Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Eye One Display 2 with New Macbook Pro  (Read 8094 times)
Khurram
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 454


« on: December 09, 2009, 04:57:47 PM »
ReplyReply

After trying to decide between the SPyder 3 pro and the Eye One Display 2, I ended up getting the eye one, after the sales person said that it is much more accurate then the Spyder 3.

I just finishing calibrating and have tried to calibrate a few times, but each time the screen seems REALLY bright, colors look ok, but the brightness is very bright.

I set the brightness level on my Macbook Pro to 3 levels below max and then 4 and 5 levels below max before calibrating, but each time after the calibration the display is quite bright - if there was a histogram for the display, i'd say it would be blown out

During the tutorial, it did say that the default gamma for macs was 1.8 and windows 2.2.

Now that the new Macs have a default gamma of 2.2, could this be causing an issue??

I'd appreciate any advice on whether or not the Eye One Display 2 works with the new macs or not and if people have found it to work ok, I'd appreciate some pointers on what I may be doing wrong.  I spent an extra $100 on the xrite over the Spyder, so if the Spyder doesn't have issues, I'd like to find out, in case the store will let me exchange the xrite.

Just another note, while the box says Eye One Display 2, throught the install icon the name of the program is Eye-One Match 3.
Logged

DavorHorvatic
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 68


WWW
« Reply #1 on: December 09, 2009, 05:12:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Khurram
After trying to decide between the SPyder 3 pro and the Eye One Display 2, I ended up getting the eye one, after the sales person said that it is much more accurate then the Spyder 3.

I just finishing calibrating and have tried to calibrate a few times, but each time the screen seems REALLY bright, colors look ok, but the brightness is very bright.

I set the brightness level on my Macbook Pro to 3 levels below max and then 4 and 5 levels below max before calibrating, but each time after the calibration the display is quite bright - if there was a histogram for the display, i'd say it would be blown out

During the tutorial, it did say that the default gamma for macs was 1.8 and windows 2.2.

Now that the new Macs have a default gamma of 2.2, could this be causing an issue??

I'd appreciate any advice on whether or not the Eye One Display 2 works with the new macs or not and if people have found it to work ok, I'd appreciate some pointers on what I may be doing wrong.  I spent an extra $100 on the xrite over the Spyder, so if the Spyder doesn't have issues, I'd like to find out, in case the store will let me exchange the xrite.

Just another note, while the box says Eye One Display 2, throught the install icon the name of the program is Eye-One Match 3.

Match 3 is correct. Eye One Display 2 is correct too. My calibration is also 1,8 Gamma, 5500 K, I have brightness level of my Macbook Pro also 3 levels below maximum - before and after calibrating and the calibration is OK, looks similar as other screens Im using.
Logged

Cheers

Davor

xpose solutions
Khurram
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 454


« Reply #2 on: December 09, 2009, 05:22:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: DavorHorvatic
Match 3 is correct. Eye One Display 2 is correct too. My calibration is also 1,8 Gamma, 5500 K, I have brightness level of my Macbook Pro also 3 levels below maximum - before and after calibrating and the calibration is OK, looks similar as other screens Im using.
THanks for the response Davor.  Are you using the Eye One with the new Macbook Pro, or the older ones that did have a native Gamma of 1.8, which is what the instructions on the Eye One said were default for the Mac.  The new Macbook's have changed the gamma to 2.2, and I'm just wondering if that is my issue.
Logged

DavorHorvatic
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 68


WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 09, 2009, 05:56:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Khurram
THanks for the response Davor.  Are you using the Eye One with the new Macbook Pro, or the older ones that did have a native Gamma of 1.8, which is what the instructions on the Eye One said were default for the Mac.  The new Macbook's have changed the gamma to 2.2, and I'm just wondering if that is my issue.

