- This topic has 2 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hello.
I am using a NEC-PA272w wide gamut monitor. My spectrometer is the ColorMunki Photo.
Windows 7×64 with Dispcal v.3.0.4.3 and Argyll v.1.6.3
My monitors internal settings are:
Brightness: 160cd/m
Gamma: L*
White Point: 6500k
ColorSpace: ‘FULL’ (other options are sRGB and AdobeRGB)
————————————————————————————-
I produce archival photography and i need my monitor to have a large color gamut coverage as well as a linear tone response.
Using Dispcal I have come to a place where I cant get my monitors full Adobe98 gamut coverage while also achieving a good neutral white point or linear tone response.
If i create a Curves + Matrix Profile I can get the full 99.1% gamut coverage advertised by NEC. But my white point and tone response are both fairly bad. I attached Screenshots of the tone curve, the gamut coverage, and verification report below.
If i create an XYZ+Matrix profile I get a near perfect white point. and a almost perfect tone response ( until i get near black). But my gamut coverage drops down to average 93%. I attached the respective screen shots below as well.
How can i get close to the full gamut coverage of 99% for Adobe98 but also keep the correct white point near 6500k and have a near linear tone response?
My calibration process includes setting the white point to specific chromaticity coordinates aligned with D65 at: x: 0.3127 y:0.329 along with custom white and black levels based off of the ‘report on uncalibrated device’ option. My tone curve is L* just like the monitors internal setting.
My profiling process includes editing the testchart to precondition the profile with an ICC profile provided by the Manufacturer. It came with the monitor. As well as adding more neutral patches and multidimensional patches.
My number of patches everages around 500-900. But my best Delta E for my white point was with 1200 or so at 0.01.
I attached the profiles as well so you can load their settings in DispcalGUI but I can type that up if you would like.
I dont know if I have given the right information or if I have given too much.
I appreciate any guidance.
Calibrite ColorChecker Studio on Amazon
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.I don’t think there is anything wrong in your case – no real display can achieve 100% coverage of a synthetic colorspace with a black level of zero, because gamuts are 3D objects and a real-world display has a non-zero black level (unless it’s an OLED or similar).
What I can see from the screenshots though is that a matrix profile is an exceptionally bad fit to your actual display (peak self-check error of 73 dE), which means its 100% gamut coverage percentage has little correlation to the actual display gamut (it’s a best fit matrix, so can’t be very accurate if the display doesn’t behave in a sufficiently additive and linear manner. Also, matrix profiles created by DisplayCAL have scaled tone curves by default to counteract the lack of BPC in some applications, meaning the curves don’t represent the display’s actual black level). I would urgently suggest to stick with a LUT-type profile.
