Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Monitor Calibration Steps--hardware and software  (Read 32957 times)
dwdallam
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2044



WWW
« on: May 17, 2006, 03:25:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Can someone tell me the steps I need to take to "correctly" calibrate my monitor? I don't need the technical information, just the steps so I don't miss something. For example, last night I changed my color temp on my monitor to 6500K. Now what? I'm prepared to buy a spider also if that is needed. I can get the ColorVision Spyder2 for around 130.00 if that is adequate for the job. The pro is a little out of my range right now.

Also, in PSCS2, I have changed the working profile to Adobe RGB 1998 (Is this correct?). I'm printing on a Costco Noritsu. My Costco has informed me that they are upgrading their printer within the next two months to the newest Noritsu printer.

Most importantly, I want to see on my monitor how the print will look on the Costco Noritsu. I've recently compared the print to my monitor, and the color was not the same. It was much less saturated and ther were some color shifts. It's worse and better depending on the image, sun, colors, exposure, etc.

I save the files in tiff in Adobe RGB 1998 for output. If this is NOT the prefered choice, which?

Thanks again.

PS--I cannot access Dry Creek photo for some reason. Seems their website is having problems. If I need that profile for the Costco Printers, can someone link me to it here? Thanks.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2006, 03:44:07 PM by dwdallam » Logged

61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 17, 2006, 05:16:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Steps for LCD:
1. Reset the display to factory defaults
2. Run calibration software
3. When asked, adjust brightness. Adjust nothing else.
4. Done

The ideal settings to calibrate to would be a native whitepoint, a native gamma, and a 120cd/m2 luminance. If however any of those settings are unavailable or the display is not 6500K natively, then aim for the following: 6500K, 2.2 Gama (1.8 Mac), 140cd/m2 max luminance. If you do web-graphics and are on a Mac, I'd recommend you calibrate to a 2.2 gamma to avoid color surprises in the websites you make (I mention this only since there are some web-monkies at these forums).

Steps for CRT"
1. Run Calibration software
2. Follow all the steps and calibrate to 6500K, 2.2 Gama (1.8 Mac), 94cd/m2 max luminance
3. Done


Don't skimp on the calibrator. With the Spyder v.1 the non-pro model did not calibrate the black-point leaving you to eye-ball it. Not very good. I'm not sure about the v.2 but make sure whatever you get it will measure blacks.

a AdobeRGB tiff works. If you are working 16-bit, then you might want to consider ProPhoto to give you some more elbow room when printing.

The Costco profiles are here
Logged
dwdallam
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2044



WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 18, 2006, 02:08:57 AM »
ReplyReply

I ahve a few question perhaps you can help calrify for me.

If I'm printing on the Noritsu, should I also convert from 16 to 8 bit? You mention using Pro Photo, but won't that throw off what it looks like on screen from the Noritsu, which I believe cannot print that many colors anyway?

If I calibrate my monitor at 9300K, will that NOT give me a correct color calibration? I mean why 6500K?

I just ran Adobe Gamma, and I had it measure my current color temp. I ran that aspect of it four times, since it is eyeball, and I came up with 7500K each time, even though my monitor is set at 6500K. So I used 7500K for cal, not 6500 thinking that my monitor is drifting from what it displays is 6500K. I guess I could keep fiddleing with the manual color temp on teh monitors adjustments untill I can measure it at exactly 6500K in Adobe Gamme, if you think that would help.

You said set set 94cd/m2 max luminance. Where is this setting?

Last, will a hardware calibration method, such as the spider, do all of this without eyeballing it?
« Last Edit: May 18, 2006, 02:41:54 AM by dwdallam » Logged

61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #3 on: May 18, 2006, 11:11:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If I'm printing on the Noritsu, should I also convert from 16 to 8 bit? You mention using Pro Photo, but won't that throw off what it looks like on screen from the Noritsu, which I believe cannot print that many colors anyway?
The point in using ProPhoto is to allow you to better control the conversion from ProPhoto to the printer profile in Photoshop. Due to ProPhotos size, there are few printer profiles that don't fit fully within it. This means you can utilize the full range of the printers gamut whereas a smaller color space such as sRGB or even AdobeRGB will not fully encompass the printer gamut due to differing shapes of the gamuts.

