[argyllcms] Re: Correction for wide gamut screens and/or RGB-LED?

  • From: Raphael Weniger <raphaelw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 14:44:31 +0200

Hello everyone,

unfortunately I'm not sure how to use a mailing list. I would have replied to the appropriate email and thread (that I can see in the archive) if I would know how to do it. I apologize for any inconveniences!

Graeme Gill wrote:
A major one is that it's a combinatorial explosion. I don't even have
access to all the displays that support in-display Luts, never mind the
of other LCD displays out there, so I can't supply such correction
matrices. (I suspect it would be a full time job keeping up with them,
even if one were suppled monitors by all the manufacturers)

The reviewers of Prad.de started to add a correction matrix to every test of wide color gamut displays. The first review was of the U2410.

http://www.prad.de/new/monitore/test/2010/test-dell-u2410-teil15.html#Korrektur (in german)

Those correction matrices are created with an i1pro as reference and the matrix is meant to be for a DTP94. So I think a list of correction matrices (for the DTP94) won't be a problem in the future. Of course your second point is true. Both sensors have a certain tolerance in accuracy. I plan to borrow/rent a i1pro myself and calculate a correction matrix for my DTP94 (for my NEC PA241W) as well. The average of both (the matrix of Prad and my own results) should be quite close to the "truth". At least better than no correction at all.

The only software I know of that uses correction matrices that can be changed (unofficial) is iColor Display 3.6. The file that contains the matrices is "DeviceCorrections.txt".
Here is my description of how to do it:
Unfortunately in German, too.

Using a correction matrix doesn't replace a spectrometer but I think it's a cheap and quite accurate solution if you only have to calibrate (one type of) displays.

Best regards

Other related posts: