[AutumnRowan]

I am new to DSLRs having just bought a k-50 (but previous 35mm and bridge camera experience) and I'm having trouble with the color on my monitor and subsequently printing. I calibrated my screen by eye using the calibration tool built in to Windows- it got me fairly close but I wanted to be a little closer on my colors. I bought a Colormunki Smile and it actually made things considerably worse. I tried it several times with the included software and got poor results every time. So then I downloaded Argyll and dispcalGUI and got approximately the same results color wise as with the Colormunki software. Overall, the calibrated monitor is much lighter and very washed out. Viewing the photos on the camera display they are much closer to the monitor I calibrated by eyeball and my prints more closely match the calibrated-by-eye as well. My guess would be that I'm missing some (important) aspect of the monitor calibration process but I have no idea what. The number of online resources is somewhat overwhelming and seem to cover more theory than practical issues. Can someone point me in a direction?

[Miguel]

This isn't how the script was written!
So, what is the brightness metric of your profiled monitor when compared with your eyeball-tuned level? Actual numbers would be nice like 120 or 140 cd/m2. The software may let you set these to a preset level.

How bright is the ambient lighting in your workspace? In general.

Out of curiosity, what's the facts about your monitor?
Thanks.

M

[AutumnRowan]

I re-ran the ArgyllCMS calibration on a different monitor and with a different graphic card (at home vs. work) and it came out what I would call acceptably close matching both my camera display and cheap HP printer; although I'm somewhat mystified as to how I got there. My goal is to not only have my monitor match the camera display and when I give digital photos to others, they can have large format photos printed accurately The monitor I'm using is an Acer H233H hand me down (I realize I will eventually have to replace it but hoping to buy good printer first). My ambient light is basically daylight thru three windows; one south, two north, I would call it moderate. The brightness of the monitor is 120 cd/m2 Thanks for your help!

[Miguel]

I re-ran the ArgyllCMS calibration on a different monitor and with a different graphic card (at home vs. work) and it came out what I would call acceptably close matching both my camera display and cheap HP printer; although I'm somewhat mystified as to how I got there. My goal is to not only have my monitor match the camera display and when I give digital photos to others, they can have large format photos printed accurately The monitor I'm using is an Acer H233H hand me down (I realize I will eventually have to replace it but hoping to buy good printer first). My ambient light is basically daylight thru three windows; one south, two north, I would call it moderate. The brightness of the monitor is 120 cd/m2 Thanks for your help!

1. I'd put my money into a better monitor first. Printing is a whole 'nother more complicated and expensive beast that will only benefit from tight color management. You can always outsource printing unlike an inferior monitor. What size "large format photos" are you planning for?
2. Your camera display should not be trusted for much beyond framing. It is merely a thumbnail jpeg of the shot incorporating the in-camera settings, and if you are integrating real color management into your workflow, I assume you are using raw files.
3. 120 cd/m2 may be a tad too bright, try dropping it down to 110 cd/m2. Too-dark prints strongly correlate with too-bright monitors.
4. Do you have blinds or curtains that can manage the window light? If you are not using them creatively, try it.

Hope this helps.

M