[argyllcms] Re: monitor calibration using Colormunki
- From: Ben Goren <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 15:30:37 -0700
On 2010 Oct 13, at 3:11 PM, adam k wrote:
> I meant to measure ambient light next to my monitor.
That's what Graeme was referring to.
In order for a print and a display to match, both must be using the same
illuminant.
In practice, this means setting up a viewing booth with controlled, known,
measured properties (D50, 120 Lux, for example) and profiling the display to
those exact same parameters.
May I suggest?
Preserve your sanity and don't obsess quite so much over screen-to-print
matches. Instead, get the best you can out of both and let the chips fall where
they may.
If at all possible, ensure that you have good lighting at your workstation.
Indirect daylight is superb. SoLux makes the best bulbs (for certain
definitions of ``best'').
Profile your display to your personal preference of D50 or D65; this may well
depend on how well your display tolerates being profiled to something other
than its native white point. (You may, in fact, be best off going with the
native white point. It's a judgement call unless you've spent thousands on your
display and at least as much on the rest of your work area.)
Get the best profile you can for your printer.
Unless your workstation is set up with excellent viewing conditions, only
evaluate your prints by daylight. Don't even try to compare them to the display.
One caveat: if your prints will be displayed in particular lighting conditions,
evaluate the prints in those conditions. Also consider getting a spectral
reading of those conditions and using Argyll to create a custom printer profile
optimized for that lighting.
Cheers,
b&
Other related posts:
