- This topic has 20 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hey Алексей,
Here’s the ICC and the measurement report.
Seems like the contrast has shot up, but it also seems the assumed target whitepoint was 6300K, not 6500?
And the deltaE values across the range are just as bad as ever….
Grey range => slowest calibration speed posible.
gamut boundary innacuracies => XYZLUT with >400 patches
When I first got the monitor and tried to do the calibration+profiling. The worst Maximum deltaE value I ever got was like 4.5. Mostly I’d get around 2-something. I just don’t unerstand why it’s consistently around 7 now…
Dynamic contrast enabled or something like that when you reseted to factory defaults.
Grey range => slowest calibration speed posible.
gamut boundary innacuracies => XYZLUT with >400 patches
Hey Vincent,
Do you mean that to achieve the best grey range, I should use the slowest speed? And to achieve better accuracy on the colours, I should use a 3DLUT with more than 400 patches?
The thing is, is I can’t use them for system default in macOS. Which also means for software that doesn’t accept 3DLUTS I need to use the 1xCurve. I may make a 3DLUT separately for softare that uses them.
Dynamic contrast enabled or something like that when you reseted to factory defaults.
It’s a good idea, but my display doesn’t have any dynamic contrast or other features like that — as far as it looks within the OSD. It has a bunch of ‘game’ related features but they’re all switched off.
I’m attached a bunch of ICCs and measuremurment reports from back in March. Do they reveal anything that I might be doing differently now, to back then?
Once again, I’m so grateful for everyone who’s taking the time to help me out.
My fault, I did nt remember that you were using macOS. Regarding grey, speed = calibration patches, 12->24->48->96. If your display has non ABL related grey issues slower modes help.
Profile gamut boundaries are more or less the same but some of them have gamma 2.2, others 2.2 and calibration curves vary with resulting TRC.
Okay, so assuming my display settings are exactly the same now as they were back in March (the RGBs being not exact because I don’t have a definite record), but all other settings the same, the same cable, room, same x-device etc.
and assuming the DisplayCAL settings are the same (if I want gamma 2.2, D6500K and 160cdm, let’s say)…should there be such a big difference in the results I’m getting?
Is it possible I’m still doing something wrong?
Was it all down to finding the lucky set of RGB values that retain good contrast but also allow for good calibration?
Can the display’s accuracy change over time?Can you try on a windows computer to exclude some software related issue? (beware HDMI range mismatch issues).
Do you monitor suffer from severe overshoot/undershoot color transition artifacts? Try lo add delay if this is your issue.
Also as I wrote before IDNK how your display behaves with that RGB gain 0-100 with 50 default, I hate monitors with those controls. Try to do not rise them above 50, do not modify contrast OSD value and just adjust brightness to be “close” to your target … or aim for native white g2.2 and see if all goes OK excluding assumed WP. We do not know native response.
PS: remember to use argyll beta for macos Argyll_V2.2.1_beta_osx10.6_x86_64_bin.
Can you try on a windows computer to exclude some software related issue? (beware HDMI range mismatch issues).
Okay good idea, I will boot into windows and try it over the next few days.
Do you monitor suffer from severe overshoot/undershoot color transition artifacts? Try lo add delay if this is your issue.
It has a setting for this called Response Time. The options are Off, Low, Middle or High. The default is Low. Back in March I would have had it on Low, but over the last week I’ve tried it on Low and Off and neither has seemed to make a difference.
How would I be able to know if it was under or overshootting? Is there a test for that?
Also as I wrote before IDNK how your display behaves with that RGB gain 0-100 with 50 default, I hate monitors with those controls. Try to do not rise them above 50, do not modify contrast OSD value and just adjust brightness to be “close” to your target … or aim for native white g2.2 and see if all goes OK excluding assumed WP. We do not know native response.
So by using the DisplayCAL interactive test, I can see that raising the gains above 50 does not adjust the white at all. Lowering the gains below does adjust the white, so I’ve only been lowering the gains from 50 to achieve the WP target in the past. Currently they’re all at 50 from the last test when I tried to let DisplayCAL do the whitepoint for me. But in the past, to achieve D6500 they generally need to be at least RBG: 38, 45, 35 or around that ratio and lower in value. So moving down by 1 value each time all together to get very close to 0.0 deltaE etc…
I’ve not been changing the the Contrast setting at all, it’s always set to 70, which is the default (0-100 range).
I will do a test setting the WP to native, the level to close to 160 and the tone curve Gamma 2.2 and see what the response is.
PS: remember to use argyll beta for macos Argyll_V2.2.1_beta_osx10.6_x86_64_bin.
That’s interesting, I’m on version 2.1.2 it look like. I’ll install the updated version.
Thanks Vincent!
