Monitor Calibration

zendog

zendog

Messages
365
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
I've just got my first three (15 * 12) landscape "test" prints back and doubtless typically they were on the dark side.

So I need to calibrate my monitor before ordering more.

After a bit of research two products seem to be about right for my budget.

Spyder4Pro and X-Rite Color Munki.

Any opinions on which or a better alternative at about the same cost?

I'm running Windows 8.1 with an Acer S240HL LCD monitor.

Cheers
Steve
 
I use color munki, very simple and seems to be decent results.
Regarding your test prints, a quick and dirty thing for you to try is to have the same image on screen and adjust your screen to get as close to the test print as possible then you should be in the ball park for future orders.
One thing to cosider, however, is how the lab you are using are applying colour correction :-
1) Automatically - can vary hugely depending on the subject and style of the image
2) Manually - better results as human is more aware of the scene and mood of the image than an algorithm
Then you have the option to soft proof using the labs colour profile and submit for printing without any correction applied, most timely but most accurate method.
 
The important thing is to use a colorimeter with integrated ambient light sensor. (I use Spyder4PRO)
This will measure your ambient light and adapt your calibration. Which is good to see the contrast on your screen as coming out on the print (when doing a softproof). At the same time, you should keep an eye on your ambient light and keep it constant darkening your room.
 
The monitor calibrator won't necessarily fix your primary issue which is dark prints, but it will improve colors. Your issue is most likely caused by your monitor brightness being set too high for image editing.

What monitor do you have? Just to give you an example, a Dell eIPS monitor set at 60% brightness as the factory default needs to be turned down to as low as 15% brightness for editing. It's a disturbing difference when you first make the change, but you get used to it within a week.

As a first step I'd look at your prints under good light (not next to your monitor), then remembering how dark they look go to your monitor and turn it down to "match". Re-edit to get the images looking nice on your monitor, then send them out to be printed again. The new prints should be a whole lot closer ... then just tweak a tiny bit from there (dark, turn brightness down .... light, turn brightness up).

Don't compare the image by holding it up beside your monitor as it will always look off using that approach. Prints are reflective where a monitor is backlit.

My monitor and calibrator allows me to target luminance and contrast ratio. I'm running at 100 cd/m^2 and try to get a contrast ratio of 250:1 for luster finish paper.
 
Last edited:
Bob_a makes a good point regards the monitor being likely set too bright.
My monitor is set to zero, yes zero brightness...
I work for a large format printing company & use X-Rite's i1 Profiler.
 
I would suggest that using ambient light monitoring is not a good idea. Yes I know a number of devices offer this but once you start chasing brightness levels on your monitor the calibration changes. If the print is too dark then the monitor is too bright for your viewing conditions. Get the calibrator to give a lower reading. Generally I would suspect this will be in the region of 110Cd/m2 to 140 Cd/m2.

The best way way to compare prints to screen is to hold the print about 45 degrees from the screen. you can then look at the screen then the print , then the screen Screen. print ,screen, repeat. :)
 
Sorry to hijack the thread but I was about to post on a similar issue when I saw this post.

I have my monitor calibrated (Spyder 4) but still have issues with dark prints.

During the calibration process I'm asked to alter the brightness to fit particular parameters of the Spyder. I then let the calibration process complete but am left with an overly bright monitor when compared to prints.

Am I wrong to think that the Spyder has set the brightness to the optimum setting? Should I turn down the brightness on completion of the calibration process to suit? Am I just being stupid and missing the point completely?
 
what printer you using and what paper/colour profile ? is it just a touch darker or it's massive difference?
 
i1 Display Pro here. The calibrator will test and let you set your monitor brightness at the recommended (120cd/m) level before it calibrates the colour.

Also the monitor you're using has what's called a TN panel (It's the type semiconductor in the display panel itself, IPS is the other most common) and these can also give you pretty variable brightness based on your viewing angle, so careful for that too if you're not sat straight on at the monitor. IPS screens are affected by this shifting to a lesser extent but it still exists.

