Monitor ICC profile - confused

[Simon Garrett]

I agree with everyone about the importance of calibrating and profiling the monitor.

Expanding Colin's point about "compensate without realising what's happening": what can happen is that the monitor colour isn't quite right, and you adjust the image to look right on the (incorrect) monitor. But what you're doing is to add an error in the image to compensate for the erorr in the monitor. And without a calibrated/profiled monitor, there's no way of knowing that this is happening.

[Mike Buckley]

most don't realise how far out their images are because they only ever see them on their own screens

When they change monitors for whatever reason, they may be surprised to suddenly realize that their images look different.

[Andrew1]

Another point to keep in mind for those who are calibrating their screen (is this an opportunity for a poll of members?) is that if you are not printing your own photos, stipulate "No Corrections" to your favourite local print shop. If you don't, their equipment will re-evaluate your shots and perhaps add their own little colour and exposure tweaks to each photo. There's no point in going through the calibration process if you are letting someone else have the final say. Without the auto corrections you'll be better able to judge the output and adjustments you make in your editing system. Also, if it is available, check http://www.drycreekphoto.com/ for their printer profile. If it's not there, ask the printer if they have it.

[Markvetnz]

The only monitors I've seen that are close to correct out the box have been expensive NEC and Dell models. I recently bought a Dell 3010. It is fantastic. It displays the Adobe rgb gamut and was pretty close to being spot on when it came out the box.

I think people struggle to understand that all their PP is totally counterproductive unless the monitor is displaying colours correctly. They spend hours adjusting everything to something that looks right to their eyes at the time and the second their file ends up on a calibrated/profiled machine it all gets displayed at the correct values and the image looks worse than before they started.

[Markvetnz]

Hi Mark,

Just be a little careful with the "camera club" approach -- I'm pretty sure it would violate the license agreement (plus could be difficult because it's an activated product).

Yes. All I suggest is that they get a machine and profile the projector properly so at least images displayed at our meetings are close to what they should be.

[revi]

To get back to the original problem (and the SOOC image shown):

For me also the SOOC image appears as between the first two images. That makes me suspect that the profile might be applied twice:
once by the system, and once by the viewer program...

[Manfred M]

The only monitors I've seen that are close to correct out the box have been expensive NEC and Dell models. I recently bought a Dell 3010. It is fantastic. It displays the Adobe rgb gamut and was pretty close to being spot on when it came out the box.

If that happened you were lucky indeed. Don't forget that there are two elements involved in the profiling; the monitor and your video card (either a discrete card or a video chip built into your motherboard). Two different video cards, attached to the same display will give you different colour variations.

[Mike Buckley]

Don't forget that there are two elements involved in the profiling; the monitor and your video card (either a discrete card or a video chip built into your motherboard). Two different video cards, attached to the same display will give you different colour variations.

I hadn't thought of that. That would explain why the Spyder calibration system removes a green cast on my monitor when it is connected to my new computer that wasn't apparent when it was connected to my previous computer.

[Simon Garrett]

Two different video cards, attached to the same display will give you different colour variations.

Even with digital connection (DVI or HDMI) to the monitor?

[Manfred M]

Even with digital connection (DVI or HDMI) to the monitor?

This is a good question and something I have never checked out. The key variables are the monitor and graphics card. The output should be consistent, regardless of the connection type between the graphics card and the monitor,, especially with a digital connection. On the other hand, stranger things have happened.

[Simon Garrett]

This is a good question and something I have never checked out. The key variables are the monitor and graphics card. The output should be consistent, regardless of the connection type between the graphics card and the monitor,, especially with a digital connection. On the other hand, stranger things have happened.

Quite true about stranger things happening! I'd assumed that with a digital connection, the calibration/profiling should still be valid if you change the card, but I've not tried it - I've always recalibrated and profiled after changing a card (which seems a sensible precaution anyway).

[Manfred M]

Quite true about stranger things happening! I'd assumed that with a digital connection, the calibration/profiling should still be valid if you change the card, but I've not tried it - I've always recalibrated and profiled after changing a card (which seems a sensible precaution anyway).

The digital connection would ensure consistency once the data has been output by the graphics card. It does not guarantee that the cards will respond the same way. This is something I have tried. I adjusted some of the card parameter for my nVidia card and the colour profile was completely different after I applied the icc profile on reboot (I had dimmed down the level), the screen was darker than just using the previously created profile.

The moment you change the card, your profile would be off as there is no guarantee that two cards perform the same way, especailly if you change card suppliers. Intel, nVidia and AMD have totally different software for their cards.