Hi Pete petecarter-at-mac.com (Pete Carter)::12/12/04::12:08 pm:: GMT-0000 >Hello list, > >Ive just been trying out a couple of different monitor calibration >systems on a Sony G520 with some interesting results. I wanted to >achieve as accurate softproofing system as possible without going out >and spending thousands. I tested the Eye-one Display, BasICColor >software and the Monitor Expert Calibrator. I'm getting a Colorvision >device in the next few weeks on loan so will compare that also. If >anyone is interested Ive quickly written them up and published them at >http://www.mule.demon.co.uk/calibration.htm
I read your report on monitor calibration with interest. I heartily applaud you for making the effort, it's a tough one, since a lot of what is important is open to visual interpretation. I guess that's why you wanted to go for measurements. I have a humble suggestion, though: The instrument and software you are measuring with when testing (and thus making judgements using) may not be accurate. Those are, of course, somewhat likely to bias the result toward the self same software and instrument when they are also used to calibrate the screen. I suggest that we can't use a particular ruler to set a point and then discount every other ruler because they measure different. The first ruler may be wrong. Checking the results of a screen calibration numerically (unless you have a spectroradiometer) are, unfortunately, somewhat suspect from the start since that self same instrument may affect results. It's going to sound as if I'm jumping to the defence of basICColor Display software here. I'll admit I do like it, and I do resell it. But I want to tell it like it is. A perusal of the Apple Colorsync users list will reveal many many more mails in praise of basICColor Display and it's sister from Coloreyes than any other application. I think that speaks for itself, it's a pretty expert listserver. basICColor Display is in a new version, simpler, gone is the brown screen dialogue box. A 14 day demo is available. At: http://www.color-solutions.de/english/index_E.htm Interesting that you find the black point high, some photographers do since it is set to 0.3CdM2 - the standard. it seems photographers are more willing to peer into the shadows. Lucky, since many LCD screens will not go over 0.2CdM2. As long as we don't get shadow detail shocks in print I think 0.2 is fine. BUT, 0.3 has been the <standard> for a long time. And, yes, it does look a bit grey. Anyway. I suggest that the best way to ascertain accuracy of a monitor screren is in a real world softproofing situation, with a verified image (perhaps an ISO certified proof) and a proper lightbox. I did this at a recent Apple HQ seminar with Thomas Holm from Pixl and we obtained a good match between proof in D50 lightbox / Cinema Display / 17 LCD and even Powerbook (to be fair, the PB a somewhat restricted gamut). We tested various software. basICColor Display won by a mile - used with an eyeOne Pro (like the eyeOne Monitor, a spectrophotometer). We used gamma 2.2 D65 aswell. Professor Abhay Sharma has tried doing comparative tests by measurement in his book and report - about colour tools. It's interesting, but I don't think it's very relevant. However - he does have a pretty scientific approach. We judge images with our eyes, what's important is that [certified] proof in lightbox and screen are in sync. just my 2p Best Regards Neil Barstow Consulting in Imaging & Colour Management http://www.colourmanagement.net/ http://www.apple.com/uk/creative/neilbarstow/ =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
