- This topic has 2 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
hello all!
I am photographer, 99% of my work is for website so I care mainly about srgb. I have calibrated my ips monitor using displaycal + spyder 5 combo. I got results as attached on picture. Gamut coverage: 99,9% srgb, 84,4% Adobe, 98.6% DCI P3, delta average 0.28 , maximum 1.01 Display cal settings were: Very large testchart for luts 778 patches, large verification testchart, gamma 2.2., 6500 K. How can I tell if calibration was ” successfully” done for my purposes and that i can believe colors that I see? Are my calibration results fine? Sorry I am quite new to calibration and thanks for your help
You can run a verification which will give you an average and maximum delta E value. The lower the better. But if all green in the report then you’re good to go :). The report even shows the various colours of the test chart versus measured.
Click verification tab, select sRGB profile in simulation profile and tick box. (Not sure why this is not ticked when you select profile). Leave everything else and run …
hello all!
I am photographer, 99% of my work is for website so I care mainly about srgb.
Use color managed browsers like Firefox or if you use OSX, Safari
I have calibrated my ips monitor using displaycal + spyder 5 combo. I got results as attached on picture. Gamut coverage: 99,9% srgb, 84,4% Adobe, 98.6% DCI P3, delta average 0.28 , maximum 1.01
Although Spyder5 lack of specific correction for widegamut backlights (be them “graphic arts” widegamut with >96% AdobeRGB and >90% P3 or just “P3” widegamut like yours) , you can use their Widegamut led (actually RGBLED) correction in order to improve results. IDNK if you used it but if visually you see some kind of colro tint in the center instead of D65 “white”, try it again in that way.
Display cal settings were: Very large testchart for luts 778 patches, large verification testchart, gamma 2.2., 6500 K.
There are some issues related with color management engines and rounding errors that MAY benefit from “single curve + matrix ” profiles more than XYZLUT profiles for web design (gradients). If you experience some issues on color managed browsers just remake profile in that way
How can I tell if calibration was ” successfully” done for my purposes and that i can believe colors that I see?
Artv partially answered that
You can run a verification which will give you an average and maximum delta E value. The lower the better. But if all green in the report then you’re good to go :). The report even shows the various colours of the test chart versus measured.
I’ll take a look in a*b* axis (=0) in grey colors, huge oscilatins are no good and lead to color errors in grey visible by nake eye. Those errors could be even more visible under color managed apps. You do not need to simulate sRGB profile to inspect that.
A visual inspection of a smooth 8bit grey gradient black to white in a non color managed enviroment is helpful to detect other grey issues. It looks by profile name that mersa6 choose a “fast” grey calibration. Depending on mersa6’s uncalibrated display beahvior in grey this may be not enough.
Click verification tab, select sRGB profile in simulation profile and tick box. (Not sure why this is not ticked when you select profile). Leave everything else and run …
When you enable that box, other boxes and options show up.
“Use simulation profile as displayprofile ” should be uncheked, otherwhise DisplayCAL will verify your display without GPU calibration (just OSD tweaks and maybe underlying HW calibration) against the profile of your choice. Since mersa6 owns a P3 display this could lead to huge errors in verification.