Im working on Intel Core 2 Duo 2,6 GHz Macbook Pro with Mac OS X 10.5.8 , non glare screen. When I calibrate, I accept proposal to use 120 luminance - hope this information can help you.
Logged

Cheers

Davor

xpose solutions
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2925



WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 09, 2009, 11:53:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Khurram
THanks for the response Davor.  Are you using the Eye One with the new Macbook Pro, or the older ones that did have a native Gamma of 1.8, which is what the instructions on the Eye One said were default for the Mac.  The new Macbook's have changed the gamma to 2.2, and I'm just wondering if that is my issue.

Actually gamma 1.8 for macs hasn't been used for quite some time although Apple just changed the official stance.  When calibrating most recommend using native gamma.  I personally use gamma 2.1 because at 2.2. there is too much contrast when using most apps such as Safari.  Do not use gamma 1.8.

However, your problem doesn't sound like a gamma problem, it sounds like a brightness problem.  First thing you have to do is make sure the "automatically adjust brightness as ambient light changes" checkbox is off in the display preference pane.  When calibrating make sure you are using the advanced mode.  At some point it will ask you to set your target luminance, which for starters is going to be around 120.  You then have to actually set the brightness yourself - the profile making process doesn't do this.  A button there will start the process, which will put up a little window measuring the luminance.  Adjust the backlight until you hit the target.  You can do this with the keys, but usually its better to use the slider in the Display preference pane because it allows much finer control. Make a note of where this is so you can reset it later.  On a MacBook Pro this will most likely only be about 50% of full brightness.

I have a couple of applescripts, once you have your desired brightness you can use one of them to read what the % of the slider is set to, plug that number into the other one, and then just run it when you want it to reset exactly where it was.

You can find the applescripts in this thread.

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....showtopic=38983
Logged

Khurram
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 454


« Reply #5 on: December 10, 2009, 12:42:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Wayne Fox
Actually gamma 1.8 for macs hasn't been used for quite some time although Apple just changed the official stance.  When calibrating most recommend using native gamma.  I personally use gamma 2.1 because at 2.2. there is too much contrast when using most apps such as Safari.  Do not use gamma 1.8.

However, your problem doesn't sound like a gamma problem, it sounds like a brightness problem.  First thing you have to do is make sure the "automatically adjust brightness as ambient light changes" checkbox is off in the display preference pane.  When calibrating make sure you are using the advanced mode.  At some point it will ask you to set your target luminance, which for starters is going to be around 120.  You then have to actually set the brightness yourself - the profile making process doesn't do this.  A button there will start the process, which will put up a little window measuring the luminance.  Adjust the backlight until you hit the target.  You can do this with the keys, but usually its better to use the slider in the Display preference pane because it allows much finer control. Make a note of where this is so you can reset it later.  On a MacBook Pro this will most likely only be about 50% of full brightness.

I have a couple of applescripts, once you have your desired brightness you can use one of them to read what the % of the slider is set to, plug that number into the other one, and then just run it when you want it to reset exactly where it was.

You can find the applescripts in this thread.

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....showtopic=38983
Appreciate your advice Wayne!

I'm not sure what applescripts are .  But I'll try using some of the settings you recommended.  Are you setting your color temperture to the default 6500, or the 5500 that Davor is using?

I had a couple of other questions.

I followed the advice on the linked post you had from yourself and others and changed the energy saver settings and the brightness settings in the display box.

in the Eye One calibration process i used the following settings:
 -luminance to 120
-WB  6500
-Gamma to 2.2
-used the ambient calibration and readings before proceeding.

The issue i came accross is with the  the luminance indicator settings/readings.  Are you supposed to stop the process when the current cd/m2 reading gets close to the target cd/m2 reading (which was the selected 120)Huh  I ran the process a couple of times the first time for about 1 1/2 hours, the second time for about 1 hour and it the current readings would just go back and forth between around 103 to 142 (mainly between 135 to 142).  I finally stopped one of the times when it got to around 123 and then let it complete the right arrow key to continue the rest of the calibration process.  Not sure if this is what I'm supposed to do.  My old Spyder 2 Pro was MUCH faster in the calibration process and the luminance settings was mainly set by visually looking at the seperation between a scale between whites and blacks.

Should I have let the program run longer (the longest i let it run was 1 1/2 hours), and is it eventually automatically supposed to stop at 120???

The display is still quite bright.

some info about my mac system info is as follows, I've got a 15" 3.06 GHz Intel core 2 Duo Mac Book Pro with 4GB 1067 MHz DDR3 RAM and an anti-glare screen.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2009, 03:47:42 AM by Khurram » Logged

Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2925



WWW
« Reply #6 on: December 10, 2009, 03:37:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Khurram
The issue i came accross is with the  the luminance indicator settings/readings.  Are you supposed to stop the process when the current cd/m2 reading gets close to the target cd/m2 reading (which was the selected 120)Huh  I ran the process a couple of times the first time for about 1 1/2 hours, the second time for about 1 hour and it the current readings would just go back and forth between around 103 to 142 (mainly between 135 to 142).  I finally stopped one of the times when it got to around 123 and then let it complete the right arrow key to continue the rest of the calibration process.  Not sure if this is what I'm supposed to do.  My old Spyder 2 Pro was MUCH faster in the calibration process and the luminance settings was mainly set by visually looking at the seperation between a scale between whites and blacks.

Should I have let the program run longer (the longest i let it run was 1 1/2 hours), and is it eventually automatically supposed to stop at 120???

The display is still quite bright.

some info about my mac system info is as follows, I've got a 15" 3.06 GHz Intel core 2 Duo Mac Book Pro with 4GB 1067 MHz DDR3 RAM and an anti-glare screen.

The software doesn't do anything to set the luminance.  It simply provides a readout of the value.  You don't need to let it sit ... it won't do anything.  You manually adjust your brightness up and down.  Each time you make an adjustment it will take several seconds for the software to sense this and provide the new value in the readout.  If using the keyboards on the Mac doesn't let you get close enough, then click and drag the slider on the Display preference pane to adjust the brightness.  Wait till the number stabilizes then adjust a small amount again.  You should be able to set the luminance in 30 seconds or less.  Personally I don't bother with the ambient light settings, but I have a pretty consistent and decently dim work area.

You don't have to "nail" your target luminance exactly.  Anywhere in the ballpark.  A 120 luminance is just a recommended starting point.  The goal with setting luminance is to achieve a density match between your printed output and your display.  The other variable in this equation is the viewing condition of the printed output.  If your print viewing conditions are very bright, you may have to increase the luminance, and vice versa.

In a "perfect" color managed scenario, the luminance is set manually by yourself and the number is irrelevant.  Ideally to set the luminance you compare the brightness of a white "print" (normally just an unprinted sheet of the paper you typically print on) to a blank Photoshop document on your screen.  Adjust the screen brightness until they are similar in brightness.  Then calibrate.  At this point you might want to read your luminance value to see what it is, and then plug that value in as your target (although I'm not sure that affects the profile).

As I work with people trying to match output to screen, a consistent and appropriate viewing station is usually the step they have overlooked.  Without this, everything is just guesswork.

Logged

Khurram
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 454


« Reply #7 on: December 10, 2009, 11:17:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Wayne Fox
The software doesn't do anything to set the luminance.  It simply provides a readout of the value.  You don't need to let it sit ... it won't do anything.  You manually adjust your brightness up and down.  Each time you make an adjustment it will take several seconds for the software to sense this and provide the new value in the readout.  If using the keyboards on the Mac doesn't let you get close enough, then click and drag the slider on the Display preference pane to adjust the brightness.  Wait till the number stabilizes then adjust a small amount again.  You should be able to set the luminance in 30 seconds or less.  Personally I don't bother with the ambient light settings, but I have a pretty consistent and decently dim work area.

You don't have to "nail" your target luminance exactly.  Anywhere in the ballpark.  A 120 luminance is just a recommended starting point.  The goal with setting luminance is to achieve a density match between your printed output and your display.  The other variable in this equation is the viewing condition of the printed output.  If your print viewing conditions are very bright, you may have to increase the luminance, and vice versa.

