Just bought the Spyder2PRO yesterday, and have been trying to calibrate my monitor with it.
I have a 22" IBM C220P Trinitron CRT monitor. The software advises me to use a 2.2-6500 profile (with Gamma at 2.2 and white balance at 6500k).
My monitor brightness is set to 25 and contrast at 100. Monitor color temp has been set at 6500k. At first I included ambient light compensation, but later disabled it.
The RGB colors look close to normal, however the gamma looks very off. In fact I see a significant grey cast in a few of my photographs.
Here are the ones:
http://tinyurl.com/ym6hxm
http://tinyurl.com/yml3f6
http://tinyurl.com/ylouj5
http://tinyurl.com/y9htqz
http://tinyurl.com/yba8zk
Does anybody with calibrated monitors see a grey cast in these photos?
What gamma do you use for your CRT monitor? If you have an IBM C220P, what value of gamma do you use?
I tried calibrating during the day with the windows open, at night with windows closed and with complete darkness, and the results seem the same.
Posted by Bob Steele on December 28, 2006 at 7:23 PM
6500, 2.2 is correct.
If you are using a Windows machine, look in "Start>All Programs>Startup" If you see Adobe Gamma, delete it. This program is installed automatically with Photoshop. Reboot and reprofile you monitor and see if it's better.
If this is your first time using a profiled and calibrated monitor, it will take some getting used to and may look very strange for a while. You will adjust, and your prints will be happier for it.
Thanks for the tips Bob; but I've already moved the Adobe Gamma out of the Startup folder, and it's not running.
I changed the gamma to 2.5, and it's looking just slightly more realistic, but again, I'm not sure if this is the right thing to do.
Posted by Tom Webster on December 28, 2006 at 8:06 PM
Try not to change the gamma. Keep in mind, you've been looking at your images on an uncalibrated monitor. As Bob stated, above, it takes time to get used to the appearance. Go back and readjust your images for the new monitor calibration.
When I first calibrated my monitor I was stunned by the difference. It does take a bit of getting used to, like Bob and Tom have stated.
After resetting the gamma to 2.2, if your images still look funky to you, PS may not be using your new monitor profile. Try this...
In PS2, go to View>Proof Setup. (Be sure NO documents are open on the work space.) A list of profiles shows up. Click 'Custom'. Look down the list to see if your new monitor profile is in the list. If it is, select it. Choose 'Save'. Provide a name you'll recognize easily, e.g. IBM_1 (don't uses hyphens or spaces). Save the file. Now, go back to View>Proof Setup. Your new custom setting should be at the bottom of the list. Select it. Now, open an image. Go to View. Select 'Proof Colors'. The color of your image is now dependent on your new monitor profile.
If your new monitor profile is NOT in the list in View>Proof Setup>Custom, you will have to recalibrate your monitor so that PS will recognize it.
It is best to calibrate your monitor in a darkened room because colors and glare will affect the photometer. Also, be sure your monitor has stabilized before profiling. CRT's take a while, so be patient. If you monitor is old, it may not calibrate as well as it would have when new, and some calibration tools favor newer screens..
Incidentally, you would use the identical procedure to set up PS for 'Soft Proofing' for printing. The difference is that you would choose the profile that matches the paper you will be printing on.
Preston, the calibration software affects not only what is seen by PS, but automatically affects all other programs, and the standard desktop display.
I have already executed the steps you mention. My problem is that irrespective of what program I use to view images, they look like exactly the same - and with a greyish cast on them - something you get with the S&H tool.
Even when I view photographs from people I know have calibrated monitors, they look like they have a cast on them.
Even the photographs I've printed look fine in print but have this ghastly grey cast when I view them on my calibrated monitor.
One of the problems I faced while calibrating was the Black luminance - the brightness setting on my monitor at any level is unable to discern the 4 different shades of black presented in a sequence. In these cases, the Spyder2 advises me to use the factory default monitor brightness, which is 50/100.
PS: My monitor was also warmed for several hours before the calibration. It's about two years old, but I can't say with authority if it's really past it's prime.
