- This topic has 29 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 5 days, 7 hours ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hello all,
I will be getting a QD-OLED monitor soon (AORUS FO27Q2) and I’d like to calibrate it but it seems QD-OLED calibration isn’t so simple.
I have a few questions that I can’t find conclusive answers to.1) I have access to a Calibrite Display SL, Display Pro HL and a ColorChecker Studio. Is the CC Studio “good” enough to create a correction for my monitor to use with the SL or Pro HL?
2) I’ve read the Pro HL has bad low light performance. Would it be better to use the SL for SDR calibration?
3) There is a ccmx for the 360Hz version of my monitor (FO27Q3) made with an i1pro2. Would I be better off using that instead of trying to create my own?
4) Is there any point in trying to calibrate the HDR modes if I will only use HDR for games under Windows 11? What would the worklfow look like and can it be done with my equipment and DisplayCal?Thanks in advance for any advice.
Calibrite Display SL on Amazon Calibrite ColorChecker Studio on Amazon
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.- Yes because 3nm-10nm is all you have in that price range.Use argyll high res mode tp create the colorimeter correction.
- Going for an SL means giving up on using HW calibration packages for certain monitors and more to come… so since i1d3 last very long, 10+ years and counting, I would not buy an SL.
- No. CCMX are not portable.
- HDR is not just calibrating grayscale and measure to create a profile for color managed apps
https://hub.displaycal.net/forums/reply/142691/
Calibrite Display Pro HL on Amazon
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.I’m hoping someone else might be able to respond and answer your questions. I think calibrating a QD-OLED should be possible using displaycal, but I haven’t been able to figure it out myself. I got the Plus HL model and have tried with displaycal AND Calibrite Profiler, and while color can get pretty accurate, the grey scale values are super wonky. ANY 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, or 2.something target will wind up extremely washed out. Targeting a gamma of sRGB will yield a decent result, but elevate values approaching black far too high. BT.1886 meanwhile has the opposite effect, crushing blacks. It’s a real shame because I know my monitor (MSI 321URX) has the capability to get extremely accurate. It just hasn’t been possible for me so far
I’m hoping someone else might be able to respond and answer your questions. I think calibrating a QD-OLED should be possible using displaycal, but I haven’t been able to figure it out myself. I got the Plus HL model and have tried with displaycal AND Calibrite Profiler, and while color can get pretty accurate, the grey scale values are super wonky. ANY 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, or 2.something target will wind up extremely washed out.
Prove it (attach measurement report with NO simulation profile at all)
Targeting a gamma of sRGB will yield a decent result, but elevate values approaching black far too high. BT.1886 meanwhile has the opposite effect, crushing blacks.
BT1886 shoudl behave almost 2.4 power law, but measure both.
It’s a real shame because I know my monitor (MSI 321URX) has the capability to get extremely accurate.
Who says that and in which report? Remember that “rtings” post calibration profiles/report are useles, they hold no calibration at all (excluding OSD white point tunning).
I’m hoping someone else might be able to respond and answer your questions. I think calibrating a QD-OLED should be possible using displaycal, but I haven’t been able to figure it out myself. I got the Plus HL model and have tried with displaycal AND Calibrite Profiler, and while color can get pretty accurate, the grey scale values are super wonky. ANY 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, or 2.something target will wind up extremely washed out.
Prove it (attach measurement report with NO simulation profile at all)
Note: without measurement we won’t know what you are talking about.
When I calibrate using my Display Plus HL, and run a calibration report to test the accuracy, delta-e’s are all well under 3, sometimes even 2. It SEEMS pretty good ON PAPER. But, to my EYES, it is OBVIOUS that there is an issue. Let me explain: I have a hardware-calibrated, professional color monitor to compare my OLED screen to. It is a Wacom Cintiq Pro 24, which I calibrated using the Wacom Color Manager software licensed through XRITE. The color came out extremely accurate, and I’ve had zero issues with that display, so I think that VISUALLY, it is a good point of reference. When what I see on the OLED display is OBVIOUSLY different from what I’m seeing on that reference monitor, I have ZERO doubts that there is an issue, even if calibration reports are saying otherwise. When I measure the Cintiq, I get a calibration report with the highest delta-e measuring 1.8.
Here’s what happens with the OLED, compared to the Cintiq. Bear in mind that NO MATTER HOW I CALIBRATE THE OLED in Calibrite, whether targeting 2.2, 2.3, 1.8, 2.4, you name it, the calibration report will consistently come back reporting excellent calibration numbers. However, ALL of those modes look horribly different from my hardware-calibrated Cintiq Pro 24. The fact that dark greys look worse on an OLED compared to an IPS 1000:1 contrast panel is a HUGE red flag. The only gamma target I’ve gotten that is anywhere close to the Cintiq Pro 24’s referenced tonal values is when I set Calibrite Profiler to sRGB. BUT, it’s still too bright in the shadow details, once again making an OLED that SHOULD have a far-superior contrast ratio to my IPS monitor somehow look WORSE.
When I calibrate using my Display Plus HL, and run a calibration report to test the accuracy, delta-e’s are all well under 3, sometimes even 2. It SEEMS pretty good ON PAPER. But, to my EYES, it is OBVIOUS that there is an issue.
Then you did not read report.
Let me explain: I have a hardware-calibrated, professional color monitor to compare my OLED screen to. It is a Wacom Cintiq Pro 24, which I calibrated using the Wacom Color Manager software licensed through XRITE. The color came out extremely accurate, and I’ve had zero issues with that display, so I think that VISUALLY, it is a good point of reference.
It has to be proven, DisplayCAL verification report is handy at this, although on macOS due to its limitations it seems unable to verify 3rd party profiles. WIndows DisplayCAL (python2) can.
When what I see on the OLED display is OBVIOUSLY different from what I’m seeing on that reference monitor, I have ZERO doubts that there is an issue, even if calibration reports are saying otherwise. When I measure the Cintiq, I get a calibration report with the highest delta-e measuring 1.8.
Then you have little knowledge of color management. On color managed apps display gamma ***whatever it is*** must match profile TRC. If that is met ***and you are on a color managed app*** if should play no difference.
A ***report*** shows that (reference vs measured gamma near black). Staring for this point you can figure out where is the problem on your system.Here’s what happens with the OLED, compared to the Cintiq. Bear in mind that NO MATTER HOW I CALIBRATE THE OLED in Calibrite, whether targeting 2.2, 2.3, 1.8, 2.4, you name it, the calibration report will consistently come back reporting excellent calibration numbers.
But you did not read report gamma values….
However, ALL of those modes look horribly different from my hardware-calibrated Cintiq Pro 24. The fact that dark greys look worse on an OLED compared to an IPS 1000:1 contrast panel is a HUGE red flag.
And report gamma plot will show that.
The only gamma target I’ve gotten that is anywhere close to the Cintiq Pro 24’s referenced tonal values is when I set Calibrite Profiler to sRGB. BUT, it’s still too bright in the shadow details, once again making an OLED that SHOULD have a far-superior contrast ratio to my IPS monitor somehow look WORSE.
Measurement report on both displays vs custom profile (for eahc didplay). Use grayscale testchart and attach both, look in gamma vs input and actual measured brightness vs reference. You’ll see the issue.
Also QD-OLED VCGT 1-D calibration curves may shed some light.You need data to see where the errors are. Your visually appraisal explained in text is to vague to know what is happeing.
PS: I forgot to say “HDR off”, then recalibrate & reprofile if you did previosu profile that way (HDR on). Windows has SDR translator for desktop , reencoding the SDR desktop data fro HDR input.
Is what you’re talking about different from the reports I’ve been reading? When I calibrate using Calibrite, for example, I am able to run a “Calibration Report” after I complete the calibration. From there, I’m given a bunch of color patches and Delta-e’s for each patch. Is this greyscale report you’re talking about different in some way? How do I complete this different kind of test for the display? Once I know how, I can complete it and report back
edit: and yes I’m on MacOS unfortunately (although am building a PC currently, so that’ll be done soon!) yes, I’ve been thus far unable to test any profiles made outside of DisplayCal using the DisplayCal software
Is what you’re talking about different from the reports I’ve been reading? When I calibrate using Calibrite, for example, I am able to run a “Calibration Report” after I complete the calibration. From there, I’m given a bunch of color patches and Delta-e’s for each patch. Is this greyscale report you’re talking about different in some way?
dE is difference between profile data and display behavior. On a gamma 1.8 display with a custom profile that stores g1.8 TRC
– verification will be all green
-a color managed video player (that uses profile data in some way) video will look OK
-color managed browser will look ok
-win desktop and non color managed app will look washed out -> all is OK but you may see things washed out.Also a sRGB-like gamma on display near black but g2.2 TRC in profile will show with little error on report but may wash out a little in color manaed apps (*)
A report show these things.
