calibrating monitor frustration [Archive] - Canon Digital Photography Forums

Saxi

8th of April 2009 (Wed), 20:34

I picked up a HP LP2475w as my main monitor but I am having some difficulty with calibration. I had a lot of inconsistencies with my Samsung 226CW to the point I don't know what to trust anymore.

I calibrated my HP LP2475w and I noticed a fairly big difference, but when I load images in Lightroom 2 they look super over saturated, I turned on 2nd monitor support for Lightroom and it is a huge difference between the other monitor (Samsung 226CW) and this monitor. I have the brightness (90) and contrast at the defaults. I know I need to bring the brightness down, but I am not sure the best way to do this in terms of how much, but not sure if this would effect the oversaturation. I have a Spyder 3 Pro and the monitor is set to 6500 (I tried sRGB as well but I calibrated based on 6500), I used 6500 as the target rather than 2.2 - Native. Am I better off trying to go 2.2 - Native like I did on the Samsungs? Is sRGB a better choice? I noticed the monitor can select sRGB but there is not a target for sRGB.

I'm at the point I don't know what to trust anymore as using hardware calibration is giving me such mixed results.

tim

8th of April 2009 (Wed), 21:14

This is beyond me, even after reading a whole book on color. Rene might know, but i'm not sure if he regularly reads the computers subforum. I left my monitor at defaults, adjusted the brightness using the monitor controls as directed by my calibration system, and everything works well. In your place i'd set everything back to default and try again.

Saxi

8th of April 2009 (Wed), 21:28

Everything is defaulted, I just have an ICC profile loaded from Spyder 3 Pro to make the adjustments. I set the target to 2.2 - 6500 (I know with my Samsung monitors I was told to use 2.2 - Native but I think that was because there were no Kelvin presets or options).

I've had more problems getting good consistent color since I got a hardware calibrator. It's been all over the place, I really don't even know what is right, I thought with a hardware calibrator it would be a precision process, but there it is all guesswork. For a while with the Samsungs, they were blue until I figured out I had to use 2.2 native instead of 2.2 6500. I'll run a cal on this one as 2.2 Native to see how that looks until I hear from someone that might have a better idea.

I know enough about color management to be dangerous, but that's it. I have an idea how it all works, but I just want to be able to put a piece of hardware on it, have it do it, and know with 100% assurance my colors are right, I am so far from that I might as well just randomly change RGB values as that is about what I have.

ChasP505

8th of April 2009 (Wed), 21:29

Saxi

8th of April 2009 (Wed), 23:41

Hey Sax... You seem to back where you were with the Samsung 226... All worked up, all over the place and confused. You're even confusing me!

I'm not familiar with that monitor's settings and controls, otherwise I'd suggest a plan of attack for you. But I think there's a color setting problem in LR that's independent of your attempts at monitor calibration. (Maybe a LR guru can jump in here.)

Regarding "Kelvin Presets and options"... turn everything back to factory default. This is totally arbitrary, but if I were in your situation I'd start with the monitor set to factory defaults, lower the Brightness to about 70, the Contrast to about 60, and then run a new calibration with 2.2-6500K, and not touching your RGB controls. Just let the calibrator do everything automatically, just specifying the 2.2-6500K.

I do keep the RGB at defaults. I didn't touch brightness/contrast. I tried 2.2 - Native and it looks 1000% better. This solved my Samsung problem too, it was a lot better after using Native, and I found someone here and from DataColor that said to use 2.2 Native on flat panels as to not effect the white point, but this monitor has Kelvin pre-sets, so I figured setting the monitor to 6500 and using that as a target was best course of action. I need to do some more tests, but I think I am in good shape now after using 2.2 Native. But it is too bright, I don't know how much I should effect the brightness and contrast, I see your recommendation but where do those numbers come from, is it just a guess what to put it at? I read a review on this monitor and they put the brightness down to 10 to get a really good white/black, it just seems so dark once you get below 50-60. The quality of the color and detail just blows away the Samsungs, and those were not cheap.

I'm looking at images I shot today in lightroom and they look really good now. Before my sons blue jeans were so saturated it looked like I pumped the blue way up. Now I think they look spot on after using 2.2 - Native, so I am assuming you need to use 2.2 native with LCD even if you have kelvin controls. I have the monitor set to custom color, it seems to have the best results (it sets RGB to 255) instead of using sRGB (which seems to be very similar to 6500), 6500, or 9300. I thought I should select 6500 on the monitor but that didn't give me as good results either, I think it might have been a combination of selecting custom color (with default RGB settings) and 2.2 Native.

