Dell UP2718Q calibration for AdobeRGB

Home Forums Help and Support Dell UP2718Q calibration for AdobeRGB

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 51 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #22655

    Wire
    Participant
    • Offline

    I’ve read very well-informed engineering literature that reads

    “at a particular level of adaptation [e.g., looking at a page or screen] human vision operates with a contrast ration of 100 to 1”

    This statement is presented as a basic and well-documented fact of vision science. And moreover goes on to contextualize the entire range of trade offs of emissive dynamics of  television as they relate to luminance signaling in these terms.

    Now obviously what vision does is radically affected by the environment, and the above claim was made by someone in no way ignorant of that. The claims seems to partly be about how an industry established very effective working model for television tech that needed solid performance minimums to perform satisfactorily over a wide range of conditions while controlling cost.

    To amplify this point about 100 to 1 consider the analogy of HDTV 709 (sRGB) primaries which very obviously limited and leave color on the table, but are sufficient to produce more than satisfactory response in most people. I doubt you’ve ever heard anyone who casually watching a color TV ever say: this show is not that good because the colors are too limited. And the prevalence and wide enjoyment and regard for black and white image shows starkly that color is not even necessary to engage a viewer in a visual medium, much we somehow create worlds of fiction from black glyphs scattered across white paper.

    I’m sort of joking…

    Obviously there’s a huge new trend in high performance video with astonishing detail, dynamic range and color that makes the device approximate looking through a window. So if you are a technician in the UHD industry I get the pure spec requirement for a display with > 1000:1 CR

    But in a practical sense, who needs greater than 1000:1, and what practical application demands it?

    I feel a bit like Bill Gates saying 640K of RAM ought to about do it for anybody.

    I think my question is what’s happening in media that’s driving this push for super high contrast? Nature shows, vid games, medicine, earth sciences?

    What kind of job has a requirement that is met by a 2000:1 CR but can’t be done with a 500:1 CR

    (As I type this, my iPhone cursor keeps becoming displaced from the actual edit insertion point and starts wandering around the input text-area like a nomad on the Russian steppes. TECHNOLOGY!!)

    /wire

    #22657

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    I’ve read very well-informed engineering literature that reads

    “at a particular level of adaptation [e.g., looking at a page or screen] human vision operates with a contrast ration of 100 to 1”

    […]I’m sort of joking…

    Obviously there’s a huge new trend in high performance video with astonishing detail, dynamic range and color that makes the device approximate looking through a window. So if you are a technician in the UHD industry I get the pure spec requirement for a display with > 1000:1 CR

    Try it, Rec709 FullHD blu ray content, or DVD content… no need to go to UHD HDR and that stuff.

    600:1 is mediocre on every way you look at it because black level will remain at 1/600 from white level. That’s why 600:1 sucks for video work or spare time activities (tv shows on computer, games, all that stuff)

    600:1 may be enough for a display meant to produce photos for printing and testing things with softproof (if other requirements are met). All other uses… a mediocre display.

    But in a practical sense, who needs greater than 1000:1, and what practical application demands it?

    ALL but softproofing images for printing, or office work. That includes working with images or spare tima activities.

    I think my question is what’s happening in media that’s driving this push for super high contrast? Nature shows, vid games, medicine, earth sciences?

    Backlit displays have a constant source of light whilie showing RGB 000. That is the problem and it’s evident for 99% of the people because they SEE it.

    What kind of job has a requirement that is met by a 2000:1 CR but can’t be done with a 500:1 CR

    ALL but softproofing images for printing, or office work

    #22662

    Wire
    Participant
    • Offline

    Ok, yes I observe  agrees with what you observe. When you see black as grey in a scene, you might hunger for more contrast. Past 100:1 IMO we are talking less about a physics of contrast and more about a psychology of contrast.  Reducing black within a given dynamic ramge can really help with enjoyment when the ambient light is a good stop or so lower than display black. But push actual screen contrast past 100:1 and the stops hunting for black. The reason dynamic iris is reviled is because of pumping not because the principle is wrong. It ends up calling attention to the characteristic it’s supposed to conceal! That’s great for marketing.

    But the 100:1 rule was not likely born out of ignorance any more so than sRGB gamut limit. It was a practical engineering tradeoff

    When I go to high quality cinema I can see the black level aa credits roll, but it’s low enough that even in dark theater it doesn’t distract. And with an enormous screen in dark room 50 cd/m2 is bright at peaks. IOW dynamic range is well scaled against perception.

    The Who became noted for a concert that hit 118db at front row, which proved that dynamic range is matter of taste even when your ears are bleeding. Pete Townsend was very public about suffering acute hearing damage from middle age on.

    I’ve never heard of a movie so bright that it scorches eye sockets 🙂 My point is CR doesn’t need to be super high to make a great experience but you want a enough to properly spread the system response into the viewing environment.

    I’d be surprised to learn that a slideable window of about 1000:1 couldn’t handle everything we know conventionally about visual media.

    When the display is no longer a feature within the environment, but becomes the environment itself, maybe different rules apply?  Marshall McLuhan famously observed that the light bulb was just 1 bit of information that carried the whole literary corpus into the reader’s sitting room.

    I’m well aware of black levels in all the gear I watch,  PCs, phone, projectors, TVs and what I’ve found is that while more contrast ain’t bad there’s a point somewhere a little past 1000:1 where it can become a hazard, like web viewed in WCG .

    The insight I am hunting for is what tasks beyond simulation (proofing) demand more

    And when is 1,000,000:1 ever needed except to describe a window wide enough to tune 100:1 into any surround?

    Or ia my thinking totally off base?

    #22670

    Wire
    Participant
    • Offline

    Just for sake of discussion…

    Attached are UP2516D Adobe RGB simulation reports for 2 units:

    Display in Adobe RGB reference mode, display profile Adobe RGB

    /wire

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #22673

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    I think that you did not tested it properly for one of them.

    Let’s assume that 1st one is factory AdobeRGB mode against AdobeRGB, you did validate in the proper way, and it shows poor grey balance.

    Now to the 2nd one.
    -If you calibrated it using DUCCS (or SDK + ArgyllCMS if available), then you validate in the proper way… and it shows again poor gray balance. DUCCS will suffer to correct some grey tint issues due to low number of calibration patches on bad QCs panels. I’ve seen it, although 1.6.6 improved it. A DisplayCAL calibration over that CAL1/CAL2 can improve those results, but in some GPUs will lead to banding.
    -If you calibrated it using DisplayCAL, you validate in the wrong way because it looks like you set “use simulation profile as display profile”, so you cleared DisplayCAL calibration, hence the poor grey scale results (even on a laptop iGPU with banding a proper DisplayCAL calibration should show a better greyscale)
    If you wish to see how closely some factory mode + displaycal white+grey calibration matches some colorspace with no color management I think that you’ll need another tool diferent form DisplayCAL like HCFR.
    If you wish to see how closely some factory mode + displaycal white+grey calibration matches some colorspace within a color managed app, just select a simulation profile but do not check “use it as display profile”.
    AFAIK current DisplayCAL version cannot test if a GPU calibration (like DisplayCAL’s) on some OSD mode matches some colorspace in a non color managed app. You may suggest it as a feature for new versions, but that functuionality will overlap some HCFR features.

    #22677

    Wire
    Participant
    • Offline

    This thread topic is about @charlesss seeking an Adobe RGB alignment for UP2718Q. One way to get that is the out-of-box factory Adobe RGB reference mode.

    Dell includes a certificate on UP models claiming  2 dE conformance in Adobe RGB and sRGB. Cert  attached.

    As the UP2516D is a cousin of the UP2718Q, I think that if I can measure my pair of cousins this gives some data points forDell’s QC for UP models.

    I’m wanting a report on how well both units track Adobe RGB out-of-box. So I tried to do same for both: Display in factory Adobe RGB reference mode, DisplayCal Simulate Adobe RGB / Use Simulation as Display.

    Do I misunderstand this function?

    * * *

    Now, if I’m not misunderstanding, I’m still instrument challenged, because even with an i1pro/UP2516D-referred correction ccmx, this Optix XR is old.

    But my reading of the  reports seem to indicate both units are close to Dell’s cert—in dE2000 terms.

