Generally computer screens that are straight out of the box are calibrated (i.e. adjusted by using the hardware controls). The problem with calibration is that we have to do this by eye and frankly our eyes are not very good at it.
If you want to try calibrating your screen and are on Windows, open up the Control Panel click on "Color Management" first of all make sure that the icc profile for your new screen shows up as the default profile. Then click on the Advanced tab and then click on the "Calibrate display" button and follow the instructions.
That's usually a good starting point, but definitely does not assure that your colours are correct. This is where an external profiling tool like the i1 or ColorMunki (made by x-Rite) or the Spyder line (made by Datacolor) come in. I've recently ditched my rather ancient (original version) i1 for a ColorMunki. Once you have run these your screen can be set for the appropriate brightness (generally 12- Cd/sq metre) and it has been profiled, you can be reasonably sure that the colours you are seeing are as close to correct as your screen can produce.
There is no way that you can calibrate a monitor without the use of a hardware device such as a colourimeter. Calibrating means setting to a known defined standard and you can't do this just by 'eyeballing' the screen.
But not only do you need to calibrate the monitor you need to make a profile for it that the colour management system can use.
There are a number of devices on the market ranging from fairly inexpensive to the more costly and all do a good job and you wont regret getting one if you're serious about colour rendering and consistency.
No, I'm not confusing calibration and profiling. You can use the controls on the screen to adjust brightness, contrast and colour temperature but without a colourimeter you will not know that they are set to the correct values. This is not calibrating the screen.
Calibration is the process of changing the response of the screen to whatever input its receiving so that a known output is achieved. e.g brightness of 120mcd, colour temp. 65K etc. This is needed for consistency.
Profiling goes beyond that and essentially creates a 'map' between the input colour numbers and the output colour numbers but is not used if there is no colour management system in use.
Profiling records the response to the input but does not necessarily change the calibration. It will, if used, change how the screen displays colours.
Hi Brian,
I found an on line pdf manual for it and it seems there are a group of buttons below the screen over to the right - the first five of these (counting from left) would appear to do whatever appears on screen when you're in the various set up modes. Unfortunately I'm not sure if the legends appear directly above the buttons or not, if they don't, I can certainly understand your confusion.
Here's the link to a Support page for the monitor.
Here's the link to the manual, which is a pdf file buried within a zip file. (it seems benign)
I hope the links work from your locale.
See page 8 for the User Controls, then continue reading (over subsequent pages) for the screens shots of the menus, where the functions of each button are shown.
My advice; adjust only the Contrast and Brightness (to turn down), leave everything else alone as once you've started tweaking other things, it may end up worse than now. That said, there seems to be an Auto setting, which may restore things.
Good luck, Dave
Agreed - so a screen should be calibrated AND profiled if you want accurate colour reproduction.
As well the editing should be done in a place where the light in the room of consistent brightness and your visual sense is not impacted by other colours in the room (nicely said, neutral walls are best).
Know what I'm doing? Some days I don't even know what I've done! As no one has told me my purple flower is green or that it looks dirty I think for now I shall just hit the auto adjust button after power fluctuations.
But at the least this thread has opened my eyes to a whole new world of worries for my passion.
Brian,
Don't worry about it, the colour looks pretty accurate to how I see these flowers here, besides for what you do, do you really need to be concerned about absolute colour accuracy?
As for your monitor and access to certain controls for it this may vary depending upon the graphics card (if any additional) in use.
Brian - if you and I were sitting at your kitchen table, looking at the same print, there is a pretty good chance we would be seeing the same image (issues with our eye sight aside).
If I were to mail you the same print and I was looking at it on my kitchen table at mid-day on one of those sunny winter days (my kitchen has large floor to ceiling windows along a wall that faces north) and you were looking at it on your kitchen table at sunset, I can pretty well guarantee that we would not see the same thing, just because the colour temperature of the light hitting the print would be so different.
We have a similar issue with our computer screens. You and I (and we can even include Grahame) could be looking at the same image and we would likely be seeing something different from one another. Once of us could have the screen set up brighter, and other could have cranked up the contrast another could be viewing using a warmer or cooler setting. In other words, our computer screens are the weak link when it comes to reproducing an image.
This is where calibration and profiling come into play. If your computer screen is properly calibrated and profiled I should be seeing pretty well the same thing you are as I have a calibrated and profiled screen. For me having this is even more important because I print and the only way I can ensure that my prints look the same as they do on my computer screen is to follow a colour managed work flow, which starts with a calibrated and profiled screen as well as following an appropriate work flow and using the right colour profiles for the printer / ink / paper combination I am using.
Most people (other than people working in the visual arts) wouldn't have a clue as to what I have just written. Most of the screens out in the wild that are connected to the internet are not set up properly. I find in this part of the world, people like their screens turned up and often have very "punchy" colours, that are fine for playing computer games or watching videos.
On the other hand, when someone tells me that my images are too dark, too light, are showing a colour cast, etc. The first thing I will ask them if they have a calibrated and profiled screen. The answer has always been "no", so far and I get to tell them that the reason that they are seeing things the way they are is that their computer screen is not set up properly!
If all you are doing is having fun and enjoying photography, you can get away with your screen the way it is. But if someone tells you that your colours are off, you won't know if that person is right or wrong.
I'll accept that experiences may well vary just as mileage in cars does, but in my experience the default out of box settings of the typical consumer monitor are way out. Particularly the brightness which tends to be cranked right up. Most people I've helped with this problem have had to turn the brightness down by as much as 80% to get the standard 120mcd.In my experience, screen calibration during manufacturing is generally fairly good straight out of the box..
Well Microsoft may use the word calibrate but it really isn't calibration, its just guess work.All I know is that windows has a calibrate colour function which allows me to set gamma, contrast, brightness and your basic gray.
Manfred's comments are spot on. Apart from accurate colour rendering, the process is about consistency - do you see what I see etc.
If you're screen isn't set correctly you may well edit an image to correct a screen problem rather than an image problem and then when it looks right on screen, its totally wrong when printed or sent to someone else to view.
Colourimeters are not expensive and can save a lot of wasted time and effort.