I would like to know more about how I can tweak the brightness/contrast, I don't want to just drop them to some arbitrary number. If I specify RGB controls in the Spyder software, it will let me know what my lumiance is, and I can try to target 90-110 lumiance if I wanted to. That brings me to something else, I use this computer for three things, work, gaming, and photography. Won't targetting 90-110 lumiance (I heard this suggested in multiple places) make it too dark for other things? I tried on my Samsung for 130 and it felt so dark even though the colors were dead on according to the spyder (within .005). Just felt drab.

tim

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 00:49

Have you read the documentation that came with the spyder? I never read the stuff that came with my Moncao system, but it worked easily so I didn't need to.

Saxi

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 07:22

Have you read the documentation that came with the spyder? I never read the stuff that came with my Moncao system, but it worked easily so I didn't need to.

Yes, I even spoke a while with technical support, they were stumpped on my Samsungs for a while before they even recommended the 2.2 Native thing.

ChasP505

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 08:06

Yes, I even spoke a while with technical support, they were stumpped on my Samsungs for a while before they even recommended the 2.2 Native thing.

I have posted in this forum several times that I got the recommendation for using 2.2-Native directly from the tech support at Datacolor, but I guess I have no credibility. I would not mess with the Kelvin settings on your monitor, but leave them at whatever the default setting is.

As far as the Brightness/Contrast numbers I suggested... Yes they are part arbitrary, part intuitive. I said that I (me, personally) would start there and tweak as needed. Think of it like seasoning a soup. You throw in some salt and pepper, but don't over do it. You can add more later if needed.

I think you're back on track Saxi, just progressively dial down your Brightness/Contrast until you find the "sweet spot". Then exhale.

Saxi

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 08:51

I have posted in this forum several times that I got the recommendation for using 2.2-Native directly from the tech support at Datacolor, but I guess I have no credibility. I would not mess with the Kelvin settings on your monitor, but leave them at whatever the default setting is.

As far as the Brightness/Contrast numbers I suggested... Yes they are part arbitrary, part intuitive. I said that I (me, personally) would start there and tweak as needed. Think of it like seasoning a soup. You throw in some salt and pepper, but don't over do it. You can add more later if needed.

I think you're back on track Saxi, just progressively dial down your Brightness/Contrast until you find the "sweet spot". Then exhale.

I didn't notice the 2.2 Native at first as I was under the impression you always wanted to target 6500. So I just wasn't looking for it. But I knew it when I got this monitor, but I thought since I actually had Kelvin controls this time, I should use 6500, I guess that isn't the case even if you have Kelvin controls.

So there is no scientific way of adjusting brightness/contrast? If you calibrate your monitor for printing, you target ~110 luminance though right? Does that make it dark for everything else?

Saxi

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 08:53

I have posted in this forum several times that I got the recommendation for using 2.2-Native directly from the tech support at Datacolor, but I guess I have no credibility. I would not mess with the Kelvin settings on your monitor, but leave them at whatever the default setting is.

As far as the Brightness/Contrast numbers I suggested... Yes they are part arbitrary, part intuitive. I said that I (me, personally) would start there and tweak as needed. Think of it like seasoning a soup. You throw in some salt and pepper, but don't over do it. You can add more later if needed.

I think you're back on track Saxi, just progressively dial down your Brightness/Contrast until you find the "sweet spot". Then exhale.

Does Brightness/Contrast effect calibration? I assume it does, meaning you shouldn't adjust them after doing a calibration and if you do you need to recal. Am I correct in this assumption?

ChasP505

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 10:19

Does Brightness/Contrast effect calibration? I assume it does, meaning you shouldn't adjust them after doing a calibration and if you do you need to recal. Am I correct in this assumption?

To use the cooking analogy again-- I'm aware that some experienced users of the EyeOne or Spyder products calibrate their monitor and then make small adjustments afterward, just as an experienced chef "seasons to taste". It's a matter of developing a feel for the nuances and quirks of the calibrating hardware/software. Not scientific, but I still like to think that photography is an art!

