[argyllcms] Re: monitor calibration - strange behavior
- From: Alberto Ferrante <alberto.ferrante@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 20:44:53 +0100
Graeme Gill wrote:
Graeme, thanks for your kind and prompt reply!
>> dispcal -t6500 -gs -b100 -qh -v -e1 -yl eizoCX240
>
>> What happens is that, after the verification step of dispcal the
>> luminosity is about 100. Though, at the end of the process, dispcal -r
>> measures a luminosity of 97 with the same profile.
>
>> Is such a behavior normal?
>
> Probably. It's hard to pin down why. Often the display is not
> that consistent, or small things (such as moving the instrument)
> can change the reading. Sometimes it tricky to hit a particular
I would exclude such large inconsistencies in the display as dispcal -R
gives always a read of 101 as luminosity (with very small variations). I
discovered that the colorimeter was not fitting perfectly due to due to
the large border of the screen, but even after fixing that, the
situation did not change much (I got a read of 108 from dispcal -r and
then another one of 102 a few seconds later).
> brightness and stay within gamut, if the brightness is close to
> the limit of the display.
This does not seems to be the case: once playing with the RGB controls
the white point is practically perfectly matched and this is why I was
keeping a setting of 101.5 for luminosity (on the previous monitor I was
using 103 to provide more "margin" for calibration).
Visually, the monitor looks a bit cold to me in color managed
applications. Maybe it is just my impression, though. I will probably do
another attempt tomorrow with the displayport cable (that should allow
me to enable the 30-bit color depth).
Is there any way to check the profile with the colorimeter (i.e., load
the color profile and then read patches with dispread to verify the
accuracy of the profile)?
Best regards,
Alberto Ferrante
--
Photo galleries : http://albertoferrante.name
Other related posts: