5K iMac, iMac Pro Correction & MacOS Matrix/LUT Profile

Home Forums General Discussion 5K iMac, iMac Pro Correction & MacOS Matrix/LUT Profile

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #18536

    Long P. Vo
    Participant
    • Offline

    I recently got my 2019 5K iMac and did a bunch of tests, here are some results for display. I’ve also attached the working 5K iMac & iMac Pro correction. You can use bundled “LCD PFS Phosphor WLED IPS, 99% P3 (MacBook Pro Retina 2016)” (MacBookProRetina2016.ccss) from DisPlayCal 3.8 onward as well, I did not notice any visual difference between the two corrections, however verifications show that the 5K iMac & iMac Pro correction is slightly better.

    Regarding MacOS Sierra going forward, I’d recommend sticking with 1xCurve+MTX until Apple decides to fix it. Visually, I notice black is lifted so slightly using 3xCurve+MTX, which I didn’t really like. Relevant discussions about this issue:

    Bug? macOS Sierra Preview/Quick Look issues with rendering colors of images when using any icc profile other than the macOS standard

    No LUT-profiles in Sierra and High Sierra

    Since my probe is retail, I was able to do a profile using i1Profiler. i1Profiler vs DisplayCal: there’s a noticeable green tint using the i1Profiler’s and it’s just a tad warmer with the DisplayCal’s.

    An interesting observation, different panel may varies though, on my machine, half the brightness indicator is dead on 150 cd/m2, one level decrease from half is 120 cd/m2, two level decrease is 90 cd/m2. This just makes photo editing session so much convenient.

    Hope this helps anyone facing choices.

    • This topic was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by Long P. Vo.
    • This topic was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by Long P. Vo.
    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #18548

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

     

    Since my probe is retail, I was able to do a profile using i1Profiler. i1Profiler vs DisplayCal: there’s a noticeable green tint using the i1Profiler’s and it’s just a tad warmer with the DisplayCal’s.

    Since newer Macs use WLED PFS backlight (“limited to P3” flavor) if you want to use i1Profiler the best choice if available will be “Panasonic VVX17P051J00” (WLED PFS for 95% P3 displays). If you choose “WLED” or “RG Phosphor” or none in i1Profiler you may get that “green tint”.

    Take a look at:
    -Measured vs. display profile whitepoint ΔE*00
    -Measured vs. assumed target whitepoint ΔE*00
    in “iMac191-i1Profiler-July-2019-120cdm%C2%B2-D6500-2.2-Measurement-Report.html”.
    i1Profiler saw another white than DisplayCAL with the custom 3nm correction.

    That Panasonic EDR bundled with DisplayCAL  and i1Profiler is almost the same as yours or DisplayCAL default CCSS for newer iMacs but green spectral distribution is just a little bit different…. so if you use that correction in i1Profiler deltaE ~3 between assumed White or profile white should be lower in 0.x-1.x range when you validate with DisplayCAL and the P3 Mac correction (like yours).

    • This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by Vincent.
    #18552

    Long P. Vo
    Participant
    • Offline

     

    Since my probe is retail, I was able to do a profile using i1Profiler. i1Profiler vs DisplayCal: there’s a noticeable green tint using the i1Profiler’s and it’s just a tad warmer with the DisplayCal’s.

    Since newer Macs use WLED PFS backlight (“limited to P3” flavor) if you want to use i1Profiler the best choice if available will be “Panasonic VVX17P051J00” (WLED PFS for 95% P3 displays). If you choose “WLED” or “RG Phosphor” or none in i1Profiler you may get that “green tint”.

    Take a look at:
    -Measured vs. display profile whitepoint ΔE*00
    -Measured vs. assumed target whitepoint ΔE*00
    in “iMac191-i1Profiler-July-2019-120cdm%C2%B2-D6500-2.2-Measurement-Report.html”.
    i1Profiler saw another white than DisplayCAL with the custom 3nm correction.

    That Panasonic EDR bundled with DisplayCAL  and i1Profiler is almost the same as yours or DisplayCAL default CCSS for newer iMacs but green spectral distribution is just a little bit different…. so if you use that correction in i1Profiler deltaE ~3 between assumed White or profile white should be lower in 0.x-1.x range when you validate with DisplayCAL and the P3 Mac correction (like yours).

    I haven’t fiddled with i1Profiler yet. Where can I find the option to choose a different correction? It seems like it’s automatically picked RG correction.

    I like that over i1Profiler I can load up additional PANTONE patches (this is imo the most underrated perk of having a retail i1D3 probe, one can access the PANTONE library for free, and one can load them in Adobe AI, PS and such).

    BUT do they make a difference? I’ve always added the Skin Tone patches when I did the i1Profiler calibration. Is there a way for me to add this set of patches to DisplayCal calibration chart and validation chart? The format is .cxf (PANTONE SkinTone™ Guide.cxf), I’d love to share all the PANTONE sets but I think that’d violate their copyright unfortunately.

    • This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by Long P. Vo.
    • This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by Long P. Vo.
    • This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by Long P. Vo.
    #18558

    Florian Höch
    Administrator
    • Offline

    BUT do they make a difference?

    Generally, not much. A display would have to be fairly nonlinear for localized increased patch density to have a measurable (or even visual) significance.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Log in or Register

Display Calibration and Characterization powered by ArgyllCMS