- This topic has 15 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Is there a way to verify a monitors existing calibration (hardware calibration via proprietary software) against a standard like Rec709, especially when the monitor is connected via a Decklink Mini Monitor?
I have a BenQ SW271 that has been hardware calibrated using the BenQ Palette Master Elements software. I would like to verify the calibration with both the regular HDMI connection to the system and the Decklink connection through Resolve, so I can test if anything is off.
Thanks for your help!
In an automated way with free software… IDNK.
In manual way using HCFR (set manual DVD patches) or command line with ArgyllCMS. You need to feed sample patches through resolve. There are MP4 Rec709 saturation samples at several % fr RGBCMYW in avsforum. Load them in resolve. Manual measurement with HCFR/argyll of those samples.
I did find the option to do a Report on an uncalibrated display device, which I assume does what I want, at least for the direct connection via HDMI. But I keep getting this error:
dispcal: Warning - Unable to determine effective Video LUT entry bit depth
And the Measuring/reporting stops at the point.
I did find the option to do a Report on an uncalibrated display device, which I assume does what I want, at least for the direct connection via HDMI.
Through decklink? Then validate as with any other display. Measurement report , simulate profile + use simulation profile as display profile. Full auto.
But I keep getting this error:
dispcal: Warning - Unable to determine effective Video LUT entry bit depth
And the Measuring/reporting stops at the point.
No, that option is for other uses. A fast way to check white with no GPU calibration. Also warning is OK.
Thank you, I think I got it working now. Just to clarify, would these be the correct settings for checking against Rec709 (see attached image).
I’m getting pretty bad results and just want to make sure it’s not a settings issue.
I have selected Resolve as the target display, connected via IP and the test pattern appears on my monitor connected via Decklink, so it seems like its working?
Missing configuration from 1st tab:
video card monitor selection
range
measurement device, correction if any…Also use a bigger chart, like some basic video with 53 patches.
For manual measurements in HCFR or ArgyllCMS spotread configuration of measurement device will be needed too.
Check with “i” button that correction was created properly, full native gamut, so there are no “desaturated” primaries that are a combination of RGB primaries (like Rec709 emulation or such).
Then validate. If you are not sure about decklink validation, then connect it to computer as you did to calibrate with Benq PME, then validate. That means, “Did PME calibrated my display in an accurate way when I calibrated it?” because if that fails… it’s pointless to plug it to decklink. Error is placed before.
These are the results with and without Probe correction (no correction first). They are very different with RGB criteria, when I select “ISO 14861:2015 color accuracy” they are pretty similar though. Both tested with direct connection (no decklink) and with “large verification testchart (video)” selected.
Fake CCSS, it’s AdobeRGB simulation.Red is a mix of native red, native green and blue. Search for another one in https://colorimetercorrections.displaycal.net/ avoid the ones with the same issue.
Regarding report choose RGB+gray balance, +show additionat statistics, see how bad it is, take a look on gray range a*b* (+ elavaluate grey balance with calibration) to get a hint of how bad grey calibration is regarding color tints
SW271 CCCS, 1st one, 3nm from a munki seems ok. See by yourself, full native gamut with near P3-red
(Thank you for your time btw.)
So here are the two Corrections side by side, the one you recommended left and the one I used previously on the right. So is the ColorMunki correction better? I’m sorry but I don’t really understand. Do I want the white line to be the same as the rgb lines?
This is all very confusing to me. The result of the BenQ software validation are like the complete opposite of the DisplayCal output…
(Thank you for your time btw.)
So here are the two Corrections side by side, the one you recommended left and the one I used previously on the right. So is the ColorMunki correction better? I’m sorry but I don’t really understand. Do I want the white line to be the same as the rgb lines?
As explained before in your former correction “red” is a simulated red. It’s made of native red, blue and green. That CCSS was measured with factory AdobeRGB mode or PME AdobeRGB calibration. CCSS should be at native gamut, no matter what mode you measure because ALL colors a widegamut can show are a mix of native primaries.
