login info join!
Forums > Digital Art and Retouching > Why does Ps look right but the saved image doesnt? Search   Reply
12last
Photographer
Velvet Paper Photo
Posts: 468
Lexington, Kentucky, US


I am so freaking pissed and annoyed right now.  I cannot figure out why a new set of photos look perfect in photoshop but when I open them in the Windows explorer window it's too dark.  Has anyone had this problem?  Does anyone know why this is happening?

EDIT:
Link here ->  http://oi45.tinypic.com/swzc6p.jpg
Another that has the opposite problem ->  http://oi49.tinypic.com/2hef0uw.jpg

They also show up dark on facebook too.
Dec 09 12 04:15 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Pictus
Posts: 956
Teresópolis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil


When saving the image, make sure it is saving the profile too...
http://i605.photobucket.com/albums/tt136/Pictus171/WEB%20stuff/Snapbla.png

You need a proper software to view the images, in windows XP the Windows explorer is not color managed, in Windows 7 it is +-, but it does not work well with V4 monitor profiles and/or LUT ones, use V2 matrix based.

Internet browsers are also not much good http://www.gballard.net/psd/go_live_pag … files.html

The default color space for web is sRGB.


Some interesting links:

Soft proofing
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutori … oofing.htm
Soft Proofing with Lightroom 4
http://digitaldog.net/files/LR4_softproof.mov
http://digitaldog.net/files/LR4_softproof2.mov

Why are my prints too dark?
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutor … dark.shtml

Using Printer Profiles with Digital Labs
http://www.drycreekphoto.com/icc/using_ … ofiles.htm

Lighting Your Workspace
http://www.kevinmillsphoto.com/2008/10/ … workspace/

Practical guidelines and references for digital photographers
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/WGuidelines.pdf

Everything you thought you wanted to know about Color Gamut and RGB Working Spaces
High resolution: http://digitaldog.net/files/ColorGamut.mov
Low Res (YouTube): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0bxSD-Xx-Q
Dec 09 12 04:35 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Velvet Paper Photo
Posts: 468
Lexington, Kentucky, US


Thank you.  It is saving the profile.
I'm on Windows 7 64-bit.
What is V4, LUT and V2?

Pictus wrote:
When saving the image, make sure it is saving the profile too...
http://i605.photobucket.com/albums/tt136/Pictus171/WEB%20stuff/Snapbla.png

You need a proper software to view the images, in windows XP the Windows explorer is not color managed, in Windows 7 it is +-, but it does not work well with V4 monitor profiles and/or LUT ones, use V2 matrix based.

Internet browsers are also not much good http://www.gballard.net/psd/go_live_pag … files.html

The default color space for web is sRGB.


Some interesting links:

Soft proofing
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutori … oofing.htm
Soft Proofing with Lightroom 4
http://digitaldog.net/files/LR4_softproof.mov
http://digitaldog.net/files/LR4_softproof2.mov

Why are my prints too dark?
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutor … dark.shtml

Using Printer Profiles with Digital Labs
http://www.drycreekphoto.com/icc/using_ … ofiles.htm

Lighting Your Workspace
http://www.kevinmillsphoto.com/2008/10/ … workspace/

Practical guidelines and references for digital photographers
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/WGuidelines.pdf

Everything you thought you wanted to know about Color Gamut and RGB Working Spaces
High resolution: http://digitaldog.net/files/ColorGamut.mov
Low Res (YouTube): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0bxSD-Xx-Q

Dec 09 12 04:42 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Pictus
Posts: 956
Teresópolis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil


Velvet Paper Photo wrote:
Thank you.  It is saving the profile.
I'm on Windows 7 64-bit.
What is V4, LUT and V2?

You are welcome, when calibrating the monitor  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eb0cnpbZePA
there will be an option for the type of monitor profile to create, use version 2 and matrix.

Whats the difference between ver.2 vs. ver4, and matrix vs. LUT ?
http://support.colourconfidence.com/ind … icleid=111

Dec 09 12 04:54 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Velvet Paper Photo
Posts: 468
Lexington, Kentucky, US


Pictus wrote:

You are welcome, when calibrating the monitor  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eb0cnpbZePA
there will be an option for the type of monitor profile to create, use version 2 and matrix.

Whats the difference between ver.2 vs. ver4, and matrix vs. LUT ?
http://support.colourconfidence.com/ind … icleid=111

I actually don't have that option.  I have the Huey Pro by Pantone.

Dec 09 12 05:11 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Pictus
Posts: 956
Teresópolis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil


...
Dec 09 12 05:29 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Velvet Paper Photo
Posts: 468
Lexington, Kentucky, US


I'm thinking this has nothing to do with the calibration of my monitor.  It looks fine in photoshop, it doesn't look fine in Firefox or Windows Explorer (not to be confused with Internet Explorer).
It's the way photoshop is saving it or something.
Dec 09 12 05:37 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Kevin Connery
Posts: 16,637
El Segundo, California, US


Velvet Paper Photo wrote:
I'm thinking this has nothing to do with the calibration of my monitor.  It looks fine in photoshop, it doesn't look fine in Firefox or Windows Explorer.
It's the way photoshop is saving it or something.

See the FAQ:
Why do my images look different on the web than they do in Photoshop or Lightroom?

They keep coming out flat, off-color, desaturated and/or dull.

Most browsers don’t understand color management. Your images need to be converted to sRGB before uploading to the web.

See the Color on the Web section of the Color Calibration and Management Reference thread for details
[/i]

Dec 09 12 05:39 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Velvet Paper Photo
Posts: 468
Lexington, Kentucky, US


Thanks. 
I don't think you all are actually looking at the photos or understanding what I'm talking about, though.
How about we just ignore the fact that I'm posting these on the web.  They look horrible in the regular Windows Explorer window.

Dec 09 12 05:46 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
rickspix
Posts: 1,301
Vallejo, California, US


buy a mac
Dec 09 12 05:48 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Velvet Paper Photo
Posts: 468
Lexington, Kentucky, US


rickspix wrote:
buy a mac

No.

Dec 09 12 05:50 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
I M N Photography
Posts: 2,280
New York, New York, US


The best thing you can do is calibrate your monitor, and then make sure that you save in the profile in which you intend to publish.

The tools exist for calibrating your monitor to match the profile.
Datacolor has one of the best price/performance deals you can find for your mac.
Dec 09 12 05:57 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Pictus
Posts: 956
Teresópolis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil


Velvet Paper Photo wrote:
I don't think you all are actually looking at the photos or understanding what I'm talking about, though.
How about we just ignore the fact that I'm posting these on the web.  They look horrible in the regular Windows Explorer window.

I also do not think you understood what I wrote...
Look what happens when using a V4 profile with Windows Explorer
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/threa … t-39634580

Photoshop is a perfect color managed software, internet browsers are not...
Some works more or less, others not...
For Firefox look http://www.metalvortex.com/blog/2012/07/12/979.html

Dec 09 12 05:58 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Velvet Paper Photo
Posts: 468
Lexington, Kentucky, US


Pictus wrote:

I also do not think you understood what I wrote...
Look what happens when using a V4 profile with Windows Explorer
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/threa … t-39634580

Photoshop is a perfect color managed software, internet browsers are not...
Some works more or less, others not...
For Firefox look http://www.metalvortex.com/blog/2012/07/12/979.html

You're posts were very helpful and are leading me in the right direction, but you are correct.  I don't understand how to fix it.  :-/  I'm on the two websites you listed earlier for the V2 profile, trying to figure out what to do.

Dec 09 12 06:02 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Kevin Connery
Posts: 16,637
El Segundo, California, US


rickspix wrote:
buy a mac

Don't http://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-iw5TaUpM1OI/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAABg/oWjr6XtVW8o/s120-c/photo.jpg.

Dec 09 12 06:07 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Pictus
Posts: 956
Teresópolis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil


Velvet Paper Photo wrote:
You're posts were very helpful and are leading me in the right direction, but you are correct.  I don't understand how to fix it.  :-/  I'm on the two websites you listed earlier for the V2 profile, trying to figure out what to do.

Use your Huey with  Argyll + dispcalGUI it will create a V2 matrix profile...

Read the docs and you will know...
VERY outdated tutorial http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/38157360

Dec 09 12 06:09 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Kevin Connery
Posts: 16,637
El Segundo, California, US


Velvet Paper Photo wrote:

Thanks. 
I don't think you all are actually looking at the photos or understanding what I'm talking about, though.
How about we just ignore the fact that I'm posting these on the web.  They look horrible in the regular Windows Explorer window.

"Most browsers don'€™t understand color management. "

Windows' Explorer is a browser. Not just IE, but the file navigator/browser/viewer.

Even now, far too many 'browsers' ignore color management. Including some that are supposed to be DAM/content managers. And even more of them which work with v2 profiles can't handle v4 ones.

Dec 09 12 06:10 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Velvet Paper Photo
Posts: 468
Lexington, Kentucky, US


Pictus wrote:
Use your Huey with  Argyll + dispcalGUI it will create a V2 matrix profile...

Read the docs and you will know...
VERY outdated tutorial http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/38157360

Thanks.
This makes absolutely no sense to me.  I have no idea what I'm supposed to do when I get to the Argyll website.
I give up.  Thanks for trying.

EDIT:  I've downloaded the exe files & other stuff & the thing that runs it, but it won't accept it.  I don't know what I'm doing wrong.

Dec 09 12 06:23 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Pictus
Posts: 956
Teresópolis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil


The Argyll are the libs and dispcalGUI the graphic frontend...

Then use Adobe bridge to view your images instead of Windows Explorer or
use FastPictureViewer or ACDSee Pro 6  or Corel® AfterShot™ Pro, the latest
2 do much more than just image browsing...

EDIT: Do not work?
Look http://www.argyllcms.com/doc/Installing_MSWindows.html
and this video
Dec 09 12 06:34 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Velvet Paper Photo
Posts: 468
Lexington, Kentucky, US


Pictus wrote:
The Argyll are the libs and dispcalGUI the graphic frontend...

Then use Adobe bridge to view your images instead of Windows Explorer or
use FastPictureViewer or ACDSee Pro 6  or Corel® AfterShot™ Pro, the latest
2 do much more than just image browsing...

EDIT: Do not work?
Look http://www.argyllcms.com/doc/Installing_MSWindows.html
and this video

I've seen it.  I don't understand it.

Dec 09 12 06:52 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
IrisSwope
Posts: 14,796
Dallas, Texas, US


Velvet Paper Photo wrote:

Thanks. 
I don't think you all are actually looking at the photos or understanding what I'm talking about, though.
How about we just ignore the fact that I'm posting these on the web.  They look horrible in the regular Windows Explorer window.

I had a similar problem.

There's a setting to calibrate your monitor in Photoshop (I have no idea if this is regular monitor calibration, or a separate photoshop thing). But when you view something in Photoshop, the color is being controlled by the photoshop calibration. As soon as you load it anywhere else, including Windows Picture Viewer, your color it no longer being controlled by photoshop.

What is the answer? I chose to turn of photoshop calibration, so I could see what the average end viewer sees. I'm sure there are other options, but that's what I chose to do.  I'm cheap, and not that picky, and just want to see images the way the uncalibrated masses will see it.

Dec 09 12 07:04 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Velvet Paper Photo
Posts: 468
Lexington, Kentucky, US


IrisSwope wrote:

I had a similar problem.

There's a setting to calibrate your monitor in Photoshop (I have no idea if this is regular monitor calibration, or a separate photoshop thing). But when you view something in Photoshop, the color is being controlled by the photoshop calibration. As soon as you load it anywhere else, including Windows Picture Viewer, your color it no longer being controlled by photoshop.

What is the answer? I chose to turn of photoshop calibration, so I could see what the average end viewer sees. I'm sure there are other options, but that's what I chose to do.  I'm cheap, and not that picky, and just want to see images the way the uncalibrated masses will see it.

Hm.  Interesting.  Thank you.  I'm looking at the photos on my iPad and they look perfect as I normally edit them, so I'm just going to deal with it until I find an easier way to fix it.

Dec 09 12 07:47 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Krunoslav Stifter
Posts: 3,843
Santa Cruz, California, US


IrisSwope wrote:
I had a similar problem.

There's a setting to calibrate your monitor in Photoshop (I have no idea if this is regular monitor calibration, or a separate photoshop thing). But when you view something in Photoshop, the color is being controlled by the photoshop calibration. As soon as you load it anywhere else, including Windows Picture Viewer, your color it no longer being controlled by photoshop.

What is the answer? I chose to turn of photoshop calibration, so I could see what the average end viewer sees. I'm sure there are other options, but that's what I chose to do.  I'm cheap, and not that picky, and just want to see images the way the uncalibrated masses will see it.