    I notice some skew in primary polarity, esp green.  And a little weirdness out at edge of saturation but very minor to my eye.

    Visually theres no obvious grey problem out of box in factory Adobe RGB. And both agree very well visually side by side.

    My instrument sees Dell’s white as a little cool.

    And visually, the factory white looks a little cool, but within tolerances.

    I have no way of knowing which is truer, display or instrument?

    I like Dell’s white compared to a slightly warmer measured 6500K, it looks more neutral. Not sure what’s going on, but it doesn’t turn as yellow as my vision adapts between ambient and display white. I notice other devices with a 6500 nominal design appear to track a little cool.

    Maybe just compensation for aging eyes?

    * * *

    Last point… Dell’s cert leads you to think that you can have reference mode color and uniformity at same time out of box. But you can’t. They’re mutually exclusive. The report is not a lie, and not even misleading, it just fails by omission of this key detail. It feels sketchy. But it also doesn’t really matter. Every tool has limits. Truely Caveat Emptor.

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.

    i1Basic Pro 2 on Amazon  
    Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

    #22680

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    This thread topic is about @charlesss seeking an Adobe RGB alignment for UP2718Q. One way to get that is the out-of-box factory Adobe RGB reference mode.

    Dell includes a certificate on UP models claiming  2 dE conformance in Adobe RGB and sRGB. Cert  attached.

    As the UP2516D is a cousin of the UP2718Q, I think that if I can measure my pair of cousins this gives some data points forDell’s QC for UP models.

    I’m wanting a report on how well both units track Adobe RGB out-of-box. So I tried to do same for both: Display in factory Adobe RGB reference mode, DisplayCal Simulate Adobe RGB / Use Simulation as Display.

    Do I misunderstand this function?

    Ah! sorry, you have 2 units! My fault.

    I thought that you tested factory calibration mode and then try to test DisplayCAL (or DUCCS calibration) over an AdobeRGB emulation, same monitor (1).

    Yes, you did it properly: Factory OSD mode, simulation profile as display profile.

    It’s also a proof of the extremely “relaxed” claims about “factory calibration”: grey issues. You can even have 1dE to reference in gray scale and grey be NOK upon visual inspection or DisplayCAl validation: greys to each other have a relatvely big separation but ~1dE towarsd reference.
    Displaycal can solve those issues on most monitors.
    Those UPs HW can solve it too (1024 entry LUTs), but DUCCS -if you use it- cannot warrantee that results because it takes a low number of calibration measurements, its SW limitation rather than HW limitation. Some SDK integration with 96 step from Argyll would be awesome if uniformity is “not bad” on a unit.

    But my reading of the  reports seem to indicate both units are close to Dell’s cert—in dE2000 terms.

    Yes, they could be what that cert says… but that cert is useless, its information is useless, it says nothing. If Eizo bundled that kind of cert will be useless too.

    For example that gray scale tracking is a nonsense. CCT is not a way to locate a grey color, you lack of another coordinate to place it!
    6500K CCT could be white or pink or green.
    If all were on tne pink side and teh same amount it would mean that white is shifted to pink: “bad white”, good range.
    Another situation matching that useless cert would be a perfect D65 white, but some greys towards pink (or neutral to white), others towards green: good white, bad range.
    There is a reason for DisplayCAL to calculate it, or to be reported on some reviews site like prad.de. Range is a extremely useful information.

    But IDNK if your work needs quality B&W. Actually it’s one of the most difficult issues with low cost widegamuts. A 2xx euro U2415 with its 6bit+dither panel can render a B&W gradient flawlessly out of the box, but a 1500 euro UHD UP may suffer issues (unless you help it with DisplayCAL and a GPU high bitdepth LUTs + dithering).

    Visually theres no obvious grey problem out of box in factory Adobe RGB. And both agree very well visually side by side.

    DisplayCal sees range issues.

    My instrument sees Dell’s white as a little cool.

    And visually, the factory white looks a little cool, but within tolerances.

    As long as its close to daylight locus (usually we aim for that whites), it’s not a big problem. You’ll see it “white”.

    I have no way of knowing which is truer, display or instrument?

    I like Dell’s white compared to a slightly warmer measured 6500K, it looks more neutral. Not sure what’s going on, but it doesn’t turn as yellow as my vision adapts between ambient and display white. I notice other devices with a 6500 nominal design appear to track a little cool.

    Maybe just compensation for aging eyes?

    If you are interestend, try to find someone with a better device or rent it.

    #22681

    Wire
    Participant
    • Offline

    If this is a repost forgive me, my phone appeared to throw away a whole submission…

    Isn’t it appropriate to assume that that CCT measurements unless otherwise specified precisely track Planckian locus? IOW if no duv is supplied, the offset is zero.

    Literature broadly suggests tolerance of duv +/– 0.003 as good tracking.

    So unless a claim is ignorant or lying, you should not expect a green/purple bias if an unqualified CCT claim is made. Applied to Dell’s claim, the certificate in the box has meaning.

    I very much agree with you that without a duv or dE qualifier, informed reference to CCT is at best confusing. To the uninitiated it’s maddening.

    And there are several ways to refer to white temp!

    Argyll dispcal(1) reports as follows:

    White chromaticity coordinates 0.3085, 0.3279
    White Correlated Color Temperature = 6744K, DE 2K to locus = 6.6
    White Correlated Daylight Temperature = 6745K, DE 2K to locus = 2.4
    White Visual Color Temperature = 6483K, DE 2K to locus = 6.3
    White Visual Daylight Temperature = 6657K, DE 2K to locus = 2.3

    That’s CCT, CDT, VCT, and VDT!

    What do these mean?

    Someone on Colorsync Users list says VDT reflects Graeme Gill’s POV on temperature. But I can’t find any explanation of these terms in the Argyll docs.

    DisplayCal “interactive measurement” window indicates temp in VDT, but this term is not discussed in DisplayCal Documentation, and not included in definitions at end.

    spotread(1) reports seem a bit clearer:

    Result is XYZ: 120.895566 128.288603 142.572909, D50 Lab: 110.043566 -4.131660 -22.699926
       CCT = 6744K (Duv 0.0045)
    Closest Planckian temperature = 6497K (DE2K 6.0)
    Closest Daylight temperature = 6673K (DE2K 1.9)

    If you ask spotread for a dE, it reports as follows:

    Delta E to reference is -6.817829 0.556709 -2.775442 (7.382126, CIE94 6.987660)

    I’m not sure how to read above output… The triplet is L, a, b, and the first value in parens is dE’00 ??

    * * *

    For anyone looking for a primer on these metrics, I like these write-ups

    http://zschuessler.github.io/DeltaE/learn/

    What is Duv? The relationship between pure white light, tint and color accuracy.

    https://www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/asset/document/Energy%20Star%20webinar%20Presentation%20-%20Ohno%202.pdf

    #22682

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    CCT is pointless and not a valid mean to address whitepoint, hence the whole cert from Dell is… nothing.
    But… as you did you can measure with DisplayCAL and you add further info to that CCT value, that dE value distance from blackbody or daylight curve. THEN with that info you can say if you wp is close or not to be white, not CCT alone (or CDT).  6500K CCT (1st c = correlated) han have a pink or green cast and it will be reported with high dE from whatever white loci you choose. Dell report has not that info, hence it means nothing. It was designed to mean nothing and to look fancy on unboxing.

    That’s is the reason cert provided by dell means nothing about quality. Saying nothing means you do not know, it does not mean device is bad, it means you do not know.
    Then you go with DisplayCAL and if your instrument is accurate (or if you assume that it is) you can test it properly. Your DisplayCAL report showed a “white” wp as I explained previously, but pretty bad grey range. Grey is not ok, or your device is not accurate, choose the lesser evil for your peace of mind.

    We can say the same thing about gamma. Luminance vs input on a 6×2? 8x2cm plot means nothing  and it’s useless, as the whole cert. You cannot see visually if that report tracks g2.2… or 2.0. You can’t tell. Do you?
    With a gamma vs input you can see things better, even the “shape” if it’s not a constant value.

