Color Calibration: Your Monitor and you
polycounter lvl 19
Asking around, it seems that very few 3d artists bother with having accurate colors, so I want to give a quick rundown. You will find zero professional photographers that don't calibrate, and once I got heavily into photography, I got a wide gamut monitor and started calibrating, and it's a world of difference.
First, to dispel the myths. Yes, it will only look perfect on your screen, and other people who calibrate, which is a small amount, BUT everyone's monitor is off, and in different ways. So starting from completely neutral is best, because it will look the most correct on the most monitors.
In your LCD, there are two parts. The light emitting portion, and the color portion. The color portion can be one of 3 basic technologies, and they are in this order of quality/price: TN < PVA < IPS
TN is most likely whate you have. It's good for low refresh times, but not very good color reproduction. IPS is super high end and is way too pricey for it to be worth it. PVA is the good middle ground. I have the HP LP2475w, and it's an excellent PVA monitor. There are starting to be some very cheap Dell PVA monitors as well, but I haven't used them and cannot vouch for them.
So once you have a monitor that is capable of good color reproduction, you need a calibration device. They are quite cheap. I have the Spyder 2, which is only 60 dollars off amazon. You only need to calibrate on an LCD once a month or so, so you can easily chip in with the other artists at your studio and share it around for your home machines. You could even use a work owned device, since it's not necessary to do it frequently. The device is essentially an eye, that can tell colors far more perfectly than our eyes. It will force the monitor to show all the shades of Red, then Green, then Blue and create a custom color curve that corrects for your individual monitor's color shifts. Maybe your monitor shows blues as too warm and reds as too cool. It's not something you can fix with just the monitor adjustments, it changes from light to dark, and requires a hardware device to properly create.
Once the color calibration profile is created, the software will force your videocard to load it upon windows start. Now everything you look at will be color calibrated. It goes a bit deeper with managing color spaces on files, but just always convert to monitor space when opening in Photoshop. I also embed my color profile when saving jpegs, as firefox 3.5 respects color profiles. I save in sRGB space.
For subtle things like skin tones and other color sensative materials, it's paramount to be starting with neutral colors, and not having your monitor's color cast throwing off your aesthetic decisions. Even color calibrating the device you have is ok, even if it's a laptop screen.
First, to dispel the myths. Yes, it will only look perfect on your screen, and other people who calibrate, which is a small amount, BUT everyone's monitor is off, and in different ways. So starting from completely neutral is best, because it will look the most correct on the most monitors.
In your LCD, there are two parts. The light emitting portion, and the color portion. The color portion can be one of 3 basic technologies, and they are in this order of quality/price: TN < PVA < IPS
TN is most likely whate you have. It's good for low refresh times, but not very good color reproduction. IPS is super high end and is way too pricey for it to be worth it. PVA is the good middle ground. I have the HP LP2475w, and it's an excellent PVA monitor. There are starting to be some very cheap Dell PVA monitors as well, but I haven't used them and cannot vouch for them.
So once you have a monitor that is capable of good color reproduction, you need a calibration device. They are quite cheap. I have the Spyder 2, which is only 60 dollars off amazon. You only need to calibrate on an LCD once a month or so, so you can easily chip in with the other artists at your studio and share it around for your home machines. You could even use a work owned device, since it's not necessary to do it frequently. The device is essentially an eye, that can tell colors far more perfectly than our eyes. It will force the monitor to show all the shades of Red, then Green, then Blue and create a custom color curve that corrects for your individual monitor's color shifts. Maybe your monitor shows blues as too warm and reds as too cool. It's not something you can fix with just the monitor adjustments, it changes from light to dark, and requires a hardware device to properly create.
Once the color calibration profile is created, the software will force your videocard to load it upon windows start. Now everything you look at will be color calibrated. It goes a bit deeper with managing color spaces on files, but just always convert to monitor space when opening in Photoshop. I also embed my color profile when saving jpegs, as firefox 3.5 respects color profiles. I save in sRGB space.
For subtle things like skin tones and other color sensative materials, it's paramount to be starting with neutral colors, and not having your monitor's color cast throwing off your aesthetic decisions. Even color calibrating the device you have is ok, even if it's a laptop screen.
Replies
http://www.artstorm.net/journal/2009/07/color-management-wide-gamut-dell-2408/
Also sorts out do's and don't when it comes to what monitors/programs that can show correct colors(very few apps can).
^ Another great thread on TFT Panels
I was thinking about getting the 2475 at one point but settled for the 2445 alternative as its cheaper and doesnt suffer the INSANE batch issues and faults that the 2475 does!
I'm interested in getting a calibrater at some point but not so much a IPS panel... sure, ill get it when ive got the money spare but I dont really see the point in seeing colours outside of the sRGB profile, or rather i dont put priority on it. There are some decent TN panels that can display the bulk of the sRGB profile when calibrated... and if thats the extent of most normal workspaces then having something thats ideal for AdobeRGB isnt worth the extra buck till im rich! haha.
but you make calibraters sound worth it, im tempted!
Microsoft Color Control Panel Applet for Windows XP
The analogy I like to use is guitarists and standard tuning. You wouldn't want to be the band member who isn't in tune with the rest of the band, would you?
You would have to calibrate each monitor, and use a dual monitor solution. I'm not sure which hardware devices support dual monitors, as I only use one, and haven't had that problem yet.
that and viewing angles... if you lower your head does the screen go dark quickly?
If they don't advertise it, it's TN. A monitor will absolutely talk about it's color reproduction if it's IPS or PVA, precisely because it is more expensive, and will have higher refresh times.
It's a huge marketing feature.
That said, you can just google "pva" I think newegg might let you sort by that also.
Unless you mean E-IPS, which is fairly new and barely in any monitors yet.
[edit] Right you must mean E-IPS, as that is what your monitor is, and its actually about the same cost as a *VA ultrasharp panel from dell.
It seems the midrange market is shifting more towards E-IPS panels these days? They're still about the same price point as VA, so i would be really curious to see a comparison.
Also checking the view angles in the specs, in most cases(unless it is listed incorrectly):
170x170 or lower = TN
176x176 = *MA
178x178 = S-IPS
I WISH newegg had a feature like that, but in fact they, like virtually every other store on the planet do not list panel type. I would say about 99% of the panels on newegg are TN. You have to google it yourself.
Eizo monitors are the ones that use IPS.
http://www.pchardwarehelp.com/guides/lcd-panel-types.php
Too many prefixes!
S-IPS
H-IPS
E-IPS
PVA
S-PVA
MVA
TN
gah, missing any here?
Yes, you're missing TFT, it goes at the bottom.
[edit] So says wiki, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thin_film_transistor_liquid_crystal_display
Still missing E-IPS there tho
It's king for photo work of course, because then the prints come out identical if you have a calibrated printer, but I also find myself working with more subtle and nuanced colors with my textures too.
I personally think the HP 2475w is basically the best monitor right now without spending boatloads.
I've got to RMA this HP L2445w as its got 2 weird blotches on it, like minor burn in. Still, i like it enough to get it again. If it wasnt for the massive amount of problems the 2475 has id still happily pay for it! I just dont want the chance of going through 3-4 different batches to get one that does its job.
otherwise isn't it moot..
when my lead was working on UI for SDTV's a few years back, there was a color gamut they had to stick to, they couldn't use pure white, fonts couldn't be less than 16 pt for readability, etc. so mastering your work based on what the consumer is likely to see isn't completely out of the question though.
Well, the thing here is that with a properly calibrated display, you are starting from a "correct" point. Working off of a purposely incorrect display, is a bad idea because there is so much variation in what the end user will see. So you're creating content for a deviation, and then everyone else will see a different deviation, instead of having a "clean" start point.
Think of it like saving a compressed texture, and then when you need to make changes, you open up and edit the compressed texture instead of the source, and save it again, thus compressing it twice. This is a similar idea.
Now having said that, i think it is much more important in certain roles, ie whoever is controlling the over all lighting, color correction and post effects on your project needs to have a calibrated monitor much more than artists doing singular assets. An artist doing a singular asset can "test" his work against other assets, and even if they are all "off" or not created on a calibrated setup, the important thing is that they are consistant relative to each other. Broader color correct etc can be done in post, as is with most games these days.
Color correction is a good idea, but isnt anywhere near and end all-be all solution to consistency in assets, an artist could have the best monitor in the world, perfectly calibrated and still create content that is totally different than the rest of the assets in the game, simply because there wasn't enough time taken to test his work against the overall product.
So I think it's about time I invest in an actual colorimeter/calibrator for my monitor. Up to this point I've always been managing my monitors myself with Powerstrip color profiles tweaked by hand (eye). And while I think I've done a halfway decent job of it, I'm sure it's really stupid for me to continue doing what I've been doing if I intend on becoming a professional pretty picture maker.
I'm wondering if anyone can recommend some specific colorimeters they've had experience with? I'm poor, but don't want to crap out on something as important as accurate color, so any recommendations would be super helpful.
Additionally I've got a few questions to ask about calibration. I've read in various places (including other threads here on polycount) that you should aim for a 2.2 gamma value, white point/color temperature of 6500k, and a luminance of anywhere from 80-160 cd/m². Primarily, it's that last value I'm curious about. I'd read that a lot of LCD/LED monitors these days might not even be able to get lower than 120 cd/m², but if I remember correctly most monitors you see available for sale advertise significantly higher values - 200-250cd/m². I imagine most people if they do fiddle with their settings, probably make things pretty bright. If one intends to work primarily with digital images, likely to be viewed on other monitors - would a higher luminance be better, or foolish?
It's hard for me to judge, not being able to really see the difference myself. I imagine the lower numbers will prevent you from losing differences in lighter shades, while also being more accurate for most print work, but I'm really not too sure and figured I'd ask. If I'm understanding luminance correctly, it's one of those things that can vary, and so can be difficult (or even silly) to try and give a definitive target number for.
Another thing I'm curious about, I've seen mention of spectrophotometers. Are they essentially the same thing as colorimeters? What's the difference, and how would that apply to me as an artwork focused individual?
And as one final question, do most calibration devices allow for multiple color profiles that you can quickly swap between? I want to be working as accurately as possible, but also wouldn't mind having a separate profile with tweaked brightness for games, or something of that nature.
Thanks for taking the time to read through this, and if anyone has any answers to the above questions - and especially any suggestions on models/brands of colorimeters, I'd really appreciate it! I only use one monitor, I'm not sure if that affects recommendations at all not needing to worry about a dual monitor setup.
Also, if my reading has lead me to any incorrect assumptions or information, please set me straight so far as that goes. I feel like I've got a general understanding of things, but I could be dead wrong.
Thanks everyone.
I was pushing for this at Telltale and we just recently got all environment artists monitors calibrated! It's so important especially on a team project. Don't see how anyone wouldn't want to.
^ That.
I think the quality of monitor your using comes into play to doesn't It?
Like the brand and all that important technical info.
It must be nice to work in a studio especially if they allow you to borrow for 1 night the calibrators they use at the studio, how I need to calibrate.
TwoListen:
The link above my post is what I would get or at least one of those.
If anyone else has experience with other brands or models, definitely post them up. I'm probably not going to be picking one up for at least a week or two, and I'd like to pursue it with as much knowledge as possible. I'm also interested in owning one myself because I've already encountered several scenarios where being able to tweak calibration would really come in handy when dealing with print centers, or something of the sort. Plus, I just like knowing as much as I can about anything related to my "craft", or what have you. So if any more technically oriented than myself know the answers to my other questions, let me know!
Gonna get the Sypder 4 pro instead of the express because express can only support 1 monitor.
http://www.i1upgrades.com/
X-Rite i1 Display Pro
LaCie Blue Eye Pro
Spyder4 Elite
I definitely want to be able to manually set as many options as possible, including specifying the target white point and luminance values, so it seems the "lower versions" of things like the Spyder4 don't allow that. I'm not certain if it's standard for all of them to allow for multiple profiles you for you to easily swap between, I could only find confirmation that the LaCie does allow for quick swapping between profiles. Anyone have experience with either of the other two to know if that's a pretty basic functionality across the board?
The LaCie is definitely the most expensive, I'm not entirely sure the reason.
After a long while of looking around and being broke, I recently ordered an i1 Display Pro. Found it on Newegg for $20 off with a $50 mail in rebate (the deal is still going in case anyone else is looking), and received it today. I'd done a fair amount of research prior to making the purchase, and also asked some fellow polycounters for advice, and I'm glad I did.
Lesson learned, calibrate your damn monitors. It was indeed stupid of me to think "calibrating" anything using my own eyes and a bunch of random utilities was ever ok. I used every random calibration assistant and web utility I could find, and generally passed all the little tests and diagrams no problem, but there's a whole lot more to calibration than what you can achieve with that.
I'm going to answer some of my own questions from my previous post now.
Concerning luminance values, I was really curious as to how luminance differed from brightness on your monitor. It seems that there's a lot to it, but it boils down to the luminance value being something you can actually measure (and it seems that the process used more than just the "brightness" option to hit the target value, potentially adjusting the RGB values for achieving something brightness alone might not be able to). I set my luminance to 140 cd/m² for now, but tried out 110, 120, and 150 for the sake of it, all seemed fine.
I was concerned, given my confusion of how brightness and luminance were connected, that going for a target luminance of 100-150cd/m² would cause me to lose out on varying darks (since that's what happened when I just lowered the brightness on my display). This is definitely not the case. My brightness is lower than it ever has been, and yet I looked at some old paintings and nearly shit myself at the stuff in shadows I'd completely missed before. It would seem that the profiling of one's video LUT is pretty hugely important to seeing what you need to be seeing.
I was originally concerned with switching profiles on the fly, and was trying to find something that could do that, but in retrospect that seems a pretty silly thing to even be looking for. I can't see any need to switch profiles, and apparently loading the video LUT associated with your profile is usually done as the operating system boots up, so it's more a function of the operating system than of the calibration device/software (though multiple profiles can be created/stored, switching through them on the fly isn't something that has a lot of uses). This is with Windows, reportedly Mac's have dynamic profile loading. Though given the adjustments of your monitor's settings during calibration, I can't at the moment see the sense in dynamically swapping profiles without recalibrating.
And, according to AlecMoody who was kind enough to answer some questions I had, spectrophotometers are more for making print/paper profiles and are typically overkill for just making display profiles. Also, this image (posted by AlecMoody some time ago in another thread) is really accurate for illustrating why this matters, as I now see.
Sorry for the book, just figured I'd share my experiences in case anyone else decided to run a search for this stuff in the future. And if I'm totally off my rocker with some of this stuff, definitely correct me on it.
Join a photo group on flickr, or ask around. There are definitely people who will lend you one within your city. I lend mine often to friends. Photographers are much more likely to have one than 3d Artist, so try there. Maybe even call up some photography supply stores and see if they rent.
I thought about this, was like someones got to be generous some where, great news I'll try this.
Thanks for bumping op, I was curious about the outcome myself.
Time to go on the hunt.
this.
Yes, your customers may all have different TVs hooked up to their xbox, but that's not the point. The point is that the art director, the concepter and the texture artist all see the same colors and the same levels.
I remember the fun we had when we had mixed HP and Dell screens. AD "it's too dark!" artist going back to his own PC "now it's so bright on my screen, it looks wrong..."
I've been thinking about buying one for a while and doing some sort of polycount crowd funding for it, like, send me $10(or whatever amount makes sense) + shipping, use it, send it back, on to the next person or something. Once the initial cost is paid off just loan it out for the cost of shipping.
Interest level?
Sorry, not to sound dumb, but is luminance basically adjusted through calibrator software, or something??
I will be ordering a screen calibrator in the coming few weeks and I'm so confused on the whole brightness/luminance thing
I'm not going to pretend to sound like an expert since I'm pretty new to this stuff myself, but my limited understanding of it is that luminance seems to be very much related to "brightness". The problem is that brightness on your monitor, say if you use your monitor's options and set it to "90" - that isn't going to be identical as the same setting on other monitors, you can't measure it in any way other than what your monitor tells you it's set to. So you really need to be able to set it to a measurable target value (luminance). The colorimeter is what does the measuring, being a consistent piece of hardware to help your screen(s) match the target value.
How you hit the target value during calibration is going to depend on your monitor, my colorimeter/software package had the option of automatically configuring my monitor settings if it supported it - which it did. So everything went through pretty much automatically. I did encounter a minor issue where after calibration, when I reset my computer - my monitor settings reset to their factory default, so I had to write down the settings after calibration and manually set them back myself when I rebooted (and they haven't reset since).
If your monitor doesn't support the software adjusting its settings automatically, during calibration the colorimeter will measure for these things and have you manually adjust your brightness/contrast, etc, to match the target values as closely as possible. I had the option of doing this but didn't really see the point if it could be done while I had a coffee.
I set mine to 140 because I'd read between 100-150 were typical depending on your lighting setup, and this room has all sorts of lighting in it depending on the time of day. I was also used to much higher brightness, and didn't want a super drastic change so quickly, figured I'd get used to this for awhile.
I had the option to measure ambient light, or even have the colorimeter hooked up in a position to measure ambient light all the time and adjust my display accordingly, but I assumed that would be more distracting or problematic than of benefit so I didn't mess with it.
at least it's making sense now, because my previous research didn't bring anything tangible, everyone either praised luminance adjustments or hated it.