Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Another wide gamut display question  (Read 5785 times)
larkis
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 196


WWW
« on: August 02, 2008, 12:07:44 AM »
ReplyReply

I posted my initial questions on this forum already when it comes to profiling the NEC wide gamut display. I purchased a eye 1 display 2 and got the 14 day trail of the profiling software from NEC (spectra view). After calibrating both my monitors with it, the images I open in photoshop look pretty close when moved form one screen to the other despite my desktop image looking radically different (i guess it's not color managed).
The question i have though is regarding the smaller differences in the way the images do appear on each of the displays and which one i should trust more. On the apple 30" display the image is a little warmer, and it's a little greener on the NEC. Even with the calibration the apple one seems to be more punchy which i guess does not always mean accurate. I have also tried to build a *L curve profile using the calibration software, and while the image looks almost identical to the 2.2 version, photoshop seems to clip some of the blacks when in this mode. Os there a book or website that explains all this stuff and how it should behave ? I want to learn more about all of this since it seems that the more detail oriented i get the more questions arise.

Also, which software lets me paste in an image so i can view how it's colors are mapped in a color space and which ones are outside it ? Sort of like the color sync utility that comes with the mac but for plotting the colors in a specific image. This would be helpful to also determine if i should use adobe rgb or pro photo rgb on a particular image. Which brings me to question 3, can camera raw or lightroom show me if an image while i'm doing all my edits is within a certain space or if it's outside it ? I know from reading elsewhere that mapping an image into the widest color space is not always a smart thing to do if the image does not need it.
Logged

My photography blog
http://blog.dominik.ca/
madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2110


« Reply #1 on: August 03, 2008, 05:30:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Are the two displays calibrated using the same settings (i.e., same white point, gamma, etc.)?
Logged

digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9187



WWW
« Reply #2 on: August 03, 2008, 10:00:21 AM »
ReplyReply

From what I've read, you've got a wide gamut display and an sRGB display, they will never match.

You can't "set" the wide gamut unit (your NEC) to sRGB and calibrate/profile it so that's not going to work. That's a mode for basically working non color managed.

That aside, you also need to calibrate both units to the same luminance. You might need to play with white point to fudge a better match. In the end, I'm not sure its a worthwhile exercise, especially for the non NEC which probably isn't anywhere as precise in terms of hitting calibration as your Apple.
Logged

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

Posts: 196


WWW
« Reply #3 on: August 03, 2008, 10:48:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
From what I've read, you've got a wide gamut display and an sRGB display, they will never match.

You can't "set" the wide gamut unit (your NEC) to sRGB and calibrate/profile it so that's not going to work. That's a mode for basically working non color managed.

That aside, you also need to calibrate both units to the same luminance. You might need to play with white point to fudge a better match. In the end, I'm not sure its a worthwhile exercise, especially for the non NEC which probably isn't anywhere as precise in terms of hitting calibration as your Apple.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=212779\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
So you are saying that the apple display would be more precise in terms of calibration when profiled (sRGB or not) than the NEC ? Should i return the NEC and just get another apple ? I got the NEC hoping it would be more precise and be able to soft proof better. It was also more than the apple display. I don't really care if the displays match, i just want to know which display will actually show me more precisely what the printed image looks like.
Logged

My photography blog
http://blog.dominik.ca/
BFoto
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 241



WWW
« Reply #4 on: August 04, 2008, 12:57:13 AM »
ReplyReply

So, i went out and bought one of these beasts. Whoa....the wife is not happy this week. Between this and LR2.0!!

I have a couple of issues, potentially related.

1. Even though my graphics card (Radeon X600) handle the 1920x1200 res, and i was able to set this as so, i dont seem to be getting the correct res. When i plug it in using 15 pin mini Dsub (analogue), the corner of the monitor says 1600x1200. yet, when i plug it in (DVI DVI - digital) to the wifes Macbook pro (radeon x1600), the correct res 1920x1200 appears. So is this the card or the cable or both.

