Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2012 · New to monitor calibration (ColorMunki) and printing (WHCC)

  
 
no_surrender
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · New to monitor calibration (ColorMunki) and printing (WHCC)


Having a hard time calibrating my Dell U2410 monitor with the X-Rite ColorMunki. I had some test prints sent to WHCC and received them a few weeks ago. Received the ColorMunki today and have profiled my monitor 3 times and can't get the monitor to match the prints.

I've displayed the test images using CS5 and LR4 and they look completely different even though I'm proofing with the same color space profile downloaded from WHCC. What gives?

Not sure what I'm doing wrong, but there's still a noticeable difference between the monitor and the prints. Please help!!

Thanks in advance!

Kevin



Nov 02, 2012 at 08:50 AM
Eyeball
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · New to monitor calibration (ColorMunki) and printing (WHCC)


Could try to explain how the monitor and prints differ (color, contrast, brightness)?

Could you describe your proofing procedure in a bit more detail? I assume you are comparing soft-proofing in CS5 with the new soft-proofing feature in LR4, both using the WHCC profile in the soft-proofing profile. Correct?

Does the Colormunki give you a luminosity reading on the monitor? If so, what is it? A too-bright monitor is the culprit in many cases when trying to match to prints but not sure in your case.

Viewing technique (looking away from the screen while activating soft-proofing, for example) and ambient lighting can also play a role in having a satisfactory soft-proofing experience.



Nov 02, 2012 at 09:21 AM
Alan321
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · New to monitor calibration (ColorMunki) and printing (WHCC)


Which ColorMunki have you got ?

The older model does printer profiles but is not well suited to modern monitors.
The newer one is much like the i1 display pro and works very well with all monitors but does not do printer profiles.

While you're into profiling "properly" you should make sure that nothing like Adobe Gamma is running. Once upon a time that software was hard to kill and had a habit of interfering with monitor profiles that you wanted to use without it. I've been out of the Windows camp too long to know how such programs affect you these days.

even though I'm proofing with the same color space profile downloaded from WHCC

Did you mean "color space and profile" ? With Ps you should be able to use your own color space and profile and then soft-proof with the WHCC profile. However, there may still be a significant difference caused by using very different target brightness (Cd/m2) or it may just be that you are viewing the prints in lighting that is very different from the lighting presumed for the WHCC profile.

Few people are set up to see their screen and their prints each in the respective correct lighting at the same time and at the same place.

- Alan



Nov 03, 2012 at 11:50 PM
no_surrender
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · New to monitor calibration (ColorMunki) and printing (WHCC)


Eyeball wrote:
Could try to explain how the monitor and prints differ (color, contrast, brightness)?

Could you describe your proofing procedure in a bit more detail? I assume you are comparing soft-proofing in CS5 with the new soft-proofing feature in LR4, both using the WHCC profile in the soft-proofing profile. Correct?

Does the Colormunki give you a luminosity reading on the monitor? If so, what is it? A too-bright monitor is the culprit in many cases when trying to match to prints but not sure in your case.

Viewing technique (looking away from the screen while activating soft-proofing, for example) and ambient lighting can also
...Show more

Eyeball, my apologies for not getting back with you sooner...

Could try to explain how the monitor and prints differ (color, contrast, brightness)?
I have created a gallery of the five test shots I sent in, they can be viewed here: http://www.kcrawphotography.com/People/TEST/26326552_ZLCPXW#!i=2193654817&k=h2pBVrC
The images are below, I'll try to explain the differences for each one.

Could you describe your proofing procedure in a bit more detail?
By proofing, I've loaded the different proofing downloads from WHCC into CS5 and LR4 for a few of their different papers (i.e.-glossy, metallic, lustre). I'm checking either the "Soft Proofing" box in the Develop Module of LR4 or the "Proof Colors" option under the View tab in CS5. This is done after the WHCC profiles are loaded so first I must go to View in CS5, then Proof Setup and select the paper and size I'm interested in printing on. This is supposed to render a preview of what the image should look like using that specific paper with WHCC. At least that's how I understand it.

I assume you are comparing soft-proofing in CS5 with the new soft-proofing feature in LR4, both using the WHCC profile in the soft-proofing profile. Correct?
When comparing, the same image looks identical when viewed side by side with CS5 and LR4 with soft proofing OFF. When proofing, they look different. When I originally posted my question asking why they looked different I think I must have opened a different file in PS instead of the same exact one using Ctrl + E in LR4 to get it to open in CS5 if that makes sense. I have the RAW file with LR adjustments, plus an exported JPG, plus another exported JPG used to send in to WHCC which I later imported back into LR. Once I opened the WHCC file in LR followed by opening it in PS CS5 they looked identical. Long story short, I believe I was viewing two separate versions of the same image which tricked me into thinking they were being displayed differently.

Does the Colormunki give you a luminosity reading on the monitor? If so, what is it?
I'm not sure I know how to check it. When I'm profiling the monitor, it gave me a reading of 143, but that's the only time I see any numerical value displayed.

http://www.kcrawphotography.com/People/TEST/i-h2pBVrC/0/X2/IMG_8828-X2.jpg
1. My monitor shows this image as being black and white. The print appears to have a slight yellow or brown tone to it like sepia.

http://www.kcrawphotography.com/People/TEST/i-bRLLgKh/0/X2/IMG_8869rev-X2.jpg
2. The print seems to have a bit more red in her skin tones than the image on my monitor. The dress in the print appears to have a yellowish color to it (not sure if hue is the right word to describe it, I don't know enough about color to accurately describe what I'm seeing). Her skin tone actually looks better in the print IMO. Also, the word "Cola" on the cooler is closer to white on my monitor, but slightly saturated with red on the print. The highlights in the windows are brighter on my monitor than the print. The left window, upper right pane, shows an orange/red roof. The print shows more clarity than the monitor with this...more color.

http://www.kcrawphotography.com/People/TEST/i-pQw2Kpv/0/X2/IMG_9292-X2.jpg
3. The print seems darker overall, less detail in the shadows than what I see on my monitor. Also, the entire image, especially the truck, look a tad more vibrant than monitor. Her skin tone on the print almost looks a bit orange as if there's a color cast from the truck on her...monitor, not so much.

http://www.kcrawphotography.com/People/TEST/i-BwmNmdv/0/X2/IMG_3873-X2.jpg
4. Print looks a little darker overall with, yet again, a tad bit of yellowish color to it. Starting to think the printer adds a bit of contrast? I've always thought the girl here was a bit underexposed, but it's more noticeable in the print. The greens in the upper right look very close between print and monitor. Highlights of the waterfall, yellowish on the print, whiter on the monitor. Color of the dress and roses look similar between the two, but darker overall in the print.

http://www.kcrawphotography.com/People/TEST/i-kSgsFFs/0/X2/IMG_9715-X2.jpg
5. There's a huge difference in color between the image when proofed/not proofed. LR4 has a destination gamut warning when proofing and the almost the entire image was highlighted with the warning. The print falls almost half way between the soft proof and normal preview. The gamut warning is the reason I selected this image to test, curious to see what the reds would do when printed.


Overall, it seems as though most of the prints contained a bit more contrast and yellow than the monitor previews.

Okay, so the ambient light in my room, which is currently my dorm room overseas, has some sort of bulbs that I can't see due to how the room is constructed, but they bounce off a yellowish wall. I suspect this light is throwing yellow onto the prints, but I don't have a laptop here to move to another location and compare again. It's usually dark out when I review/edit here so I have to use the light. I'm guessing the ColorMunki is doing a good job of adjusting for this with my monitor?? BTW, only the pepper shot was taken here in Korea and edited here. The other shots were taken before I moved here and edited under different lighting conditions before calibrating my monitor.

Thanks again for looking and offering your help!

Kevin



Nov 04, 2012 at 01:24 AM
no_surrender
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · New to monitor calibration (ColorMunki) and printing (WHCC)


Alan321 wrote:
Which ColorMunki have you got ?

The older model does printer profiles but is not well suited to modern monitors.
The newer one is much like the i1 display pro and works very well with all monitors but does not do printer profiles.

While you're into profiling "properly" you should make sure that nothing like Adobe Gamma is running. Once upon a time that software was hard to kill and had a habit of interfering with monitor profiles that you wanted to use without it. I've been out of the Windows camp too long to know how such programs affect you these
...Show more

Alan, I hope I have the newer model since I just purchased it from B&H a couple weeks ago.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/798928-REG/X_Rite_CMUNDIS_ColorMunki_Display.html

Please read the comments in my last post regarding lighting and what differences I'm seeing. I think I have to agree with you, the light I'm viewing the prints under is less than ideal, but there's not much I can do to change it in my room.

Should I make adjustments or anything so I'm editing photos to be printed based off an ideally lit viewing area? This is new to me, but I have read a little bit into it. Most homes use incandescent lighting, right? I'm guessing this is where images would be displayed, but if they were to be under cooler fluorescent lighting they would need to be processed or printed differently, no?

Thanks for taking the time to help me figure this out!

Kevin



Nov 04, 2012 at 01:32 AM
glacierpete
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · New to monitor calibration (ColorMunki) and printing (WHCC)


no_surrender
the colornunki can be used with dispcalgui. It has more options, and quite likely will give you the better results. It is FREE open source.
http://dispcalgui.hoech.net/



Nov 04, 2012 at 04:51 AM
howardm4
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · New to monitor calibration (ColorMunki) and printing (WHCC)


I dont know where the 'doesn't work well w/ modern displays' comes from but the original CM Photo is a spectrophotometer and really really more than fine for both print and display of all types. There's the classic issue of colorimeter vs. spectrophotometer issue on the blackest blacks (spectro's tend to be a bit noisier). It's the old i1Display2 colorimeter that has issues w/ modern displays dues to its filter matrix not being built/calibrated for LED backlights.


Nov 04, 2012 at 07:26 AM
Alan321
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · New to monitor calibration (ColorMunki) and printing (WHCC)


howardm4 wrote:
I dont know where the 'doesn't work well w/ modern displays' comes from but the original CM Photo is a spectrophotometer and really really more than fine for both print and display of all types. There's the classic issue of colorimeter vs. spectrophotometer issue on the blackest blacks (spectro's tend to be a bit noisier). It's the old i1Display2 colorimeter that has issues w/ modern displays dues to its filter matrix not being built/calibrated for LED backlights.


Looks like I made a mistake and over-generalized. My colorMunki is not compatible with my NEC 2690 spectraview monitor. The Spectraview software would not work with it and the colorMunki software would not play with the monitor LUTs. Hence no way to benefit from the smarts in the monitor when using the colorMunki.

Perhaps this is not a general problem but here in Oz NEC marketed spectraview very differently from in the US and what I think is a spectraview system may not be exactly what you are familiar with. Our system did not come with an NEC approved measuring device. I got poor results from my i1 Display 2 but luckily the Adobe RGB preset built into the monitor seemed to work very nicely without any profiling (which I "confirmed" visually by comparing it with a correctly profiled monitor). Since then I got an i1 Display Pro that does play ball with the NEC monitor.

- Alan



Nov 05, 2012 at 02:11 PM
howardm4
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · New to monitor calibration (ColorMunki) and printing (WHCC)


Yea, the whole worldwide marketing of Spectraview is horrible. You get different hardware and software depending on what continent you're on. You must have the CM Create or something because I use a CM Photo for print profiling and w/ North American Spectraview software (on a PA241) and german BasICColor Display software.

The i1D2 and it's ilk dont like wide-gamut. That was why NEC branded version of it as sold w/ the USA SV kit had custom filter matrices



Nov 05, 2012 at 02:25 PM
Eyeball
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · New to monitor calibration (ColorMunki) and printing (WHCC)


no_surrender,

These color management things can be a real pain to work out. Here are some initial thoughts:

- If I understand your explanation correctly, you had the test prints done BEFORE you received your new ColorMunki and tried calibrating your monitor with it. You are now trying to "get the monitor to match the prints." That is really backwards from what you should be doing, at least initially. You should calibrate your monitor first, edit the images on your calibrated monitor, and make test prints from those images.

- You mention that the b&w print came back with an almost sepia toning. That sounds like a mistake at the lab and the fact that they made that mistake may indicate that they introduced color shifts into the other prints as well. You should be able to verify that by looking at the file you sent them in PS. If it looks b&w on the screen and color samples taken with the eye dropper show equal values for RGB, then I would say the problem was definitely at the printers.

- If your calibration process is showing 143 for monitor luminance, that is a probably a little high for best print matching. 120 is the general recommendation for LCD displays and some folks will go as low as 100. It depends quite a bit on the strength of your ambient lighting. The brighter your workroom, the brighter you display can be. It sounds though like monitor brightness is probably not your biggest problem - most of your observations seem more related to hue and saturation.

- Make sure that you send the files to the lab with a standard ICC profile that they accept. Some labs will only accept sRGB. Some will accept Adobe RGB. It is usually a good idea to embed the ICC profile in the file although some labs don't want an embedded profile (usually when they accept only sRGB). Check with the lab or an online FAQ on their website to be sure. A mismatched ICC profile during printing can impact saturation and hue.

- It sounds like you may be using the dynamic adjust feature on your ColorMunki that tries to adjust the monitor profile according to ambient lighting. I have that feature on my i1d2 and I don't use it. I tried it for a short while and for me, I thought the dynamic adjustments were too strong and I didn't like how it varied depending on the time of day. It may work for some people but you may want to try turning it off at some point and see if it helps or hurts your consistency.

- Soft-proofing for me (and I think probably quite a few other folks) is a pretty tricky thing. The task at hand, simulating a reflective print with a transmissive display, is not an easy thing. I wouldn't necessarily give up on it if I were you but I wouldn't drive myself nuts over it either. I would concentrate first on trying to get a decent test print.

- FWIW, the test images you posted don't look bad to me. The b&w doesn't have a cast. The others look OK without any significant cast that I can see. The last couple with strong reds are going to clip the reds in sRGB of course but there's not much you can do about that except back off on the saturation a little.

In summary, I would suggest the following:
- Redo your testing starting with new edits on your newly calibrated monitor and sending those files out for new test prints. This is assuming I understood what you have done to date and that you haven't already re-done your workflow.
- Before the re-test, you might want to drop the monitor luminance to around 100-120.
- I would suggest trying another lab or perhaps multiple labs for your test prints. It would be a shame if you were trying to make adjustments to your monitor to try to adapt for mistakes made at the lab. It really sounds to me like WHCC was skewed a little yellow/red for your test prints but since you apparently edited those images prior to properly calibrating your monitor, I'm not really sure.

As I said, these color management things can be a real pain but hopefully I gave you some additional things to check or think about.



Nov 08, 2012 at 10:03 PM
no_surrender
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · New to monitor calibration (ColorMunki) and printing (WHCC)


Eyeball,

Thanks so much for taking the time to respond. I'll have to use your suggestions and send them new samples to be safe. I've used several other labs before for some personal work and a few that I "donated" to my old squadron. The main reason I've moved solely to WHCC is because they offer reduced/free shipping to APO...I'm currently in Korea and will be moving to Italy soon. Printing with H&H, BRI, Nation's, etc would kill me in shipping costs.

I'll keep you posted with the results from my next test with WHCC. Thanks again!

Kevin



Nov 09, 2012 at 12:20 AM
Eyeball
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · New to monitor calibration (ColorMunki) and printing (WHCC)


If you are permitted some time off base, I would think you should be able to find a decent printer in South Korea. I would think South Korea would be like Disneyland where electronics and photography are concerned.

Just out of curiosity, I checked whether Dry Creek does any machine calibration in Korea and there is apparently one outside Seoul (Goyang City). Here is the link:

http://www.drycreekphoto.com/icc/Profiles/SouthKorea_profiles.htm

Dry Creek provides calibrated profiles for common lab photo printers, primarily in the U.S. to places like Costco (speaking of Costco, there are apparently 7 in Korea and they appear to have photo printing with internet submission possible).

You may be far from Seoul but I suspect if you went to any decent photo printer in Korea and asked them to print "without making automatic adjustments", they could probably do a good job. Normally these types of printers accept sRGB only.



Nov 09, 2012 at 08:33 AM
no_surrender
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · New to monitor calibration (ColorMunki) and printing (WHCC)


Thanks for the tip and link. I've been to Seoul once and hope to go again soon. I'm sure Dry Creek is a great lab, but I'm pretty confident I'll stick with WHCC since I'll be using them once I move to Italy. I didn't see a DCP for Italy so that makes my decision easier.

Thanks again for the help!

Kevin



Nov 09, 2012 at 09:22 PM





FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.