Actually I think I found the reason of the inconsistency: even though I double checked all the monitor settings in the past days, a setting in a menu called "range extension" and incorrectly set on "auto" went unnoticed. I think that in "auto" the monitor decides automatically if the range extension should be used or not depending on the image. I disabled it as enabling range extension increases gamma to 2.4 instead of the "native" 2.2. I also inserted 50 neutral patches (-g50 of targen) and the light grays seem more neutral now (i.e., I do not have the feeling that images are cold in the highlights anymore). I may add some more as I work a lot on black and white images ;) Best, Alberto Ferrante On 02/15/2013 08:31 PM, Alberto Ferrante wrote: > Graeme Gill wrote: >>> Inconsistency between different reads in the same conditions. I just run >>> dispcal -r multiple times without even touching the colorimeter. >>> I've done the same with dispcal -R with much more consistent results. >> >> It sounds like that explains your shift from 100 to 97 then ? > > Well, actually not... Let me summarize things a bit: > * different reads done by using dispcal -R give pretty consistent > results (about 101.5) > * different reads by dispcal -r give pretty inconsistent results (97-108) > * white point setting (option 2) in dispcal give reasonably consistent > results (about 101.5) > * the verification step of dispcal (repeated twice) gives a read of > about 101. > > To me it looks like the problem is somehow in dispcal -r > > Yesterday night I tried profcheck on the icc profile by using 500 new > patches and the results I got is the following: > No of test patches = 512 > Profile check complete, errors: max. = 2.817538, avg. = 1.219014, RMS = > 1.335181 -- Home page: http://www.alari.ch/people/alberto Photo galleries : http://albertoferrante.name Public key: http://www.alari.ch/people/alberto/keys/yahoo.asc