Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Calibrating a Dell Ultrasharp 2407WP w/Eye-One  (Read 14882 times)
budjames
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 687


WWW
« on: December 03, 2006, 04:09:18 AM »
ReplyReply

2 weeks ago I purchased a Dell 2407 WFP display for my Dell Precision 470 Workstation. I also purchased the Eye-One Display 2 colorimeter to replace my 5 yr old Monaco Optix colorimeter.

After some trial and error, I discovered that the best calibration was achieved with Eye-One software by using the "Laptop" calibration routine instead of the "LCD" routine. I also discovered that since the Dell display is so bright with the default settings, that by manually adjusting the RGB output to 70% rather than the default of 100%, that I was easily able to adjust the brightness to match the software target of 120 by setting the brightness to about 30%.

Using the LCD routine yielded a much contrastier result that was unacceptable.

I was curious if others out that using this combination could share their experiences.

Cheers.
Bud
North Wales, PA
Logged

Bud James
North Wales, PA
www.budjamesphotography.com
jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1603



WWW
« Reply #1 on: December 03, 2006, 04:57:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
After some trial and error, I discovered that the best calibration was achieved with Eye-One software by using the "Laptop" calibration routine instead of the "LCD" routine. I also discovered that since the Dell display is so bright with the default settings, that by manually adjusting the RGB output to 70% rather than the default of 100%, that I was easily able to adjust the brightness to match the software target of 120 by setting the brightness to about 30%.
Ouch, 30%! That's quite a loss, you're down to 5.3 million tonalities instead of 16.7 million.

Wasn't it possible to adjust the brightness level of the monitor itself low enough to achieve your target luminance?

If not, I would recommend trying to calibrate and profile against a higher target luminance (re-run the process a few times and check that you get consistent results).
Logged

Jan
raloran
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 07, 2006, 02:55:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Ouch, 30%! That's quite a loss, you're down to 5.3 million tonalities instead of 16.7 million.

Wasn't it possible to adjust the brightness level of the monitor itself low enough to achieve your target luminance?

If not, I would recommend trying to calibrate and profile against a higher target luminance (re-run the process a few times and check that you get consistent results).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=88483\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

hi jani,
i've just bought this monitor and have the same problems as the original poster. how high would you recommend to go with the luminance. i'm getting results in the 200cd/m2 region with my i1 d2 equipment and still have a rather crappy picture. :-( i am seriously thinking about sending it back to dell.

regards, ralph from cologne, germany
Logged

-- "Et haett no immer jot jejange" (saying in Cologne for "at the end everything turns out well")
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2184



WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 08, 2006, 10:02:09 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't have those results at all.  I lower my brightness via the video driver 4% to get the 140 luminance with the monitor set to 0.  Using LCD produces extremely accurate results against everythig I have printed over the past year (since I got it).

I would suggest possibly updating your video drivers, I suspect it's a software issue.

EDIT - I should also note that I have the 2405, I just realized this thread is the 2407 - they may have made some changes for the worse.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2006, 10:02:49 AM by kaelaria » Logged

jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1603



WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 09, 2006, 05:44:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
i've just bought this monitor and have the same problems as the original poster. how high would you recommend to go with the luminance. i'm getting results in the 200cd/m2 region with my i1 d2 equipment and still have a rather crappy picture. :-( i am seriously thinking about sending it back to dell.
Hi Ralph,

I'm really not sure how far you can stretch it. The problem with a higher target brightness is, as described in other discussion threads, that the contrast against the ambient light -- that is, the light in the room your monitor is in -- may become uncomfortably high.

In addition, some calibrators may not function well at high brightness levels, you'll see this if you get inconsistent results from multiple calibration/profiling runs.

The alternative is to perform brightness adjustments in your video card settings, which will result in lookup table adjustments that in principle reduce the precision and possible tonalities. It is ... hard to predict how well this will turn out. As I'm sure that others will point out, they may feel comfortable with how this works, whereas others find it completely unacceptable (as I did).

Or, in fewer words: YMMV (your mileage may vary)
Logged

Jan
dlevens
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #5 on: September 22, 2007, 01:43:28 PM »
ReplyReply

I too have been struggling with the best way to calibrate this Dell 2407 monitor. I have the eye-one Display 2 device and using Eye-One Match 3 v3.6.2, I am also running Windows Vista Ultimate and have the ATI Radeon 1650 Pro.