    That’s what you need to understand, that cert is nothing, says nothing, means nothing from a QC point, that’s why they ship monitors with it. A bad behaved display would meet that constraints… and a good one too.
    A better way to test it is the way DisplayCAL or other sources do: assume sone daylight white (or blackbody if you check it), check if it’s white (dE vs assumed), check if its cool or warn (CCT/CDT value), check grey tint against reference, check range, check basic gamut boundaries.
    Your units shows a white wp, just a little cooler but that is no problem, gamut emulation will get a pass but bad grey. Do you want to correct it? use DisplayCAL if your GPU causes no banding.

    #22683

    Wire
    Participant
    • Offline

    You don’t have to read between the lines of my previous message to get that CCT absolutely has a meaning of you assume that if left unspecified Duv is within some good tolerance, which may be assumed if not reported.

    Any fact that the omission of the tolerance is misused is a somewhat different matter. I mean, consider the report could be in completely good faith, and when the unit arrives at user it won’t turn on! Do we say the cert just left  just left us “not knowing” too bad, so sad? I guess so if you are purely pedantic about it, but usually we stop talking about color at that point and look for the plug not in the wall 🙂

    The fact that the cert is ambiguous in purest sense of doubt doesn’t render the stat meaningless.

    Given industry conventions, we should assume any unstated Duv for CCT is within some tolerance. Of course it’s a worthy point for discussion! What are those tolerances? I’ve seen claim of +/–0.003, but truly IDK.

    But this detail doesn’t detract from the observation that a CCT measurement is implicitly about the Planckian locus. So if the actual performance fall ways off that line and goes unmentioned in the cert, we would say either the cert is incompetent or lying. I am not comfortable with either of those judgements! And my measurements show that in fact these two units are within a reasonable tolerance. So I question why you are calling this out except to make the finer point, look at the whole story. Yes I agree.

    IOW, Why would a manufacturer who claims to care about color quality provide a CCT figure with a huge unstated green/purple bias? Sure it may be true that it’s a lie by omission, but it’s also reasonable to expect that the claim implies tracking the Plankian locus unless otherwise noted. Therefore the cert has meaning! Until shown otherwise. I can’t show otherwise. Can you?

    OK I’ve said my piece on that point.

    As to what you note about bigger picture, gamma tracking and “you can’t see these details”. I think that point is very well taken about both the need for high-quality calibration, and it’s irrelevance! I’m joking, but not quite. It’s a bit of a paradox.

    Lastly, there were a bunch of other questions in there about color temp and metrics which would appear to be well within your area of expertise and general interest, but rather than commenting on them, you have been blasting a perfectly legitimate measure of performance 🙂

    So what is “Visual Daylight Temperature” in DisplayCal?

    Inquiring minds want to know

    Yours in good will and friendship

    /wire

    #22685

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    The fact that the cert is ambiguous in purest sense of doubt doesn’t render the stat meaningless.

    Yet it’s meaningless and it was made that way because it does not compromise manufacturer.
    The paper cert graph you show us has no QC value because it says nothing (maybe uniformity but in an ambiguous way about UC  OSD incompatibilities). OTOH your DisplayCAL report shows us a lot.
    One means nothing, the other shows useful information. It’s very easy to understand for everybody.

    Same happens with most “certifications” like Technicolor Color Certification Program used by some Dell competitors, they are so relaxed that make no additinal cost (cost=QC) comprimise for manufacturer. They are an useful marketing asset.

    Given industry conventions, we should assume any unstated Duv for CCT is within some tolerance. Of course it’s a worthy point for discussion! What are those tolerances? I’ve seen claim of +/–0.003, but truly IDK.

    You have DisplayCAL report, made by yourself. You have a combo box with Luv, D50 translated or absolute. You’ll see that those constraint means nothing: 6504K CCT/CDT can have a visible green or pink cast across greyscale… and DisplayCAL show us grey range issues in factory calibrated OSD mode.

    This QC issue in your displays is the easiest by far to correct. Usually if uniformity is “good”/”not bad” (asn you say to us that they are visually good) you just need a good GPU that causes no banding, run DisplayCAL on top of a “not so good” HW or factory calibration and things get fixed.