In a "perfect" color managed scenario, the luminance is set manually by yourself and the number is irrelevant.  Ideally to set the luminance you compare the brightness of a white "print" (normally just an unprinted sheet of the paper you typically print on) to a blank Photoshop document on your screen.  Adjust the screen brightness until they are similar in brightness.  Then calibrate.  At this point you might want to read your luminance value to see what it is, and then plug that value in as your target (although I'm not sure that affects the profile).

As I work with people trying to match output to screen, a consistent and appropriate viewing station is usually the step they have overlooked.  Without this, everything is just guesswork.
Thanks again Wayne.  I skipped the ambient settings and set the luminance settings as you recommended.  I'll be printing tomorrow and will see if the luminance settings I landed on worked out ok.
Logged

KHatch
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #8 on: December 13, 2009, 09:55:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Hello,

Are you using Snow Leopard?

I'm using the Eye One with EyeMatch and can't get a good calibration on my MacBook Pro (previous gen 2.5ghz Penryn model) to save my life. However, I get great results on my desktop running 10.5 Leopard.

On the MB Pro and SL, it creates some funky color issues, particularly in the blues turning purple. When I click a menu at the top of the screen, the highlight is purple instead of blue. If I load a photo with blue in it in PS CS4, the blues shift to purple. This is with their latest version which is supposed to be SL compatible. Looking around the net, it seems it's not an isolated problem. There's even a YouTube video showing it.

Apparently, XRite and Apple are aware of this. From what I read, it's an issue with the way SL handles color profiles and needs a fix from Apple.

In the meantime, I'm using the calibration tool built into OSX and getting pretty good results. However, I'm not confident enough in them for color critical work.

Keith
Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2925



WWW
« Reply #9 on: December 14, 2009, 02:33:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: KHatch
Hello,

Are you using Snow Leopard?

I'm using the Eye One with EyeMatch and can't get a good calibration on my MacBook Pro (previous gen 2.5ghz Penryn model) to save my life. However, I get great results on my desktop running 10.5 Leopard.

On the MB Pro and SL, it creates some funky color issues, particularly in the blues turning purple. When I click a menu at the top of the screen, the highlight is purple instead of blue. If I load a photo with blue in it in PS CS4, the blues shift to purple. This is with their latest version which is supposed to be SL compatible. Looking around the net, it seems it's not an isolated problem. There's even a YouTube video showing it.

Apparently, XRite and Apple are aware of this. From what I read, it's an issue with the way SL handles color profiles and needs a fix from Apple.

In the meantime, I'm using the calibration tool built into OSX and getting pretty good results. However, I'm not confident enough in them for color critical work.

Keith
Had no problems calibrating my new iMac to both my laptop and itself using SL.  Is this a supposed laptop display problem only?
Logged

jerryrock
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 570



WWW
« Reply #10 on: December 15, 2009, 09:47:09 AM »
ReplyReply

I use the Datacolor Spyder3 Elite to profile my LED backlit MacBook Pro. The DataColor Spyder 3 Elite uses a series of photographs for profile verification. The photos range from landscapes to portraits, subtle and bold color to black and white gradients. It is Snow Leopard compatible and works great on white LED backlit displays.

Sample photo (1 of 21) from the DataColor calibration software program:


« Last Edit: December 15, 2009, 10:08:44 AM by jerryrock » Logged

Gerald J Skrocki
skrockidesign.com
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2925



WWW
« Reply #11 on: December 15, 2009, 01:01:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: KHatch
Hello,

Are you using Snow Leopard?

I'm using the Eye One with EyeMatch and can't get a good calibration on my MacBook Pro (previous gen 2.5ghz Penryn model) to save my life. However, I get great results on my desktop running 10.5 Leopard.

On the MB Pro and SL, it creates some funky color issues, particularly in the blues turning purple. When I click a menu at the top of the screen, the highlight is purple instead of blue. If I load a photo with blue in it in PS CS4, the blues shift to purple. This is with their latest version which is supposed to be SL compatible. Looking around the net, it seems it's not an isolated problem. There's even a YouTube video showing it.

