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

[Emulator]

Phew after all of them BIG words I think I need my eye tested.
Amazing...

The all seeing one I presume, not the other two.

You forgot to emphasise that quantum theory is relevant - the image doesn't exist unless you are viewing it.

 

[Roy Sletcher]

¸ Some stuff edited out to save bandwdth

Maybe so. There is too much pseudoscience going around these days that countries are willing to bet their financial health on. Has anyone ever visually counted, one by one, each of the ~16 million colors of a 24 bit monitor?

¸ Some stuff edited out to save bandwdth

*.

HA HA ha....

Yes and it is very simple - Should take a computer couple of milliseconds, and then it will spit out a visual chart of the colours which may tak a little longer depending on its graphics capability.

Example:
R1,G0,B0 to R256,G0,B0
R1,G1,B0 to R1,G256,B0
R1,G1,B1 to R1,G1,B256
R2,G0,B0 to R256,G0,B0
...and so on to:
R255,B255,G255

which will be approx 16.7 million colours

I am pretty sure that image already exists in Photoshop but am too lazy to look right now.

HOWEVER STRATMAN, I UNDERSTAND THE SPIRIT OF WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, AND I FUNDAMENTALLY AGREE - WHO CARES

One additional point I do feel strongly about is the amount of disinformation and misinformation that is written about the subject throughout the many graphics forums on the internet. Printerknowledge is one of the restrained and moderate sites in this regard.

Some writings are downright incorrect and plainly wrong yet presented a facts by enthusiastic participants who know not of what they speak.

I am trying to formulate a response to this point in my mind, but want it to percolate a little before posting, as I don`t want to come across as a strident fanatic about the subject. (Which I am )


Roy Sletcher
Colour management is not rocket science. It is a bit more complicated than that.

 

[Roy Sletcher]

The link below gives interesting reading relating to colour spaces, cameras and monitors.

https://forums.adobe.com/thread/284944?start=0&tstart=0

Hi Emu,

With all due respect. (Learned that line watching The Sopranos)

Went to you link and read most of the content. It dates back to 2008. Nothing wrong with that because the science (for want of a better word) has not changed, but the hardware being used certainly has.

In 2008 flat panel LCD`s were in their infancy. Very expensive and not very good. Many were still using their Incredible Hulk CRT monitors. The result is that those comments not directly comparable with current displays.

Even worse, you are putting a lot of faith in the words of unknown participants in a forum without establishing their credentials relating to the comments they make.

As a for instance, they are talking about OFFSET PRINTING (Not inkjet) and then ramble on for many messages about RGB and colour spaces.

Offset Printing uses the CMYK model or colour space NOT RGB, Secondly the SWOP (Standard Web offset Profile) has been available in Photoshop for over 10 years. This should have been the response in the second message in that thread. Could add lot more - but wont.

I think the lesson for us here is be certain the person you are believing has some clue about the subject he professes expertise in.

This is after all the internet!

DISCLAIMER - I am not an expert and am open to correction with sources and attribution included.

RS

 

[Emulator]

As I was saying, there are some interesting thoughts to be found. The idea that switching colour space of an image and then switching back to the original colour space, might tidy up the out of gamut colours in a subsequent process, while leaving the image in its original profile, I may be wrong but I don't think is practical or controllable - try it and see for your self.

But even the process of removing the profile (in Adobe), of an image produces uncertain results (to me, may be not to some!), try it on the Prophoto Evaluation image. What exactly are you left with? (Finishing a sentence with a preposition*****) This in theory puts it in the PCS (Profile Connection Space), which appears to be an image with a dull version of the original, which cannot apparently be changed back, but non-the-less is a visible image with some sort of "colour space", but what is it?

I must thank @mikling for starting this thread and inspiring an interest in using ArgyllCMS for display profiling. Having become more familiar with dispcalGUI, I am now more confident in my display setup. One of the initial problems was that the display's inbuilt controls screen appeared immediately behind the colour patch screen in the centre of the display and you needed both to set up the initial state. Then I found you could resize and move the colour patch screen. Reading the supporting documentation helped, although that is a thing I am inclined to ignore!

I have now achieved a remarkably well profiled LCD display, compared with previous attempts, at 110cd/msq.

I have Spyder/SpyderPRINT, ColorMunki Photo and ArgyllCMS and tried them all, but the extent of detail achieved with Argyll+ColorMunki is very pleasing.

 

[3dogs]

@Emulator is the improvement enough to support the agony of the learning curve required?
And are you seeing that reflected in print quality output, I ask because its tempting, but you are well into the learning. Reading other sources seems to indicate a dedicated following, but they all seem to be computer folks, and one of them, I am NOT.

 

[3dogs]

The link below gives interesting reading relating to colour spaces, cameras and monitors.

https://forums.adobe.com/thread/284944?start=0&tstart=0

Just got to following this link and it confirms my conclusions based on my research.
Brand choice becomes tribal, outcomes get skewed to justufy tribalism, and non of us are squeeky clean on that score.

Second, in light of the above, I will NEVER be open minded enough to make the adjustments required to connect my Mac to my Eizo. I have become too "tribal" in my workflow.

Third, I ditched Colour Navigator soon after trying it out, it may work for some folks, not me.

Finally, it is with great sadness that I see yet again, folks grasping output graphs and tables to communicate visual perceptions to each other, its a platform that is cold, has no soul, and ignores preferances and bias. @stratman suggested that the fellow that was unable to see the colours of the gum tree bark, that I see and the camera revealed, has a vision defect, explaining the fact that he does not see. That is where science is loaded with BS, because it tries too hard to explain, ignoring our idividualised humanity and ideosyncratic preferences. I think you said the picture does not exist until you are looking at it..........same can be said of blind science, if a person sees colour, there IS colour, the graph is WRONG, its not human, we are, the graph serves us, not the other way around.

The fella in question is an Aussie born bushie, been looking at trees on his farm all his life, just never got around to thinking on WHY the bark was so beautiful after rain, then waiting till it dried and walking up to the tree to examininge the bark closely. I did, now I see........

 

[Emulator]

@Emulator is the improvement enough to support the agony of the learning curve required?
And are you seeing that reflected in print quality output, I ask because its tempting, but you are well into the learning. Reading other sources seems to indicate a dedicated following, but they all seem to be computer folks, and one of them, I am NOT.

Yes, in my opinion it is and certainly worth the "hard learning?" that may be involved. In fact it isn't all that hard, you don't have to understand all the background, it is more a question of following "instructions" and perhaps a little help on here.

Comparing a correctly profiled print against a correctly profiled display is, as you are aware, difficult, mainly because one is reflective and the other illuminated. But taking that into account, the current match is the closest I have achieved. If you want to try it yourself, I am sure you will get there with only a little pain!

 

[3dogs]

Yes, in my opinion it is and certainly worth the "hard learning?" that may be involved. In fact it isn't all that hard, you don't have to understand all the background, it is more a question of following "instructions" and perhaps a little help on here.

Comparing a correctly profiled print against a correctly profiled display is, as you are aware, difficult, mainly because one is reflective and the other illuminated. But taking that into account, the current match is the closest I have achieved. If you want to try it yourself, I am sure you will get there with only a little pain!

I'm starting to suspect you have a cruel streak concealed in there somewhere.

 

[Emulator]

Who me? Let me know when you are ready for your first session!

 

[The Hat]