista but I'm skeptical. Windows is becoming more and more dumbed down and I'm guessing their system is going to be better but over simplified for most serious photographers. Only time will tell. An effective color management system has to be a widespread standard that starts with the OS. Every program needs to handle it and interact with the OS color management system in the same way. Until that happens expect to get frustrated over color management. Just my 2 cents.

So far I decided that using a monitor calibration system is good enough for me and I only count on photoshop and a few other color aware programs to display correct colors. Like Pixart mentioned brightness is probably the largest weakness of monitor profiling. The software tells you to turn the brightness all the way up, but I think this is due to the many cheap monitors and older monitors that don't have high brightness. The brightness for the most part doesn't change the colors but just the intensity. So the Spyder/Eye-one device profiles the color correctly but the intensity tricks the brain into thinking the colors are different. This is a real problem for light or dark shades and when you print an image the highlights and shadows are way off. Like Pixart I have to adjust the monitor's brightness by trial and error to get it right and turned my Samsung 213T down to about 65/100 to get it right.

Mark

berryspun · « **Reply #9 on:** October 25, 2006, 09:50 »

Thanks everyone! Very useful information.

eendicott · « **Reply #10 on:** October 25, 2006, 18:50 »

I'm too cheap...I go to this site and follow the instructions...

http://home.comcast.net/~morrised2006/tips/monitor.htm

The first time I did it, I saw a dramatic increase in file acceptance at the sites. Trying to keep the overhead low and attempting to make money

Keefo · « **Reply #11 on:** November 11, 2006, 20:56 »

Well, crud, my CRT finally died. It was so easy to calibrate -- had great presets etc.

I went ahead and bought a Dell 2407wfp. I've been trying to calibrate it with a Spyder 2 (not pro), and haven't had much luck. Has anybody out there been very successful with this? The Spyder2 worked great on my CRT.

If so, what did you choose for your target gamma and white point? And what changes did you make to factory default brightness/contrast? On the monitor, what do you have set for color settings/adjustment?

I posted pretty much this same post over on dpreview, but since the topic of calibration was discussed here recently I thought I'd ask here too. I can't justify buying new hardware for calibration right now. My wife will kill me (especially after spending all the dough on this monitor).

Now a little rant on color management
I was using a very old CRT -- Hitachi Superscan Pro 800. But it was a great monitor. It was easy to calibrate with preset temperature settings, etc. I buy this new, nice, beautiful, LCD and I have high expectations, but I don't think they're unrealistic. I was thinking they would have some kind of reasonable presets. Guess what they have? "PC Blue," "PC Green," and "PC Red." What the heck? I realize the color gamut on these LCDs is much less than CRTs, so maybe people aren't flocking to them for high-end color reproduction, etc. But wow, even OS manufacturers are starting to realize the desire for color management. Can't these monitor manufacturers at least take a few steps in the right direction? Or at least not step backwards? Is it so much to ask for a freakin' 65000k whitepoint setting? Ugh. For those of you out there with other LCDs, have you been running into the same problem?

Take care,

Kevin

maco0708 · « **Reply #12 on:** April 12, 2007, 14:18 »

I just got the Spyder2Pro and I am trying to calibrate my Dell E1505 laptop with SXGA+ screen (1680x1050 resolution and glossy screen).

I did the calibration 3 times and every time I get pretty heavy color cast and the result is definitely worse than pre-calibration.

Has anybody have the same problem and how did you solve it.

I read somewhere that some laptop screens can not be calibrated, is this true?

sharply_done · « **Reply #13 on:** April 12, 2007, 14:28 »

I've attempted to calibrate a few LCD screen without success. It's my guess that only the best (= priciest) LCD screen will display correctly. If I'm correct, then you are SOL: laptops are optimized for portability, not performance.

Greg Boiarsky · « **Reply #14 on:** April 12, 2007, 14:37 »

Wow. Thanks for the reminder--I was way past time to calibrate. BTW, I calibrate my LCD computer monitor just fine.

It sounds to me like you may have Adobe Gamma or something similar running. Check your startup folder and remove it if it's there. That should help.

Quote from: maco0708 on April 12, 2007, 14:18

I just got the Spyder2Pro and I am trying to calibrate my Dell E1505 laptop with SXGA+ screen (1680x1050 resolution and glossy screen).

I did the calibration 3 times and every time I get pretty heavy color cast and the result is definitely worse than pre-calibration.

Has anybody have the same problem and how did you solve it.

I read somewhere that some laptop screens can not be calibrated, is this true?

maco0708 · « **Reply #15 on:** April 13, 2007, 06:56 »

I checked the startup folder and I didn't have adobe gamma running. Any other suggestions?

I also have a general question about ICC profiles:
When you make a profile with a spyder, does Windows load it at startup and uses it for every application.

The main reason why I got the spyder is that images is Photoshop look lot different than in ACDsee.
My guess is that PS CS uses ICC profiles but ACDsee is not capable of using ICC profiles.

So my questions is: When windows loads a profile globally and then you run a application that is not capable of using profile (ACDsee v5.0), is the profile used or not?

Thanks everybody.

leaf · « **Reply #16 on:** April 13, 2007, 08:02 »

I have used spyder2 to calibrate my monitor. i first tried it on a cheap eizo screen and didn't really notice any difference. I now have an more costly lacie photon20visionII screen and it seemed to help a lot. Maybe the screen was just more out of wack before I started.

Anyhow - when i load windows, the profile is loaded and I can see the screen change from being unprofiled to profiled when all the drivers are loaded. Photoshop uses this profile when i edit images.

I don't really know however how a program without ICC profile capability would react though.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Monitor Calibration (Read 10418 times)

berryspun

Striker77s

Greg Boiarsky

Keefo

yingyang0

leaf

phildate

Pixart

Striker77s

berryspun

eendicott

Keefo

maco0708

sharply_done

Greg Boiarsky

maco0708

leaf

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors