Photo editing Monitors (colour correction screen)

[3dogs]

Here is a link to what I consider to be a proper colour correction monitor.
I simply can't afford one, but at the end of the day it is what it sets out to be. What put me on to Eizo was the evenness of brightness corner to corner and the graduation between tones.

Whilst I can't go there, I know that on a technical basis if I have BOTH fluctuating brightness AND variations around my screen my adjustments are going to be out. I suspect that I and most viewers looking at two prints colour corrected on two different screens but printed at the same time off the same printer, would NOT pick the difference.
BUT
(for me), right or wrong, that devalues the lesser, simply because I know it exists. That is a character flaw that I live with, thankfully it IS a resistible compulsion

http://www.eizo.com/global/products/coloredge/cg277/index.html

 

[Emulator]

A visit to a shrink would probably be cheaper. Or simply raising the topic on here!

 

[3dogs]

A visit to a shrink would probably be cheaper. Or simply raising the topic on here!

Let me think on that option, yes here is safety amongst the printer hoarders, ink fossikers, alchamlists and at the shrink, facing reality, no just too scary?

 

[stratman]

Or you could buy a decent monitor and purchase a monitor calibration kit, such as from SpectraCal (CalMAN RGB) or Spyder (4Pro or 4Elite) and take the few minutes required to calibrate your monitor on a regular basis or when the lighting changes significantly.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

 

[palombian]

Here is a link to what I consider to be a proper colour correction monitor.
I simply can't afford one, but at the end of the day it is what it sets out to be. What put me on to Eizo was the evenness of brightness corner to corner and the graduation between tones.

Whilst I can't go there, I know that on a technical basis if I have BOTH fluctuating brightness AND variations around my screen my adjustments are going to be out. I suspect that I and most viewers looking at two prints colour corrected on two different screens but printed at the same time off the same printer, would NOT pick the difference.
BUT
(for me), right or wrong, that devalues the lesser, simply because I know it exists. That is a character flaw that I live with, thankfully it IS a resistible compulsion

http://www.eizo.com/global/products/coloredge/cg277/index.html

Most of the EIZO Coloredge monitors are wide gamut, and even if I would want to pay for it, it is overkill for me since I show most of my photos on the web.
You also have to buy their own calibration software.

As far as I understood, the (auto) colour correction is for internal variations, not for the ambient light.
Same as the Colormunki suggests to run a software calibration every 4 weeks.
I can't imagine these variations are high enough to be noticed in uncontrolled light.

In my situation a sRGB monitor and a Colormunki Photo is enough.

I experimented with the brightness adjustments of the Colormunki software, but didn't find it usefull until now.
The quality of the EIZO's seems to be better than average, I am searching for a second hand Flexscan.
Tests suggest to switch off the automatic brightness adjust on these monitors .

 

[CakeHole]

Or you could buy a decent monitor and purchase a monitor calibration kit, such as from SpectraCal (CalMAN RGB) or Spyder (4Pro or 4Elite) and take the few minutes required to calibrate your monitor on a regular basis or when the lighting changes significantly.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

Ive also mentioned spectracal in another thread to him LOL, far cheaper and probably better results than relying on a monitor to magically adjust everything perfect on its own LOL

 

[stratman]

Ive also mentioned spectracal in another thread to him LOL, far cheaper and probably better results than relying on a monitor to magically adjust everything perfect on its own LOL

I agree that a colorimeter is a good investment when color fidelity is desired, and I like CalMAN.

Nothing magical about the EIZO calibration. What may make it even better is to use CalMAN to create LUTs files for EIZO's self-calibration. (http://www.spectracal.com/Documents/QSG/EIZO-CalMAN-AutoCal-QuickStart.pdf)

 

[3dogs]

Or you could buy a decent monitor and purchase a monitor calibration kit, such as from SpectraCal (CalMAN RGB) or Spyder (4Pro or 4Elite) and take the few minutes required to calibrate your monitor on a regular basis or when the lighting changes significantly.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

Stone the crows fellas! You reckon im a galah? Just spent yonks yappin on about gettin profiles read with the colormunki, be a bit of a drongo if id spent all them reddies on a bloomin Eizo then not kept it up to scratch, regular like.

The Eizo calibrates easily with munki, its own optional system was ok but I find using munki gives better results. My screen does not offer auto calibration I have to initiate that myself.

I had a read of calman but could not get past the marketing speak, once I see "you can" I quit cant stand marketers bs regardless of how good the product is supposed to be. Spent a good 20 min trying to find if I could use it with my Eizo, and/ or munki photo. Got fed up with the piffle speak and circular referencing.

Translation

Gosh fellows, seems you missed my thread on profiling Canson Watercolour a while ago, I calibrate printer and screen, and use the advanced option that allows me to create a number of screen settings that I can select as required, anytime I print outside my optimum lighting window.

 

[stratman]

@3dogs:

Are you drinking billy's bong water again?

(Yes, that's a play on the Australian word 'billabong'.)

Thanks for the translation!

 

[Emulator]

Looking at the timing of the posts, I don't think they have night time in Aus, they just keep on rolling along.