There is many choice of profiles that can be generated and I get lost choosing. I'm just a novice. When I used dispcal and Argyll I didn't know which option to choose. A Kielcz On Feb 3, 2012, at 1:26 PM, "Іван Циба" <ivantsyba@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: Try dispcalGUI - most advanced monitor calibrating and profiling solution. It based on Argyll, of course. 2012/2/3 adam k <aak1946@xxxxxxxxx> > Yes, but I'm not that good at it. Have keep learning. > > A Kielcz > > On Feb 3, 2012, at 10:21 AM, Roger Breton <graxx@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Aren't you using Argyll too? / Roger > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto: > argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > On Behalf Of adam k > > Sent: February-03-12 9:55 AM > > To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: [argyllcms] Re: Monitor calibration > > > > The lowest I can set with Colormunki software is 80. How can I try lower? > > > > A Kielcz > > > > On Feb 3, 2012, at 9:36 AM, Roger Breton <graxx@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> Actually, my NEC PA271 is adjusted for 62 cd/m2, that is plenty > >> "bright" for everything I do. There is no need to strain one's eyes > >> for doing color correction and the like in Photoshop. Right now, on > >> this partly overcast winter day, there is 58 Lux @5754K falling the > >> face of my monitor and it is very comfortable for viewing. > >> > >> Roger > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> [mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > >> On Behalf Of adam k > >> Sent: February-02-12 11:08 PM > >> To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> Subject: [argyllcms] Re: Monitor calibration > >> > >> Thank you everybody for taking your time and replies. I'll keep my > >> u2410 at 80 cd/m^2 because it is very bright otherwise. Just out of > >> curiosity I mat try 120 also. > >> > >> A Kielcz > >> > >> On Feb 2, 2012, at 11:02 PM, Roger Breton <graxx@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >>> ISO-12646 suggests that 80 is good Luminance for screen to proof, > >>> even today. 120 can be used too. > >>> > >>> Bottom line, trust the adapting visual mechanism to show us a good > >>> visual match to a proof, even at the lower calibrated luminance. > >>> > >>> / Roger > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > >>> [mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > >>> On Behalf Of Philip Reed > >>> Sent: February-02-12 7:49 PM > >>> To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > >>> Subject: [argyllcms] Re: Monitor calibration > >>> > >>> Hi Adam, > >>> > >>> 80 is quite a bit dimmer than 120. I have a Dell Ultrasharp U2711 > >>> and calibrate to 120. If I went with 80, I would not be able to see > >>> detail in the dark areas or shadows and I get good matches with my > >>> prints. This however seems to be a very subjective topic and also > >>> depends on your ambient lighting conditions. I tend to edit photos > >>> at night with no artificial lights. > >>> > >>> Regards - Phil (no guru either) > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > >>> [mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > >>> On Behalf Of adam k > >>> Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2012 7:35 PM > >>> To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > >>> Subject: [argyllcms] Re: Monitor calibration > >>> > >>> I know that this group is full of gurus. I'm novice though. Is 80 > >>> cd/m^2 brighter than 120 cd/m^2? > >>> > >>> A Kielcz > >>> > >>> On Feb 2, 2012, at 6:35 PM, "János, Tóth F." <janos666@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > >>> > >>>> It does make sense for me as my plasma display can not reach more > >>>> than > >>>> ~85 cd/m^2 anyway. But this is enough in a dark room. > >>>> 80 cd/m^2 is a little too bright for web pages with bright > >>>> backgrounds and black text but usually optimal for most of the > >>>> movies and > >> games. > >>>> In a dark room which is actually not that dark if you have white > >>>> walls and there is something on a relatively big display... > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >