Verification after 3D LUT creation for Resolve

Home Forums Help and Support Verification after 3D LUT creation for Resolve

Viewing 8 posts - 16 through 23 (of 23 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #35863

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    Okay thank you.

    In summary you are saying it’s pointless to make any calibration with the Spyder 5…?

    For whitepoint. Make a numerical match with WhiteLED correction, then if it does not look white use viaual whitepoint editor.

    But what will the i1d3 help me if it is so difficult to figure out how to use DisplayCAL…?

    On a CX271 its easy, CN7 and “No compensation”. In displayCAL verify with GB-LED, RGphosphor (U2413) correction or some user made CCSS

    Your CX271 has no LUT3D, hence you cannot load it into monitor, but youcan load it in Resolve

    I thought that would be clear anyway?

    IDNK what you mean

    TRust that your display has aperfect neutral grey => dont care about VCGT => do ot apply VCGT in LUT3D

    Okay, Color Navigator should have taken care about neutral grey here in the first calibration step.

    Again wrong approach.

    At least it worked. First time I had some kind of success. Whereas als DisplayCAL approaches seem to fail…?

    User misconfiguration on both

    Wrong. Better to use a visual white point with such innacurate device as an Spyder 5.

    If you can show me a video how to do this… with the documentation it is impossible to figure out how this should work.

    1st reply on this message

    Because that preset will only correct white & grey TRC. It’s very likely that you do not want sRGB TRC. It’s user misconfiguration.

    How can the user configure it right if all is so cryptic? “Maybe it’s not what you want”….?

    Do not use those presets, Default D65 gamma 2.2,  matrix 1 curve with black point compensation. On a well behaved IPS, even office grade this will work.

    sRGB TRC definition is in wikipedia for example, unlikely to be what you want but I cannot know.

    That’s also mentioned in the manual with a vague, very general reference to the ambient viewing conditions…? Why all so vague? Can’t you use real world examples, practical explanations and suggestions?

    Because the definition of sRGB TRC, that you did not even google. Hence stick to default preset is easier.

    I thought it was an CX271. Yours have no HW calibration AFAIK, hence no ColorNavigator support. Closest colorimeter correction would be “White LED”.

    I said GUI monitor. One reference monitor CX271, one GUI monitor FS2331.

    This forum is kind of killing any motivation to use this software… sorry to say this but till now it gave me only frustration.

    Thank you.

    -i1displayPro

    -CX271: CN7 with no compensation (RG_phosphor EDR)
    Choose native gamut and then make a LUT3D with DisplayCAL for resolve (same RG_phosphor  CCSS)
    or
    Choose Rec709 gamut & gamma 2.4 and do not use LUT3D in resolve
    (you can verify results in DisplayCAL with RG_phosphor  CCSS, a bundled correction that can be auto imported for i1d3)

    -FS2331, White LED correction
    If you wish to make a LUT3D for GUI for the Foris monitor:
    -if you want to keep system wide grey calibration, do not apply VCGT on resolve LUT3D, but DisplayCAL tray loader or another tool has to loas it into GPU
    or
    -if you only care about resolve, no not install DisplayCAL generated profile for Foris, just use it as input for making the LUT3D and apply VCGT

    That’s pretty easy. Maybe innacuracies of your spyder is making this more difficult. For example:
    -we do not know where your verification fails. Only white? grey balance? primaries? just a small screenshot instead full report
    -Also if you choose “visual white point”, you should not care about “assumed vs measured error” since you are using that option because you do not trust white point coordinates measured by Spyder, hence that test in the report is useless.
    -Also if you use visual white point match you should not use absolute colorimetric lut3d, why? by definition. It will undo your visually matched whitre to go back to numerically matched by innacurate measurement from spyder (or other tool). This has been writen hunderds of times in each thread regarding LUT3D creation.

    i1Display Pro on Amazon  
    Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

    #35871

    saltarob
    Participant
    • Offline

    Thank you. I gave it another try.

    X-Rite is now Calibrite. And the i1Display Pro is now ColorChecker Display Pro, it that right?

    https://calibrite.com/us/product/colorchecker-display-pro-monitor-calibration/?noredirect=en-US

    Is that the colorimeter which you are recommending?

    For whitepoint. Make a numerical match with WhiteLED correction, then if it does not look white use viaual whitepoint editor.

    I am not sure what you mean with “match with WhiteLED correction”. I guess it means to set the chromaticity coordinates to the desired white point. In my case 0.3127 and 0.3290. I opened the visual white point editor with this values and it looked white for me. I hold my white card next to it and couldn’t see any color cast.

    Then I made a new 3DLUT with applied VCGT for Resolve and a new HW calibration with CN7 and “No compensation”.

    Both verifications where quite good. Only the absolute black is always off to much.

    1. Resolve 3DLUT verification:

    https://saltanat-test.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/public/DisplayCAL/Verification/Resolve_Verify_3DLUT%20%E2%80%94%202022-07-01%2013-02.html

    2.  The CN7 Rec.709 verification:

    https://saltanat-test.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/public/DisplayCAL/Verification/Resolve_Verify_CN_Rec709%20%E2%80%94%202022-07-01%2013-26.html

    3. A second CN7 Rec.709 verification to see if the results are consistent:

    https://saltanat-test.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/public/DisplayCAL/Verification/Resolve_VerifyLarge_CN_Rec709%20%E2%80%94%202022-07-01%2014-56.html

    Are that measurement problems near black coming from the Spyder5 or from the screen?

    Further I also verified the sRGB HW calibration from CN7:

    https://saltanat-test.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/public/DisplayCAL/Verification/CX271_Verify_CN_sRGB_2.2%20%E2%80%94%202022-07-01%2014-48.html

    Then I calibrated the FS2331 with Default D65 gamma 2.2, matrix 1 curve with black point compensation and made a verification:

    https://saltanat-test.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/public/DisplayCAL/Verification/FS2331_Default65_2.2%20%E2%80%94%202022-07-01%2016-26.html

    After that I wanted to generate a 3DLUT for the Resolve GUI on top of the previous calibration (Default 65 2.2). I followed the “3D LUT creation workflow for Resolve” instructions but I left the “Tone curve” as measured and applied the VCGT to the 3D LUT. Is this correct? I made a verification. According to the results it seems to be okay:

    https://saltanat-test.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/public/DisplayCAL/Verification/FS2331_Verify_3DLUT_GUI%20%E2%80%94%202022-07-01%2020-20.html

    Did I improve? Did I do it better now or is still everything wrong?

    Thank you.

    #35872

    saltarob
    Participant
    • Offline

    Sorry the last link (3DLUT for the Resolve GUI verification) was wrong. Here is the correct one:

    https://saltanat-test.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/public/DisplayCAL/Verification/FS2331_Verify_3DLUT_GUI%20%E2%80%94%202022-07-01%2020-37.html

    #35873

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    Thank you. I gave it another try.

    X-Rite is now Calibrite. And the i1Display Pro is now ColorChecker Display Pro, it that right?

    https://calibrite.com/us/product/colorchecker-display-pro-monitor-calibration/?noredirect=en-US

    Is that the colorimeter which you are recommending?

    Xrite is still Xrite, but colorimeter business is now Calibrite. Yes, that’s the device.

    For whitepoint. Make a numerical match with WhiteLED correction, then if it does not look white use viaual whitepoint editor.

    I am not sure what you mean with “match with WhiteLED correction”. I guess it means to set the chromaticity coordinates to the desired white point.

    yes

    In my case 0.3127 and 0.3290. I opened the visual white point editor with this values and it looked white for me. I hold my white card next to it and couldn’t see any color cast.

    Then it’s ok.

    Then I made a new 3DLUT with applied VCGT for Resolve and a new HW calibration with CN7 and “No compensation”.

    Hmmm no, “No compensation” is for i1d3 (to use GB-LED EDR). Leaving no compensation on a Spyder IDNK what is does.

    Same applies to all your reports measuring CX271 with no correction, likely to be very innacurate measurements regarding white but ypu’ll need a better device to use as a reference for comparison.s

    Both verifications where quite good. Only the absolute black is always off to much.

    1. Resolve 3DLUT verification:

    https://saltanat-test.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/public/DisplayCAL/Verification/Resolve_Verify_3DLUT%20%E2%80%94%202022-07-01%2013-02.html

    Maybe you can try to fix that tint in black, only if it bothers you. in CN calibration settings there are some greyscale set of preferences, one aims fro neutral grey ramp but it may worse a little the contrast. Yours seems a little in the low side, but it may be caused by SPyder5 innacuracies (not very good in dark readings)

    Also that tint in black could be fake, caused by Spyder innacuracies. So try CN with i1d3 if black tint is still there try CN7 option for a better grayscale.

    2.  The CN7 Rec.709 verification:

    https://saltanat-test.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/public/DisplayCAL/Verification/Resolve_Verify_CN_Rec709%20%E2%80%94%202022-07-01%2013-26.html

    Same as above regarding black.

    Are that measurement problems near black coming from the Spyder5 or from the screen?

    Same as above regarding black. Spyder5 is a poor performer in low light, a bad device design in all its components. Newer Spyder X is closer in design to i1d3 and it could have been a great device (on cheaper side) but datacolor ruined it because it does not store its spectral sensivities in fimrware so it cannot be corrected in a distributed way. With “corrected in a distributed way” I mean by donwloading an spectral power distribution sample (CCSS/EDR) for a family of displays or for an specific model, this removes “inter instrument variation” error, display model can be more generic, but correction is customized for each colorimeter since it i scomputed from display spectral sample (generic) and each individual colorimeter firmware data (custom) so overall correction is custom. I1d3 can do this, hence it is the only option unless you go to thousand dollar range.

    Then I calibrated the FS2331 with Default D65 gamma 2.2, matrix 1 curve with black point compensation and made a verification:

    https://saltanat-test.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/public/DisplayCAL/Verification/FS2331_Default65_2.2%20%E2%80%94%202022-07-01%2016-26.html

    Seems good for color managed apps, a foris gaming display like yours seems able to be characterized by an idealized profile. good.

    BEWARE, this verification is testing if profile matches calibared display. It is not testing if your sRGB-like foris matches sRGB/Rec709 primaries.

     

    • This reply was modified 1 month, 2 weeks ago by Vincent.
    • This reply was modified 1 month, 2 weeks ago by Vincent.
    #35876

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    Sorry the last link (3DLUT for the Resolve GUI verification) was wrong. Here is the correct one:

    https://saltanat-test.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/public/DisplayCAL/Verification/FS2331_Verify_3DLUT_GUI%20%E2%80%94%202022-07-01%2020-37.html

    +

    “BEWARE, this verification is testing if profile matches calibared display. It is not testing if your sRGB-like foris matches sRGB/Rec709 primaries.”
    Thats all color managed apps like Photoshop need and it won’t matter which gamma you choose as long as profile stored actual display behavior.

    Hence your Foris dispaly may need a LUT3D like you did for Resolve or madVR. I’ll use it because with LUT3D your display is behaving like if it was Rec709 with 2.4 gamma. Without it in MS Windows it will be rendered to Foris native gamut with gamma 2.2 (AFAIK). In macOS there is an option to rely on OS color management engine, like if it was Photoshop.

    • This reply was modified 1 month, 2 weeks ago by Vincent.
    #35882

    saltarob
    Participant
    • Offline

    Thank you so much for helping me to get my feet on the ground.

    Hmmm no, “No compensation” is for i1d3 (to use GB-LED EDR). Leaving no compensation on a Spyder IDNK what is does.

    I compared it. Since the results with “no compensation”, especially for the whitepoint, turned out better in the DisplayCAL verification, and the white looked okay in the visual white point editor, I went for it. But maybe that was wrong again? Following the verification results with CN7’s compensation on “color managed”:

    CN7’s Rec.709 calibration with compensation on “color managed”:

    https://saltanat-test.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/public/DisplayCAL/Verification/Resolve_Verify_CN_ColorManaged_Rec709%20%E2%80%94%202022-07-01%2013-11.html

    CN7’s sRGB calibration with compensation on “color managed”:

    https://saltanat-test.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/public/DisplayCAL/Verification/CX271_Verify_CN_ColorManaged_sRGB_2.2%20%E2%80%94%202022-07-01%2014-20.html

    As you said, it may be pointless with the Spyder5 devise but I just try to understand it. Thank you.

    BEWARE, this verification is testing if profile matches calibared display. It is not testing if your sRGB-like foris matches sRGB/Rec709 primaries.

    Yes thank you. I was aware of this. And I tried if I could verify it against an sRGB simulation with an device link but I couldn’t figure out how to do this. Maybe it’s not possible?

    Hence your Foris dispaly may need a LUT3D like you did for Resolve or madVR. I’ll use itbecause with LUT3D your display is behaving like if it was Rec709 with 2.4 gamma. Without it in MS Windows it will be rendered to Foris native gamut with gamma 2.2 (AFAIK).

    I made a 3DLUT for Resolve like it is described in “Creating a 3D LUT for the GUI color viewer“. Was this wrong? As I said in the previous post I just made two modification to be able to use the 3DLUT in Resolve on top of this Default 65 calibration. I left the “Tone curve” on “as measured” and applied the “VCGT” to the LUT. Was this wrong?

    If you want, you can verify the 3D LUT you have just created by going to the “Verification” tab and clicking the “Measurement report” button. Enable the “DeviceLink profile” checkbox.

    I did this (above is from Florian Höch) in the “3DLUT for the Resolve GUI verification”.  Was it wrong?

    My original approach was to calibrate the Foris display to sRGB and Rec709 do avoid the inconsistency between color managed applications and non color managed application. But you said, that’s not what I want and should do…?

    Now if I watch a video in Safari, which should be color managed it looks very different on FS2331 compared to CX271. FS2331 is more saturated and too much red.

    In the Display mode I chose “LCD generic” for the CX271 and “LCD White LED” for the FS2331. Is that okay?

    Thank you.

    #35883

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    Thank you so much for helping me to get my feet on the ground.

    Hmmm no, “No compensation” is for i1d3 (to use GB-LED EDR). Leaving no compensation on a Spyder IDNK what is does.

    I compared it. Since the results with “no compensation”, especially for the whitepoint, turned out better in the DisplayCAL verification, and the white looked okay in the visual white point editor, I went for it. But maybe that was wrong again? Following the verification results with CN7’s compensation on “color managed”:

    CN7’s Rec.709 calibration with compensation on “color managed”:

    https://saltanat-test.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/public/DisplayCAL/Verification/Resolve_Verify_CN_ColorManaged_Rec709%20%E2%80%94%202022-07-01%2013-11.html

    CN7’s sRGB calibration with compensation on “color managed”:

    https://saltanat-test.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/public/DisplayCAL/Verification/CX271_Verify_CN_ColorManaged_sRGB_2.2%20%E2%80%94%202022-07-01%2014-20.html

    As you said, it may be pointless with the Spyder5 devise but I just try to understand it. Thank you.

    There is no point making a comparison CN with “color managed” (generic matrices) and then “no correction “in displaycal, it’s like apples vs oranges.
    Unless you have am accurate device to compare agisnt it… you cannot know which is morer accurate.
    A more “fair”but inaccurate (because device) will be “color managed” in CN and in DisplayCAL choose Spyder5 built-in mode “Widegamut LED” or something like that (1st tab upper right combo… like you did for the Foris choosing “Whiet LED”)

    BEWARE, this verification is testing if profile matches calibared display. It is not testing if your sRGB-like foris matches sRGB/Rec709 primaries.

    Yes thank you. I was aware of this. And I tried if I could verify it against an sRGB simulation with an device link but I couldn’t figure out how to do this. Maybe it’s not possible?

    AFAIK no, you can do it running DisplayCAL in  a virtual machine. Host will load VCGT, guest will run verification with “simulation profile + use simulation prpofile as display profile”.

    It would be a nice feature to add to DIsplayCAL. There is an user porting DisplayCAL to python 3.x. Contact him in his thread and suggert him to add this feature to his TODO LIST once all code is ported & stable.

    Hence your Foris dispaly may need a LUT3D like you did for Resolve or madVR. I’ll use itbecause with LUT3D your display is behaving like if it was Rec709 with 2.4 gamma. Without it in MS Windows it will be rendered to Foris native gamut with gamma 2.2 (AFAIK).

    I made a 3DLUT for Resolve like it is described in “Creating a 3D LUT for the GUI color viewer“. Was this wrong? As I said in the previous post I just made two modification to be able to use the 3DLUT in Resolve on top of this Default 65 calibration. I left the “Tone curve” on “as measured” and applied the “VCGT” to the LUT. Was this wrong?

    It does not matter.
    It is equivalent to:
    -generate a 2.2 gamma calibration on a detailed profile, then make a LUT3D (Rec709 g2.4) and embed VCGT to correct grey (& do not load GPU calibration)
    -generate a profile with no calibration, then make a LUT3D (Rec709 g2.4) (& do not load GPU calibration)
    also there are other equivalent approaches.

    If you want, you can verify the 3D LUT you have just created by going to the “Verification” tab and clicking the “Measurement report” button. Enable the “DeviceLink profile” checkbox.

    I did this (above is from Florian Höch) in the “3DLUT for the Resolve GUI verification”.  Was it wrong?

    My original approach was to calibrate the Foris display to sRGB and Rec709 do avoid the inconsistency between color managed applications and non color managed application. But you said, that’s not what I want and should do…?

    Foris should be sRGB-like in native gamut. DisplayCAL or i1Profiler or other GPU calibration tools cannot calibrate colorspace, only grey gramp.

    You can use its output (an iCC profile) to perful full gamut calibration with a LUT3D. Taht LUT3D will be load by a 3rd party tool like Resolve, MADVR, DWMLUT… not by DIsplayCAL, not by i1Profiler.

    Hence you cannot calibrate your Foris to simulate srGB/Rec709 primaries, you can use them to make an ICC profile whcih can be osed for other things.

    Now if I watch a video in Safari, which should be color managed it looks very different on FS2331 compared to CX271. FS2331 is more saturated and too much red.

    Maybe safari video player is not color managed. JPG & HTML colors should be. Use W3C shoool colorpicker web and test (google it). Also if you are on macOS both display should have assigned their profiles.

    In the Display mode I chose “LCD generic” for the CX271 and “LCD White LED” for the FS2331. Is that okay?

    Thank you.

    No if you trust Spyder readings. Explained above 1st reply in my message

    #35887

    saltarob
    Participant
    • Offline

    Thank you so much for all the explanations. I learned a lot and slowly I am understanding a little bit more. I just ordered the ColorChecker Display Pro. I will continue with my test after the new device arrives.

    Thank you.

Viewing 8 posts - 16 through 23 (of 23 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Log in or Register

Display Calibration and Characterization powered by ArgyllCMS