If the printer can take a 16-bit image then give it one if you are letting it do the color conversion for your. If not, then there won't be a big benefit. If your image started off as a 8-bit/channel image, then there is no point whatsoever in converting to 16-bit/channel as you won't gain anything.

Quote
If I calibrate my monitor at 9300K, will that NOT give me a correct color calibration? I mean why 6500K?
While you will get a correct color calibration, 9300K is not a good choice because it is very very blue and that will have an effect on your adjustments. Your images will appear cool and that can cause you to compensate unnecessarily. 6500K is the best choice since that is close to actual daylight* and our eyes function best at that range. For those reading this with a LCD display that is 9300K native, then calibrate it to 6500K anyway. The negative effects of a monitor that is too cool will outweigh any negative effects from calibrating to a different color temp. People with CRTs don't have to worry about image degradation when adjusting color temp since the adjustments are analog adjustments to the CRTs RGB ray guns.


*I'll as a little side-point here that 6500K isn't a specific color, but a range of colors. Daylight is a very specific characteristic of light called D65. Ideally, you'd calibrate the display for D65 but there are few programs that do so.


AdobeGama is worthless. Since it depends on your eyes, which are easily fooled, you can have a very different interpretation each time you calibrate with them. The hardware calibrator will do the calibration and measure for you and be a billion-trillion times more accurate.

Your will be able to set the display to 94cd/m2 when calibrating with a hardware calibrator.
Logged
dwdallam
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2044



WWW
« Reply #4 on: May 18, 2006, 02:56:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Excellent information Dan. Thanks much. I guess I'll buy the hardware calibration equipment today or when I get this information back. If you have one you recommend, or if others can recommend with reasons why, please let's discuss that hardware/software package.

PS--I believe the Noritsu can only print in 8 bit mode. When I forget and give the operator the disk (always in tiff) to use in the machine itself--not the kiosk--it says, "No Data Found." If I then resubmit the images (in tiff) at 8 bit, it has no problem. On the other hand, given that information, I believe that the Noritsu system automatically reduces the bit depth to 8 bits when I use the kiosk. I believe this because the kiosk will process the 16 bit tiff images. For that reason, I usually convert them myself to see if there is any color shift I need to deal with before printing, instead of letting the Noritsu system do it. Do you see any logical problems with my method here?

Last, when I hit your link to the profiles above, I get a "Forbideen access" server message. I can't even acess the dry creek home page. It comes up as a blank page.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2006, 03:02:51 PM by dwdallam » Logged

Serge Cashman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 200


« Reply #5 on: May 18, 2006, 03:14:04 PM »
ReplyReply

I would suppose Costco Noritsu assumes your images are sRGB. Also the results may shift if you didn't request turning auto adjustments off...

If you use a newish LCD chances are it's already close to 6500K and 2.2, so first try to make sure your workflow is correct before you buy a colorimeter. There are many colorimeter packages out there (from $80 to $325). What's your budget? Spyder2 is reasonably good for a single monitor system.

Setting 6500K in the monitor menu does not mean it actually is 6500K though. To know what it is you need a colorimeter. 6500K is what looks "white" to most people so you can use it unless it doesn't look white to you.

I think on contemporary macs 2.2 is closer to their native gamma, just like on PCs.

Technical note:
When used as targets in calibration software both D65 and 6500K refer to specific chromaticities (6500K is 0.314, 0.324 CIExy and D65 is 0.313, 0.329 CIExy). However theoretically an infinite number of chromaticities have CCT 6500K, which does not matter for this discussion.
Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #6 on: May 18, 2006, 08:15:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Do you see any logical problems with my method here?
Nope. If you are sending the printer a image converted to its color space then you won't benefit much at all sending it a 16-bit/channel image. You will benefit however, if the printer is doing a color conversion.

Quote
Last, when I hit your link to the profiles above, I get a "Forbideen access" server message. I can't even acess the dry creek home page. It comes up as a blank page.
The site is working just fine on my end. I'll bet that either your ISP (Internet Service Provider) is blocking the domain, you have some internet filtering software blocking it or DryCreek's server for whatever reason is blocking an IP address range you just happen to fall into. If you don't have filtering software on you computer, then give your ISP a call.

DryCreek's e-mail is web_info@drycreekphoto.com if you need to contact them.

Quote
I would suppose Costco Noritsu assumes your images are sRGB. Also the results may shift if you didn't request turning auto adjustments off...

[...]

I think on contemporary macs 2.2 is closer to their native gamma, just like on PCs.

[...]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65939\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The Costco printers do assume sRGB but it it's converted with their custom profile it won't do any conversion.

Current Macs are still 1.8 gamma. The Intel Macs may be different, but I can't check since I haven't got one.


I use a Eye-One Display 2 which works quite well. Manaco is another good brand. The Spyders are good but you get what you pay for and they come up short in measuring highlights when compared to the other two companies (which are now one company since Manaco bought GretagMacbeth). Also, if you buy a Spyder, make sure it measures blacks. I know with previous generations only the pro model did so.
Logged
Serge Cashman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 200


« Reply #7 on: May 18, 2006, 09:32:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Well - so there you go. First try to convert files to sRGB before printing. Next - try converting to the profile downloaded from drycreek when they get their act together (I've noticed some problems accsessing their site as well). Next step is to get a colorimeter package - it's often more involved than what you'd expect.

And I don't know why you'd think current macs are 1.8...
« Last Edit: May 18, 2006, 09:55:24 PM by Serge Cashman » Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #8 on: May 19, 2006, 12:43:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
And I don't know why you'd think current macs are 1.8...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65975\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
What would make you think otherwise? If Apple has switched to 2.2, they did so incognito. I have not been able to find any credible (or non-credible for that matter) information indicating such a switch has been made anywhere on the internet or on Apples support site.
Logged
dwdallam
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2044



WWW
« Reply #9 on: May 19, 2006, 04:58:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Well - so there you go. First try to convert files to sRGB before printing. Next - try converting to the profile downloaded from drycreek when they get their act together (I've noticed some problems accsessing their site as well). Next step is to get a colorimeter package - it's often more involved than what you'd expect.

And I don't know why you'd think current macs are 1.8...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65975\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I assume saving with the Costco profile will do the conversion to sRGB as to eliminate the need to also convert to sRGB?

Let's hope the new Noritsu printer they are getting uses Adobe 1998, or even PhotoPro.

I am now able to reach dry creek.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2006, 05:00:39 AM by dwdallam » Logged

dwdallam
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2044



WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 19, 2006, 05:03:47 AM »
ReplyReply

After others chime in and you all agree on calibration methods, we should also put together the steps for Adobe Photoshop settings, including the use of profiles. Then, I think this information should be a sticky. It is very important.

As a thanks to the website owner, the document can be signed by those who participated, on behalf of Luminous Landscape, and we can post it to newsgroups and other forums.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2006, 05:04:31 AM by dwdallam » Logged

digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9217



WWW
« Reply #11 on: May 19, 2006, 07:44:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Current Macs are still 1.8 gamma. The Intel Macs may be different, but I can't check since I haven't got one.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65969\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Still 1.8 (silly but for so called legacy reasons, Apple has suck to 1.Cool.

The only thing I've found screwy about the Intel Mac is it isn't working properly with version 4.0 ICC display profiles.

On this site (http://www.color.org/version4html.html) V4 profiles on the Powerbook show all four quadrants correctly but not on my iMac. Even if I drag the V4 profile from the Powerbook over to the iMac, it's not working as it should.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
opgr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1125


WWW
« Reply #12 on: May 19, 2006, 08:48:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Still 1.8 (silly but for so called legacy reasons, Apple has suck to 1.Cool.

The only thing I've found screwy about the Intel Mac is it isn't working properly with version 4.0 ICC display profiles.
Yeah, it's the freaking byte-ordering on intel. The entire ColorSync processing requires meticulous byte swapping. (Ask me if I'm happy, one button Universal Binaries, my a**!). For sheer fun you could try Get Info on Safari and check "Open using Rosetta". It will then run in emulated mode, but it will correctly display the image.
Logged

Regards,
Oscar Rysdyk
theimagingfactory
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9217



WWW
« Reply #13 on: May 19, 2006, 08:55:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
For sheer fun you could try Get Info on Safari and check "Open using Rosetta". It will then run in emulated mode, but it will correctly display the image.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=66016\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Cool, that does work (now Safari previews that page correctly). It also runs dog slow <g>.

Neat trick. Now we just need Apple to fix this (and the other ColorSync bugs).
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #14 on: May 19, 2006, 09:57:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Neat trick. Now we just need Apple to fix this (and the other ColorSync bugs).
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Make sure you file a [a href=\"http://www.apple.com/macosx/feedback/]bug report[/url] on that. They may know about the issue, but you never know.
Logged
Serge Cashman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 200


« Reply #15 on: May 19, 2006, 05:07:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
What would make you think otherwise? If Apple has switched to 2.2, they did so incognito. I have not been able to find any credible (or non-credible for that matter) information indicating such a switch has been made anywhere on the internet or on Apples support site.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The place I heard it last is Xrite Monaco Optix video tutorial on the Xrite site. I'm sure I could find more references to it in other places...

[a href=\"http://www.xritephoto.com/product/optixxr/demo.asp]http://www.xritephoto.com/product/optixxr/demo.asp[/url]
« Last Edit: May 19, 2006, 05:14:53 PM by Serge Cashman » Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #16 on: May 19, 2006, 05:51:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The place I heard it last is Xrite Monaco Optix video tutorial on the Xrite site. I'm sure I could find more references to it in other places...

http://www.xritephoto.com/product/optixxr/demo.asp
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=66050\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
In that tutorial they state "it's common to use 2.2" not that it actually is 2.2.
Logged
Serge Cashman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 200


« Reply #17 on: May 19, 2006, 06:35:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
In that tutorial they state "it's common to use 2.2" not that it actually is 2.2.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It actually is probably neither. It may be close to  one or the other (plus, there are three compponents to it). 2.2 is used because it's close to the native state of modern systems.

Here's some paper from Apple site describing how wonderful their cinema display is (it seems to be written by a third party) that states that the default state is close to 6500K 2.2. You can check it yourself if you have an EyeOne Display2 apparently, since that's what they used in that article.

[a href=\"http://images.apple.com/pro/pdf/AppleReport2005_rc1_051214.pdf]http://images.apple.com/pro/pdf/AppleRepor..._rc1_051214.pdf[/url] see page 13.

Of course  then they go ahead and change it to D50 1.8, but you know what that means...
« Last Edit: May 19, 2006, 06:53:47 PM by Serge Cashman » Logged
Serge Cashman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 200


« Reply #18 on: May 19, 2006, 06:36:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Spyder2 pro (and I suppose Display2) gives you gamma curves for Uncalibrated (3 curves obviously), Target, Calibrated and Correction. You can easily see what your native gamma is close to.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2006, 06:50:14 PM by Serge Cashman » Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #19 on: May 19, 2006, 07:01:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Again, you misinterpreting information. The pdf you refer to is talking about calibrating and not what Macs run at natively.

Another point you are overlooking is the fact that gamma is determined by the video card LUTs and not the monitor.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad