- This topic has 53 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 3 months, 4 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Ultrastudio 3g device is using Thunderbolt protocol which my old PC unfortunately doesn’t have, but yeah I dont need it to create a LUT = can it be done properly on PC without ultrastudio in order to use it later with macbook with ultrastudio 3g device hooked in ? 🙂 Im attaching a report with gamma set to custom 2.4 everywhere and screenshot oh ow i validate profile.. et’s check my Sony Bravia tv where I’m able to set levels to full
Ultrastudio 3g device is using Thunderbolt protocol which my old PC unfortunately doesn’t have, but yeah I dont need it to create a LUT = can it be done properly on PC without ultrastudio in order to use it later with macbook with ultrastudio 3g device hooked in ? 🙂 Im attaching a report with gamma set to custom 2.4 everywhere and screenshot oh ow i validate profile.. et’s check my Sony Bravia tv where I’m able to set levels to full
Did you set the Gamma in the Calibration tab too? It is the second tab, it shouldn’t be set to As measured. This measurement report also isn’t that great, but the Gamma is off, which makes me think that it is not set in the Calibration tab. Also make sure that “Apply calibration (vcgt)” is checked in the 3D LUT tab.
Also when you are calibrating another screen make sure to not use the Colorimeter Correction for your monitor, but another one depending on the screen (mostly White LED).
I calibrated sony bravia 95xh with me setup with full levels trought all devices, results are same with poor gamma 🙁 I guess its sonething from macbook with levels but i have no way of changing it since im using clean rgb signal trough 3g ultrastudio.
It’s so strange, but I think it’s not because of the Macbook, because like you said you are passing a clean signal without the Macbook messing it. If your Macbook has the supported Thunderbolt 3 port for the Decklink I think it should be fine. The levels are controlled from DaVinci Resolve, but also it may be worth looking in the Desktop Video software and driver for the Decklink. Also are you using a good HDMI cable?
It would be really helpful if you have someone more professional near you to try and help you.
If anything doesn’t work out, I think you can use this calibration https://hub-assets.displaycal.net/wp-content/uploads/users/jerry121/2026/01/18/Measurement-Report-3.9.17-Resolve-2026-01-18-19-43.html you attached as it was the best you got, and I think it’s passable for non critical work.
You can also try to contact Blackmagic Design see if they can help somehow. As for the RGBCMY, I found this thing but I’m not sure if that’s the correct one and I don’t quite know what it is: https://www.avsforum.com/threads/variable-i-e-per-levels-cube-and-rgbcmy-patch-generator-sofs9-i-e-oledpatchsortsofs9.3315832/.
I changed hdmi cable for hdmi 2.0 standard with no luck unfortunately. Its strange as Ive tested sony bravia xh95 which is known for its color accuracy and results from displaycal are still poor like from my dell 27qs. Could it be a bug somewhere ans shuld i use this verification
The problem is i ave no clue how proper calibrated monitor should looks like, for me after lut is being applied the image just looks more slightly washed out but maybe this is how it should be however on sony bravia xh95 with all the enhancments settings disabled Im observing same behaviuor.
I even calibrated davinci resolve with just color viewer without blackmagic ultrastudio hooked it. Observations are same resulting in poor gamma, similiar as with device hooked in.
Thank you all for helping with my issues, its a bit shame we cant sort it out for now.
I changed hdmi cable for hdmi 2.0 standard with no luck unfortunately. Its strange as Ive tested sony bravia xh95 which is known for its color accuracy and results from displaycal are still poor like from my dell 27qs. Could it be a bug somewhere ans shuld i use this verification
Yes, I think you can use the calibration from that verification as it’s the best one that you had. I think it is using Gamma 2.2 instead of 2.4, but other than that it is pretty good! And also if you do Video for YouTube or Web, that also uses Gamma 2.2 instead of the standard 2.4 for more critical work.
The problem is i ave no clue how proper calibrated monitor should looks like, for me after lut is being applied the image just looks more slightly washed out but maybe this is how it should be however on sony bravia xh95 with all the enhancments settings disabled Im observing same behaviuor.
Yes, I think that your Dell Monitor is oversaturated by default as per Rtings. If you want to be sure how a calibrated monitor looks, you can calibrate your Dell Monitor directly from DisplayCAL without Resolve, or if you can’t do that from MacOS, you can do that from your Windows Laptop. You can use that as a reference of how the monitor will properly look, make sure to verify it also. You don’t need to create a LUT for that, just an ICC Profile, and keep the Gamma settings to 2.4 like you did, because that’s the Gamma for Video. For desktop it is 2.2 Gamma, but since you do Video, compare it with Gamma 2.4.
I even calibrated davinci resolve with just color viewer without blackmagic ultrastudio hooked it. Observations are same resulting in poor gamma, similiar as with device hooked in.
That tells us something really important, that the UltraStudio isn’t the culprit, and also that MacOS doesn’t alter the signal that much even if connected directly without the UltraStudio (if the verification results are really similar).
Thank you all for helping with my issues, its a bit shame we cant sort it out for now.
No problem, but did you also try this version of DisplayCAL: https://github.com/eoyilmaz/displaycal-py3/releases ?
I think the remaining things that may cause the problem are:
- DisplayCAL not creating the LUT correctly;
- DaVinci Resolve not loading the LUT correctly;
- DisplayCAL verification (or DaVinci not displaying it correctly?) not working correctly even if LUT is correct.
So we narrowed down the things that may cause the problem. 🙂
Proceeded with calibration of dell monitor with windows laptop but not with LUT option, just screen = report showing great verification results. Image became more contrasty than before calibration, when I calibrate for a LUT there is an opposite effect with washed out image. No matter what I do I cant get good results with a LUT option.
Great news! 😃 That behaviour is correct, because Gamma 2.4 looks more contrasty than Gamma 2.2.
So there is something wrong with the creation or loading of the LUT then. Did you try to manually create a LUT from this good calibration, then copy it and try it in Resolve?
Look what I found!
https://github.com/eoyilmaz/displaycal-py3/issues/490
https://github.com/eoyilmaz/displaycal-py3/issues/465
So basically don’t select “Create 3D LUT after profiling” on MacOS, profile and calibrate your Display the same way you did with the same settings, and then go back to the 3D LUT tab, make sure all settings are set correctly (the Gamma, apply vcgt, and stuff) and click Create 3D LUT. The result should be awesome! 😁
Yes, many thanks to @Sergij for taking time to look a solution. The measurement report looks nice now and Im very happy. Just level 0 of Correlated Color Temperature for some reasons looks way off = can it be ignored safely 🙂 ?
Yes, many thanks to @Sergij for taking time to look a solution. The measurement report looks nice now and Im very happy. Just level 0 of Correlated Color Temperature for some reasons looks way off = can it be ignored safely 🙂 ?
I’m so happy that it finally worked out for you! 😊
Yes you can safely ignore that level 0, because that’s the temperature of the black color which can’t be corrected as far as I know. @Vincent can maybe verify if it’s all right. 🙂
If anything looks weird to you, you can use the colorimeter correction for your display, and make a calibration with speed “Medium”, and 1553 patches with “Auto-optimized” testchart, but I think it is OK!
Congratulations!!! 👏😃
Dont want to dig rabit hole deeper, but after using spectral correction dedicated to my monitor Ive got different (better?)results(Dell, DELL S2721QS by 4KM (i1 Pro 2)). Contrast ratio changed from around 1300 to 1200, which calibration should i trust more ?Dell stating contrast ratio for this monitor is 1300 but google says if measured its more 1200. How do you guys choose spectral corrections ? Do You try them all and keep better obtained result ? Or do we never actually know that for sure, as i imagine results are not much different or ar they ?
The latest results are better to me.
Explanation:
You can use a community uploaded spectral correction for non-wide gamut monitors (less complex technologies, because they don’t require a spectrometer with a very high resolution, which are really expensive so community corrections with those are rarer). If your monitor has a wide gamut, you need to use some of the built-in (in DisplayCAL or other software) more precise corrections made with higher-end spectrometers. Make sure if you use a community made correction it is CCSS (CCMX is if you measure exactly your own monitor with a spectrometer) and at least 3.3nm.
If you don’t know (or aren’t sure) what technology your display uses, compare a user-uploaded spectral correction, to one of the built-in spectral corrections in DisplayCAL, if it matches the community correction just with a higher resolution, then use the built-in correction – you can to that by clicking on the “i” icon next to the selected correction, then switch to the other correction and also click the “i” button, so you can compare them. I know this tip from @Vincent, he mentioned it somewhere in the forum.
I compared the spectral correction from your monitor (the community one by someone named 4KM), and it is quite unique. It looks like a mix between LCD White LED family (AC, LG, Samsung), and LCD PFS Phosphor WLED IPS, 94% P3 (Panasonic…). So I think it’s best for you to use the user-generated correction for your monitor. You can compare it with another sRGB display and it should be similar, the spectral corrections mostly define the white-point (the white color), and if it looks correct to your eyes (neutral) than it is fine.
I think you should use the user-uploaded spectral correction like you did, and I think you’re good to go!
