2019-12-01 at 8:45 #21317
Hello, I am working on an iMac 5k 2019 with a Spyder 5 (Elite) – and while the calibration in the original software produces only extreme color shifts, DisplayCal seems to work much better. In the review, however, it comes to exceeding the norm in RED (and black). For the standard calibration (6500, 2.2, 100), I was able to bring the warning down to ORANGE, but not at the Photo Preset (5000, 2.2 and 80 selected by me). See both test reports.
Are there any tips on how to achieve a better result? Or am I checking wrong? I use Extended Verification Test Form (simulation profile is not selected).
I am using the following settings (see Profiles), for the correction I use the web loaded LCD PFS-Fluorescent WLED (Apple 27 “iMac (early 2019) – however, when choosing this option the mode will automatically jump to refresh (generic) instead of LCD (generic), but this does not seem to matter?
Online videos also mention that Spyder5 and DisplayCal should not be installed at the same time, but on the MAC this is the only way for the Spyder 5 to be recognized by DisplayCal. The package installation file .pkg can not be imported / loaded by DisplayCal (in my case).
I chose a single curve for the default calibration, as this profile should work across Macs. For the photo calibration I tested a single curve (NOT OK in RED), and a 9hour LUT calibration (NOT OK in RED and BLACK)
Screenshot calibration settings for photo.
Screenshot of report (LUT plus matrix)
Measurement protocol for the photo profile (LUT plus matrix) – with problems with the red and black.
Measurement protocol for the standard profile (single curve) – with problems with the red, but in the orange range.
Looking forward to feedback!2019-12-01 at 16:05 #21331
are you using True Tone or Night Shift by any chance? If so, please turn these features off. You might also want to try using no correction with the Spyder5 just to see how the uncorrected results are, and how the correction influences them.2019-12-01 at 22:13 #21341
Thanks a lot for your reply. I had Night Shift and auto-brightness off and True Tone seems to not exist in my setup (iMac 2019 and Mojave).
I tried a calibration procedure without correction file applied and while visually it looks fine yet different from the corrected version (a bit darker), the report looks like this (worse un/fortunately): see attachments
I will also attach a few screenshots to show how messed up it looks when using the original software. Every fifth time it comes out without the pink tint and seems better. It seems my probe has a life of its own.
Thanks for any hints.2019-12-01 at 23:08 #21349
There seems to be considerable display and/or instrument drift. How old is the Spyder5? Is there any sort of automatic brightness adjustment going on? I would probably also uninstall the Spyder software to make sure it is not interfering (I think they have a background program that optionally measures and adjusts for ambient light).2019-12-03 at 13:40 #21390
Thank you. The Sypder is one year old but has only been used since this week.
Auto-brightness of the monitor is turned off – I uninstalled the Spyder software via CleanmyMac and the result looks much similar (every time I calibrate it looks a little different).
For calibration, I also have “interaktive Anzeige” turned off, since my iMac does not have color controls (but I also have tried it with only adjusting brightness and leaving colors unadjusted).
Any other auto-brightness setting I should think off?
My next steps:
– I will test the procedure on my MacBook Pro.
– maybe something is wrong with my probe and I need to contact Datacolor.2019-12-03 at 14:50 #21401
Are you on macOS Catalina? It does not seem to support custom whitepoint for built-in displays on some machines (looks like a macOS bug), so you have to calibrate to native white (“As measured”).2019-12-04 at 9:08 #21416
Thanks Florian. I am still on Mojave.
I tested the Spyder5 on my MacBook Pro 2013, and
- with Spyder5Elite installed it gave me good results in standard and photo and the Datacolor report was OK for both.
- with Spyder5Elite deinstalled and with DisplayCAL installed, it gave me an OK (knapp, da orange) for the standard and a NOT Ok for the Foto (the blacks this time) – but it is the first time somehow that the profiles created by Spyder5Elite and DisplayCAL are almost identical. Which is a good sign.
What does the NOT OK regarding the black mean in that case? Is it tolerable or is it an indicator for something being totally off? (the Datacolor CalTest gives me an OK for the Datacolor produced profile, which looks almost identical, but it is by far not as detailed)
It seems to me, that it could be a specific problem with the Spyder and the Phosphor WLED Screen of the iMac5k?
the Datacolor support mentioned that it can turn out too red and I should manually adjust for that – but if I manually adjust (in relation to my visual likings) it would ridicule the correct
settings/calibrations (a mathematical approach) I am after.
Will try again on the iMac now. Wish I had another probe to test and compare.
Attached images and reports: MacBook Pro White LED Screen
– Standard 6500 2.2 120
– Foto 5000 2.2 802019-12-04 at 12:13 #21423
So I moved back to my iMac 5k 2019 and with first only Spyder5Elite installed I get a standard and a photo profile that passed the Datacolor test afterwards. The standard looks a bit washed out and warmer than the original (which seems to be ok).
Then I deinstalled Spyder5 software and installed DisplayCal.
With the Standard Profile I get an OK in the colors for the first time, but now a NOT OK in the RGB greybalance (see image and profile)
Also, this profile looks a bit different than the standard profile created with Spyder5 elite software, the red tint is not there compared to the Spyder software, it looks closer to the original iMac Display profile, just a bit brighter.
So I have a Datacolor profile that is a bit reddish but passed the Datacolor test. And I have a DisplayCal profile that is not passing the test in the RGB greybalance area, but seems okay otherwise.
I used the 3nm correction file from the web this time, not the newer 10nm one from the same database, I read somewhere it makes a difference with those displays.
I photographed the screen with a set WB of 6000 – iMac Display profile, standard profile from Datacolor, standard profile from DisplayCal.
According to the measurement report from DisplayCal, what could be done about the RGB greybalance? I will try “as measured” instead of setting my own 120 and also try some other correction profile settings.2019-12-04 at 14:27 #21432
I also managed to test the Photo setting’s – the colors seem to be OK now, but I get a NOT OK for RGB greybalance.
It seems that the problem with the REDS was solved by only having one SOFTWARE installed at a time. Good to make process.
Now I have to see how I can solve RGB greybalance (same as with the standard profile) and decide which profile I trust.
Attached: Report and image for DisplayCal photo calibration
plus: I photographed the screen with a set WB of 6000 (on the moment phone app)
– iMac Display profile,
– photo profile from Datacolor D50 2.2 85
– photo profile from DisplayCal D50 2.2 85
- This reply was modified 1 week, 1 day ago by MichPoe.