Monitor calibration advice

[Pookeyhead]

Yes yes, okay.

Instead of arguing over nothing, go and check that your unverified grey card is in fact neutral grey. That's quite important.

Thanks for your concern, but I know what I'm doing - the grey card is a good match for the X-rite color checker classic grey swatches, so I'm satisfied.

The background colours (I know it may be moot now of course )..... are

#b8b8b8 (184,184,184) and
#dddddd(221,221,221)

Interestingly, I get different numbers. Once again, highlighting the uselessness of using the forum background. A) It's really too light any way, and B) it's at the mercy of your browser. It's 217, 217, 217 here. Remember this is nothing to do with monitor calibration either, as these are the RGB values being rendered by the browser. All values being equal though, it is neutral. However, using this as a reference does mean you need to rely on your colour acuity. Ask 10 people which of 10 different greys is the most neutral and you'll get 10 different answers probably. The average reader in here will not have well controlled room lighting, and looking at the forum background, or any grey source when I have the blinds open results in different visual results throughout the day. At sunrise/set it looks greenish... on a cloudy day it looks very warm etc. Think about it and you'll realise why.

I would suggest the following:
Always work in dark room conditions when working on photos.

Sorry, but that's terrible advice if you mean literally a dark room. In a TOTALLY dark room you'll need to be calibrating to around 60 cd/m2, and a great many monitors darken the image by reducing the backlighting in steps that are not linear, and the U2412M is one of those monitors, so it also relies on simply darkening the LCD. LCD panels that do not have genuine backlight dimming are not at their best at such low luminance levels. Also, no LCD panels can actually produce pure black, especially IPS panels, so in a totally dark room, you'll never actually see (perceive) black.

If you meant darkroom conditions as in a professional environment, we've already been through cheap and reliable ways to get consistent room lighting.

So darken down your room and do a calibration with the ambient light compensation activated and accepting its suggestions. Do that with these calibration settings: Gamma 2.2, 6500K, 120 cd/m2. Gamma won't change, the rest might change upon the suggestions of the ambient light sensor.

Then try again. How about that?

Dude.. we've been through this... read the thread. Careful with the ambient light compensation though. Use it with inadequate domestic lighting that is around 3400K and it will give some very weird results.

 

[Eddzz!!]

Eddzz!!, please be aware that suddenly after calibration, it is normal that you might see a color tint, as your eyes need some minutes to get used to the new color temperature.

Ambient light compensation is a bad thing if you don't really look after your room light, but is perfect if you're taking care of it. Therefore, I would suggest the following:
Always work in dark room conditions when working on photos. So darken down your room and do a calibration with the ambient light compensation activated and accepting its suggestions. Do that with these calibration settings: Gamma 2.2, 6500K, 120 cd/m2. Gamma won't change, the rest might change upon the suggestions of the ambient light sensor.

Then try again. How about that?

I actually jumped the gun on your suggestion and tried calibrating with Gamma 2.2 (Mac) last week - the difference was noticeable and I *think* I've achieved a good calibration (finally!).

You say to work on photos in a darkened room which is currently what I'm doing. Is it worth then getting a 6500K bulb for a desk lamp as @Pookeyhead suggested, or should I just continue to work in darkness?

 

[Pookeyhead]

I actually jumped the gun on your suggestion and tried calibrating with Gamma 2.2 (Mac) last week - the difference was noticeable and I *think* I've achieved a good calibration (finally!).

You say to work on photos in a darkened room which is currently what I'm doing. Is it worth then getting a 6500K bulb for a desk lamp as @Pookeyhead suggested, or should I just continue to work in darkness?

Working in total darkness is never a great idea, as you'd need to calibrate to quite a low luminance level, and LCDs aren't at their best there, especially ones like yours that can't dim the backlighting fully. You'll just have very indistinct black tonal range. Plus, no LCD panel can actually produce a black because they're backlit. Moderately dim room lighting of a known temperature is the ideal solution.

Gamma 2.2 is the standard for both Mac and PC. It's been a very long time since Macs were calibrated to 1.8.

 

[Eddzz!!]

Working in total darkness is never a great idea, as you'd need to calibrate to quite a low luminance level, and LCDs aren't at their best there, especially ones like yours that can't dim the backlighting fully. You'll just have very indistinct black tonal range. Plus, no LCD panel can actually produce a black because they're backlit. Moderately dim room lighting of a known temperature is the ideal solution.

Gamma 2.2 is the standard for both Mac and PC. It's been a very long time since Macs were calibrated to 1.8.

Right, okidoki. I usually work with a lamp on anyway, so will continue that way!

Re Gamma settings, I notice that the U2412M has two gamma settings "PC" and "Mac" - I've set it to "Mac".

 

[Pookeyhead]

Right, okidoki. I usually work with a lamp on anyway, so will continue that way!

Re Gamma settings, I notice that the U2412M has two gamma settings "PC" and "Mac" - I've set it to "Mac".

That's on the monitor though isn't it? Not the Spyder software. There should be no difference in gamma between modes if they are both 2.2, as 2.2 is 2.2... regardless of what computer is driving it. In the menu, it just states whether gamma is PC or Mac.. not what value it sets. The only reason it would do this is if the Mac value is actually 1.8. If you set the screen to use 1.8 and then calibrate to 2.2, you're just forcing more changes in the GPU's 8bit LUT which is hard pressed enough as it is to make the necessary changes without adversely affecting image quality. Gamma for PCs is 2.2, and your screen should be set to 2.2... hence the PC setting.

Other things to check. Is dynamic contrast on? If so, turn it off. It's sh1t!! and will mess up your calibration. If I remember rightly these are only available in movie and game modes though, so doubt this is an issue.

As an owner of a U2412M (well... I bought it for my wife) I can assure you it calibrates beautifully with a decent calibrator. The Spyder 3 never was great and never worked well even compared to my old DTP94.

[edit]

@Eddzz!!

I've double checked on my wife's U2412M. Setting Mac definitely puts the screen into gamma 1.8.

If you're not happy with your calibration, that old Spyder 3 is probably where the problem lies as I keep suggesting. If the only way you can get acceptable results is to set the screen to gamma 1.8 then calibrate to 2.2 using your spyder, then that calibrator really should be got rid of.

You should NOT be using a gamma of 1.8 even on a Mac!! Mac OS has not had a gamma standard of 1.8 since around 2008... possibly earlier. Both Macs and PCs are gamma 2.2 as standard. That's what you should set our screen to.

 

[Eddzz!!]

That's on the monitor though isn't it? Not the Spyder software. There should be no difference in gamma between modes if they are both 2.2, as 2.2 is 2.2... regardless of what computer is driving it. In the menu, it just states whether gamma is PC or Mac.. not what value it sets. The only reason it would do this is if the Mac value is actually 1.8. If you set the screen to use 1.8 and then calibrate to 2.2, you're just forcing more changes in the GPU's 8bit LUT which is hard pressed enough as it is to make the necessary changes without adversely affecting image quality. Gamma for PCs is 2.2, and your screen should be set to 2.2... hence the PC setting.

Other things to check. Is dynamic contrast on? If so, turn it off. It's sh1t!! and will mess up your calibration. If I remember rightly these are only available in movie and game modes though, so doubt this is an issue.

As an owner of a U2412M (well... I bought it for my wife) I can assure you it calibrates beautifully with a decent calibrator. The Spyder 3 never was great and never worked well even compared to my old DTP94.

[edit]

@Eddzz!!

I've double checked on my wife's U2412M. Setting Mac definitely puts the screen into gamma 1.8.

If you're not happy with your calibration, that old Spyder 3 is probably where the problem lies as I keep suggesting. If the only way you can get acceptable results is to set the screen to gamma 1.8 then calibrate to 2.2 using your spyder, then that calibrator really should be got rid of.

You should NOT be using a gamma of 1.8 even on a Mac!! Mac OS has not had a gamma standard of 1.8 since around 2008... possibly earlier. Both Macs and PCs are gamma 2.2 as standard. That's what you should set our screen to.

I will have another go when I get home this evening and report back. Unfortunately I'm sort of stuck with the Spyder Pro3 as I can't afford anything better...

 

[Pookeyhead]

I will have another go when I get home this evening and report back. Unfortunately I'm sort of stuck with the Spyder Pro3 as I can't afford anything better...

Just whack it on Ebay... cut your losses. Clearly it's actually useless, so just stop using it. Sounds like it's doing more harm than good actually. With all due respect, if you need to force your screen into a redundant gamma setting just to allow it calibrate to a standard you can live with... then it's not really calibrating anything is it? You'd trust it's right would you?

If you bought it used... then sell it for the same price.

Wex sell the i1 Display Pro for £100 now... getting cheaper all the time. You can get the Color Munki Smile for £67 new.

 

[Ruben Carmona]

Pookeyhead is right, it was not my intention to recommend you to work in a total dark room. The optimal is a room where the spyder will suggest you a brightness between 80-120 cd/m2.

Concerning the daylight bulb, this makes sense when comparing your prints with the display, as the print need to be hold under a standard daylight.