2. Calibration setting - D65, gamma 2.2, black point .5, White point 150, contrast ratio - default.
The problem -
a. During calibration this message appears "Max luminecence that can be acheived is 106. This is lower than target value. Auto adjustment will be made to maximum possible"
b. Caibration summary - WP 6490, Luminecence 103, Gamma 2.2, Contrast 1/255.

This baby has a max contrast ratio of 1/800, so i am not sure what went wrong. Contrast ratio = Black/White points = .5/150 = 300.

What i am i not understanding?
Should i set the contrast ratio to other than default?
IS this affected by the first issue?
Logged

larkis
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 196


WWW
« Reply #5 on: August 04, 2008, 01:48:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
So, i went out and bought one of these beasts. Whoa....the wife is not happy this week. Between this and LR2.0!!

I have a couple of issues, potentially related.

1. Even though my graphics card (Radeon X600) handle the 1920x1200 res, and i was able to set this as so, i dont seem to be getting the correct res. When i plug it in using 15 pin mini Dsub (analogue), the corner of the monitor says 1600x1200. yet, when i plug it in (DVI DVI - digital) to the wifes Macbook pro (radeon x1600), the correct res 1920x1200 appears. So is this the card or the cable or both.

2. Calibration setting - D65, gamma 2.2, black point .5, White point 150, contrast ratio - default.
The problem -
a. During calibration this message appears "Max luminecence that can be acheived is 106. This is lower than target value. Auto adjustment will be made to maximum possible"
b. Caibration summary - WP 6490, Luminecence 103, Gamma 2.2, Contrast 1/255.

This baby has a max contrast ratio of 1/800, so i am not sure what went wrong. Contrast ratio = Black/White points = .5/150 = 300.

What i am i not understanding?
Should i set the contrast ratio to other than default?
IS this affected by the first issue?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=212908\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have the 30" version and the analog input only supports 1900x1200 while the digital one does 2560x1600. Maybe on the smaller models the analog supports 1600x1200 only ? Check the documentation or call them up.

When it comes to the contrast ratio, and i'm not an expert on this but i believe the dimmer the display the more the ratio changes. I have my display set to 100 liminesense (don't want to burn out my retinas in the darker environment i'm in) and the calibration software lists the contrast at somewhere around 1/333. The contrast ratio number manufacturers give is probably measured at full brightness and when you add the crack smoking marketing guys to the mix you get numbers such as 1:10,000 and others. Mind you 1:800 is probably more realistic but that would still be very bright to look at.

Also, when you look at the NEC monitor product matrix (there is a pdf on their site) it seems that the cheaper the monitors and the more consumer oriented they become the bigger the contrast ratio numbers.
Logged

My photography blog
http://blog.dominik.ca/
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9187



WWW
« Reply #6 on: August 04, 2008, 07:57:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
So you are saying that the apple display would be more precise in terms of calibration when profiled (sRGB or not) than the NEC ?

For sRGB yes considering you can't profile the product as an sRGB device cause it isn't one. But you purchased a wide gamut display presumably because you wanted a wide gamut display.

The chromaticities of the unit are fixed. There's a kind of dumb "sRGB" mode so non color managed sRGB data doesn't look butt ugly but that's not a state you can calibrate and profile the unit for.

If you want an sRGB display you can calibrate and profile, you don't want a wide gamut display like this unit.
Logged

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

Posts: 9187



WWW
« Reply #7 on: August 04, 2008, 08:06:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Should i set the contrast ratio to other than default?

First, in preferences, set calibration priority to Best Grayscale tracking. Be sure you have the ColorComp ON in the OSD (its off by default).

I have my contrast ratio set to 300:1 but be aware, it may not hit this value based on the luminance you set which takes priority.
Logged

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

Posts: 241



WWW
« Reply #8 on: August 04, 2008, 02:25:21 PM »
ReplyReply

New settings
D65, Gamma 2.2, White point intensity 150, Contrast 1/300

Did as you suggested with gretscale and colorcomp.

Interesting results, the figures went the oposite direction i though they would.
I got the same message but worse results this time.

Black level .61
Intensity 90
Contrast ratio 1/149
Logged

Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad