Help regarding gamma

Home Forums Help and Support Help regarding gamma

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #4841

    MattBrzozow
    Participant
    • Offline

    Hello,

    First off, I just want to say – excellent piece of software you developed here.

    I calibrated my LCD monitor with a ColorMunki Display using both the Xrite software. I sent pictures away for printing and they returned very dark compared to how they looked on the monitor. So I ran a few tests I found online to check the quality of the calibration. Everything seemed fine, except my monitor always failed the gamma tests – i.e., it was saying my monitor was not calibrated to a gamma of 2.2.

    That’s when I found this software and decided to give it a try. The calibration seems similar to what I got using the Xrite software. So I ran a report on the calibrated device to check the results (gamma etc.). The report is posted below:

    22:50:58,973 ——————————————————————————–
    22:50:58,973 Report on calibrated display device
    22:50:59,030 ——————————————————————————–
    22:50:59,032 Command line:
    22:50:59,032 dispcal.exe
    22:50:59,035 -v2
    22:50:59,036 -d1
    22:50:59,036 -c1
    22:50:59,038 -yn
    22:50:59,039 “-P0.50036954915,0.500974658869,1.5”
    22:50:59,039 -r
    22:50:59,039
    22:50:59,378 DisplayCAL: Starting interaction with subprocess
    22:50:59,381 Setting up the instrument
    22:51:00,230 Product Name: Colormunki Display
    22:51:00,230 Serial Number: CM-16.A-02.178714.03
    22:51:00,230 Firmware Version: v1.03
    22:51:00,230 Firmware Date: 05Jun12
    22:51:00,505 Place instrument on test window.
    22:51:00,513 DisplayCAL: Waiting for send buffer
    22:51:02,029 DisplayCAL: Sending buffer: ‘ ‘
    22:51:02,036 Hit Esc or Q to give up, any other key to continue:
    22:51:11,365 Patch 3 of 3
    22:51:11,408 Current calibration response:
    22:51:11,413 Black level = 0.4216 cd/m^2
    22:51:11,414 50% level = 19.83 cd/m^2
    22:51:11,414 White level = 93.20 cd/m^2
    22:51:11,414 Aprox. gamma = 2.23
    22:51:11,414 Contrast ratio = 221:1
    22:51:11,415 White chromaticity coordinates 0.2938, 0.3089
    22:51:11,415 White Correlated Color Temperature = 8001K, DE 2K to locus = 4.3
    22:51:11,417 White Correlated Daylight Temperature = 8005K, DE 2K to locus = 0.3
    22:51:11,417 White Visual Color Temperature = 7726K, DE 2K to locus = 4.0
    22:51:11,418 White Visual Daylight Temperature = 8024K, DE 2K to locus = 0.3
    22:51:11,420 The instrument can be removed from the screen.
    22:51:11,584 DisplayCAL: Reached EOF (OK)

    After calibration, the gamma is set to a value of 2.2. So I am curious if you knew why my monitor has failed the various tests I found online and why my printed photos returned darker than expected based on the monitor image.

    Thank you for your help!

    Matt

    Calibrite Display SL on Amazon  
    Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

    #4842

    Florian Höch
    Administrator
    • Offline

    Hi,

    […] So I am curious if you knew why my monitor has failed the various tests I found online […]

    The gamma tests you can find online (such as lagom.nl) usually work off the assumption of gamma 2.2 and 1:1 pixel mapping (no interpolation), and if your monitor is calibrated to 2.2 or the browser you’re using employs color management to display the gamma test image, usually the results will be spot on – but this depends on the display technology as well, e.g. TN panels (which are widely used in laptops and notebooks as well as cheaper desktop monitors) generally have such high viewing angle dependency that only the point you view direct on may look correct. There is not really a solution to this other than using a display with a better, different panel technology that is less viewing angle dependent (i.e. PVA or IPS).

    […] why my printed photos returned darker than expected based on the monitor image.

    If the print provider does not tightly control its own processes and printers and at least provides an accurate enough soft-proofing profile to customers so that they can check the expected output before sending files off to print, there is little chance that you will get a good match to a properly profiled monitor preview. The weakest link in the chain is almost always the print path, and the reason for that is that it is not trivial to control: Laying ink on paper or other substrate is more involved than displaying something on a (comparatively well-behaved) self-luminous device like a monitor.

    #4844

    MattBrzozow
    Participant
    • Offline

    Thank you so much for your quick reply. I appreciate the detail!

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Log in or Register

Display Calibration and Characterization powered by ArgyllCMS