Calibrating

[clanthar]

Seriously, is a calibrated monitor REALLY REALLY needed? Once again, I have a new mac.

Nothing is really really needed -- don't worry, be happy.

Nothing comes already calibrated including MACs.

There are two concerns involved with preparing your display for photo processing. 1. calibration and 2. profiling.

MACs have always come with software for manual calibration. Go to System Preferences -- Displays -- Color -- Calibrate. The problem with this method is that it requires you to pass judgment based on what you see. How well do you see? Hardware calibrators remove that "human" error element. You can learn to do a pretty good job manually calibrating your display. (Win 7 now has the same manual calibration software).

You will have to decide (manual or not) where to set the gamma value. What you're setting is the contrast response of your display. The historical value of 1.8 comes from the press industry that knew what they were doing long before companies like Apple, Microsoft, HP, etc. got into the business and screwed it up. Apple to their credit noticed that the press folks were already doing it right and were smart enough to ask, "yo guys, where should we set this?" In this case the goal is to make the display look as much like the final print as possible. All the emphasis and the only emphasis and the only concern in this case is the final print -- anything happening on the computer is only a process that exists to reach the best print. Along comes the Internet and images on webpages, etc. and hardware makers decided that 2.2 was the best contrast value for computer displays looking at photos online. Pick one.

Calibrating your monitor is half the process. The next step is to profile it. This can only be done with a hardware device. AND this is a useless process unless you use editing software that will use the profile (Photoshop, Lightroom, etc.). A display profiler examines the performance of your specific display and compares it with established standards. A profile is then created that describes any discrepancies in your specific display and allows software like Photoshop to attempt to compensate for those discrepancies.

The kind of hardware mentioned in this thread does both: calibrate and profile.

Joe

 

[clanthar]

And even then, some monitors can't be truly calibrated. A TN panel is nearly impossible to get calibrated, from what I understand, vs. an IPS panel.

Exactly right: Any calibration attempt is limited by the physical properties of the hardware -- you can't sharpen a knife made from wood. Calibrating a typical laptop TN display is like trying to sharpen wood.

A profile is also only as good as the hardware that you profile. The goal of a profile is to allow Photoshop to compensate for slight discrepancies that may exist in that specific display. Photoshop/software can't compensate if the hardware sucks to begin with.

Joe

 

[Ken Rockwell Fan]

Bull ****.

Run a hardware calibrating device over an OS X install that you've done by eyeing it with the OS X calibration. There will be a difference.

I run a Spyder 3 Pro which calibrates the monitor and then adjusts the profile according to ambient lighting in the room.

And even then, some monitors can't be truly calibrated. A TN panel is nearly impossible to get calibrated, from what I understand, vs. an IPS panel.

Nobody said there wouldn't be a difference. Eyeballing the settings works just fine for someone who doesn't want to or can't afford to spend the money for the extra hardware. Apple wouldn't include the software for all these years if it was bogus. Again if your doing professional work or just anal, by all means invest in a quality colorimeter and pixel peep till your heart is content.

 

[KmH]

What?? It cost's money to calibrate??? :thumbdown:
I have a Mac...do they come calibrated?

Yes, it costs money to buy the device used to calibrate your monitor.

Calibration is not a one time thing. It needs to be done on a regular basis, at least monthly.

There are 2 kinds of calibration devices:

1. Colorimeters
2. Spectrophotometers (more expensive than colorimeters)

Colorimeters can only profile displays. Spectrophotometers can profile displays, printers and scanners.

If you have an outside lab do your prints, a colorimeter will suffice. If you do your own printing you need a spectrophotometer.

The X-RITE ColorMunki ann mentioned is a spectrophotometer.

I don't do my own printing, so I use the X-RITE i1 Display 2 colorimeter.

Someone else mentioned display types TN (Twisted Nematic) and IPS (In-Plane Switching).

TN displays cost less than IPS displays. TN displays have a narrower range of viewing angles that don't distort color, than IPS displays do.

Consequently IPS displays are more often used for critical image editing use.

 

[Village Idiot]

Bull ****.

Run a hardware calibrating device over an OS X install that you've done by eyeing it with the OS X calibration. There will be a difference.

I run a Spyder 3 Pro which calibrates the monitor and then adjusts the profile according to ambient lighting in the room.

And even then, some monitors can't be truly calibrated. A TN panel is nearly impossible to get calibrated, from what I understand, vs. an IPS panel.

Nobody said there wouldn't be a difference. Eyeballing the settings works just fine for someone who doesn't want to or can't afford to spend the money for the extra hardware. Apple wouldn't include the software for all these years if it was bogus. Again if your doing professional work or just anal, by all means invest in a quality colorimeter and pixel peep till your heart is content.

And you have to do more than just change the gamma with an Apple display.

Eyeballing the setting could work horribly as well. A person may see colors differently than "normal" and that could throw the whole thing off. I've seen displays calibrate via OS X's built in software that take a dramatic turn once calibrated with hardware.

So saying it'll work fine is bull ****. It's a statement that totally depends on the person. They could end up making it worse off than when they originally started. But that's ok, that's called just working fine for those people.

 

[Overread]

You can't calibrate by eyeballing it because your eyes are subjective not impartial - furthermore not all eyes see colour the same - heck changes through the day will affect the view of your eyes. Our eyes are great, but they are not impartial, which is why you need a machine which is totally impartial.


The difference can be massive and whilst you might think your monitor looks ok - running a hardware based calibrator really shows up just how far out monitors can be.

 

[ann]

I calibrate at lease once a month and if i have been doing a lot of work, every two weeks. It isn't that the work changes anything, but my eyes adjust to what i am looking at and so since the quality of my work is important (at least to me) it is an easy thing to do. Takes about 5 minutes, if that.

 

[Ken Rockwell Fan]

You can't calibrate by eyeballing it because your eyes are subjective not impartial - furthermore not all eyes see colour the same - heck changes through the day will affect the view of your eyes. Our eyes are great, but they are not impartial, which is why you need a machine which is totally impartial.


The difference can be massive and whilst you might think your monitor looks ok - running a hardware based calibrator really shows up just how far out monitors can be.

That's fine and good for all the pros at work but your average person will never buy a colorimeter. For those people "eyeballin' it" with Apple's included software will work just fine. Not everyone can afford or wants to spend their money on a $50 Spyder meter or a $3000 X-Rite system.

 

[Village Idiot]

You can't calibrate by eyeballing it because your eyes are subjective not impartial - furthermore not all eyes see colour the same - heck changes through the day will affect the view of your eyes. Our eyes are great, but they are not impartial, which is why you need a machine which is totally impartial.


The difference can be massive and whilst you might think your monitor looks ok - running a hardware based calibrator really shows up just how far out monitors can be.

That's fine and good for all the pros at work but your average person will never buy a colorimeter. For those people "eyeballin' it" with Apple's included software will work just fine. Not everyone can afford or wants to spend their money on a $50 Spyder meter or a $3000 X-Rite system.

I know some folks that are color blind. Eye "ballin' it" will work just fine for them as well?

And average person or average hobbyist, which I would count a lot of people on this board. Why not purchase a device that will help improve their final products? I guess they could just eye ball it and live with that.

 

[Overread]

That's fine and good for all the pros at work but your average person will never buy a colorimeter. For those people "eyeballin' it" with Apple's included software will work just fine. Not everyone can afford or wants to spend their money on a $50 Spyder meter or a $3000 X-Rite system.

Aye but not everyone can afford a DSLR either
Most here have chosen to take their hobby further than just light snapshots - a part of that is refining the gear to capture the photo and the other part is refining the editing process. Sure there will be those who only shoot JPEG mode and will only use shots straight out of the camera - and then there will be those who do buy teh £3000 Xrite system.

The key is to educate the people as to why the hardware options are important and thus enable them to make a proper choice on the matter at hand rather than to dictate the answer to them based upon a singular viewpoint

 

[clanthar]

Aye but not everyone can afford a DSLR either
Most here have chosen to take their hobby further than just light snapshots - a part of that is refining the gear to capture the photo and the other part is refining the editing process. Sure there will be those who only shoot JPEG mode and will only use shots straight out of the camera - and then there will be those who do buy teh £3000 Xrite system.

The key is to educate the people as to why the hardware options are important and thus enable them to make a proper choice on the matter at hand rather than to dictate the answer to them based upon a singular viewpoint

Well said! I teach hundreds of students a year. One of my jobs is to help them be happy with the choices they ultimately make -- the ability to make a choice and be content with the choice requires understanding.

The manual adjustment software can be beneficial and better than doing nothing; caveat: it takes practice to learn to use it.

Joe

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

 

[GeorgieGirl]

Here is my newest revelation as a result of getting my photos today in the mail.

1) The colors shown in the calibrated monitor are not the same as the photo, but I expected that for a variety of reasons and needed to test so that I can make certain adjustments.

2) The printed photo is so much better than anything I have viewed on my monitor that I could just about scream with Joy. Sharp, sharp, sharp and OMG sharp and filled with detail.

I am using good stuff and I am glad I print tested.

So, going off on a completely different direction, calibrating a monitor for pp purposes is one thing, but I might be of the idea that a monitor is like glass. I have a Macbook Pro with the expanded graphics that come on the 17". And I saw the difference between the non-enhanced graphics when I chose this baby.

Print the photo is now my new motto. Web viewing is a disappointment in comparison.

 

[KmH]

A calibrated display and a photo will never look exactly the same, because a display is back lit and a photograph is fore lit.

You can get close though if you 'soft-proof' in Photoshop®.

 

[ann]

Just in case this thread has created a need

ATLEX.COM Part Number CMUNPH