I know that the monitor profile affects how color will appear in any program-it's global. I assumed you were referring to a cast that was appearing in images viewed in PS. Sorry if I misunderstood.
It is possible, based upon your issue with the black luminance, that your photometer/software is having trouble generating an accurate profile because you are forced to use a default value for brightness/contrast.
Can you borrow a different tool from someone and try to recalibrate your monitor? Have you contacted tech support about this? It is possible that either the tool is not working properly or the software has a glitch. If you do talk with tech support, be sure to give them the age of your monitor and an approximate number of hours it is used each day. It may be that your monitor is 'old' and the tool simply can't compensate for the ageing.
You might also give your eyes and mind time to get used to the new profile. After a time, if it still doesn't look right, explore further. I hope you can get this figured out.
You're welcome, Ashutosh. Let us know what you find out.
All the best,
-PB
Posted by Cliff Beittel on December 29, 2006 at 12:59 PM
"One of the problems I faced while calibrating was the Black luminance - the brightness setting on my monitor at any level is unable to discern the 4 different shades of black presented in a sequence. In these cases, the Spyder2 advises me to use the factory default monitor brightness, which is 50/100."
When you've set brightness that way, what luminance reading does the Spyder2 software report? With both the original Spyder and now with MonacoOPTIX, my Viewsonic P225f CRT cannot distinguish differences in the black blocks when the luminance is where it should be (85-95). I just ignore the blocks (which is what the Monaco software tells me to do) and go with the correct luminance. Doing it that way, both my images and other peoples' images look right on the monitor, my images print perfectly on an Epson, and the files print fine when delivered to publishers.
Also--have you checked to see the profile you've created is actually in use (Control Panel>Display>Settings>Advanced>Color Management)? I always include the current date in my Profile names so I can make sure the correct one is in use.
Cliff, actually I don't remember the luminance reading as reported by Spyder2 when I was calibrating the monitor. Black luminance, however, was at 0.7, and White luminance at 76.0.
The profile I created is indeed in use, as it is set everytime at bootup.
Just a few minutes ago, I did a re-calibration. I am going to post two images, and ask for your feedback - if your monitor has been correctly calibrated, do these images look:
1) normal
2) too much contrast
3) very little contrast
4) milky, with a greyish cast
Posted by Cliff Beittel on December 29, 2006 at 7:22 PM
Both look fine here. That's Velvia light, my favorite kind! The first image perhaps is a little dark in the blacks.
I believe "white luminance" is also called just plain luminance, and your 76.0 figure is the one that is supposed to be at least 85 (but not much more than that) for a CRT. My 30 days was just up today, so I'm viewing at a freshly calibrated 87.
Discussion
13 repliesI have a 22" IBM C220P Trinitron CRT monitor. The software advises me to use a 2.2-6500 profile (with Gamma at 2.2 and white balance at 6500k).
My monitor brightness is set to 25 and contrast at 100. Monitor color temp has been set at 6500k. At first I included ambient light compensation, but later disabled it.
The RGB colors look close to normal, however the gamma looks very off. In fact I see a significant grey cast in a few of my photographs.
Here are the ones:
http://tinyurl.com/ym6hxm
http://tinyurl.com/yml3f6
http://tinyurl.com/ylouj5
http://tinyurl.com/y9htqz
http://tinyurl.com/yba8zk
Does anybody with calibrated monitors see a grey cast in these photos?
What gamma do you use for your CRT monitor? If you have an IBM C220P, what value of gamma do you use?
I tried calibrating during the day with the windows open, at night with windows closed and with complete darkness, and the results seem the same.
If you are using a Windows machine, look in "Start>All Programs>Startup" If you see Adobe Gamma, delete it. This program is installed automatically with Photoshop. Reboot and reprofile you monitor and see if it's better.
If this is your first time using a profiled and calibrated monitor, it will take some getting used to and may look very strange for a while. You will adjust, and your prints will be happier for it.
I changed the gamma to 2.5, and it's looking just slightly more realistic, but again, I'm not sure if this is the right thing to do.