Apparently, XRite and Apple are aware of this. From what I read, it's an issue with the way SL handles color profiles and needs a fix from Apple.

In the meantime, I'm using the calibration tool built into OSX and getting pretty good results. However, I'm not confident enough in them for color critical work.

Keith

Thought I would add I've add every generation of MacBook Pro (yes, I'm the first one in line to upgrade) and never had a problem calibrating with an i1 Pro, so not sure what the issue is here.

Second, I'm never confident using a laptop for color critical work.  Laptops are 6 bit displays (not 8bit) and cannot display full 24bit color.  They exceed the the limit of thousands of colors by using dithering, thus giving the illusion of millions of colors, and most of the time you can do an adequate job with them.  But not color critical work.
Logged

KHatch
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #12 on: December 16, 2009, 05:31:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for your response Wayne. After my post, I was thinking the same thing and should hook the MBP up to an external monitor and see what that produces - just to eliminate/validate that theory.

I never use the laptop for color critical work either. However, sometimes I do some basic culling, editing, etc. on the laptop and export the library to the desktop for finishing, sending to lab, etc. I would like to have it as close as possible just so I know what I'm looking at.

Happy Holidays!

Logged
KHatch
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #13 on: December 20, 2009, 10:18:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Well, not to keep drudging this up to the top but...

I installed Snow Leopard on my MacPro and calibrated the Dell 2407WFP with similar results. I re-calibrated a second time and got a much better profile with decent print results. The blue highlights in the menu are still a bit on the purple side but blues in images appear to be closer.

The drive with 10.5 Leopard has a profile that's spot on and perfect. That eliminates hardware as an issue.

It was strange that EyeMatch 3.6.3, which is supposed to be Snow Leopard compatible, needed Rosetta.

I stand by my assertion that Snow Leopard handles profiles "differently"
Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2925



WWW
« Reply #14 on: December 22, 2009, 12:35:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: KHatch
Well, not to keep drudging this up to the top but...

I installed Snow Leopard on my MacPro and calibrated the Dell 2407WFP with similar results. I re-calibrated a second time and got a much better profile with decent print results. The blue highlights in the menu are still a bit on the purple side but blues in images appear to be closer.

The drive with 10.5 Leopard has a profile that's spot on and perfect. That eliminates hardware as an issue.

It was strange that EyeMatch 3.6.3, which is supposed to be Snow Leopard compatible, needed Rosetta.

I stand by my assertion that Snow Leopard handles profiles "differently"
I suppose it is possible, but I know I'm not seeing anything like that at all.  I bring up a test image to judge a display profile,  looked identical before and after upgrading my OS. I didn't look at it that closely.  Now I didn't make a new profile, it certainly could be that process would have introduced some changes, but that happens anyway.  You can make 2 profiles in a row, and if you look closely you'll find some subtle differences.

I'll probably get flamed for this statement, but personally I wouldn't draw any conclusions using that particular display ... isn't that about a $600 24" display?  I know my buddy has pulled his hair out several times trying to deal with a 24" lower price Dell display and his Macbook Pro.  Last time we calibrated it we both felt it just didn't handle certain colors very well no matter what we did.

as far as Rosetta, i1 match has always used Rosetta.  Snow Leopard is the first version of OS X that doesn't install it by default.  There aren't many things that need it anymore.  
« Last Edit: December 22, 2009, 12:37:15 AM by Wayne Fox » Logged

David Saffir
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 172


WWW
« Reply #15 on: December 27, 2009, 07:26:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Just a thought for you -

Just about every laptop has screen and color issues. The screens are just not as capable as desktop displays, particularly the more recent ones that have a larger color gamut. Additionally, the angle of view on a laptop (the sweet spot) is more restricted - if you move back and forth you'll notice changes.

I use an Eye-One 2 with a MB Pro/Snow Leopard with no issues (amazing, I know) - other than those above. Editing color images on a laptop screen is just a pain.

David Saffir
http://davidsaffir.wordpress.com
Logged

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

Ad
Ad
Ad