On initial calibration of my main screen when first purchased I had to set the brightness to 11%. That's crept up over the years to 30% now as the CFL backlight wears out.
 
So if i'm reading this correctly you calibrate colour at a brightness setting of 120cd/m and then reduce brightness on completion to, in your case 11% (new screen).
 
When you perform the calibration (At least with the two packages I've used) step one is always to get the brightness of the monitor down to 120cd/m - you pop the colourimeter on the screen and a readout will be shown measuring the current brightness. Then you just dial down the display until it reads 120, leave it there and proceed with the rest of the process. From that point out you don't touch your monitor brightness! :)
 
Hi

When I calibrate my monitor using the spyder4Elite I set the monitor brightness to 90cd/m and ignore the software recommendation which is normally around 120cd/m, I find 90cd/m to more correct for the dark area my Computer is situated.

One other thing to do which has not been mentioned is that to get correct results from an outside printing service is to obtain a copy of their printer profile and then use that for soft proofing, without that you do not stand much of a chance in getting results that match your monitor.

If they will not or are unable to supply the correct profile find another service, and find another service if the reply they use sRGB as well as sRGB is a colour space not a monitor profile.

Paul
 
Denyerec / Paul-H. This is where I struggle. I've calibrated at both 120 & 90 , used Loxleys profile and still end up with dark prints compared to my monitor. I have to reduce brightness by quite a bit to get anywhere near the print.

Perhaps printing is not for me.
 
Have you tried soft proofing with the printers supplied profile, soft proofing can make a huge difference to the image seen on the screen, especially if you are using a wide Gamut colour space and the printers profile is designed to match a much narrower gamut to try and match a narrow gamut colour space that most none photographers end up using.

I suspect in your case soft proofing will show you just how dark your image will produce, giving you the chance to lighten it before sending it out for printing.

As I said above if your printer is unable to provide their printer profile, find another printer, all good ones will be happy to provide their printers profile.

Paul
 
Paul,
Thanks for bearing with me on this.
Just been looking on line at softproofing. I thought that was an optional step and largely unimportant.
I was applying the Loxley profile to a jPeg straight out of the Lightroom develop module. I hadn't considered softproofing first.
Still need to research further but am now struggling to understand why I should also softproof for a web image-surely that is what Lightroom produces directly- an on screen image.
I'll get there eventually I'm sure, but it does all get a bit technical for me at times.

Regards Neil.
 
Neil

If its any help, I've softproofed several images using the Loxley profile in Lightroom. The image does become a bit darker and colder with the profile enabled . It could be that the change in colour doesn't help with the appreciation of correct density.

Applying the profile to the image doesn't as far as I can see make a great deal of difference, although I would suggest keeping the output profile from Lightroom as sRGB

I've looked at the Loxley profile in Colorsync and it is generally smaller than sRGB although it does have a slightly larger range in the cyan and yellow red direction. Nothing significant though

John C
 
From long pre-cloud and with crt displays I've sent digital files to print and they've come back good (exhibition prints with an instruction to the lab to print without intervention; Blurb book images with embedded cmyk profile).

One thing at a time, & start basic - no fancy gizmos or confusions. I suspect that many more people have a Colormunki etc than actually need one ... Monitor brightness first - take a look here and elsewhere on-line: http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/ It can also be handy to have an image on-screen to compare against a test print of the same image. Just as an example of working condition, my current ips display is set to 50% brightness and reads (light meter) as 80 cd/m2.

Then colour - there are quick & dirty (& free) ways to assess this - the proof of the pudding is in what works for your purpose. It's too easy to get the knickers in a twist about all this stuff.

Soft proofing ... simulates a look on screen without altering the file's embedded colour profile. It's also possible to convert to a colour profile & embed it ...
 
Hmm, i am a little confused. I have used a Spyder4 Pro to calibrate my monitor and the instructions did not refer to setting a specific brightness for my monitor.

It asked me to set the gamma to 2.2 though
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top