Quote from: GWGill on October 09, 2019, 07:02:03 pm Not really. In this video I show you how to calibrate your display I also talk about how important color calibration is. Self calibration works for reflective measurement only, since there is a white reference for it to calibrate against. My color calibrator of choice is called the Colormunki Smile by X-rite. There is no self calibration for emissive (i.e. Display) measurement, since there is no reference source it can use. The accuracy depends on the initial factory calibration and the instrument remaining stable over time and any abuse. The good news is that diffraction grating based spectrometers such as the ColorMunki/i1Pro/Spectrolino spectro's seem to be relatively slow to drift, as long as they aren't given a severe knock (which could displace the optical path, causing a wavelength shift), and as long as they haven't got excessively dirty or dusty etc. This is in distinct contrast to dye filter based colorimeters, that have a reputation for markedly drifting over a few years. Thin film based filter colorimeters (like the i1d3 series, SpyderX or possibly the ColorMunki Smile) are likely to be much more stable. This is really the most important point here- A colormunki being a spectro with a grating isn't going to shift color as badly since it's not relying on interagreement of multiple different color filters. I would say you're well into the world in which scientific precision begins to break down and some element of subjectivity needs to be taken into account. You'll never have a perfect match of any screen to any print, or any screen to any other screen using a different backlight/phosphor technology. In Displa圜ALs verification tab, enable 'Simulation profile', select sRGB IEC61966-2. IMO, if the grey tones look tinted, change them until they look good to your eye and calibrate for that. Select the ICC profile in novideosrgb, enable 'Calibrate gamma to', select the target gamma you want, and then enable the clamp. Or pick a paper you'll be printing on most of the time and do a visual match of the white point. But if you're using your monitor for doing print proofing, video color grading, DICOM viewing, etc. all at the same time, then you've just got to pick a happy medium (or be insanely diligent about switching built in LUTs). I'd keep your current spectro, but add an i1displaypro3 or colormunki display, and use the spectro to create a correction matrix for the colorimeter using displaycal. Colorimeters are MUCH better at seeing detail in dark tones (SNR gets too high for spectros to accurately read near-blacks in emissive/transmissive modes) but your spectro will be more accurate at obtaining accurate values for color primaries, as explained by Pat earlier.īesides getting better at reading dark values, the only way I can see spectrophotometers really "upgrading" in the near future would be to decrease the space between the grating steps, therefore measuring in higher detail to deal with very spikey spectra, but a better solution for that would be for our display technology to just get better at providing a smooth response. 709 with a gamma of 2.2), and for wide-gamut displays, check whether the display is designed to cover one of the two major common wide gamut color spaces, AdobeRGB and DCI-P3, and use the respective one for testing (and even then, wider gamut than either of them is a positive criteria, these screens are meant to be used in a color managed environment).There's a post on AVSForum talking about the recently released i1pro3 and how it basically doesn't improve upon the previous versions for profiling displays. For these types of tests, a better approach would be to only compare standard gamut displays to sRGB (or maybe Rec. Yes, although comparing the native response of a wide-gamut display like the ED323QUR to sRGB doesn’t seem particularly useful, since it’s gamut is supposed to be wider than sRGB by design (and a positive criteria for people who look into buying a monitor like this). You can expect to get a reply from me here □ĭoes that mean that I’m doing everything right, if you look at the screenshot of my settings? I can take the results produced by using the methodology described in my original post as accurate? Quite a honor to get a reply from the man himself! □
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |