Any hope to calibrate monitor?

John Poirier · 01-19-2013, 05:35 PM

Originally posted by thazooo

If you have a higher end monitor and printer that can display and/or print the RGB color space that's great, I do and I use the color space. Judging from the OP question, I don't think that applies. They appear to be working on an average system with a low end monitor. Suggesting using the sRGB color space should help getting the prints to match a bit closer.
When this digi 1st. started it was easy to take a shot, load it and print it. Colors matched quite well. This all occurred using the sRGB color space, yeah many years back.
Same can apply today and does for most folks using the small digicams. Load them and print.
If the original poster wants to upgrade to higher end stuff, that's cool and they will have to do the studying you suggest.

Dubious using sRGB, probably not, most print labs want sRGB files.

Yes, lots of people shoot images in sRGB and lots of labs are comfortable working with it. It is just not the only way to go, or the best.

One concern is that the OP might downgrade image files to sRGB, taking away the opportunity to work on the images in a better colour space as skills improve.

To the OP: If you are curious, you could experiment with printing images from both colour spaces. See for yourself. If you don't have problems with Adobe RGB, that's what you should use. I don't know of any modern printers that would have problems with Adobe RGB.

I started digital printing in the early 90s- before the first Epson Stylus Photo came out, and before Windows supported colour management. I began with a Fargo thermal dye sublimation printer. That was an adventure.

In my experience, getting colour right was a more complicated process than your "take a shot, load it and print It" description. If you were lucky and the gear you were using all happened to to be calibrated similarly out of the box, it's not impossible. However, it was a matter of luck rather than good technology.

I'd much rather work in a colour managed environment. You don't have to be obsessive about it, but getting the basics right avoids a lot of frustration and money wasted on bad prints. I calibrate my monitor, use manufacturers' profiles for printing, and get along just fine.

DSims · 01-19-2013, 06:09 PM

Originally posted by John Poirier

A monitor calibration device is very useful. I use a Spyder 4. I find that it givers very accurate colour balance on my system.

I have the Spyder 3, not the Spyder 4. The Spyder 4 is advertised to be "27% better," IIRC.

By the time you pay for the Spyder 4 it's getting close to the price of the i1Display Pro. I've never heard anyone compare the Spyder 4 to a $1000 unit, but the i1Display Pro is taken very seriously by professionals in both the monitor and TV calibration businesses. Objective tests show it performing with a much higher degree of accuracy than previous "consumer-priced" models - even better than the previously great DTP-94 ever did (which unfortunately doesn't work so well on most new monitors).

The i1Display Pro does such a good job that most people will probably not feel the need to tweak the results afterward.

Both the monitor purchase and (especially!) any print management purchase decisions may take a good bit of time to research, but fortunately the monitor calibration tool is an easy decision which only requires the commitment to spend the money. A few searches around the web can quickly confirm that it currently has no peer, which is why I have no hesitation in recommending it.

John Poirier · 01-19-2013, 08:55 PM

Originally posted by DSims

I have the Spyder 3, not the Spyder 4. The Spyder 4 is advertised to be "27% better," IIRC.

By the time you pay for the Spyder 4 it's getting close to the price of the i1Display Pro. I've never heard anyone compare the Spyder 4 to a $1000 unit, but the i1Display Pro is taken very seriously by professionals in both the monitor and TV calibration businesses. Objective tests show it performing with a much higher degree of accuracy than previous "consumer-priced" models - even better than the previously great DTP-94 ever did (which unfortunately doesn't work so well on most new monitors).

The i1Display Pro does such a good job that most people will probably not feel the need to tweak the results afterward.

Both the monitor purchase and (especially!) any print management purchase decisions may take a good bit of time to research, but fortunately the monitor calibration tool is an easy decision which only requires the commitment to spend the money. A few searches around the web can quickly confirm that it currently has no peer, which is why I have no hesitation in recommending it.

Thanks for the additional information. It always helps to see the thinking behind recommendations.

I've been using Spyders since they first came out, so there is a certain amount of inertia on my part. The Spyder gets the job done, and I have enough experience to work around shortcomings without worrying too much.. Since retiring from serious technical work I haven't bothered to keep up with everything new in calibration devices. Sounds like the i1Display is worth investigating, particularly for someone starting from scratch.

One thing we should keep in mind is that to some extent we are straying into individual perceptions. My personal interpretation of acceptable accuracy and the meaning of tweaking is probably different from others'. And my interpretation varies with circumstances. For example, my standards for fine art reproduction are tighter than for printing my personal work.

DanWeso · 01-20-2013, 08:26 AM

Originally posted by DSims

I have the Spyder 3, not the Spyder 4. The Spyder 4 is advertised to be "27% better," IIRC.

By the time you pay for the Spyder 4 it's getting close to the price of the i1Display Pro. I've never heard anyone compare the Spyder 4 to a $1000 unit, but the i1Display Pro is taken very seriously by professionals in both the monitor and TV calibration businesses. Objective tests show it performing with a much higher degree of accuracy than previous "consumer-priced" models - even better than the previously great DTP-94 ever did (which unfortunately doesn't work so well on most new monitors).

The i1Display Pro does such a good job that most people will probably not feel the need to tweak the results afterward.

Both the monitor purchase and (especially!) any print management purchase decisions may take a good bit of time to research, but fortunately the monitor calibration tool is an easy decision which only requires the commitment to spend the money. A few searches around the web can quickly confirm that it currently has no peer, which is why I have no hesitation in recommending it.

I bought a i1Display Pro about a month ago and used it to calibrate my DELL 2005wfp, 3007wfp desktop monitors and my xps m1530 laptop. I thought the colors look good before, but WOW, what a difference a calibrated monitor makes. I am now a true believer on the importance of a calibrated monitor and the i1Display Pro makes the task so simple. I was going to buy the ColorMunki, but I am glad I spent the extra money for the i1Display Pro.

thechumpen · 01-21-2013, 03:12 AM

Thanks all. I have done a bit of research into sRGB versus Adobe RGB and for the moment I will stick with sRGB. However, just reading up on it all has taught me a lot about the topic. For now all I want is to get to a point where I can print out some of the pics I am taking to fill a few photo frames in the house. Therefore I just want the prints to resemble what I have created on the screen as much as possible. I still have lots to learn about photography in general so am going to focus on that rather than worrying about Adobe RGB and pro printing etc. I'm nowhere near that level yet.

To this end I found a good deal on a Dell U2412M which is an IPS monitor and gets reasonable reviews so should be a big improvement on what I have now. Therefore I have ordered that as a starting point. Will also be useful for the day job so not too hard to justify. I will then follow the advice in this thread to try and get things looking OK by tweaking the display, Lightroom and printer etc, and will keep an eye out for a deal on an i1Display. Although because I got a good deal on the monitor I may end up buying the i1Display sooner than I think...

Anvh · 01-21-2013, 04:44 PM

If you use RAW you actually have no colour space you know

As for the screen and printing, if you use the correct software and profiles then the convertion should be handled correctly so that a colour that can not be displayed will be change to closest neighbour.

Allison · 01-21-2013, 07:14 PM

It is important to remember that when calibrating to a color space, you have to be sure that the printers are calibrated for the same color space. So if you are outsourcing your printer, you will want to calibrate to whichever color space or profile that they use. Calibrating monitors does go a long way to make sure that colors are right in print, so I do calibrate bother of my monitors weekly to the profiles provided by my print houses.

While calibrating helps, it is not the only influence in brightness - it is also influenced by LCD vs. LED. Since I am dealing with clients, I know they could view images on either screen, so my dual monitor set-up has both screen types. The LED monitor is much brighter to begin with, so I know to also check my histogram and clipping warnings when editing. You can't rely on just what you see or just what a histogram tells you, but you need to get all of the information you can get. Even your ambient light is going to change how bright you think the image is, so unless you are going to edit with exactly the same lighting conditions every time, you cannot just rely on what you see.

Anvh · 01-21-2013, 07:46 PM

@Allison
For the first part, that's why you can soft proof. You can use the full colour gramut of the monitor but for work on the magazine for example you can put the software into softing profile of the printer they use.

For the second part, i trully doubt you've a real LED screen. You probably mean LCD with LED backlight

Most calibration devices can actually meter the light in the room and adjust the brightness of the monitor accordanly so it doesnt matter what type of backlight the screen use in terms of brightness.
However white LED do change there colour over time, so RGB LED setup of CFL backlight are prefered for colour accurate work.

These are real LED monitors for example, look at the price

http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/cat-monitors/cat-oledmonitors/

Allison · 01-23-2013, 03:27 PM

No, I did mean LCD with and LED backlight and I already knew the difference, but I just wasn't being very clear. The reason why I have two different monitors is because I have a lot of different clients with a lot of types of monitors. The reason why I am calibrating my monitors to my printing service is because this is pretty much all I ever do on that computer. I need to be able to move through 1000+ images quickly to get them back out to clients via online proofing in a pretty short amount of time (I am a wedding photographer). I want to look at the image in any of my editing programs (I use lightroom, photoshop, nik filters, and onOne plugins) and have the colors be right for my printer. It is just easier to calibrate everything to that one printer.

Brownie4u · 10-09-2013, 10:13 PM

Has anyone had experience with the different versions of Spyder 4... express / pro / elite?
I assume they all do a good job. What is the recommended version to buy?

After some disappointing results printing some of my photos I think it is time to calibrate my monitor... And then re-edit my photos

**jatrax** · 10-09-2013, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Has anyone had experience with the different versions of Spyder 4... express / pro / elite?

Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/digital-processing-software-printing/2122...#ixzz2hIIg4Ypn

Look here: Datacolor Spyder4PRO - Advanced Color Calibration - Datacolor Imaging Solutions
I have the pro version and it seems to work fine for me. Note, that calibrating the monitor is only one step, you also need to calibrate (or obtain a profile) for the printer/paper/ink you are using. Calibrating the monitor makes the monitor correct but does nothing for the printer.

cbope · 10-14-2013, 09:15 AM

Just an FYI, X-rite has two similarly named but very different spectrophotometers for calibrating displays, the i1Pro 2 and i1Display Pro. They are COMPLETELY different devices, although both are very good for calibrating all types of displays. The i1Display Pro is a newer device and is supposedly a little more sensitive with lower output displays.

I use i1Display Pro's at work and I have the i1Pro 2 at home. Previously, I was using a Spyder 4 Pro at home.

Disclaimer: I work for a sister company of X-rite, but not X-rite itself.

cbope · 10-14-2013, 09:22 AM

Originally posted by Colbyt

Just in case you didn't know Windows 7 has a calibration tool hidden in the control panel section. I discovered this tool after looking at some of those pricy options mentioned above.

Correct, but without a colorimeter or spectrophotometer to actually measure your display, it's only guessing. Using the "calibration" tool built into Windows will not give you a calibrated display.

The problem of trying to calibrate your display based on your own vision is that the human eye is very adaptable. Your vision will "self-adjust" after only about 20 or 30 minutes (yes, there are studies on this). You need something to actually measure the output of the display to have any hope of a calibrated display. The Spyder 4 Express is a cheap and decent option if all you need is basic screen calibration.

01-19-2013, 06:09 PM	#32
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	Originally posted by John Poirier A monitor calibration device is very useful. I use a Spyder 4. I find that it givers very accurate colour balance on my system. I have the Spyder 3, not the Spyder 4. The Spyder 4 is advertised to be "27% better," IIRC. By the time you pay for the Spyder 4 it's getting close to the price of the i1Display Pro. I've never heard anyone compare the Spyder 4 to a $1000 unit, but the i1Display Pro is taken very seriously by professionals in both the monitor and TV calibration businesses. Objective tests show it performing with a much higher degree of accuracy than previous "consumer-priced" models - even better than the previously great DTP-94 ever did (which unfortunately doesn't work so well on most new monitors). The i1Display Pro does such a good job that most people will probably not feel the need to tweak the results afterward. Both the monitor purchase and (especially!) any print management purchase decisions may take a good bit of time to research, but fortunately the monitor calibration tool is an easy decision which only requires the commitment to spend the money. A few searches around the web can quickly confirm that it currently has no peer, which is why I have no hesitation in recommending it. Last edited by DSims; 01-19-2013 at 06:28 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Any hope for an entirely dead 645Nii?	tfb	Pentax Medium Format	3	06-20-2012 03:21 AM
How to Calibrate Your Monitor	RioRico	Photographic Technique	24	02-17-2012 08:34 PM
Anyone calibrate a MacBook monitor?	jmdeegan	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	3	04-18-2008 11:17 AM
Warning: Do not calibrate your monitor with these images (IR)	khardur	Post Your Photos!	4	07-05-2007 01:19 PM
How do you calibrate a monitor?	xfraser	Photographic Technique	3	09-30-2006 08:24 PM

01-19-2013, 05:35 PM	#31
John Poirier Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Gabriola Island Posts: 619	Originally posted by thazooo If you have a higher end monitor and printer that can display and/or print the RGB color space that's great, I do and I use the color space. Judging from the OP question, I don't think that applies. They appear to be working on an average system with a low end monitor. Suggesting using the sRGB color space should help getting the prints to match a bit closer. When this digi 1st. started it was easy to take a shot, load it and print it. Colors matched quite well. This all occurred using the sRGB color space, yeah many years back. Same can apply today and does for most folks using the small digicams. Load them and print. If the original poster wants to upgrade to higher end stuff, that's cool and they will have to do the studying you suggest. Dubious using sRGB, probably not, most print labs want sRGB files. Yes, lots of people shoot images in sRGB and lots of labs are comfortable working with it. It is just not the only way to go, or the best. One concern is that the OP might downgrade image files to sRGB, taking away the opportunity to work on the images in a better colour space as skills improve. To the OP: If you are curious, you could experiment with printing images from both colour spaces. See for yourself. If you don't have problems with Adobe RGB, that's what you should use. I don't know of any modern printers that would have problems with Adobe RGB. I started digital printing in the early 90s- before the first Epson Stylus Photo came out, and before Windows supported colour management. I began with a Fargo thermal dye sublimation printer. That was an adventure. In my experience, getting colour right was a more complicated process than your "take a shot, load it and print It" description. If you were lucky and the gear you were using all happened to to be calibrated similarly out of the box, it's not impossible. However, it was a matter of luck rather than good technology. I'd much rather work in a colour managed environment. You don't have to be obsessive about it, but getting the basics right avoids a lot of frustration and money wasted on bad prints. I calibrate my monitor, use manufacturers' profiles for printing, and get along just fine.

01-19-2013, 08:55 PM	#33
John Poirier Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Gabriola Island Posts: 619	Originally posted by DSims I have the Spyder 3, not the Spyder 4. The Spyder 4 is advertised to be "27% better," IIRC. By the time you pay for the Spyder 4 it's getting close to the price of the i1Display Pro. I've never heard anyone compare the Spyder 4 to a $1000 unit, but the i1Display Pro is taken very seriously by professionals in both the monitor and TV calibration businesses. Objective tests show it performing with a much higher degree of accuracy than previous "consumer-priced" models - even better than the previously great DTP-94 ever did (which unfortunately doesn't work so well on most new monitors). The i1Display Pro does such a good job that most people will probably not feel the need to tweak the results afterward. Both the monitor purchase and (especially!) any print management purchase decisions may take a good bit of time to research, but fortunately the monitor calibration tool is an easy decision which only requires the commitment to spend the money. A few searches around the web can quickly confirm that it currently has no peer, which is why I have no hesitation in recommending it. Thanks for the additional information. It always helps to see the thinking behind recommendations. I've been using Spyders since they first came out, so there is a certain amount of inertia on my part. The Spyder gets the job done, and I have enough experience to work around shortcomings without worrying too much.. Since retiring from serious technical work I haven't bothered to keep up with everything new in calibration devices. Sounds like the i1Display is worth investigating, particularly for someone starting from scratch. One thing we should keep in mind is that to some extent we are straying into individual perceptions. My personal interpretation of acceptable accuracy and the meaning of tweaking is probably different from others'. And my interpretation varies with circumstances. For example, my standards for fine art reproduction are tighter than for printing my personal work.

01-20-2013, 08:26 AM	#34
DanWeso Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Buffalo, NY Photos: Albums Posts: 191	Originally posted by DSims I have the Spyder 3, not the Spyder 4. The Spyder 4 is advertised to be "27% better," IIRC. By the time you pay for the Spyder 4 it's getting close to the price of the i1Display Pro. I've never heard anyone compare the Spyder 4 to a $1000 unit, but the i1Display Pro is taken very seriously by professionals in both the monitor and TV calibration businesses. Objective tests show it performing with a much higher degree of accuracy than previous "consumer-priced" models - even better than the previously great DTP-94 ever did (which unfortunately doesn't work so well on most new monitors). The i1Display Pro does such a good job that most people will probably not feel the need to tweak the results afterward. Both the monitor purchase and (especially!) any print management purchase decisions may take a good bit of time to research, but fortunately the monitor calibration tool is an easy decision which only requires the commitment to spend the money. A few searches around the web can quickly confirm that it currently has no peer, which is why I have no hesitation in recommending it. I bought a i1Display Pro about a month ago and used it to calibrate my DELL 2005wfp, 3007wfp desktop monitors and my xps m1530 laptop. I thought the colors look good before, but WOW, what a difference a calibrated monitor makes. I am now a true believer on the importance of a calibrated monitor and the i1Display Pro makes the task so simple. I was going to buy the ColorMunki, but I am glad I spent the extra money for the i1Display Pro.

01-21-2013, 03:12 AM	#35
thechumpen Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Middle of England Photos: Albums Posts: 296 Original Poster	Thanks all. I have done a bit of research into sRGB versus Adobe RGB and for the moment I will stick with sRGB. However, just reading up on it all has taught me a lot about the topic. For now all I want is to get to a point where I can print out some of the pics I am taking to fill a few photo frames in the house. Therefore I just want the prints to resemble what I have created on the screen as much as possible. I still have lots to learn about photography in general so am going to focus on that rather than worrying about Adobe RGB and pro printing etc. I'm nowhere near that level yet. To this end I found a good deal on a Dell U2412M which is an IPS monitor and gets reasonable reviews so should be a big improvement on what I have now. Therefore I have ordered that as a starting point. Will also be useful for the day job so not too hard to justify. I will then follow the advice in this thread to try and get things looking OK by tweaking the display, Lightroom and printer etc, and will keep an eye out for a deal on an i1Display. Although because I got a good deal on the monitor I may end up buying the i1Display sooner than I think...

01-21-2013, 04:44 PM	#36
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	If you use RAW you actually have no colour space you know As for the screen and printing, if you use the correct software and profiles then the convertion should be handled correctly so that a colour that can not be displayed will be change to closest neighbour.

01-21-2013, 07:14 PM	#37
Allison Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 667	It is important to remember that when calibrating to a color space, you have to be sure that the printers are calibrated for the same color space. So if you are outsourcing your printer, you will want to calibrate to whichever color space or profile that they use. Calibrating monitors does go a long way to make sure that colors are right in print, so I do calibrate bother of my monitors weekly to the profiles provided by my print houses. While calibrating helps, it is not the only influence in brightness - it is also influenced by LCD vs. LED. Since I am dealing with clients, I know they could view images on either screen, so my dual monitor set-up has both screen types. The LED monitor is much brighter to begin with, so I know to also check my histogram and clipping warnings when editing. You can't rely on just what you see or just what a histogram tells you, but you need to get all of the information you can get. Even your ambient light is going to change how bright you think the image is, so unless you are going to edit with exactly the same lighting conditions every time, you cannot just rely on what you see.

01-21-2013, 07:46 PM	#38
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	@Allison For the first part, that's why you can soft proof. You can use the full colour gramut of the monitor but for work on the magazine for example you can put the software into softing profile of the printer they use. For the second part, i trully doubt you've a real LED screen. You probably mean LCD with LED backlight Most calibration devices can actually meter the light in the room and adjust the brightness of the monitor accordanly so it doesnt matter what type of backlight the screen use in terms of brightness. However white LED do change there colour over time, so RGB LED setup of CFL backlight are prefered for colour accurate work. These are real LED monitors for example, look at the price http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/cat-monitors/cat-oledmonitors/

01-23-2013, 03:27 PM	#39
Allison Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 667	No, I did mean LCD with and LED backlight and I already knew the difference, but I just wasn't being very clear. The reason why I have two different monitors is because I have a lot of different clients with a lot of types of monitors. The reason why I am calibrating my monitors to my printing service is because this is pretty much all I ever do on that computer. I need to be able to move through 1000+ images quickly to get them back out to clients via online proofing in a pretty short amount of time (I am a wedding photographer). I want to look at the image in any of my editing programs (I use lightroom, photoshop, nik filters, and onOne plugins) and have the colors be right for my printer. It is just easier to calibrate everything to that one printer.

10-09-2013, 10:13 PM	#40
Brownie4u Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: Vancouver Photos: Gallery Posts: 53	Has anyone had experience with the different versions of Spyder 4... express / pro / elite? I assume they all do a good job. What is the recommended version to buy? After some disappointing results printing some of my photos I think it is time to calibrate my monitor... And then re-edit my photos

10-09-2013, 10:29 PM	#41
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Quote: Has anyone had experience with the different versions of Spyder 4... express / pro / elite? Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/digital-processing-software-printing/2122...#ixzz2hIIg4Ypn Look here: Datacolor Spyder4PRO - Advanced Color Calibration - Datacolor Imaging Solutions I have the pro version and it seems to work fine for me. Note, that calibrating the monitor is only one step, you also need to calibrate (or obtain a profile) for the printer/paper/ink you are using. Calibrating the monitor makes the monitor correct but does nothing for the printer.

10-14-2013, 09:15 AM	#42
cbope Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Helsinki Posts: 664	Just an FYI, X-rite has two similarly named but very different spectrophotometers for calibrating displays, the i1Pro 2 and i1Display Pro. They are COMPLETELY different devices, although both are very good for calibrating all types of displays. The i1Display Pro is a newer device and is supposedly a little more sensitive with lower output displays. I use i1Display Pro's at work and I have the i1Pro 2 at home. Previously, I was using a Spyder 4 Pro at home. Disclaimer: I work for a sister company of X-rite, but not X-rite itself.

10-14-2013, 09:22 AM	#43
cbope Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Helsinki Posts: 664	Originally posted by Colbyt Just in case you didn't know Windows 7 has a calibration tool hidden in the control panel section. I discovered this tool after looking at some of those pricy options mentioned above. Correct, but without a colorimeter or spectrophotometer to actually measure your display, it's only guessing. Using the "calibration" tool built into Windows will not give you a calibrated display. The problem of trying to calibrate your display based on your own vision is that the human eye is very adaptable. Your vision will "self-adjust" after only about 20 or 30 minutes (yes, there are studies on this). You need something to actually measure the output of the display to have any hope of a calibrated display. The Spyder 4 Express is a cheap and decent option if all you need is basic screen calibration.