    Same happens for @charlesss, let’s assume aceptable uniformity (and you can validate it too with DisplayCAL):

    1-Set a factory OSD mode or use DUCCS to get a HW native gamut or AdobeRGB calibration
    2-test results with Displaycal
    2a.- Good, done 😀
    2b.- Bad WP or grey (DUCCS has some issues)
    2b1.-you own GPU that causes no banding, DisplayCAL GPU calibration, done 😀
    2b2.-typical old nvidia or iGPU: do a DisplayCAL calibration. Visual inspect banding, choose the lesser evil: GPU cal and a little banding, too much banding use no GPU calibration on top of factory OSD modes or DUCCS CALx modes.

    It’s an easy to do list.

    IOW, Why would a manufacturer who claims to care about color quality provide a CCT figure with a huge unstated green/purple bias? Sure it may be true that it’s a lie by omission, but it’s also reasonable to expect that the claim implies tracking the Plankian locus unless otherwise noted. Therefore the cert has meaning! Until shown otherwise. I can’t show otherwise. Can you?

    Yes, the reports you made and Dell’s useless cert paper (which we may assume that does not “lie”, its data is not forged)

    -If device is accurate, grey scale is bad and its a good example of why CCT/CDT values ***alone*** are meaningless regarding white point and gray scale tracking
    -If device is inaccurate, your report’s white point was OK (white even a bit cool) so it will be off.

    Choose the lesser evil regarding peace of mind about factory cal status of your units.
    If you or somebody make you that CCMX for your colorimeter and some spectrophotometer working at 3nm or better  for one of your UP25 (which looks like some WLED PFS variant with higher floor on red specral distribution, so 3nm or better is recommended)…I would say that DTP94 is OK for measuring white and most greys, so your report will be ok.

    So what is “Visual Daylight Temperature” in DisplayCal?

    Ask ArgyllCMS mailist about “V*T”, it’s a text from ArgyllCMS. IDNK, I look for the first 2 numbers, there is no significative variation between correlated and visual counterparts.

    #22686

    Wire
    Participant
    • Offline

    Here’s what a task-focused user wants to do:

    1. Unbox display
    2. Plug it in
    3. Set menu to Adobe RGB
    4. Get to work

    Question: Does factory setting correspond reasonably to Adobr RGB?

    Well, design is intended to do so! Included QC cert says basics track design.

    Hmm, I want to trust, yet I should verify (I sound like Ronald Reagan!)

    Measurement result:

    • Primaries = Adobe RGB
    • TRC is 2.2
    • White close to 6500
    • Gray ramp neutral and smooth

    Are tolerances due to display or meter?

    Side by side units are a good match. Meter is known to be at limits.

    Data point for others: Devices meet marketing claims, are inexpensive. Pls enjoy!

    Let’s reset the clock to 2005 and see what constituted a studied review of a class-leading display…

    2005: Dell 2405FPW HD

    https://www.pcworld.com/article/120529/article.html

    PRICE: “Dell is shaking things up with this 24-inch beauty that sells for an industry-quaking [low price] $1199”

    COLOR TEST: “sharp text and crisp, colorful images. The unit performed particularly well on our Web page test screen, producing easily legible text and subtle distinctions in shading”

    https://www.cnet.com/reviews/dell-ultrasharp-2405fpw-review/

    COLOR TEST: “The Dell UltraSharp 2405FPW also performed well on the grayscale tests. True black was very dark, white looked pure and untinted, and the display was able to reproduce subtle gradations of very light and very dark gray, something many LCDs cannot do. We saw some color in the midgrays, but where many LCDs produce myriad colors, the UltraSharp 2405FPW picked up only a subtle reddish hue.”

    https://www.digitaltrends.com/monitor-reviews/dell-2405fpw-review/

    COLOR TEST: “We watched parts of The Matrix and Lord of the Rings: Return of the King to test dark scenes and earth tones.”

    LOL!

    Skip ahead to 2020: 25in QHD with WCG + ICC color space modes and reference color QC Cert: $299

    BORING!

    Ok, ok, sure QC cert doesn’t tell whole story

    #22687

    Wire
    Participant
    • Offline

    What did pro-level Eizo look like in 2005?

    Eizo CG210 CG211 LCD display review

    Color settings: Gamma and color temp.

    CR:550

    Chromaticity completely unspecified.

    Reviewer uses extra application  to generate an xy gamut plot with coarsely labeled coordinates showing “larger gamut than laptop”. Looks like sRGB.

    Good looking uniformity and gray ramp!

    “Why doesn’t my screen match my prints?”

    • This reply was modified 2 weeks, 1 day ago by Wire.
    #22689

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline
    • Gray ramp neutral and smooth

    It is not, it’s useless to hide it when we can see your reports. Bad grey range on both reports, range over 2. Even 1.5 is noticeable visually as many DUCCS users suffer (less since DUCCS 1.6.5)

    Thet’s the very reason CCT gray scale tracking is useless. If you are not able to understand it when your own reports says that… well it’s beyond by pedagogical skills. Everyone can see range in your reports.
    -If your device + correction are accurate grey is wrong
    -If your device + correction are not accurate things that were on spot on report will be off, others are unknown.

    Let’s reset the clock to 2005 and see what constituted a studied review of a class-leading display…

    2005: Dell 2405FPW HD

    https://www.pcworld.com/article/120529/article.html

    PRICE: “Dell is shaking things up with this 24-inch beauty that sells for an industry-quaking [low price] $1199”

    COLOR TEST: “sharp text and crisp, colorful images. The unit performed particularly well on our Web page test screen, producing easily legible text and subtle distinctions in shading”

    https://www.cnet.com/reviews/dell-ultrasharp-2405fpw-review/

    COLOR TEST: “The Dell UltraSharp 2405FPW also performed well on the grayscale tests. True black was very dark, white looked pure and untinted, and the display was able to reproduce subtle gradations of very light and very dark gray, something many LCDs cannot do. We saw some color in the midgrays, but where many LCDs produce myriad colors, the UltraSharp 2405FPW picked up only a subtle reddish hue.”

    https://www.digitaltrends.com/monitor-reviews/dell-2405fpw-review/

    COLOR TEST: “We watched parts of The Matrix and Lord of the Rings: Return of the King to test dark scenes and earth tones.”

    LOL!

    No objective report no party. If i wanted poetry I’ll go to Yeats, not to a review.

    Also you are mixing QC in widegamuts with sRGBs (CCFL or LED) which are different. The widegamut uniformity issues are more common with same QC. It’s relatively easy to get a good sRGB like Dell U series… but I wrote that before.

    A good source of objective reports are owners, like you did (thank you), or prad.de (its a german site but google translator works reasonably well): they write CCT or CDT plus dE distance  like displayCAL, grey ramp dC against reference (as displayCAL but DIsplayCAL says more information), range (grey color against grey color in grey ramp, “color tint spread” in greys if you wish to name it in a more pedagogical way). They also test overshoot issues cause by manufacturers trying to get better milisencond response time past beoynd panel capabilities, you cannnot do this with DIsplayCAL, also requieres specialized HW. Other review sites test oversoot iisues too, but AFAIK none test QC like DisplayCAL reports or prad.de

    • This reply was modified 2 weeks, 1 day ago by Vincent.
    #22692

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    What did pro-level Eizo look like in 2005?

    Eizo CG210 CG211 LCD display review

    <iframe title=”“Eizo CG210 CG211 LCD display review” — Northlight Images” class=”wp-embedded-content” sandbox=”allow-scripts” security=”restricted” style=”position: absolute; clip: rect(1px, 1px, 1px, 1px);” src=”https://www.northlight-images.co.uk/eizo-cg210-cg211-lcd-display-review/embed/#?secret=MVnTgTD7UV&#8221; data-secret=”MVnTgTD7UV” marginwidth=”0″ marginheight=”0″ scrolling=”no” width=”474″ height=”267″ frameborder=”0″></iframe>

    Color settings: Gamma and color temp.

    CR:550

    Chromaticity completely unspecified.

    Reviewer uses extra application  to generate an xy gamut plot with coarsely labeled coordinates showing “larger gamut than laptop”. Looks like sRGB.

    Good looking uniformity and gray ramp!

    “Why doesn’t my screen match my prints?”

    An off-topic joke, that guy posts  more photos of display unboxing now, than actual data verifiying display behavior. Truly a sign of the times.

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 51 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Log in or Register

Display Calibration and Characterization powered by ArgyllCMS