How do I complete this different kind of test for the display? Once I know how, I can complete it and report back
Explained above
edit: and yes I’m on MacOS unfortunately (although am building a PC currently, so that’ll be done soon!) yes, I’ve been thus far unable to test any profiles made outside of DisplayCal using the DisplayCal software
External displays can be validated using a windows laptop.
macOS color management on dektop is extremely simplified and may be the culprit of your issues (*)
And HDR off of course.Hey, it’s been a while since I attempted to calibrate my QD-OLED. I have good news, but to quickly recap my temporary solution for my issues in the past: For a long time, I had to stick with MSI’s sRGB factory-calibrated mode. It was the most accurate option at the time, considering I couldn’t get near-black levels to display correctly on my OLED display via calibration. DisplayCal was a bit too confusing and didn’t seem to have the necessary presets for my monitor + probe combination, so I instead went with the factory’s calibration. Not amazing, but also not terrible either. It also locked me to the sRGB space, even though the monitor can push right up into the P3 Wide space as well. I use a Calibrite HL Plus colorimeter. I had tried it with both Calibrite and DisplayCal in the past, with little success.
Anyway, I have some good news: Calibrite Profiler has been fixed! While I can’t speak to whether or not things have improved in DisplayCal, I can confirm that the Calibrite Profiler software (which you can use for free with one of their colorimeters such as the one I’m using) pushed out a great ICC. My Wacom Cintiq Pro with hardware LUT calibration (used for a visual reference) now matches the MSI 321URX’s image extremely well. I thought I’d throw this on this site somewhere, as I left a lot of comments a long while ago discussing the issues I was having. I want to let future calibrators/professionals/enthusiasts know that, at least in my experience, the issue seems to be fixed.
Its all with the gamma curves being right. An oled vs a IPS without making a oled like a IPS is going to look different to me. Lighting could be the problem. 2 solutions to lighting. Makeing a non 0 black or ambient light adjust in the software. Who knows what without reports. A backlight of .05 for black should be close enough to a IPS and still be blacker than a IPS. Setting your target black is a option in Displaycal. Check your gamma though to be sure gamma matches the TRC in the profile. Vincent was good at explaining this.
Anyway, I have some good news: Calibrite Profiler has been fixed! While I can’t speak to whether or not things have improved in DisplayCal, I can confirm that the Calibrite Profiler software (which you can use for free with one of their colorimeters such as the one I’m using) pushed out a great ICC. My Wacom Cintiq Pro with hardware LUT calibration (used for a visual reference) now matches the MSI 321URX’s image extremely well. I thought I’d throw this on this site somewhere, as I left a lot of comments a long while ago discussing the issues I was having. I want to let future calibrators/professionals/enthusiasts know that, at least in my experience, the issue seems to be fixed.
Calibrite Profiler has less available corrections for your display and any display, also if Calibrite Profiler has them, DisplayCAL has them too un default bundle for i1d3.
Also the few greyscale points measured by Calibrite Profiler… DIaplayCAL and do it too, even better.So there is no objective or practical reason at all to use Calibrite Profiler.
Also JUST BY INSTALLING OR UPDATING, Calibrite Profiler enables ms windows LUT Loader, so calibration is loaded truncated to 8bit and in a un realiable way.
Remember that after updating CalibriteProfiler user must to olde control panel / color managememt /advanced and disable it. Taht will let DisplaYCAL loader work properly and make the better use of your GPU LUT capabilities.I can confirm that the Calibrite Profiler software (which you can use for free with one of their colorimeters such as the one I’m using)
I can use it too, for free, with a i1DisplayPro rev A from 2012. Calibrite wanted me to pay 10euro for the upgrade*… but as Mr. Burns say “I’m happier with the dollar”(:D). Even its security is poor.
(*) older i1Profiler 3.7.1, latest compatible with i1d3 was more competent regarding calibration and at least did not lie to its users regarding which colorimeter correction was applied.Maybe Calibrite Profiler has it’s use for i1Studio printer profiler (unlikely with ArgyllCMS and ChromIQ) or for scanner profilers, but it’s an useless tool for colorimeter display calibration.
I did a report and wanted to work on the blue color. Its a very bad color for the Vizio V 5-555-J01. I did the fix blue by little. 75% is to much blue lumance but 100 is close and the rest. Patch 73 is off. Even with calibration enabled in report it is worse. My red is loseing its tracking and needed 1 point hue adjust for 1 red primary lumance that was 25%. Perhaps that is why. I got more rights and better skin with it on default hue. Gamma is adjust so all RGB are on each other almost and blue done to make gamma and fix red and green to match. red and green are good controls on this screen when in default offsets and gains and contrast.
I need to run a profile again since the CMS changed a little. It still is close since last profile target and gamma was the same. The calibration was different witht the CMS controls since going for full rec709 and not 75% with HCFR.
