- This topic has 9 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Well, the headline already says it: I want to calibrate my monitors to Adobe RGB – DisplayCal only offers sRGB.
What can I do?-DisplayCAL does not offer sRGB. You are understanding what DisplayCAL gives you i a wrong way. “sRGB” is about TRC (which has the same name) not about colorspace.
-DisplayCAL cannot simulate colorspaces, it can fix white and grey on whetever colorspace selecetd by uder in his monitor HW. Then make a profile
-You can simulate colorpaces with other 3rd party tools lik ethe excellent DWMLUT software, feeding that application with the profiles obteined from DisplayCAL.
-It is useless to calibrate to AdobeRGB. I see no reason doing that. There is no software (AFAIK) that is not color managed and expects content to be AdobeRGB… maybe some prehistoric graphic design software and it that case you will want to upgrade.Well, maybe I misunderstand the idea of a monitor calibration. But to my understanding, the calibration enables me to see colors on my screen as close to the printed output as possible. I’m using Lightroom and struggle with judging wether or not white balance and coloring I set there are actually what I will see later on in print (addition benefit: the colors of both my monitors will be match).
This implies that – as printing usually is done in Adobe RGB and I take my pictures in Adobe RGB – the monitor should show Adobe RGB as well.
And thank you for the hint to DWM LUT – but that solves a problem specific to windows, where the color management is limited to applications specifically using it.
Well, maybe I misunderstand the idea of a monitor calibration. But to my understanding, the calibration enables me to see colors on my screen as close to the printed output as possible.
No, that is color management (ICC) + additional monitor calibration (brightness, grey neutrality to white & choosing your desired white color.. which are nothing related to AdobeRGB)
I’m using Lightroom and struggle with judging wether or not white balance and coloring I set there are actually what I will see later on in print (addition benefit: the colors of both my monitors will be match).
This implies that – as printing usually is done in Adobe RGB and I take my pictures in Adobe RGB – the monitor should show Adobe RGB as well.
No, you need color management, not matching AdobeRGB in monitor. For proper printed copy maching screen you need additionaly
-proper printer color management
-proper softproofing
-proper light source to see your printed copies
-matching in monitor that light source conditions.AdobeRGB has no use here. As asid before you do not need to match AdobeRGB at all.
Well. then – I mean, your list is just showing that you always can make things difficult beyond being reasonably handled.
But then – please enlighten me – why do we have color profiles at all? If it does not matter how a picture looks on my screen as it is by usual means always different from what I see as printed result? What’s better about sRGB (besides that it’s not from Adobe ;))? Why does the vendor of the monitor prove that the monitor has a 99% coverage of AdobeRGB and 100% sRGB?
You seem that jumped in the widegamut world without the proper and required PREVIOUS knowledge of what is color management.
Profiles are needed so you can assign in a bidirectional ways RGB numbers (in a certain colorspace, RGB number values are only valid to that colorspace) to CIE XYZ color coordinates. AdobeRGB is a colorspace FOR CONTENT (a RGB colorspace that can cover CMY in offset printer).
Lightroom needs to know display CURRENT colorspace (ICC profile) so it can reencode certain CIE XYZ coordinates in an image to RGB numbers in monitor colorspace. There is no reason to limit a widegamut response to AdobeRGB. That part is what you seem to do not understand. Display colorspace can be bigger, Lightroom or any other color managed app won’t care.
Visual matching in printed copy vs screen equires to match white & brightness of these two light sources. This is nothing related to AdobeRGB colorspace boundaries. It is just white color and brightness, since application rendering of images uses always a relative whitepoint intent in “image to screen” tranlations.
Printer (ink+ paper type) colorspace (printer-paper ICC) can be smaller or difrent in shape than content colorspace (AdobeRGB in your sample), hence you need to simulate which colors in source cannot be covered by printer. You need “softproofing”.
This is the basic minimum explanation and without understanding it it is pointless to buy widegamuts… etc.
It is true that if you assume white point mismatch between printed copy and screen, fix brightness using your eyes and use softproof some solution may seem to work at some extent “out of the box” without user knowing all the stuff and color transformations going under the hood (an iMac, or a NEC PA/Eizo coloredge) but sooner or later that user is going to make a mistake… so better learn how color management woks in advance.
If this summary looks too complicated for you look for a webinar or a classroom-based course.TL;DR
You do not need to calibrate to AdobeRGB. Just use DisplayCAL to fix white (to your desired value) & grey. Resulting display ICC profile (a set of after calibration measurements describing display colospace) is all Lightroom needs.There is no software (AFAIK) that is not color managed and expects content to be AdobeRGB… maybe some prehistoric graphic design software and it that case you will want to upgrade.
Vincent, I suppose, you don’t print by yourself and don’t make layouts for press and interior/building design. AdobeRGB covers standard offset profiles like Fogra 39 on RGB display. It also has D50 WP, the press lighting standard. It is strictly needed for professional CMYK images correction. Some Pantone palettes exceed AdobeRGB significantly. My Epson 9900 (filed in P9000V scheme) also exceeds AdobeRGB on some papers. Extended gamut is not needed for consumer photos, but it gets much better color for art work, reproduction and is widely used in advertisement, including typical deep cyan on packages.
There is no software (AFAIK) that is not color managed and expects content to be AdobeRGB… maybe some prehistoric graphic design software and it that case you will want to upgrade.
Vincent, I suppose, you don’t print by yourself and don’t make layouts for press and interior/building design. AdobeRGB covers standard offset profiles like Fogra 39 on RGB display. It also has D50 WP, the press lighting standard. It is strictly needed for professional CMYK images correction. Some Pantone palettes exceed AdobeRGB significantly. My Epson 9900 (filed in P9000V scheme) also exceeds AdobeRGB on some papers. Extended gamut is not needed for consumer photos, but it gets much better color for art work, reproduction and is widely used in advertisement, including typical deep cyan on packages.
That is not related at all with what i wrote. I wrote that (AFAIK) THERE IS NO “non color managed software” that expects content to be AdobeRGB so you need your monitor to match exactly AdobeRGB. Hence making a widegamut restrict its own colorspace to be AdobeRGB (instead of using native gamut) … it’s pointless.
Or if you want with an example “there is no MS PAINT that expects content to be always AdobeRGB”
Leave it at native gamut (with your desired white and most common TRC). We are saying the same.
THERE IS NO “non color managed software” that expects content to be AdobeRGB so you need your monitor to match exactly AdobeRGB
Sad to say, there is poor CM implementation or absence of 3D LUT-based profiles support. CorelDRAW has strange color management, by example. ACDSee does not support 3D LUT-based profiles, while it may show RGB miniatures with ICC and RGB/CMYK proof.
THERE IS NO “non color managed software” that expects content to be AdobeRGB so you need your monitor to match exactly AdobeRGB
Sad to say, there is poor CM implementation or absence of 3D LUT-based profiles support. CorelDRAW has strange color management, by example. ACDSee does not support 3D LUT-based profiles, while it may show RGB miniatures with ICC and RGB/CMYK proof.
Again that is not related to my sentence. If CM is not reliable on those apps (I remember now there were issues with windows QuarkExpress), it will be pointless to simulate AdobeRGB in display too.
If you simulate AdobeRGB in display and use unreliable CM engines (that ouput image RGB data to display in 1:1 identity translation) ONLY if that software expects ALL content to be encoded in AdobeRGB colorspace then it will show colors in a proper way. That is my quoted sentence.
Does CorelDraw expect “ALL” files to be encoded in AdobeRGB colorspace? I’d say no.
Does CorelDraw reencode ALL files you open (vector/bitmaps in whatever RGB/CMYK colospace they were encoded) to AdobeRGB colorspace on the fly, by default, and then send those adobeRGB reencoded values 1:1 to GPU? I’d say no.AFAFIK there is no application without color management (1:1 translation from RGB image data on memory to RGB display) that expects all content to be encoded in AdobeRGB so you need your monitor to match exactly AdobeRGB
Therer is no need to simulate AdobeRGB on screen…. maybe if all your images are AdobeRGB or smaller colorspace and you DO NOT want color management engine to do reencoding for red [0-255] scale [image colorspace -> display colorspace] and you want “calibration engine” (HW cal, DWMLUT with dithering) to deal with that conversion. That is the only situation where it may be useful to restict colrspace to AdobeRGB, but you’ll suffer same situation you want to avoid in green [0-255] scale when showing sRGB content. It is more practical to leave native colospace.
