- This topic has 4 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hello,
I’m a layperson when it comes to colour calibration. I’d like to ask if doing a factory reset on a monitor would bring its colours back to when it was first purchased? (We are using BenQ SW2700PT in our office)
My thinking is that colours from the monitor drift over time(because hardware) and this is beyond a simple factory reset, hence the need for proper colour mangement and frequent calibrations?
Could someone enlighten me please?
Best Regards,
Hi,
I’m a layperson when it comes to colour calibration. I’d like to ask if doing a factory reset on a monitor would bring its colours back to when it was first purchased? (We are using BenQ SW2700PT in our office)
As far as monitor settings go, I’d think so.
My thinking is that colours from the monitor drift over time(because hardware) and this is beyond a simple factory reset, hence the need for proper colour mangement and frequent calibrations?
Color management is not only to counter-act device drift – these devices may not come calibrated from the factory at all (other than expensive graphics monitors specifically for color work). For a primer on color management, see (e.g.) The Color of Toast.
A feature request related to that particular screen and others.
REQUEST:
I think that DisplayCAL should show a warning popup before making or uploading spectral corrections asking users if they are sure that they made such CCSS at a native gamut configuration of their displays.
For example, all spectral corrections present in colorimetercorrections.displaycal.net for QLED like dodeqaa Polyhedra’s monitor SW2700PT were taken at emulated gamut calibrations like sRGB/AdobeRGB (2+2 for this particular example) .
Something like asking users if they are sure that they are using their screens in an OSD with native gamut… or if they wish to upload an emulated gamut spectral power distribution because an unknown reason (I find no reason to do that) ask them to name it accordingly.
Otherwise it will be a chaos, I think that it is a little chaos right now. Some users do not know how to check this when they download such CCSSs or when they are prompted to choose one by DisplayCAL display detection. It seems to be more difficult for some of them to “clear” emulated gamut contributions to a particular channel (based on an educated guess about what to delete)
IDNK if there is possible some kind of “auto-detection” if the “main peaks” of a channel (“shape”+ nanometer where they they are located) seems to be part of another channel spectral power distribution at the same nanometer location. Just a “Hey!, double check if you are in an emulated gamut configuration” before uploading or saving it to a file.
I think that DisplayCAL should show a warning popup before making or uploading spectral corrections asking users if they are sure that they made such CCSS at a native gamut configuration of their displays.
That’s a reasonable idea. Added on my to-do list.
Otherwise it will be a chaos, I think that it is a little chaos right now.
It’s not fully avoidable for user-provided data, not only because of the display setup issue but also because of naming and other user-controlled meta info that cannot be auto-detected. Ultimately, it depends a bit on user’s diligence with which they fill that information.
IDNK if there is possible some kind of “auto-detection” if the “main peaks” of a channel (“shape”+ nanometer where they they are located) seems to be part of another channel spectral power distribution at the same nanometer location
Probably not worth implementing imo. The spectral response of most display primaries is bound to overlap anyway, which would make developing some kind of heuristic to detect problems like non-native gamut hard. I think a good visible warning right on the colorimeter correction creation dialog should at least provide the necessary clarity as to how the display should be setup for those measurements.
