Calibrating and Profiling Monitors...do it correctly. Use Argyll CMS.

[stratman]

I have read that LED TV' may be more accurately calibrated after ~100 hours of use.

I have also read varying amounts of time for a monitor to be turned on before calibrating, from 15 -60 minutes. The following is a paper on how long after turning on a monitor before calibrating:

http://www.spectracal.com/downloads...isplay Warm Up Rates - How Long is Enough.pdf

 

[mikling]

in

I have read that LED TV' may be more accurately calibrated after ~100 hours of use.

I have also read varying amounts of time for a monitor to be turned on before calibrating, from 15 -60 minutes. The following is a paper on how long after turning on a monitor before calibrating:

http://www.spectracal.com/downloads/files/Website/Website Articles/Display Warm Up Rates - How Long is Enough.pdf

yes, that would also apply to a new monitor as well.....as I discovered. 100 hours is fine with me I can vouch for that.

The stabilization after turn on.....with the newer LED lighting, the stabilization should be reached fairly quickly as opposed to CCFL types. On my DELL, you can see the shifts within the first 5-10 minutes. I suppose measurements would also prove that it was still shifting easily way beyond that first 5 or ten so the hour mark is possibly warranted and you can't miss with that.

The 100 hours is what got me. On an 8 hour day, it translates to nearly two weeks of use! Who can wait that long!!!!

 

[stratman]

The 100 hours is what got me. On an 8 hour day, it translates to nearly two weeks of use! Who can wait that long!!!!

I hear you!

A professional TV calibrator I was following over at AVS Forums calibrated his new TV immediately after buying it. Why wait? I believe he was going to re-calibrate after a period of use as well. (you may need to re-calibrate after firmware upgrades also)

My recommendation is if you are going to have someone else calibrate your TV for you then schedule the professional to come over after ~100 hours of use. Until then tinker with the controls if you like. However, if you are going to calibrate your own TV, then why wait? You're going to do it again anyways because you like doing activities like this.

 

[The Hat]

157 channels and nothing on but the calibrator…

 

[mikling]

157 channels? Hat, Channels? the new era has arrived and is causing traditional channels all sorts of problems.
Yeah... over the years I preferred to always used a HTPC and calibrate the HTPC - Flat Sscreen combination with a Spyder. That way I avoid the requirement for intricate TV calibrations that supposedly only trained techs and secret service access codes will allow. I let software do it for me and use the OS for handling it. In 2015 hopefully, I'll use Argyll to calibrate so I can watch movies.

 

[3dogs]

That's the problem with my EIZO.
OK, it is their low range product, but I did not expect this, my 10 years old DELL 1905 was better.

When I buy a wide gamut (thanks to Roy) , I will consider a DELL again.

I was thinking to move down the cost scale, and considering a) NEC and b) cheaper EIZO. I just cant do it, Roy puts it in terms of RAW capture and throwing away data, which is exactly what I avoid, but approach it using different critera.
You only get what you pay for - they say.......so advanced technology costs more, so price, to a certain extent carries along thw whole gamut of attributes and is to me a primary differentiator, next is manufacturer.
Using the same logic Roy outlines, I look at who is using what, and why, what point (for me) to shoot RAW with good gear then not be able to actually SEE what I have captured in its entirety. Thus, the question I ask myself is this, if my objective is to make the best prints possible, what combination of gear is MOST lkely to be ABLE to deliver that for ME, given my limitations.

That is how I fall vuctim to my own technical insecurity, I am driven to copy the successful in my chosen field, then either rise or fall on my own ability, and that makes me blind to many worthy options when it comes to monitors (and other bits of gear).
For me the real value of this forum is the fact that so many different ways of looking at the same thing get discussed, and I get to think far more broadly than I would otherwise.

Great thread - thanks

 

[Roy Sletcher]

I really haven't a clue about the detail of ArgyllCMS dispcalGUI as yet, but here are two of the outputs available from dispcalGUI as a result of the profiling of an ASUS v239V. The first versus sRGB and the second versus Adobe RGB1998.

View attachment 2173 View attachment 2170

The third and fourth are Gamutvision B&W Density and 3D L*a*b* versus Adobe RGB 1998

View attachment 2174 View attachment 2175

Look good to me Emu.

Despite my loud mouth I am by no means an expert, just know enough to trouble shoot any simple problems I run into.

One comment about your charts/graphs - I note you are running at a fairly high luminance level at 157 which is pretty high.

From this I would surmise you are viewing in a very bright room. If the ambient light level drops does you monitor appear hot or very bright? Guess all is well if it works for you. I would imagine something as sophisticated as ArgyllCMS dispcalGUI would monitor luminance in real time, given that entry level spyder and X-rite do this.