There is no such thing as photoshop calibration only monitor calibration which creates monitor profile and is read by the OS in any color managed application along with the embedded color profile within the image. Photoshop being color managed application as far as I know canot deactivate it's color management. Photoshop works with so called working profiles (sRGB, Adobe RGB 1998 etc.), and non color managed applications do not.
That being said I think I know what you mean, but it you said it wrong. When you say "the uncalibrated masses" do you mean web users?

BTW. Windows Picture Viewer should be color managed but not in slideshow mode.

Dec 09 12 07:49 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Krunoslav Stifter
Posts: 3,843
Santa Cruz, California, US


DP
Dec 09 12 07:50 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Ben Hinman
Posts: 596
Westwood, California, US


The color depth of JPEGs is limited. PSD naturally supports a higher dynamic range, and if you're saving with web safe colors that takes a LOT of the possible colors off the table.
Dec 09 12 08:09 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Ben Hinman
Posts: 596
Westwood, California, US


rickspix wrote:
buy a mac

Its no different on a mac. Try saving a file as a jpeg and a psd and then flipping back and forth between them using quick preview. It will be the same as on windows.

Dec 09 12 08:11 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Krunoslav Stifter
Posts: 3,843
Santa Cruz, California, US


Ben Hinman wrote:
The color depth of JPEGs is limited. PSD naturally supports a higher dynamic range, and if you're saving with web safe colors that takes a LOT of the possible colors off the table.

Why would that make any difference in this case?

Dec 09 12 08:23 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Krunoslav Stifter
Posts: 3,843
Santa Cruz, California, US


Velvet Paper Photo wrote:
They also show up dark on facebook too.

Could it bee that the soft proofing is on by accident. Make sure it's off.

In the Photoshop menus > Go to "View" > and make sure that the "proof colors" is off.

Dec 09 12 08:29 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
IrisSwope
Posts: 14,796
Dallas, Texas, US


Krunoslav-Stifter wrote:
There is no such thing as photoshop calibration only monitor calibration which creates monitor profile and is read by the OS in any color managed application along with the embedded color profile within the image. Photoshop being color managed application as far as I know canot deactivate it's color management. Photoshop works with so called working profiles (sRGB, Adobe RGB 1998 etc.), and non color managed applications do not.
That being said I think I know what you mean, but it you said it wrong. When you say "the uncalibrated masses" do you mean web users?

BTW. Windows Picture Viewer should be color managed but not in slideshow mode.

I totally believe that I probably did say it wrong. I said it in the most non-technical way possible.

When I say the "uncalibrated masses" I mean the average end viewer. It irks me when someone sends a file, then qualifies it's color, based on whether or not you have a calibrated monitor. If it's going on the web, most everyone does not have a calibrated monitor. So creating a file that you know won't show up correctly to most users, doesn't make sense to me.

But I'm way off point now.

Dec 09 12 09:10 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Krunoslav Stifter
Posts: 3,843
Santa Cruz, California, US


IrisSwope wrote:

I totally believe that I probably did say it wrong. I said it in the most non-enchnical way possible.

When I say the "uncalibrated masses" I mean the average end viewer. It irks me when someone sends a file, then qualifies it's color, based on whether or not you have a calibrated monitor. If it's going on the web, most everyone does not have a calibrated monitor. So creating a file that you know won't show up correctly to most users, doesn't make sense to me.

But I'm way off point now.

I think your job is to make sure you have proper color managed workflow and the client you work for. Even if you post online you are still did you part, what happens after that is beyond your control. So there is still responsibility on your end.

If people have such standards that color managed workflow dose not bother them I can understand that to. I'm not saying that for you specifically, just saying in general.

Dec 09 12 09:15 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Ben Hinman
Posts: 596
Westwood, California, US


Krunoslav-Stifter wrote:

Why would that make any difference in this case?

Are you kidding me? Less possible colors means oftentimes the more vibrant colors are going to be replaced with a web safe standard or whatever closest color is in the color profile you're using in your jpegs. Thats why images are going to look differently.

Dec 09 12 09:38 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Kevin Connery
Posts: 16,637
El Segundo, California, US


IrisSwope wrote:
When I say the "uncalibrated masses" I mean the average end viewer. It irks me when someone sends a file, then qualifies it's color, based on whether or not you have a calibrated monitor. If it's going on the web, most everyone does not have a calibrated monitor. So creating a file that you know won't show up correctly to most users, doesn't make sense to me.