I currently have my Dell calibrated for a 110 White Luminance value and a 40 Black Luminance value and the monitor does not look dark at all. Of course it's not glaringly bright either. Pure white looks slightly "pearly" rather than blown out.

ChasP505

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 10:40

Have you read the documentation that came with the spyder? I never read the stuff that came with my Moncao system, but it worked easily so I didn't need to.

Tim, I know this is addressed to Saxi, but I have to say that I got a handle on using the Spyder products mostly from the numerous step by step, fully illustrated tutorials and reviews I easily found by doing a Google search.

I also studied the EyeOne products and the similarities in the software far outweigh the differences.

Saxi

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 11:06

To use the cooking analogy again-- I'm aware that some experienced users of the EyeOne or Spyder products calibrate their monitor and then make small adjustments afterward, just as an experienced chef "seasons to taste". It's a matter of developing a feel for the nuances and quirks of the calibrating hardware/software. Not scientific, but I still like to think that photography is an art!

I currently have my Dell calibrated for a 110 White Luminance value and a 40 Black Luminance value and the monitor does not look dark at all. Of course it's not glaringly bright either. Pure white looks slightly "pearly" rather than blown out.

How do you test the black, I only see "luminance" when using Spyder 3 Pro, do I need an Elite or an Eye One to do black? I also can't get the luminance to show up all the time, I set it to adv mode and turned on RGB controls but it doesn't seem to listen it just uses fully auto, do it 4-5 times and eventually it comes up to do manual. Using the latest 3.04 too.

I understand photography is an art, but color is a science. Red is red and blue is blue, anything else is less than ideal and I want to make sure my monitor is dead on, so everything else I do has a reference point, that is why I want to scientifically (if possible) do brightness/contrast rather than go by what I feel looks good. I want to make sure it is baselined to something that I can repeat on other systems.

ChasP505

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 11:37

René Damkot

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 12:24

Saxi, When I calibrate using the spyder3 Elite software in Expert mode, it gives me a blank to enter the target Black Luminance value. I leave it empty, so the calibrator measures the native Black value. It tends to come back as 40-42.
40? :shock:
That seems *very* high.
I suggested doing a routine calibration, then progressively adjusting your Brightness and/or Contrast. Yeah, you'll have to expend some more paper and ink.

I'd do the same: Lower brightness, re-calibrate, read what the luminosity is, and if it's over 120Cd/m^2, repeat.

As for the settings: It's best to use "Native", unless after calibration the whitepoint is off 6500K by a mile.

By the way: What OS? There's another thread where Vista doesn't seems to play nice with a spyder... Thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=672680)

Saxi

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 12:26

Saxi, When I calibrate using the spyder3 Elite software in Expert mode, it gives me a blank to enter the target Black Luminance value. I leave it empty, so the calibrator measures the native Black value. It tends to come back as 40-42.

Frankly, I don't think I can be of any more help. I don't have any more answers and I personally did lots of trial and error before arriving at the formula that works for me and my specific system. But if we're being scientific, the method then would be to change only one variable and note the effect. That's why keeping in mind the limitations of the Spyder3 Pro software, I suggested doing a routine calibration, then progressively adjusting your Brightness and/or Contrast. Yeah, you'll have to expend some more paper and ink.

Maybe you can find other owners of that monitor and compare notes.

I'm now tapped out and I'm throwing in the towel! :(

I'm sorry I tapped you out.
I guess that is the difference between Pro and Elite software, I do not have any option to set black point, and I can't even get to select luminance. I did fine if I selected the ambient testing (it recommends off but if I select on, I get some control) I can actually measure white/black, it doesn't give me numbers but it guides me to a meter I need to center.

Saxi

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 12:44

40? :shock:
That seems *very* high.

I'd do the same: Lower brightness, re-calibrate, read what the luminosity is, and if it's over 120Cd/m^2, repeat.

As for the settings: It's best to use "Native", unless after calibration the whitepoint is off 6500K by a mile.

By the way: What OS? There's another thread where Vista doesn't seems to play nice with a spyder... Thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=672680)

Vista 64, the target it gave me was 200Cd/m^2, I read 90-120 is ideal but it felt dark when I did it on my Samsung. I had a hard time finding out how to get the luminance to even show up, it acts so wierd the software. I managed to get it up by using the option to check for ambient (keeping the spyder plugged in all the time) and was able to adjust based on the target but I don't think I have anyway to change the target from 200 in the pro version. I will check out that thread.

Saxi

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 12:47

40? :shock:
That seems *very* high.

I'd do the same: Lower brightness, re-calibrate, read what the luminosity is, and if it's over 120Cd/m^2, repeat.

As for the settings: It's best to use "Native", unless after calibration the whitepoint is off 6500K by a mile.

By the way: What OS? There's another thread where Vista doesn't seems to play nice with a spyder... Thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=672680)

I did make a registry change when I was calibrating my Samsungs to stop the nvidia from loading a default LUT coming from sleep and rebooting, not sure if this is the problem they were having. I primarily use LR and don't go into photoshop as much but they seem to be in sync here.

ChasP505

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 13:19

40? :shock:
That seems *very* high.

Yeah René, there's an abundance of discussion here about where your white luminance value should be, but no one says anything about black level. In the past I've tried setting the Black target in the mid to low 30s range but couldn't get there by using the Brightness control without the display going totally murky. So I took someone else's advice and allowed the calibrator to measure the black value. My blacks still look like true blacks, both on the display and printed. What do you suggest?

****I just realized something... I meant to say 0.40!!

René Damkot

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 13:49

Hahaha, that seems way more appropriate... I'd assumed it was a typo ;)

Colorblinded

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 13:50

That's a rather significant difference!

ChasP505

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 13:59

So what's a misplaced decimal between friends!!

A little side note regarding the Spyder3... I've read some test reviews of the Spyder3 that were so extremely technical that I got lost in the techno jargon... But they concluded that a weak point of the Spyder3 is in its measuring and reporting of the black luminance value. It tends to be too high. So I'm guessing that if I'm getting a measurement of 0.40cd/m2, it must actually be more like 0.30.

And I'm not gonna try to fix what ain't broken!

Saxi

8th of May 2009 (Fri), 23:20

I ended up picking up a HP LP2475w monitor as my main monitor as I wanted to use an IPS monitor and was getting tired of the problems I've had with all the Samsung monitors I have. I "think" the calibration is fairly close with my main monitor, but my Samsung 226CW is way off, I have a picture of my son wearing a green outfit from last Easter, on the HP it is green, on the Samsung it is grey. Both monitors were calibrated with the Spyder 3 Pro for 2.2 Native one after another. Both are loading the appropriate color profiles. I think I am going to pick up an EyeOne and give it a try to see if I have any better luck, but so far the Spyder has given me far less consistency than just using sRGB profile. The colors may not be 100% accurate, but they consistently show the correct colors just not the exact shade. I am not sure how much of this is related to being a Vista machine, the spyder, and just the Samsung 226CW in general. I am likely going replace my left monitor (samsung 226CW) with a Dell 2209WA. I had three Samsung 226CW fail within the same period of time, 2 of them were backlight warmup related.

Bearmann

10th of May 2009 (Sun), 12:14

Wow! That 40 number had me confused too! The Real world Photoshop book recommends using the native white point on LCD's, but I think suggests trying both and seeing what works. Many things I read say a white luminance of around 120. Some LCD's have trouble calibrating below this point. Here's a great site for testing your monitor, however, the contrast and brightness are so interdependent, that's the one part that didn't seem as useful to me. http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/ You can also test your black point at http://www.drycreekphoto.com/Learn/Calibration/monitor_black.htm
I'm also confused as to why the Spider does not set the brightness and contrast for you. I couldn't set brightness and contrast on my Dell 2202WA with my Optix XR, but that's an older package that is no longer being sold or supported. It shouldn't be a problem with a modern calibration and profiling package.

ChasP505

10th of May 2009 (Sun), 15:10

I'm also confused as to why the Spider does not set the brightness and contrast for you.

Bearman-- From information on the ColorEyes website (http://www.integrated-color.com/cedpro/coloreyesdisplay.html), I understand that the Spyder3 or EyeOne pucks combined with the ColorEyes calibration software WILL automatically set your brightness and contrast directly through your video card.

Also, to Saxi-- After my earlier contributions to this thread, I've found that I get absolutely excellent, repeatable calibration and print results with my new Dell 2209WA using the Spyder3 Elite, 6500K, 2.2 gamma, 130 cd/m2 white luminance, 0.30 black luminance. And... I'm calibrating with the Brightness and Contrast controls, never touching the RGBs.

siriusdogstar

10th of May 2009 (Sun), 15:33

set the monitor for sRGB, then calibrate.

Saxi

10th of May 2009 (Sun), 17:38

Bearman-- From information on the ColorEyes website (http://www.integrated-color.com/cedpro/coloreyesdisplay.html), I understand that the Spyder3 or EyeOne pucks combined with the ColorEyes calibration software WILL automatically set your brightness and contrast directly through your video card.

Also, to Saxi-- After my earlier contributions to this thread, I've found that I get absolutely excellent, repeatable calibration and print results with my new Dell 2209WA using the Spyder3 Elite, 6500K, 2.2 gamma, 130 cd/m2 white luminance, 0.30 black luminance. And... I'm calibrating with the Brightness and Contrast controls, never touching the RGBs.

I tried touching RGB and without. I wonder if the Elite just works a lot better than the Pro edition. I have an elite puck (they sent me a replacement) but only Pro software. I know the pucks are the same except for the color.

ChasP505

10th of May 2009 (Sun), 18:02

You might want to download the trial of ColorEyes and run it with your Spyder3 puck.

Saxi

10th of May 2009 (Sun), 18:07

You might want to download the trial of ColorEyes and run it with your Spyder3 puck.

I was just about to give that a try, so basically the ColorEyes is a better software product than what ships with Spyder and EyeOne? Would that basically make the Spyder Pro as good as the Spyder Elite or better?

Saxi

10th of May 2009 (Sun), 18:09

You might want to download the trial of ColorEyes and run it with your Spyder3 puck.

Is Color Eyes friendly for running on Multiple machines or does it require internet activation every time you want to run it on a different machine? Does the software allow you to run it on as many pcs as you like? I am trying to calibrate at least 4 of my machines here.

Bearmann

10th of May 2009 (Sun), 21:36

I wasn't necessarily referring to automatic calibration, though that would be nice. I just meant a software controlled calibration, e.g. set your brightness at its highest, click this button, now set your brightness at its lowest and click this button, etc.

I haven't seen a consensus on what is the best product. Even with the same screen and same calibration product, some people get good results and others don't.

ChasP505

10th of May 2009 (Sun), 22:19

so basically the ColorEyes is a better software product than what ships with Spyder and EyeOne?

I don't know... I have no experience using it. I've only read their website and some reviews. I only know that the website presents it as top shelf calibration software.

Would that basically make the Spyder Pro as good as the Spyder Elite or better?

I think you still haven't grasped that the Spyder3 puck is the same, identical hardware, whether it comes in the Pro or Elite package. Just as the Eyeone Display2 uses the same exact puck as the EyeOne LT package. Only the software is different. So the answer would be no.

ChasP505

10th of May 2009 (Sun), 22:24

Is Color Eyes friendly for running on Multiple machines or does it require internet activation every time you want to run it on a different machine? Does the software allow you to run it on as many pcs as you like? I am trying to calibrate at least 4 of my machines here.

I don't know. But I gave you a link to the ColorEyes website. I'm sure you can find the answers there.

ChasP505

10th of May 2009 (Sun), 22:29

I wasn't necessarily referring to automatic calibration, though that would be nice. I just meant a software controlled calibration, e.g. set your brightness at its highest, click this button, now set your brightness at its lowest and click this button, etc.

The Spyder3 Elite package and the EyeOne Display 2 both allow you to directly enter "target" white and black values. The Spyder3 Pro does not have that direct functionality.

Saxi

11th of May 2009 (Mon), 06:48

I don't know... I have no experience using it. I've only read their website and some reviews. I only know that the website presents it as top shelf calibration software.

I think you still haven't grasped that the Spyder3 puck is the same, identical hardware, whether it comes in the Pro or Elite package. Just as the Eyeone Display2 uses the same exact puck as the EyeOne LT package. Only the software is different. So the answer would be no.

Actually I am familiar that the pucks are the same. But the software is different, it is much easier to do the luminance values with Elite as Pro is very limited.

René Damkot

12th of May 2009 (Tue), 06:16

I couldn't set brightness and contrast on my Dell 2202WA with my Optix XR, but that's an older package that is no longer being sold or supported. It shouldn't be a problem with a modern calibration and profiling package.

My Monaco Optix XR pro only gives a "too low-good-too high" slider for LCD screens, unless you turn on "expert mode" (IIRC). Then it allows you to set a specific value (100 Cd/m^2 for instance).

ChasP505

12th of May 2009 (Tue), 07:48

unless you turn on "expert mode" (IIRC). Then it allows you to set a specific value (100 Cd/m^2 for instance).

Spyder3 Elite works the same way. They call the two options "Assisted Mode" and "Expert Console".

Bearmann

12th of May 2009 (Tue), 18:54

My Monaco Optix XR pro only gives a "too low-good-too high" slider for LCD screens, unless you turn on "expert mode" (IIRC). Then it allows you to set a specific value (100 Cd/m^2 for instance).

I've only got the regular version, not the Pro version. It only has trouble calibrating a LCD; it does fine profiling a LCD once the brightness and contrast have been set.

DavidPhoto

22nd of May 2009 (Fri), 14:05

I use 2.2-native. Screen looks great but prints are a little dark. I had Black Lumin.=.40 and White Lumin.=110. I've worked them down to .30 and 94 but so far I dont see much difference.
To adjust white Lum. it says to use the contrast control but most people seem to indicate that the screen must be too bright if prints are coming out dark. ????
Any tips?

ChasP505

22nd of May 2009 (Fri), 16:23

it says to use the contrast control but most people seem to indicate that the screen must be too bright if prints are coming out dark. ????
Any tips?

With the Spyder3 Elite and the Dell 2209WA, I found that using 6500K/2.2 gave better results than native/2.2. I also found that with my typical home office lighting, 130cd/m2 gives me a good print to display match. I do use both Brightness and Contrast controls, but in practice the Contrast control is barely budged from the factory default of 75 up to 80.

For black, I target 0.30 cd/m2 and the Brightness control gets lowered from default 75 down to 25. I read one source which said your black and white luminance settings should have at least a ratio of 400:1 for good contrast/dynamic range.

When printing from Photoshop, I use Softproofing (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/soft-proofing.shtml). I think this is something that is often neglected and could be the reason for your dark prints.

DavidPhoto

22nd of May 2009 (Fri), 17:27

With the Spyder3 Elite and the Dell 2209WA, I found that using 6500K/2.2 gave better results than native/2.2. I also found that with my typical home office lighting, 130cd/m2 gives me a good print to display match. I do use both Brightness and Contrast controls, but in practice the Contrast control is barely budged from the factory default of 75 up to 80.

For black, I target 0.30 cd/m2 and the Brightness control gets lowered from default 75 down to 25. I read one source which said your black and white luminance settings should have at least a ratio of 400:1 for good contrast/dynamic range.

When printing from Photoshop, I use Softproofing (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/soft-proofing.shtml). I think this is something that is often neglected and could be the reason for your dark prints.

Hey thanks for the response ChasP505.
I have the Spyder3 Elite and the same monitor. I just got this printer (Epson 3800) and have only printed a few small samples from Lightroom so far. Other than being a bit dark, print color seems to be spot on. Of course the light in the room that I am in is fairly dim. When I take the prints into better light they look much closer. But I will try using your luminence target values to see what I get. In playing around with different luminence target values I did notice that with this monitor that when the brightness setting gets low there is little discernable difference. Prior to this I had the settings at .40 and 110 and things looked pretty good. Of course my goal is to get the prints closer to the display.

ChasP505

22nd of May 2009 (Fri), 21:53

Other than being a bit dark, print color seems to be spot on. Of course the light in the room that I am in is fairly dim. When I take the prints into better light they look much closer. .

I let my prints dry for several hours and then look at them in natural daylight before judging. My office is bright due to two big windows directly behind me as I'm sitting at my desk, and they get the strong New Mexico sunlight. Even with wood shades drawn, the light filters through. That's why I don't use/need any artificial lighting and I calibrate to a higher white point than most people.

René Damkot

27th of May 2009 (Wed), 11:11

Of course the light in the room that I am in is fairly dim. When I take the prints into better light they look much closer.

Prints should be compared under standard lighting: lighting-your-workspace (http://www.kevinmillsphoto.com/2008/10/lighting-your-workspace/) and http://www.just-normlicht.de/uk/shop/index.asp might be overkill for most users, but gives a hint ;)

If your prints end up under low intensity tungsten lighting, you might want to anticipate that and either use a different .ICC profile (no idea how to create it, but ISTR reading about the possibility in some software or other, maybe a RIP), or adjust manually (adjustment layer, trial and error)