How do your prints look? One outcome of a high luminance level could be dark prints or "crushed blacks" in the darker tonal ranges.

I was also mildly interested to see that your charts described their rendering intents as Absolute colorimetric, and the table gives the rendering intent as Relative colorimetric. Probably nothing of consequence.

All these comments and posts are valuable learning tools as we increase our knowledge base.

RS

 

[Roy Sletcher]

I was thinking to move down the cost scale, and considering a) NEC and b) cheaper EIZO. I just cant do it, Roy puts it in terms of RAW capture and throwing away data, which is exactly what I avoid, but approach it using different critera.
You only get what you pay for - they say.......so advanced technology costs more, so price, to a certain extent carries along thw whole gamut of attributes and is to me a primary differentiator, next is manufacturer.
Using the same logic Roy outlines, I look at who is using what, and why, what point (for me) to shoot RAW with good gear then not be able to actually SEE what I have captured in its entirety. Thus, the question I ask myself is this, if my objective is to make the best prints possible, what combination of gear is MOST lkely to be ABLE to deliver that for ME, given my limitations.

That is how I fall vuctim to my own technical insecurity, I am driven to copy the successful in my chosen field, then either rise or fall on my own ability, and that makes me blind to many worthy options when it comes to monitors (and other bits of gear).
For me the real value of this forum is the fact that so many different ways of looking at the same thing get discussed, and I get to think far more broadly than I would otherwise.

Great thread - thanks

Excellent summary 3dogs. I think we share the same mental condition, or are driven by the same demons. I recommend my psychiatrist: R. U. Nuts.

Now that I am retired, and on a fixed income, have to think long and hard about each purchase to ensure value for money, and longevity. We are fortunate to have the internet as a resource to do this. It has certainly improved my percentage of good value for money deals.

To paraphrase your comment `You always pay for what you get. The big challenge is to get what you payed for!``

My personal opinion is that the difference in a wide gamut monitor over a standard monitor is still very small, and if you have to agonize over the need, the chances are you can wait till the specs price curve improves.

For graphic imaging professionals there is no choice, they have to buy them, and the prices are pitched at that level right now.

RS

 

[3dogs]

@Roy Sletcher Whilst I am sure your shrink is a very capable fellow, sounds like you may need to consider carefully before you agree to my request, as it may send him into the arms of my fellow R U Allthere. See thing is, would you , could you, please PM me the phone number of your man R U Nuts. I am planning on retirement Feb. 2017 and may just benefit from a bit of pre planning

This IS the conundrum in a nutshell, for me:

"My personal opinion is that the difference in a wide gamut monitor over a standard monitor is still very small"

.......a little voice of a very big demon that whispers " but what if you are missing something, perhaps you just can't see what you think you are looking for" .....and I immediately retreat into ,



On a serious note, buyer beware, marketing noise, fads, trends and assorted diversions is exactly why a person spends a year or more researching ad nausium BEFORE committing ones hard earned reddies.
My partner buys the cheapest, then buys another one to replace it, then yet another, cos the replacement bent or died, and my goodies go on to live a long life doing exactly what I want from them then get re homed and make a healthy contribution the the funds needed to purchase a replacement new BOY'S TOY!!

 

[Emulator]

@Roy Sletcher Whilst I am sure your shrink is a very capable fellow,.... a replacement new BOY'S TOY!!

I think we all operate that way if the truth be known. The only way to evaluate is to compare technical specs and test results and then you can be misled, but the advantage of the forum is that usually there is someone astute, that has not been misled and they drag everyone else back to reality.

Look good to me Emu.................

Nice to see someone has looked carefully at the content, I am not wasting my time! Yes Roy I noticed the 157 and as I normally run at 110, I reacted as you did. This is why I said I hadn't a clue about dispcalGUI as yet. Further examination of all the data shows that luminosity is set to 120, which it had assumed, without asking me. I speculate that 157 may be the maximum capability of the display, but I am not sure! It certainly looks like 120 in practice.

I hadn't noticed the Absolute Colorimetric, so that is a new question to be answered. Does it use that to show the maximum extent of the gamut? It looks as though I would be able to switch it, to look at the others.

There is a lot to read about ArgyllCMS DispcalGUI and a lot of it is not designed as easy reading for the uninitiated.

One thing the exercise has shown is that the latest £200-£300 monitors can produce reasonable results if you are looking at sRGB. AdobeRGB is another matter, but when you look at the printers' performance, they still leave something to be desired.