Think of a display's 'correctness'. Where it falls, uncalibrated, is somewhere in a VERY large bell curve; most kinda-sort in the center, and the rest ranging from close to not at all close. Where it falls, calibrated, is in a MUCH smaller bell curve, rarely very far from the center.

If your display isn't in the center--where it would be if calibrated--more people will see it "more"  incorrectly. You can't control what the 'uncalibrated masses' see, but you can give them something which is least likely to be off overall.

Ben Hinman wrote:
The color depth of JPEGs is limited. PSD naturally supports a higher dynamic range, and if you're saving with web safe colors that takes a LOT of the possible colors off the table.

If you're saving a photo with 'web safe' colors, you're not saving it as a JPEG. Or, put another way, if you're saving it as a JPEG, you're not going to get 'web safe' colors; it doesn't work that way.

Dec 09 12 09:49 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Krunoslav Stifter
Posts: 3,843
Santa Cruz, California, US


Ben Hinman wrote:
Are you kidding me? Less possible colors means oftentimes the more vibrant colors are going to be replaced with a web safe standard or whatever closest color is in the color profile you're using in your jpegs. Thats why images are going to look differently.

I don't think you understand what is going on. Possible colors are determine by bit depth and maximum reproducible gamut or range of colors is determine by the color profile of the image and the ultimately the limitations of the display device, as well as the nature of the image.   

JPEG's can't support more than 8 bit's per channel but that is more than enough to display all the colors you need, the other factor is the color profile you embed in your image. If you talk about sRGB as the standard for web than that could be a problem but usually it's not. You may have an image that was already worked on in sRGB, you may have colors in the image that don't go beyond the gamut of sRGB, you may have a B&W image and the gamut of the profile doesn't matter anymore. And rendering intent, process of compressing the color range of one color profile into another - often times dose a good job to preserve the appearance as much as possible. Unless you are preparing for a very small print color space, than for obvious reasons you will see shift in color. But it doesn't seem to be the case here.

Either way there are plenty of standard procedure methods and some are posted by other users that should take care of any obvious problems.

I wonder if the problem OP has is in: soft proofing activated by accident as I wrote earlier.

BTW. If you are talking about "web safe" colors they are so out of date that is not even funny.

Dec 09 12 10:08 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Krunoslav Stifter
Posts: 3,843
Santa Cruz, California, US


Ben Hinman wrote:
The color depth of JPEGs is limited. PSD naturally supports a higher dynamic range, and if you're saving with web safe colors that takes a LOT of the possible colors off the table.

This only applies to 32 bits/channel mode and not the standard 8 and 16 bits/channel mode. The dynamic range remains the same, what does change is the tonal range. And that gets to be a problem only after extensive editing and not simple conversion. Besides if you are going to post an images online you will use JPEG not PSD.

As for web safe colors they are not in use for this type of work and JPEG does not relate to them directly.

Dec 09 12 10:17 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Lea Halliwell
Posts: 3,939
Lexington, Kentucky, US


Krunoslav-Stifter wrote:

Could it bee that the soft proofing is on by accident. Make sure it's off.

In the Photoshop menus > Go to "View" > and make sure that the "proof colors" is off.

I'm not sure if it's on or not. I will check when I get back to my computer. Thanks!

Dec 09 12 11:06 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Image Magik
Posts: 1,067
New Orleans, Louisiana, US


Velvet Paper Photo wrote:
I'm thinking this has nothing to do with the calibration of my monitor.  It looks fine in photoshop, it doesn't look fine in Firefox or Windows Explorer (not to be confused with Internet Explorer).
It's the way photoshop is saving it or something.

Is it just affecting the thumbnail or the opened image? I had a problem where
Photoshop saved jpegs had dark or faded colors when saved for the thumbnail but the opened image was fine. Now I just make all my jpegs with Lightroom and don't have that problem anymore.

Dec 09 12 11:22 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
richy01
Posts: 153
Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands


Technical basics on CM here...interesting. Btw I find your Explorerimages to be looking better than the photoshopversions...
Dec 10 12 01:00 am  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Pictus
Posts: 956
Teresópolis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil


Krunoslav-Stifter,
By looking at her screen shoots, Photoshop proof is not enabled.


-----------------------


An updated tutorial...

-Download and install Argyll + dispcalGUI
DispcalGUI have a new “Zero Install”, I do not like and prefer the manual way...
Both versions are available to download.

