Is our monitor properly calibrated?

whoelse · 16th April 2004

Just wonder, do most ppl here calibrate their monitor to display the color correctly? I use the software that comes with the monitor to tune the setting.

For my another monitor and my notebook, photo on clubsnap all display very differently since I did not calibrate it correctly. This will also mean that a properly exposed picture may display over or underexpose on all our monitor depending on whether they are properly calibrated.

Is there a free or good software out there so we can use to tune our monitors?
Anyone know?

Octopuz · 16th April 2004

Originally Posted by whoelse

Just wonder, do most ppl here calibrate their monitor to display the color correctly? I use the software that comes with the monitor to tune the setting.

For my another monitor and my notebook, photo on clubsnap all display very differently since I did not calibrate it correctly. This will also mean that a properly exposed picture may display over or underexpose on all our monitor depending on whether they are properly calibrated.

Is there a free or good software out there so we can use to tune our monitors?
Anyone know?

You need a specific device like Eye One or Spyder to calibrate your monitor accurately... These devices r not cheap.. Maybe borrow from your friends who have it..

VampTreSS · 16th April 2004

Does anyone have tis then? The Eye One or Spyder.. Can burn it.. But of cos, tht's just my suggestion.. *act innocent*

Or, whoever has it, could I "borrow" it? Pm me!

justarius · 16th April 2004

Originally Posted by VampTreSS

Does anyone have tis then? The Eye One or Spyder.. Can burn it.. But of cos, tht's just my suggestion.. *act innocent*

Or, whoever has it, could I "borrow" it? Pm me!

hehe, it's not just the software. Its a physical device to attach to your screen to help calibrate it...so you can't just 'burn' it...

horizoner · 16th April 2004

I am using a very primitive way ...

First send my pics for developing (Fuji) and will tell ppl strictly no correction. Then I will compare the hardcopy pics with the softcopy and adjust my monitor accordingly. Like this, the monitor can be about 95% calibrated. At least it works for me

Azure · 16th April 2004

Originally Posted by horizoner

I am using a very primitive way ...

First send my pics for developing (Fuji) and will tell ppl strictly no correction. Then I will compare the hardcopy pics with the softcopy and adjust my monitor accordingly. Like this, the monitor can be about 95% calibrated. At least it works for me

Yepz. Same thing I do and it works fine for me, and for the offset and lab materials I need to work with.

whoelse · 16th April 2004

Well done, very creative.
Usually when we buy a monitor, there will have a software plus something look like a grey card that we can stick on the monitor to adjust. I think this is fine. So, there isn't something we can download freely and adjust? But then again, probably we need to grey thingy.

No wonder everytime I hear comment abt other people exposure which are contradicting. It maybe our monitor that are tune differently. That itself can be a few stop different looking at the display. Also I find LCD more washout no matter how I adjust :-0

Guess the better method for adjusting monitor for those that have not calibrate is to use the method u guy suggested -> hardcopy tunning.

Octopuz · 16th April 2004

Originally Posted by horizoner

I am using a very primitive way ...

First send my pics for developing (Fuji) and will tell ppl strictly no correction. Then I will compare the hardcopy pics with the softcopy and adjust my monitor accordingly. Like this, the monitor can be about 95% calibrated. At least it works for me

Yaya.. this is the common method advised by most of the photo processing lab..

Watcher · 16th April 2004

Originally Posted by Octopuz

Yaya.. this is the common method advised by most of the photo processing lab..

Because you will then be tied to the same photo lab while you do all the work of profiling. Brilliant

Do you know what is being done when the above advise is taken? You're calibrating your system to match the printer; not to a consistent standard

.

There is no quick and cheap way to calibrate your system. Device drift in the output. Phosphor on your CRT changes color as it age, Sony Artisan comes with a set of hardware + software profiling system that also automatically reminds you to re-profile every 30 days

. Printing chemicals changes its properties as prints are processed. Both need regular re-profiling. As Beautiful Memories how often they reprofile their system...

Java_Guru · 16th April 2004

It is actually worse than that if you use this technique. This implies that you will color edit 100% of all the photos you take. That is crazy.

Think abt it carefully in terms of a workflow and you should realise how come it is 100%.

[quote=Watcher]Because you will then be tied to the same photo lab while you do all the work of profiling. Brilliant

QUOTE]

Noir · 16th April 2004

Originally Posted by whoelse

Is there a free or good software out there so we can use to tune our monitors?
Anyone know?

Not exactly free, but if u use photoshop, try calibrating using Adobe Gamma which comes with it. However if u have another $300 to spare, u can think about investing in a basic hardware calibration device, like Spyder.

horizoner · 16th April 2004

Originally Posted by Watcher

Because you will then be tied to the same photo lab while you do all the work of profiling. Brilliant

Do you know what is being done when the above advise is taken? You're calibrating your system to match the printer; not to a consistent standard .

There is no quick and cheap way to calibrate your system. Device drift in the output. Phosphor on your CRT changes color as it age, Sony Artisan comes with a set of hardware + software profiling system that also automatically reminds you to re-profile every 30 days . Printing chemicals changes its properties as prints are processed. Both need regular re-profiling. As Beautiful Memories how often they reprofile their system...

I only use this kind of calibration for lab which i frequent and comfy with. Anyway, most FDI lab are very consistant esp when no correction is required on their side. I don't think it's necessary for our monitor to be 99.999% accurate for most photographer

Azure · 16th April 2004

I print only at a handful of FDI labs (2-3) and I regularly check on my monitor every 3-4 weeks. Of course if you are one to splurge on those fancy Spyders and stuff, no one is going to stop you. I'm happy with what I deem a cost-effective approach. BTW, for the techfolks, I let PhotoShop do all the work. It is called a batch process, a.k.a. a hands-free workflow where I can go get coffee.

As for Frontier labs, BM is the only one I know that uses powder-based chemicals. Maybe some of you'd like to check with the Fuji techs on the sensitivity of that. The FDI labs I print at use fluid chemicals, more stable if the lab runs heavy printing.

//my last post on this... will not be drawn into silly arguments

Watcher · 16th April 2004

Personally, I find that to me it is as important as the lenses that I buy for my camera. Users here go for expensive lenses, pro lenses, etc and have no problem spending >$2k on lenses. A Spyder or a i-One display cost from $300 to $500. For a film user, it would be a waste. But for digital users who spends hours in front of the computer, their "digital lab", making sure the colors, saturation, etc are right, it is like the precise or accurate colours does matter as much to them.

If that is the case, fine. I tried to raise interest a year ago. No one seems interested. So why do I bother?

Watcher · 16th April 2004

Originally Posted by horizoner

I only use this kind of calibration for lab which i frequent and comfy with. Anyway, most FDI lab are very consistant esp when no correction is required on their side. I don't think it's necessary for our monitor to be 99.999% accurate for most photographer

My tribal shots was a good example. I did the editing and light/contrast and the levels on a uncalibrated monitor. Came out, the model looks too dark or toasted. I had to redo all again.

See this thread and the 4th photo was done on the uncalibrated screen, vs the rest. If you can't see the difference, then never mind.

Noir · 16th April 2004

Calibration is important, but sadly, often a misunderstood or ignored part of the workflow. Why even bother spending so much on camera gear if final print results are less than optimal anyway? Or even spend time ,or rather waste time, in front of the computer tweaking colours on an uncalibrated monitor, that is if one even does that, that is. Yes! Labs can help with making the prints look nicer but the whole beauty of digital photography, I believe, is that the serious photographer has more control over how the final product will look in the end without much external interference.

Comparing the prints with the softcopy and adjusting the monitor accordingly is a way. However what if the final output is for the screen for sharing and not for prints?

Neo · 17th April 2004

The genius is in the print. Agree with Noir and Watcher on the opinion that there's no point spending so much on lenses and cameras to deliver high quality images if you're not able to fine-tune your images and deliver a perfect print (whether inkjet or photo lab) that shows your photography potential. For me, not getting my monitor calibrated is false economy, since I'll be spending so much time and money reprinting my images just to get it right. The money spent on a Spyder allowed me to get prints really close to my screen, so there's less frustration during the imaging stage.

Remember that even with a calibrated monitor, there're issues like RGB vs CYMK, and transmitted vs reflected images to consider. BUT, with a Spyder or any calibration device, you have much less problem trying to get a good print. A Spyder costs $350... about the price of a cheap zoom lens. How much ink and paper have you wasted getting the right colours?

SniperD · 17th April 2004

Anyway, a cheaper solution would be to hop on down to EASTGEAR. They got a calibration unit on loan

Ice · 17th April 2004

Originally Posted by SniperD

Anyway, a cheaper solution would be to hop on down to EASTGEAR. They got a calibration unit on loan

Is it for free or need to pay a rent? If is the latter, what is the rate?

SniperD · 17th April 2004

Think it's $30 for 3 days... further details you have to call or visit Eastgear

16th April 2004	#1
whoelse Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,227	Is our monitor properly calibrated? Just wonder, do most ppl here calibrate their monitor to display the color correctly? I use the software that comes with the monitor to tune the setting. For my another monitor and my notebook, photo on clubsnap all display very differently since I did not calibrate it correctly. This will also mean that a properly exposed picture may display over or underexpose on all our monitor depending on whether they are properly calibrated. Is there a free or good software out there so we can use to tune our monitors? Anyone know?

17th April 2004	#18
SniperD Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Behind the viewfinder... Posts: 5,954	Anyway, a cheaper solution would be to hop on down to EASTGEAR. They got a calibration unit on loan __________________ EYE-DEAS

17th April 2004	#20
SniperD Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Behind the viewfinder... Posts: 5,954	Think it's $30 for 3 days... further details you have to call or visit Eastgear __________________ EYE-DEAS

16th April 2004	#3
VampTreSS Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 724	Does anyone have tis then? The Eye One or Spyder.. Can burn it.. But of cos, tht's just my suggestion.. act innocent Or, whoever has it, could I "borrow" it? Pm me!

16th April 2004	#5
horizoner Member Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 431	I am using a very primitive way ... First send my pics for developing (Fuji) and will tell ppl strictly no correction. Then I will compare the hardcopy pics with the softcopy and adjust my monitor accordingly. Like this, the monitor can be about 95% calibrated. At least it works for me

16th April 2004	#10
Java_Guru Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 785	It is actually worse than that if you use this technique. This implies that you will color edit 100% of all the photos you take. That is crazy. Think abt it carefully in terms of a workflow and you should realise how come it is 100%. [quote=Watcher]Because you will then be tied to the same photo lab while you do all the work of profiling. Brilliant QUOTE]

16th April 2004	#13
Azure Deregistered Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: ClubSNAP community Posts: 2,783	I print only at a handful of FDI labs (2-3) and I regularly check on my monitor every 3-4 weeks. Of course if you are one to splurge on those fancy Spyders and stuff, no one is going to stop you. I'm happy with what I deem a cost-effective approach. BTW, for the techfolks, I let PhotoShop do all the work. It is called a batch process, a.k.a. a hands-free workflow where I can go get coffee. As for Frontier labs, BM is the only one I know that uses powder-based chemicals. Maybe some of you'd like to check with the Fuji techs on the sensitivity of that. The FDI labs I print at use fluid chemicals, more stable if the lab runs heavy printing. //my last post on this... will not be drawn into silly arguments

16th April 2004	#14
Watcher Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: The heart of the Abyss Posts: 2,319	Personally, I find that to me it is as important as the lenses that I buy for my camera. Users here go for expensive lenses, pro lenses, etc and have no problem spending >$2k on lenses. A Spyder or a i-One display cost from $300 to $500. For a film user, it would be a waste. But for digital users who spends hours in front of the computer, their "digital lab", making sure the colors, saturation, etc are right, it is like the precise or accurate colours does matter as much to them. If that is the case, fine. I tried to raise interest a year ago. No one seems interested. So why do I bother?

16th April 2004	#16
Noir Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 321	Calibration is important, but sadly, often a misunderstood or ignored part of the workflow. Why even bother spending so much on camera gear if final print results are less than optimal anyway? Or even spend time ,or rather waste time, in front of the computer tweaking colours on an uncalibrated monitor, that is if one even does that, that is. Yes! Labs can help with making the prints look nicer but the whole beauty of digital photography, I believe, is that the serious photographer has more control over how the final product will look in the end without much external interference. Comparing the prints with the softcopy and adjusting the monitor accordingly is a way. However what if the final output is for the screen for sharing and not for prints?

17th April 2004	#17
Neo Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 947	The genius is in the print. Agree with Noir and Watcher on the opinion that there's no point spending so much on lenses and cameras to deliver high quality images if you're not able to fine-tune your images and deliver a perfect print (whether inkjet or photo lab) that shows your photography potential. For me, not getting my monitor calibrated is false economy, since I'll be spending so much time and money reprinting my images just to get it right. The money spent on a Spyder allowed me to get prints really close to my screen, so there's less frustration during the imaging stage. Remember that even with a calibrated monitor, there're issues like RGB vs CYMK, and transmitted vs reflected images to consider. BUT, with a Spyder or any calibration device, you have much less problem trying to get a good print. A Spyder costs $350... about the price of a cheap zoom lens. How much ink and paper have you wasted getting the right colours?