- This topic has 7 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hi,
What colorimeter should I buy?
I’m a bit overwhelmed by the available choices. What would you suggest to buy? It is important to me that I can use it with open source software, so the less hassle it causes with DisplayCAL, the better.
Color management is completely new to me. Actually, I also have to buy a new monitor (should be 24″), and I want to establish a color managed workflow for photography. So suggestions for monitors are welcome as well.
For Monitor and colorimeter together, I’d like to stay below 1000€.
For warranty, I’d rather not buy second hand.OS: Linux
Raw converter: Darktable
Use case: DSLR still photographyThank you very much!
StefanOn a budget Colormunki display is a solid choice. Do you intend to do prints of your photos?
Calibrite Display SL on Amazon
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.Do you intend to do prints of your photos?
Yes, I want to have prints look more like what I see on the screen (or vice versa). Of course, the prints won’t emit light 😉
Yesterday I came across [1]. Since I might get a wide-gamut display: What would be a good spectrometer? Or is that just total overkill?
The least expensive option I’ve found is “ColorMunki Photo” at 375€. Not actually cheap but within reach.
Unless you want to make your own prints your money is better spent on Colormunki display and the monitor. You want to look at wide-gamut IPS displays. I’d start here http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/monitor_panel_parts.htm after you find a size and resolution you like (with <90% Adobe RGB coverage) go to panel search and look for local deals on models using that panel part.
Hmmm, after more reading about the technology being used: I’m really getting to like the idea of a spectrophotometer. Especially since I’d like to also calibrate/profile my old monitor and laptop (both CCFL backlight), and I want to be flexible with future display technologies.
If I understand correctly, then I can do all the calibration and profoling with a spectrophotometer alone, i.e., there would be no need to get a colorimeter, right?
What are the downsides of buying a “ColorMunki Photo” instead of a “ColorMunki Display”?
- Price
- Measurement takes longer on on low intensities. Is this true? Is this a problem (I don’t mind if it takes a few hours?)
- How does spectrometer self-calibration work?
Anything else?
Thanks again!
StefanDo you intend to do prints of your photos?
Yes, I want to have prints look more like what I see on the screen (or vice versa).
In that case, a spectrometer is pretty much a requirement, because you can’t use a colorimeter for reflective measurements. But the type of printer also plays a role, e.g. inkjet is more easy to profile (doesn’t drift as much) as color laser, for example.
Measurement takes longer on on low intensities. Is this true? Is this a problem (I don’t mind if it takes a few hours?)
It is true that affordable spectrometers (which includes both the ColorMunki aas well as the i1 Pro/Pro 2) are relatively slow and less precise on lower intensities in comparison to a reasonably fast and sensitive device like a ColorMunki Display (even moreso compared to an i1 Display Pro). If this is a problem or not depends a bit on the display technology. Spectrometers usually can’t read as low as a good colorimeter, and this may impact overall precision. I wouldn’t recommend a spectrometer if the display’s contrast ratio is over (roughly) 1000:1. Also, you may have to take the instrument off the screen after a certain amount of time to refresh the self-calibration, which can be a bit of a hassle (you’ll get a prompt asking you to do it).
How does spectrometer self-calibration work?
Usually by putting the instrument on a reference tile (often made out of ceramic) and measuring it. In case of the ColorMunki Photo/Design, the instrument has a built-in reference tile, and you rotate the instrument’s dial to “self-calibration” position to do this measurement.
Hi, and thanks for this extensive answer.
Do you intend to do prints of your photos?
Yes, I want to have prints look more like what I see on the screen (or vice versa).
In that case, a spectrometer is pretty much a requirement,
Oh, I’ve caused a misunderstanding with above statement: I intend to have a select few of my photos printed by a proffesional shop. I do not intend to do this myself, nor to even buy a printer. So I’d be using the device solely for calibrating monitors, not printers.
Spectrometers usually can’t read as low as a good colorimeter, and this may impact overall precision. I wouldn’t recommend a spectrometer if the display’s contrast ratio is over (roughly) 1000:1.
So how can I make a decision now? There seems to be a precision issue with
- high-contrast display plus spectrometer on the one hand, and
- wide-gamut display plus colorimeter on the other [1].
I’m confused, and I certainly don’t want to buy both.
Maybe it helps to set this in context: I’m a somewhat enthusiastic hobbyist photographer, image quality is why I bought a DSLR and two primes, but I’m not a professional. It’s just that when post-processing a photo, I’d like to know what I am doing. When a print is delivered to me, and it doesen’t look like expected, then I want to know whether I messed up, or the print shop. When I share photos with friends, and they look crappy on their screen, then I want to be confident that it’s their setup to blame, not mine.
Also, you may have to take the instrument off the screen after a certain amount of time to refresh the self-calibration, which can be a bit of a hassle
The way you say this, this does not really sound like a big pain in the back.
—Stefan
Oh, I’ve caused a misunderstanding with above statement: I intend to have a select few of my photos printed by a proffesional shop.
It can be hard or even impossible to match monitor & print if the printing process isn’t tightly controlled by the service provider (unless you talk about contract proofs where this is typically the case). Ask them if they provide print profiles for the type of printer and paper you intend to have prints made on, and ask them about typical deltaE variance of their printing results (you can probably consider yourself lucky if they even know what the latter means).
wide-gamut display plus colorimeter on the other [1].
I consider this to be less of a problem because:
- Devices like the ColorMunki Display come with (generic) spectral corrections that usually lead to acceptable results, and
- The main challenge in a good screen-to-print match comes from having an accurately profiled printer and stable printing process as well as matching the paper white simulated on screen (using softproofing) closely to the appearance of unprinted paper under your viewing illuminant. The former (printer) is largely outside your control if you use a service provider, but the latter can usually be achieved relatively easily with a bit of patience and careful setup.