-I installed argyll to c:\argyll and dispcalGUI to  c:\Argyll\dispcalGUI\ 
(better *not* to use version number for directory name)

-For some instruments Argyll driver must be installed, ColorMunki Display/i1 Display Pro do not need,
Huey maybe not, Spyder 3 need and Spyder 4 I do not know.
To install argyll driver into Windows check here and/or this video

How Can I Install Hardware with Unsigned Drivers in Windows 8?
http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/how-can-i- … windows-8/

-dispcalGUI should run as administrator (Windows vista/7/8)
Click with the right mouse button over C:\Argyll\dispcalGUI\dispcalGUI.exe go to
Properties>Compatibility> and enable “Run this Program as an administrator”
http://i605.photobucket.com/albums/tt136/Pictus171/WEB%20stuff/adm-dispcal-1.png

-First time you run dispcalGUI.exe, go to Menu>File>Locate Argyll CMS executables
point to c:\Argyll\bin\  (remember, I used NO version in directory name)
http://i605.photobucket.com/albums/tt136/Pictus171/WEB%20stuff/dispcal-lib-1.png

-Go to menu>Options and enable Show advanced calibration options
set dispcalGUI like this
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4686872/dispcalGUI-1b.png
Click in “Calibrate & profile”
OBS, Single Curve + Matrix profiles may get better neutrals and Curves + Matrix better colors.

For Spyder4 or i1Display/Munki go to menu>tools>Import colormeter corrections>AUTO, then select the proper one in the Correction, also can try to use the ones from dispcalGUI database, just click in the small Earth icon.
(For the AUTO to work, first you must install the default calibration software from Datacolor or X-rite)
http://i605.photobucket.com/albums/tt136/Pictus171/WEB%20stuff/Snap-correction_zpse4f3c5ea.png

-Put the calibration device over the spot and click in "Start measurement"
http://i605.photobucket.com/albums/tt136/Pictus171/WEB%20stuff/inidisp.png

-Click in “Whitepoint/White level”
http://i605.photobucket.com/albums/tt136/Pictus171/WEB%20stuff/delta_d.png
Wait 5 seconds and Click in “Start measurement”
Using the monitor RGB channels, try to make 6500 with the smallest delta(all 3 colored bars with the same size) and adjust the monitor brightness to +- 120 to 160 cd/m2, as I work into a dim environment I prefer 120 cd/m2, when you have the desired values, click in “Stop  measurement” and “Continue on to calibration”
OBS, notebook users probably will not have the option to change the RGB channels, so just adjust the brightness.

When the process finish, install the profile...
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4686872/Ins_icc.png

To verify the result, go to menu Tools>Measurement report
For reference, print some targets in Fine Art quality, check http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/arti … mages.html
The Outback is a good one http://outbackprint.outbackphoto.com/pr … essay.html
Can also use:
http://www.photofriday.com/calibrate.php
http://www.drycreekphoto.com/Learn/Cali … ivity.html
http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/gradient.php
The gradient(view in Photoshop) should be smooth with no clipping in the blacks and no color casts.
http://i605.photobucket.com/albums/tt136/Pictus171/WEB%20stuff/grad.png
A gradation with noise is more forgiving...
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4686872/grad_noise.png

Consider reading the quickstart http://dispcalgui.hoech.net/#quickstart
Also look at the review sites like http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews.htm
or http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/reviews.html
to see how they calibrated their units for optimum results.

Complementary information:
Soft proofing - Color Spaces and alike information.

How to choose a good monitor
Dec 10 12 05:32 am  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Krunoslav Stifter
Posts: 3,843
Santa Cruz, California, US


Pictus wrote:
Krunoslav-Stifter,
By looking at her screen shoots, Photoshop proof is not enabled.

You are quite right, I missed that. There is no display of the output profile in the documents title.


-----------------------

Pictus wrote:
An updated tutorial...

Thanks for the extensive effort to write the update. smile

Dec 10 12 02:44 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Pictus
Posts: 956
Teresópolis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil


Glad to help!
As you are a very good instructor, maybe you can create a video showing how to proper use this life saver tool, I find it much better than the other solutions for monitors without hardware programmable LUT.
Ahhh, here a tuto to use Argyll for creating printer profiles http://www.lassini.com/blog/?s=argyll&search=Search
Dec 11 12 10:33 pm  Link  Quote 
12last   Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers