- This topic has 11 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hi,
I’m relatively new to profiling, so I appreciate any help you all can give.
I have an LG 34WK95U, a new “Nano IPS” monitor, which is supposedly similar to Quantum Dot, though I don’t know how similar.
I’ve been trying to create a profile for it and have noticed that I’m losing some details in the shadows, though it’s hard to say if they’re really supposed to be there or not.
I’m calibrating with an i1Display Pro. I’m using single curve + matrix on macOS (LUT appears to have the same problem for me) and I’ve tried most combinations of the corrections:
LCD RG Phosphor
Panasonic VVX17P051J00
LCD White LED (What X-rite recommended for this monitor, but that recommendation seems suspect)and:
Black point correction on/off
With Black point correction on, I’m able to discern all squares on http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/black.php. With it off, 5 is the first visible one.
In both situations and seemingly regardless of the correction profile I end up with lost details in shadows. It almost looks like black crush from a VA monitor, but it’s not that.
Other details in case they’re relevant:
- My test is primarily Netflix on Safari as that’s one of my main uses of this computer where I care about reasonable color accuracy.
- Energy saver is off
- Auto dimming is off
I’ve attached a couple of profiles and a measurement report.
Any advice would be appreciated, thank you!
Aside, can I confirm that this is a reasonable way to visually match the white point between two monitors:
- Open the Visual whitepoint editor on both monitors and full screen them.
- Set the monitor I’m matching TO to default (255/255/255)
- Adjust the monitor I’m matching until it visually matches
- Record a reading with i1DisplayPro
- Start profiling w/ interactive display adjustment and the specified Chromacity coordinates
- Adjust the monitor color until as close as possible to matching
- Continue with profiling and from then on use “As measured” (Do I need to redo this at all if I change correction profiles?)
Thanks!
Calibrite Display Pro HL on Amazon
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.FWIW, it looks like the profile taken at 13-02 is the best that I’ve seen so far. The black detail is okay, though I do see what seems like a band in the blacks on http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/gradient.php and general banding which is not really visible with the built-in profile (attached) or a profile created w/ BPC disabled.
Hi,
I have an LG 34WK95U, a new “Nano IPS” monitor, which is supposedly similar to Quantum Dot, though I don’t know how similar.
According to http://palomakiconsulting.com/what-is-lgs-nano-cell-technology/ the spectrum of this panel type doesn’t look very similar to anything else I’ve seen. I would probably not use any of the existing corrections for other types as I suspect they won’t be a good match.
With Black point correction on, I’m able to discern all squares on http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/black.php. With it off, 5 is the first visible one.
Never create a curve(s) + matrix profile without black point compensation (not the same as correction!), and keep in mind macOS itself only supports a specific (single curve + matrix, BPC on) profile type (because of macOS bugs). Applications like Photoshop will use LUT profiles just fine though.
Continue with profiling and from then on use “As measured” (Do I need to redo this at all if I change correction profiles?)
Yes, the correction affects what x, y coordinates are read (same color will produce different readings).
Hi,
Thanks for getting back to me so quickly.
I would probably not use any of the existing corrections for other types as I suspect they won’t be a good match.
Without my own way of creating corrections, is there anything I can do but wait for someone else to create one? What is the impact of having the wrong corrections?
Never create a curve(s) + matrix profile without black point compensation (not the same as correction!), and keep in mind macOS itself only supports a specific (single curve + matrix, BPC on) profile type (because of macOS bugs). Applications like Photoshop will use LUT profiles just fine though.
Okay, thanks. The artifact that I’m seeing now is dark but not black shadows seem to be more saturated and posterized than they should be. For example, the shadowed side of someone’s face in a dark scene may be more red than would be natural, like the person has a sunburn. It’s not as stark as I’ve seen in other threads, but it is noticeable to me. Could that be an impact of using the wrong corrections?
Backlight of Nano IPS displays is likely to use W-LED plus K2SiF6+Mn4 phosphor*, so if you do not have the means to create a correction the natural choice of correction should be “Panasonic VVX17P051J00” (W-LED PFS phsophor for multimedia displays with high DCI-P3 colorspace coverage but not more than 8x% of AdobeRGB).
If you are able to create a correction because you lend or rent an Xrite spectro you should use ArgyllCMS drver “hi res mode” (3nm) because that kind of phosphors have a very narrow spectral power distribution. If you use 10n you’ll miss a lot of info.
*) Optical characteristics and longevity of the line-emitting K2SiF6:Mn4+ phosphor for LED application
Ji Wook Moon, Bong Gul Min, Jin Sung Kim, Myoung Su Jang, Kang Min Ok, Kwan-Young Han, and Jae Soo YooThe artifact that I’m seeing now is dark but not black shadows seem to be more saturated and posterized than they should be.
Always do critical evaluation in a program with “known good and working” color management (e.g. Photoshop, Gimp) under macOS to avoid the latter’s bugs. Make sure that you created the correct profile type (i.e. the macOS default, SINGLE curve + matrix, black point compensation ON).
I’ve got a profile that looks better to me now. The shadows seem a little lighter than they should but it doesn’t suffer from the same posterization.
I have some questions about the measurement report attached. I thought I remember seeing a report that had the gamma targets not in a straight line. This one has them in a straight line though the actuals start low and end high. Is that normal?
Also, is it normal for RGB Gray balance to start to tint to a certain color as it gets darker? It seems like yes as it starts to rely more heavily on the actual color of the backlight.
Does anything else stand out as odd in this measurement report?
Thanks!
I have some questions about the measurement report attached. I thought I remember seeing a report that had the gamma targets not in a straight line. This one has them in a straight line though the actuals start low and end high. Is that normal?
What’s the nominal values (the unfilled circles) is determined by the profile. The filled circles are the measured values.
Also, is it normal for RGB Gray balance to start to tint to a certain color as it gets darker? It seems like yes as it starts to rely more heavily on the actual color of the backlight.
Yes. For maximum contrast, you usually don’t want to correct the blackpoint.
Does anything else stand out as odd in this measurement report?
No.
I’m having trouble selecting the right type of correction forAW342DW which has nano-ips, I have colormunki display. These are the available corrections from the online database http://imgbox.com/Ddloufch
I’m having trouble selecting the right type of correction forAW342DW which has nano-ips, I have colormunki display. These are the available corrections from the online database http://imgbox.com/Ddloufch
One of the “spectral” will do the job. It looks like common WLED PFS phosphor.
I’m having trouble selecting the right type of correction forAW342DW which has nano-ips, I have colormunki display. These are the available corrections from the online database http://imgbox.com/Ddloufch
One of the “spectral” will do the job. It looks like common WLED PFS phosphor.
Thank you, Vincent.
These are the two spectral corrections http://imgbox.com/t9BJcM5f
http://imgbox.com/RbsMzEW5
