- This topic has 42 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hi @Vincent !
I follow up on this topic since my last tests within a bran new project with 0 node correction applied.
Image pipeline : MacBook Pro – Thunderbolt 3 – UltraStudio 4K Mini (via Resolve) – HDMI – BenQ PD2700U
Target calibration : Rec.709, Gamma 2.4, 100cd/m2Following the settings attached below, below are listed the steps I have followed :
1. Set the BenQ monitor to Gamma 2.4 in its menu settings;
2. Start the profiling via DisplayCal threw Resolve and adjust the RGB and luminance values via the monitor menu settings;
3. Generate a 3D LUT targeting Rec.709 Gamma 2.4;
4. Import the 3D LUT in Resolve as a viewing monitor lookup table;
5. Verify the calibration via DisplayCal threw Resolve;
6. Check the measurement report generated by DisplayCal.I still find the incorrect results in the reds as you can see in the measurement report attached below…
Thank you again for you support !
That means that there is some weird behavior in the whole chain as a “single object” [UltraStudio 4K Mini – PD2700U HDMI input limited] that cannot be captured with your current resolution of the 3d mesh of XYZLUT profile. There is nothing more to do unless your deck link card+ resolve can take video data (limited) expand to full in a reliable way, send full thorugh decklink and make teh benq work in full. I cannot help you with that last task because IDNK that decklink capabilities.
I’ll say that it is HDMI limited input the culprit, but you’d need further testing with a raspi or a pc, feeding limited input signal data and checking vs full range side to side.
I said that ago: before attempting to validate a LUT3D you must ensure that display matches native gamut profile (LUT3D is a transformation from one profile to another). Otherwise you won’t know if you did someting wrong and you are wasting time.
If lastest profile is verified with same errors it measn that profile does not match display. Also contrast has drop significatively… which points to user error in the configuration of the devices.Hi !
I have found that setting up the “output levels” to Full range in the “Display & instrument window” for profiling gives me better results using Video or Full range in the [monitor + I/O box] pipeline :
Measurement report 1 — 2022-12-05 13/27/11
3D LUT in Resolve as a viewing monitor lookup table
Display vs Rec.709 Gamma 2.4 (simulation)
Video range (monitor + I/O box)Measurement report 2 — 2022-12-04 22/46/38
3D LUT in Resolve as a viewing monitor lookup table
Display vs Rec.709 Gamma 2.4 (simulation)
Full range (monitor + I/O box)Do you find anything positive in those results @Vincent ?
Thank you again for your support !
both show colorspace desaturation vs predicted. Maybe you shoudl as Blackmagoc to assist you in tde IO box configuration since it seems the one that is messing the pipeline
Thank you for your feedback Vincent !
I have asked Blackmagic about this. Hope they will be able to provide support to my case.
BTW, if it can help, here is an access to my workflow, settings and image pipeline :
https://app.milanote.com/1P43C31xxzvjg4?p=8He5MuhLdo8both show colorspace desaturation vs predicted. Maybe you shoudl as Blackmagoc to assist you in tde IO box configuration since it seems the one that is messing the pipeline
Don’t you think the result is close enough according to the ∆E results ?
The colorspace desaturation seem to be quite limited if not imperceptible to the naked eye.Hey Bastien, did you ever figure this out? Do you think you can send me screenshots of your correct DisplayCal settings to calibrate the pd2700u for rec709 gamma 2.4 though resolve? I have the same setup as you but dont know where to start. Thanks!
