Ohenry, Spyder calibration question

[Ferdinand]

Hello Ohenry,

Been reading about your posts and it seems like you have a good amount of experience on using the Spyder.

I have read the manual and also calibration posts on Computer Darkroom. And my question is after you run PreCAL and then in Optical do you set your Target Whitepoint to Native or 6500K? The manual dated December 2002 from Colorvision seems to use the 6500K settings. But from what I read it seems its best to set to Native so that you won't lose your PreCAL calibration data.

Also in the September 2002 of the manual, Colorvision suggests a Luminance value for Black of 0.30 and White of 90.0 but in their December 2002 Manual, there is no mention of these value, do they still hold true?

Any advice or suggestions from you would be much appreciated.

Best regards,
Ferdinand.

>> http://www.computer-darkroom.com/pho...photocal_2.htm

[NHL]

FYI, this is what I use:

Gamma = 2.2
WhitePoint = Native
Black = 0.30
White = 90.0

[ohenry]

I'd love to help you, but you are using a CRT and I have a high end LCD. The calibration procedures are completely different.

I will say that the software has been upgraded and improved, but I'm not sure of the release date. Therefore, I wouldn't follow the advice of older publications unless it specifically relates to the version you are using.

[Ferdinand]

Thanks Ohenry and NHL.

NHL how did you arrive at those settings? Are they the ones off http://www.computer-darkroom.com/pho...photocal_2.htm ?

Yesterday was my first time using the SpyderPro with Optical.

After the calibration when I compare the print out from my Canon I960 using Glossy Paper Plus and original Canon Inks I found that my print has a brighter white than what is seen on the monitor. Is there suppose to be subtle differences like that?

I have 2 machines at home. And the monitor are Envision's EN980 19" monitor and a SONY G550.

Now I am wondering if someone here can suggest a better way to calibrate these monitors.

The Envision only allows for control of R and B guns, with 6500K and 9300K presets. I have no problem achieving the recommended luminance of Black at 0.30 and White at 90.0

The SONY has 5000K and 9300K presets but the way to tweak the RGB guns is global, meaning there is no way to do individual tweaking of the guns separately, they are all moving the same way. Also on the SONY I notice the best luminance I can achieve for Black is 0.15 and White 70.0

Now on the Envision, using PreCAL to get all my guns within 0.5 Diff and between 85 to 95 luminance and then using Gamma = 2.2, WhitePoint = Native, Black = 0.30, White = 0.90 I ended up with a monitor that doesn't give me a white that is as white as I like, to me it looks kinda light brown tint when compare to my prints.

On the SONY all I could do was get the guns to within 0.5 Diff and there is nothing I could do with the luminance, instead of the 85 to 95 range, all I can get is around 70. Using the same Gamma = 2.2, WhitePoint = Native, Black = 0.30, White = 0.90 I ended up with a monitor that gives me a white that is more to my liking and a cleaner white. Weird isn't it? :-/

I thought getting a Spyder would make Calibrating my monitor easy and painless but its seems to be causing me more confusion :roll:

Any input would be much appreciated. Thanks.

Ferdinand

[PeterP]

On and On it goes

The Optical spyder caliberated your monitor.
Another product called printfix helps caliberate the printer to match as well.

[Ferdinand]

PeterP :P new wannabe photographers are born daily, can't be help.

Anyways, I was hoping that by using only Canon paper and Canon ink, I would be able to get by with Canon's default profile. One would assume that Canon would surely optimise their ink, paper and profile to get the right colour right? Or am I wrong with my assumption?

And why would my calibrated SONY G550 would have a brighter white than my calibrated envision EN980? :shock:

Regards,
Ferdinand

[PeterP]

The manfacturers profiles are usually not too bad

For my epson 2200, I have 2 sets of paper profiles from epson and both do a slightly different but ok job. I also obtained a set of profiles from George Lepp and they produce a slightly different result with a color cast I'm not too fond off :? And I tried some of the Cone profiles. In the end, I ended up rolling my own and now I pretty much get what I see.

As for why your two monitors look different when caliberated, that is somethng beyond me, maybe the different phospors used in them?
When my current monitors go to silicone heaven I plan to switch to a good LCD, that should stop the ongoing color shifts, but that is a year or so away.

[Ferdinand]

Thanks Peter, well, I guess I will just have to be happy with what I got Just want to make sure I have dig everywhere for an answer before settling with what I am getting. Prior to buying the Spyder I can see during the RGB calibration step that my previous RGB value has a B that is way too high maybe that is why I am so used to a whiter white than what I have now after bringing the B down and R up to be in step with each other.

Don't think I can afford a LCD monitor anytime soon Will just have to stick to my budget of $200 dollar monitors.

Thanks again everyone for your input.

Regards,
Ferdinand

[NHL]

Originally Posted by Ferdinand

NHL how did you arrive at those settings?

The drop down menu will let you pick between a CRT or an LCD so the newer software is identical... There's a baffle for the actual Spyder head that'll you have to put on for an LCD display.

I have a CRT for my picture editing so it should be valid for your settings as well... The values are default (except for the Gamma which is different between PC and MAC) and jive with the small manual included with the Spyder!

[Ferdinand]

LOL NHL sounds simple enough, and you are using standard calibration instead of precision correct? I guess the magic number is Luminance Black 0.30 and White 90.0 and I should just accept that and not argue about it

Thanks again Just went you think getting a calibration hardware would make things simpler heheheh

Regards,
Ferdinand