- This topic has 5 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
First of all thank you so much for making this AWESOME front end to ArgyllCMS for display calibration. It doesn’t get much better or more accurate than displaycal.
I’m trying to calibrate a dell monitor here. When I drop the brightness down to 80cdm2 my contrast ratio drops pretty hard. I also get less sRGB gamut coverage. At 140cdm2 it calibrates much better and I get more sRGB coverage (96 vs 90). I’m trying to calibrate it so I can match prints from my Pixma Pro 100 better. I’ve tried leaving it brighter and using soft proofing but its still not really enough to judge from and prints can go severely dark if i don’t watch the histogram closely. So it seems my options are to reduce my brightness and get better levels going on at the expense of contrast and gamut or learn to live with this somehow.
I’m hoping someone here has a little experience with this monitors. I could target 100 cdm2 and recalibrate and that might get me closer. From what I read it seems like they start to have issues below 120cdm2. I have an old apple cinema display at work that I use at 80cdm2 and it does ok. Another thing: I’m using a original color munki spectrometer. If I went and bought a CM display how much better would that work for me?
Another thing: the soft proofing in lightroom seems really inaccurate compared to the canon plugin. With the darks showing as incredibly light. At least in the canon plugin I can see where they crush pretty easily.
Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks again,
Zos
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3152201
That’s where i got the idea you should stay at 140. Really confused where to go from here.
I dropped it to 100cdm2 and it looks better. I might go down to 80 but that’s on the dim side for day use in this room. I went from D65 to my preferred D50 for proofing prints and it doesn’t seem as yellow as when i tried it the first time. RGB coverage actually increased 1% but contrast reduced from 1:750 roughly to 1:650 roughly. I’ll take the compromise. I can at least see what my shadows are looking like more vs a print.
The takeaway I get from this is to calibrate to taste and not worry so much about getting the maximum output from a display if you are trying to match prints.
I can’t decide if setting the white point via the RGB adjustment is actually helpful or not in making a better profile. Some people claim its better to leave it untouched and let the profile take care of the differences. To me it seems better to set RGB to neutral white if possible so your profile is making less corrections. That’s what I did.
I’ll hold off on getting a colormunki display for now, but that’s probably my next purchase. The older munki I have is on loan so I definitely need something here.
Edit: I do have one further question. Why does displaycal default to D50 for the photography preset? Seems like mostly everyone is of the opinion that D65 is better for actual use since most of the world views things with a D65 white point.
oooooooh I must add I just ran display cal again and my RGB adjustments keep shifting. It now shows not enough blue. What the hell? Why would that keep moving every time I run it? Colormunki not accurate enough??
Calibrite Display SL on Amazon
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.Ohhhhhhhhh. My bad its because I decided to try running for D65 so the white point changed. Its too early in the morning for this! I haven’t even had coffee yet! LOL 🙂 🙂
Edit: I do have one further question. Why does displaycal default to D50 for the photography preset?
Typical photo (studio) lighting and lamps have a CCT of anywhere around 3000-6500K, and average daylight on a sunny but slightly overcast day is closer to D50 than D65.
Seems like mostly everyone is of the opinion that D65 is better for actual use since most of the world views things with a D65 white point.
There is no “better” or “worse” when it comes to arbitrary display whitepoint choices – but the display whitepoint should match your actual lighting conditions. Controlled lighting is better than uncontrolled.
I tried D65 and feel its too blue. Compared to a test print it feels blue. Even under sunlight an overcast day like today. It bothers me that reds look too cold. Under D50 they look more, well, red. I know my canon paper has a bluer white point than say fine art paper, but D50 still feels more accurate. D50 wins. Its as simple as that. There’s a reason I have preferred it to everything else after all these years. It matches more what comes out on paper in typical viewing conditions. I left my other monitor in D50 and sure enough it looks closer. I’m going to go back and stick with D50 for now. My current living room light is pretty warm too, so it makes more sense. I also seem to get much more accurate color matching on the Canon with perceptual though I can see where it desaturates color when I print out an sRGB test chart. I think the color shifts are small enough that I can just keep using relative when I print as it definitely has slightly more saturation and contrast. I think I will stick to 100cdm2 as a happy medium too. Its not far from what I can predict how something will print in terms of brightness. The internet is so full of disinformation when it comes to profiling. Thanks for your clarification.