I am able to calibrate this thing down to 80 Luminance using just the brightness on the monitor. I never touch the graphic drivers and I leave the monitor RGB at 100.

I went back and forth with Gretag support and got someone who really knew the product and how to calibrate. I was told that to get the best calibration, it was better to not use the RGB on the monitor, and just leave the monitor at defaults. Apparently the RGB controls on these cheap monitors are not real RGB controls and tend to cause more issues. I was told to stick to adjusting brightness only on the monitor since I use DVI (there are no contrast controls for DVI).

Oddly, my same monitor and video card calibrated great under Windows XP using 6500k 2.2 120 lum. But on Vista 120 lum still washes out my blacks, they look like glowing greys. So I kept choosing a lower and lower lum and eventually the 80 lum and 90 lum looked like real inky black. Not sure if this is a bad thing or not, but I am currently at 6500 2.2 and 90lum with only touching the monitor brightness down to 32.

I also tried calibrating using the laptop choice in the Match software but all this seems to do is skip the RGB controls and contrast which is something I do anyways when using the LCD choice. I started skipping the RGB after speaking to the Gretag tech.

Also, another hidden gem for those of you using the Match software. After you calibrate just click next to get back to the front screen of the Match software. There is a nice tool I never new about that you can use to validate your profile. It is greyed out when you first launch the match software, but right after a calibration if you click next you can run this, it will then test your calibration. I was told anything under 1.0 is a good result. I tend to always end up at .42 to .44

Here is the quote from the Gretag tech that explains this better.
Quote
Make a profile at 6500k, and Gamma 2.2, then at the end Do Not Click Finish but click the right arrow again. this will take you back to the start of that application, then go up to the menu bar and look for Start Monitor Validator. This will run a program that will allow you to see how well your monitor works with a profile at those settings. this is a really neat program in that it will give you values in Delta E which is how color differences are measured, the lower the better. Most Apple Cinema Display's have a Delta E of less than 1, but I have a really cheap 17" Acer at home that has a Delta E of around 2 and my monitor cost all of $140 brand new. Delta E of 1 is the minimum change in color someone with Highly Acute color vision can see. The average person can not see a change until
around Delta E of 2-3. Another way to imagine this Delta E value is if you held two prints that had a Delta E value difference of 5, you could see the difference when held next to each other, but by the time you moved them 2 feet apart, you could no longer see a difference, that's how small 1 Delta E is.

You can play around with settings when you profile your monitor and see what makes your overall Delta E higher or lower, sometime native will actually be worse and have a higher delta e then using 6500k and Gamma 2.2. The monitor I'm using here, has a lower over all Delta E when I use 6000k for instance, there really is no way to guess at what will work best on your monitor but I'd still say 6500k and Gamma 2.2 is your best bet.

In any case I guess I am sticking with 6500 2.2 and either 80 or 90 lum.

Dennis
Logged
jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1603



WWW
« Reply #6 on: September 22, 2007, 02:57:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I went back and forth with Gretag support and got someone who really knew the product and how to calibrate. I was told that to get the best calibration, it was better to not use the RGB on the monitor, and just leave the monitor at defaults. Apparently the RGB controls on these cheap monitors are not real RGB controls and tend to cause more issues. I was told to stick to adjusting brightness only on the monitor since I use DVI (there are no contrast controls for DVI).
This has little to do with the price of the monitor.

When you're adjusting the RGB controls of an LCD monitor, you're effectively altering the monitor's LUT (look-up table), thereby reducing the number of available colours.
Logged

Jan
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2739



WWW
« Reply #7 on: September 22, 2007, 05:27:16 PM »
ReplyReply

We have a couple of people using these on Macs. and cannot get the luminance value low enough to be helpful when in photoshop and trying to match print output ... they are just too bright.

We finally replace them with some Apple displays, and moved the Dells to some graphic artists that aren't working with photographs, but mainly do just web work.   Seems to work OK for them.
Logged

feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2907

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #8 on: September 22, 2007, 05:37:38 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't know if this is relevant: Dell is notorious for changing the panel in their monitors after good reviews to cheaper ones. There's a lengthy thread on the Dell monitor lottery on another forum. Perhaps you have an inferior PVA panel.
Logged

tived
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 674


WWW
« Reply #9 on: September 23, 2007, 10:11:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
This has little to do with the price of the monitor.

When you're adjusting the RGB controls of an LCD monitor, you're effectively altering the monitor's LUT (look-up table), thereby reducing the number of available colours.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=141290\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi Jani,

at what value should your RGB be set to, to get 100% out of your screen? or to get the maximum available colours?

I too, change my RGB values to get my desired brightness value of 120. and when evaluating a 21-step wedge, I can't see the difference between the two darkest and the two lightest step.

to all,

I would love to see a good guide to calibrate LCD monitors, and what compromise one is making by changing your settings. Is factory default the best setting and then just let the calibrator do its magic?

Henrik

PS: I am using two 2405 Dell screens connected to two nVidia Quadro FX3400...thinking heavily about getting one of the new NEC 26" screens

reason being that I find it hard to edit images with heavy shadows

Henrik
« Last Edit: September 23, 2007, 10:13:27 PM by tived » Logged
llama
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 72



WWW
« Reply #10 on: October 16, 2007, 01:23:21 PM »
ReplyReply

I use coloreyesdisplay 3.2 on my Windows machine with a Dell 2407FWP and get best results if I target 100cd/m2 as my luminance. Delta E values are very good at that value.

Luckily CED 3.2 uses DDC to adjust the display automatically, so I don't actually move the controls myself.

N
Logged

sojournerphoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 473


« Reply #11 on: October 16, 2007, 06:15:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I use coloreyesdisplay 3.2 on my Windows machine with a Dell 2407FWP and get best results if I target 100cd/m2 as my luminance. Delta E values are very good at that value.

Luckily CED 3.2 uses DDC to adjust the display automatically, so I don't actually move the controls myself.

N
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=146407\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I use a Dell 2007 monitor and I have adjusted the brightness (backlight) control on the monitor itself to 34% from the default at 75%. This now calibtrtes pretty well adn I get a good match to screen. Previously I was printing everything much too dark

Mike
Logged
David Sutton
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 869


WWW
« Reply #12 on: October 17, 2007, 02:49:49 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't know if this applies, but I also have a 2007 fp. When first started using it after profiling with Spyder2 pro it was so bright my eyes would ache for hours. I now have the luminance to 80 (brightness down to 4 in the screen menu), gamma 2.2, but what really fixed the brightness problem was setting the white point to native when calibrating. It seems to match the print output closely.
David
« Last Edit: October 17, 2007, 02:50:22 AM by Taquin » Logged

Meerkat
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 14


« Reply #13 on: October 21, 2007, 09:17:16 PM »
ReplyReply

I have been doing a lot of research on this monitor recently (thinking about getting one for myself) when I cam across this thread on another forum that might help you.

The thread is at whirlpool forums

Some of the specific information I have cut and paste below.

NOTE: This is for the 2407WFP-HC.

Quote
Before testing we calibrated the screen to optimum levels -- first by entering the service menu by powering off the screen, holding down the "+", "Menu" and "Power" buttons to turn it back on, then "-" to access the menu. Here we turned off ACC, or Auto Colour Correction. During our calibration through the normal menu we noticed that any contrast setting above 50 tended to mess with gradients and compress blacks, and after some time settled for 47 contrast, and a brightness of 49 for the most balanced image.

After this it blew through our DisplayMate tests with ease using a DVI connection, gradient ramps being consistent with well paced darks, and discerning all 255 shades within the greyscale. Firing up Stalker: Shadow of Chernobyl for a quick gaming session showed that it's perfectly fine for PC gaming, and running our bevy of 1080p videos revealed it to be an excellent screen for watching movies too, provided you set the black level to something a little more acceptable to compensate for video intended for TV. Viewing angles were fine and on par with what we've come to accept from monitors of this size -- no surprises here.

It turns out this was a quote actually taken from the following review CNET Review

There are also other users in the the same Whirlpool thread who talk about their own settings. May be worth a look.

I hope this helps.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2007, 09:18:15 PM by Meerkat » Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad