Monitor calibration and black crush

[Colin Southern]

oldmankit, did you get the colorimeter after all? Did it improve the blacks? I have the same monitor, I just bought a colorimeter, and I cannot calibrate the display in a way that will solve the black crush. I don't know why that is, I tried pretty much all settings combinations allowed by the software (dispcalGUI + Argyll).

I also have a profile for this monitor that I found on the Web, and that one works great for black crush, but it has a color cast.

Anyway, did you make any progress on the matter?

Um, that post was well over a year ago - so not sure if you'll get a reply. I know that some like to live by dispcalGUI and Argyll, but they weren't for me ...

[gap]

Unfortunately, the software that was bundled with the colorimeter did much worse.

[Sonic4Spuds]

http://www.hughski.com/ Looks interesting in that it uses a method of measuring color that can be more accurate than conventional low end hardware.

[Colin Southern]

http://www.hughski.com/ Looks interesting in that it uses a method of measuring color that can be more accurate than conventional low end hardware.

Probably a moot point Will as it's Linux only, whereas the main competitors are Windows/Mac only.

[Colin Southern]

Unfortunately, the software that was bundled with the colorimeter did much worse.

Are you sure that the issue is with the monitor and not an issue with the image(s)? Most cameras capture around 12 stops - and most monitors only display around 6 - and that's assuming that the white point is set correctly; so just wanted to ensure that it wasn't something as simple as a dynamic range issue where a bit more compression would fix the problem.

[gap]

Sonic4Spuds: Thanks for the suggestion. I actually work in Linux most of the time. But I already have a colorimeter.

Colin: Thanks for the reply. It's not the images. This monitor has a severe black crush problem. Just to give you an idea:

http://www.it.com.cn/diy/bigimg/2009...539511_61.html

The one on the right is the one I have. See, the shadows are just black, no details, and it can't be fixed with the monitor's controls.

However, I did finally manage to create a good profile that fixed it. In case someone else with the same problem finds this thread, what worked for me was to create a "gamma + matrix" type of profile with Argyll, white point D65, native white level, native black level, gamma 2.2. It will only work with the "relative colorimetric" rendering intent, but seems to be as good as it gets.

[oldmankit]

I came back to this thread late!

Yes I got the Spyder 2, and yes it helped, although it is still not great at showing different levels of blacks. This monitor is well-known for its black crush problem; fortunately I knew about this before I bought it, so it wasn't a surprise.

I got tired of the linux software I was using and so profiled it in windows using the spyder software. It's easy enough to import that profile to use in linux. There are far fewer controls in the spyder software, but for an amateur like me, that's just fine.

(One note, I could get the spyder software to work in windows virtual machine, but it always ended-up with an empty profile. So I actually booted into windows to get this to work. I'm doing more of my photo work in windows now that I am using photoshop.)

[MauriceFH]

Spyder/huey/Eye One 2 will not do, the DPT-94 is the king of darkness
Sadly is not made for wide gamut or LED, but the Quato iColor Display
implement correction matrices and some people are getting good results...
Can do the same for Argyll, but you need to have a spectrometer to create the correction matrices...

The ColorMunki Photo can calibrate any type of monitor and also printer and it is supported by Argyll.

[MauriceFH]

I must say, after some time in profiling I think the Munky photo is the easiest and best way forward. There is a simple reason for this: getting colour right is only part of the story, you need to ensure that the vdu is matched to the printing process - it can make the vdu look a bit dull but when your eyes adjust you tend to see it looks like the print.

[Colin Southern]

I must say, after some time in profiling I think the Munky photo is the easiest and best way forward. There is a simple reason for this: getting colour right is only part of the story, you need to ensure that the vdu is matched to the printing process - it can make the vdu look a bit dull but when your eyes adjust you tend to see it looks like the print.

Hi Maurice,

Not really I'm afraid

What one should really be doing is calibrating and profiling the monitor to an industry standard ... and then profiling the printer to the same standard. Adjusting a monitor to match a printer is dangerous ground as one may well be compensating for errors in the other; it's OK from the point of view that your prints may match what you expect, but it may also mean that when you adjust an image and post it online that what others see is completely different to what you're seeing.

[Sonic4Spuds]

Yes Colin,

the software is currently Linux only, but the device ships with a boot CD with pre-installed software which should run on any computer. I decided to go for the device and am waiting to have my device built now.

-Sonic

[oldmankit]

Yes Colin,

the software is currently Linux only, but the device ships with a boot CD with pre-installed software which should run on any computer. I decided to go for the device and am waiting to have my device built now.

-Sonic

I love the idea of a boot CD. I have a friend who has had to ditch his colorometer just because he upgraded his Mac. How stupid is that!?