-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Colorvision vs. Basiccolor test
- Thread starter cspringer
- Start date
R
Ranjan
Guest
Basiccolor is one very good software but their documentation & support is not that great, I have used it once & really found it to be far better than eye1color.
What I remember reading in the help file is that the validation bar should be shorter & restricted within the green area, once it start crossing that area, its not possible to get accurate colors on that monitor.
Your data shows that ur monitor is too old to be calibrated, horizontal bars are reaching up to the red area.
Thats all I understand about this excellent software.
--
Ranjan Sharma
http://www.lightzoneindia.com
What I remember reading in the help file is that the validation bar should be shorter & restricted within the green area, once it start crossing that area, its not possible to get accurate colors on that monitor.
Your data shows that ur monitor is too old to be calibrated, horizontal bars are reaching up to the red area.
Thats all I understand about this excellent software.
--
Ranjan Sharma
http://www.lightzoneindia.com
Basiccolor presets offers Photography and ISO3664/12646(standardized prepress workflow). Am I wrong in assuming I should use ISO since ultimately this is for printing?
The first was calibrated using Colorvsion Express and the second
with Basiccolor (Express mode). This is an older CRT.
Anyone have a link that might help me understand these results?
The Delta E is the difference between two colors. Under 3 is essentially not perceptible by a human eye.
In this case it is the difference between the actual color patch measured and the result expected from the monitor's description in the profile. So low Delta Es mean the profile accurately describes the current state of the monitor.
Note, that for the measurment to make sense you'd need to calibrate the monitor, make sure that the profile is assigned to the monitor and the corresponding LUTs are loaded.
So for me to make sense of this picture I'd need to know how you used the Spyder2 profile. I suppose you haven't measured the results right after the calibration and the monitor is most likely calibrated by Basiccolor. That's why the Spyder results are off.
Basiccolor profile is accurate (I suppose you just calibrated it) with some minor difficulties achieving neutral greys.
If you want to play with switching profiles I suggest using the XP color control panel applet for it. Also, make sure there's only one LUT loader in the Startup folder, normally it's a shortcut to loader of the application that created the profile. You can use the applet's "wincolor.exe L" loader if you switch between different calibration programs.
In this case it is the difference between the actual color patch measured and the result expected from the monitor's description in the profile. So low Delta Es mean the profile accurately describes the current state of the monitor.
Note, that for the measurment to make sense you'd need to calibrate the monitor, make sure that the profile is assigned to the monitor and the corresponding LUTs are loaded.
So for me to make sense of this picture I'd need to know how you used the Spyder2 profile. I suppose you haven't measured the results right after the calibration and the monitor is most likely calibrated by Basiccolor. That's why the Spyder results are off.
Basiccolor profile is accurate (I suppose you just calibrated it) with some minor difficulties achieving neutral greys.
If you want to play with switching profiles I suggest using the XP color control panel applet for it. Also, make sure there's only one LUT loader in the Startup folder, normally it's a shortcut to loader of the application that created the profile. You can use the applet's "wincolor.exe L" loader if you switch between different calibration programs.
You can probably improve the neutral greys results if you select a gamma closer to the monitor's native gamma (like, sRGB). Also, since you are using a CRT try achieving your white point target (in your case D50) by the RGB sliders of the onscreen controls).
A lot of users would find D50 a bit too yellow. D65 is a more common target. But it doesn't really matter as long as it looks white to you.
A lot of users would find D50 a bit too yellow. D65 is a more common target. But it doesn't really matter as long as it looks white to you.
R
Ranjan
Guest
I think that ISO3664/12646 & another preset 'Pre-press" both do the same thing but the ISO3664/12646 may be more for accuracy.
The install folder must be having a pdf help file.............thats what I read but its not that detailed & assumes that the user know already many things about color & the many presets
--
Ranjan Sharma
http://www.lightzoneindia.com
R
Ranjan
Guest
Thats true but I have found that if the crt does not support or have a preset of 6500K / 5000K then forcing the RGB control to simulate neutral grey will make the monitor look too bad.
So try & see if that works with ur monitor.
--
Ranjan Sharma
http://www.lightzoneindia.com
Of course it works with my monitors.
You have advanced software and a good quality colorimeter that let you accurately achieve any white point you want. (It's more problematic for LCD users).
You do it in Hardware Setup / Color Temperature step.
You have advanced software and a good quality colorimeter that let you accurately achieve any white point you want. (It's more problematic for LCD users).
You do it in Hardware Setup / Color Temperature step.
R
Ranjan
Guest
You are right,
what I meant was that the CRT should support the 6500 K option natively, if it does not &then you try to force it by manually setting that temp it will give you awkward results.
Just having an advance software & forcing the LUT to get a netural Grey will not necessarily give you a good color profile. Its a known fact that best calibration profile results occur with minimum changes to the LUT
You can force the RGB control in CRT but not in LCD.
--
Ranjan Sharma
http://www.lightzoneindia.com
You are correct about LCDs.
However adjusting RGB on CRTs is a normal procedure. If you don't do it then your white point target will be achieved anyway, but with videocard LUTs. It's normally not such a big deal on CRTs and modern videocards, cause everything is analog and LUTs are higher than 8 bit, but still. Why not bring your hardware as close as possible to your targets?
The preset of "6500K" does not mean it actually is 6500K or D65 or whatever. That's what you need colorimeters for - to measure the actual output.
However adjusting RGB on CRTs is a normal procedure. If you don't do it then your white point target will be achieved anyway, but with videocard LUTs. It's normally not such a big deal on CRTs and modern videocards, cause everything is analog and LUTs are higher than 8 bit, but still. Why not bring your hardware as close as possible to your targets?
The preset of "6500K" does not mean it actually is 6500K or D65 or whatever. That's what you need colorimeters for - to measure the actual output.
I ran Colorvision express and then installed Basiccolor and ran Validation. I then calibrated with Basiccolor Express and finished with Validation.
I think if you install Basiccolor it may reset the LUTs, at least after reboot. If you haven't readjusted your monitor hardware after Spyder2 calibration (brightness/contrast, RGB sliders) then you can probably load the profile in the XP color applet and then run validation.
I've never tried validating Colorvision's profile with a different software and same colorimeter. It's an interesting idea. I'll try and post my results.
I've never tried validating Colorvision's profile with a different software and same colorimeter. It's an interesting idea. I'll try and post my results.
If 100 is perfect should I recalibrate with the higher target? This is a monitor I am testing (sits in the closet).
You have 100 right now. It's good. It's listed under Luminance - White - Achieved.
When you set your targets you can change the luminance targets in the Settings / Luminance. You might as well pick Maximum to leave your white luminance as it is.
If you really wanted 160 (which is listed as your Target) it would ask you to up your Contrast during the hardware adjustment. You don't need that. 160 is crazy bright.
When you set your targets you can change the luminance targets in the Settings / Luminance. You might as well pick Maximum to leave your white luminance as it is.
If you really wanted 160 (which is listed as your Target) it would ask you to up your Contrast during the hardware adjustment. You don't need that. 160 is crazy bright.
Sorry, I haven't read the caption of your post.
83 is a bit low.
You are supposed to get to the luminance target during the hardware adjustments. If you had it but then it got too low then you probably lost some luminance because of the videocard LUT adjustments.
83 is a bit low.
You are supposed to get to the luminance target during the hardware adjustments. If you had it but then it got too low then you probably lost some luminance because of the videocard LUT adjustments.
The first was calibrated using Colorvsion Express and the second
with Basiccolor (Express mode). This is an older CRT.
Anyone have a link that might help me understand these results?
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum