- This topic has 4 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 12 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
A month ago I used DisplayCAL 3.1.3.1 (Linux) to do a calibration on my Lenovo T61 laptop, which is 9 yrs. old.
This time when I did it I used the Report on Uncalibrated Device…
It measured the whitepoint, the blackpoint and the other variables.
I did the color patch calibration which took about 70 mins. to complete.
When it was over and auto-installed (via GNOME 3) the screen in Color Profile Viewer says:
The profile has the following problems:
• The primaries do not add to whiteThis is the first time that I saw this notice. And I checked the calibration & profile I did back in February and it does not show this message.
I kind of understand what it is saying…that the R,G,B does not add up to white.
In the May 2016 calibration & profile, I got the whitepoint to 5000K, whereas in the one from previous, it was 4700 K.
What do I need to do to make it not say this?
This message may actually be bogus – it is neither expected nor required that the “primaries” of a LUT profile add up to white, this requirement only exists for matrix profiles.
It may have something to do with the Profiling tab > Profile Type:
Curves + Matrix
XYZ LUT + Matrix
I usually leave it as it in the default position to Curves + Matix. But this last time I selected XYZ LUT + Matrix.
But if I rememeber also I may have selected other options like putting in the Black Point, which I have never done before.
I do not know why I would choose XYZ LUT + Matrix instead of Curves + Matrix.
What is the diffrence between them?
And you can see the difference in the color temp. 4700 vs 5000. What about that?
I do not know why I would choose XYZ LUT + Matrix instead of Curves + Matrix.
LUT profiles are more accurate, sometimes significantly so.
And you can see the difference in the color temp. 4700 vs 5000. What about that?
Well, what about it? You can choose any whitepoint target you’d like for calibration.