When I first calibrated my monitor I was stunned by the difference. It does take a bit of getting used to, like Bob and Tom have stated.
After resetting the gamma to 2.2, if your images still look funky to you, PS may not be using your new monitor profile. Try this...
In PS2, go to View>Proof Setup. (Be sure NO documents are open on the work space.) A list of profiles shows up. Click 'Custom'. Look down the list to see if your new monitor profile is in the list. If it is, select it. Choose 'Save'. Provide a name you'll recognize easily, e.g. IBM_1 (don't uses hyphens or spaces). Save the file. Now, go back to View>Proof Setup. Your new custom setting should be at the bottom of the list. Select it. Now, open an image. Go to View. Select 'Proof Colors'. The color of your image is now dependent on your new monitor profile.
If your new monitor profile is NOT in the list in View>Proof Setup>Custom, you will have to recalibrate your monitor so that PS will recognize it.
It is best to calibrate your monitor in a darkened room because colors and glare will affect the photometer. Also, be sure your monitor has stabilized before profiling. CRT's take a while, so be patient. If you monitor is old, it may not calibrate as well as it would have when new, and some calibration tools favor newer screens..
Incidentally, you would use the identical procedure to set up PS for 'Soft Proofing' for printing. The difference is that you would choose the profile that matches the paper you will be printing on.
Let us kow what you find out.
-PB
I have already executed the steps you mention. My problem is that irrespective of what program I use to view images, they look like exactly the same - and with a greyish cast on them - something you get with the S&H tool.
Even when I view photographs from people I know have calibrated monitors, they look like they have a cast on them.
Even the photographs I've printed look fine in print but have this ghastly grey cast when I view them on my calibrated monitor.
One of the problems I faced while calibrating was the Black luminance - the brightness setting on my monitor at any level is unable to discern the 4 different shades of black presented in a sequence. In these cases, the Spyder2 advises me to use the factory default monitor brightness, which is 50/100.
PS: My monitor was also warmed for several hours before the calibration. It's about two years old, but I can't say with authority if it's really past it's prime.
I know that the monitor profile affects how color will appear in any program-it's global. I assumed you were referring to a cast that was appearing in images viewed in PS. Sorry if I misunderstood.
It is possible, based upon your issue with the black luminance, that your photometer/software is having trouble generating an accurate profile because you are forced to use a default value for brightness/contrast.
Can you borrow a different tool from someone and try to recalibrate your monitor? Have you contacted tech support about this? It is possible that either the tool is not working properly or the software has a glitch. If you do talk with tech support, be sure to give them the age of your monitor and an approximate number of hours it is used each day. It may be that your monitor is 'old' and the tool simply can't compensate for the ageing.
You might also give your eyes and mind time to get used to the new profile. After a time, if it still doesn't look right, explore further. I hope you can get this figured out.
-PB
All the best,
-PB
When you've set brightness that way, what luminance reading does the Spyder2 software report? With both the original Spyder and now with MonacoOPTIX, my Viewsonic P225f CRT cannot distinguish differences in the black blocks when the luminance is where it should be (85-95). I just ignore the blocks (which is what the Monaco software tells me to do) and go with the correct luminance. Doing it that way, both my images and other peoples' images look right on the monitor, my images print perfectly on an Epson, and the files print fine when delivered to publishers.
Also--have you checked to see the profile you've created is actually in use (Control Panel>Display>Settings>Advanced>Color Management)? I always include the current date in my Profile names so I can make sure the correct one is in use.
The profile I created is indeed in use, as it is set everytime at bootup.
Just a few minutes ago, I did a re-calibration. I am going to post two images, and ask for your feedback - if your monitor has been correctly calibrated, do these images look:
1) normal
2) too much contrast
3) very little contrast
4) milky, with a greyish cast
Attached is the first photograph.
Thanks in advance.
I believe "white luminance" is also called just plain luminance, and your 76.0 figure is the one that is supposed to be at least 85 (but not much more than that) for a CRT. My 30 days was just up today, so I'm viewing at a freshly calibrated 87.