A vote for the Spider 3 ( I use the Pro) The elite is same hardware but with different software, yes you can upgrade a pro to an elite, at a later date

As far as I am aware it will not calibrate you printer

Another good rule of thumb the other thread doesn't mention is that you want 16 bits if you're using Adobe RGB. 8-bit files (jpg, e.g.) can give you posterization in Adobe RGB because it's a wider gamut than sRGB (the 256 levels for each channel are spread over more color space). If it's raw or 16 bit there should be no problem converting in post. The raw file's data shouldn't change in A or s (besides a metadata tag and the thumbnail), so in-camera color space is really a final decision only if you shoot jpg or tif out of camera.

Photoshop's convert profile command is in the edit menu, I believe.

Testing123 said:
No reason to do so as sRGB is a subset of Adobe RGB.

I'm aware that AdobeRGB has more colour detail (colour depth?) than sRGB, so I can see that logically the lesser might be able to be extrapolated from the greater, but I wasn't aware that there was currently a way of doing this in post? Is that what you are saying Testing123? At the moment I am sometimes unsure which colour space to use, as I'm not always sure what the client wants to do with the shots at the end. I was always taught AdobeRGB for printing/publication, and sRGB for web/computer display. Being able to shoot in "A" and have the option of "s" would be very useful.

P.S. To the mods, sorry for going off topic, I promise this will be my last. In the voice of my children "TaoTeJared started it"! ;-)

P.P.S I think I may have found the answer in http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1230

SkintBrit said:
... Adobe and sRGB options Tao, would it be impossible for cameras to shoot in both simultaneously, just as you can shoot in Raw and jpeg?

No reason to do so as sRGB is a subset of Adobe RGB.

EDIT: Not worth the misunderstanding and anger this will likely provoke.

Thanks for your replies Tao and Drab, you're very kind, as I think calibrating my printer would be desirable, it would seem to me that the ColorMunki device is the one to go for. I might wait to get one, when I can afford the Epson printer to go with it though. With regards to your comment about Adobe and sRGB options Tao, would it be impossible for cameras to shoot in both simultaneously, just as you can shoot in Raw and jpeg?

I took a look at the Munki - Looks like a good product US$499 - I miss the (£) at times. The Spyder3 Studio is about the same price US$449.

I did have a bad monitor that I had to calibrate constantly. Then again I only paid $150 for a 22" one. There is a difference in monitors when you spend the $ or find the good ones like Dell's ultra sharp monitors. I worked with an IT guy who worked for an Ad agency and his sole responsibility was to make sure everything was calibrated in their office. He walked me through everything but it basically came to a some simple things:
- Get all the updated drivers for Pick one (Adobe RGB, sRGB) for Monitor, Video Card (or just the updated one), & printers. That will get you 90% there and keep from things shifting too much.
-If it works - don't mess with updating it again. Ever!
-Calibrate printer first.
-Calibrate Monitor last. Remember your monitor is suppose to show what you can print. Go from real world to virtual world.
That is what he said. Being that he did this for 200 artists, 40hrs a week for 2 years and my stuff has been good for almost 3 years - I think he had it right. I have seen many other work flows as well. Drab points out some good points as well. Most of us have our monitors too bright, for instance.

Printer - Drivers for ink & drivers for paper. That is the name of that game if you are printing yourself. Buy OEM ink (Canon, Epson, HP) or very high replacement grade (Costs more $) and any paper you use, get the drivers for it if it is not OEM paper. Having a printer that has dedicated black (black, grey, lt. grey) helps if you want true black and white. Toning B&W images I have found does take some test prints. I calibrated one printer once and still had to do this. I usually just test print a small part of an image first - move the print across the page and keep printing on the same paper - just in a different spot. Depending on your printer - this can change rapidly if ink starts running out - the newest high end printers have a much less problem with this now. Personally I didn't want to spend $500 on something that I can spend $20 on test prints/year. Takes a bit longer and not perfect, but those who get my images have never noticed anything.

Color shift/ calibration Scare mongering? Yes & No. If we all had the top of the line devices, it's not that big of a deal unless your business has a absolute need for it or if your are neurotic about perfect color. I'm neurotic about many things but minor shifts usually don't bother me. The fact that most of us don't have the top line gear - I think it is good and can relieve many headaches. I understand drivers enough that it is just as easy for me as to calibrate everything. If you see the need for it in your workflow and don't really understand drivers, I wouldn't hesitate and get one.

Now what is killing me the most is that some on-line printers are requesting only sRGB. Everything I have is Adobe RGB. Some of my photos have came back looking like garbage. My fault really, but that is starting to really peeve me off. ;)

Spy Black said:
If you can live with HD resolution you can get a TFT TV and use it as a monitor. These are IPS units and have computer inputs. The smallest units I've seen are 32-inch models going for around $500. You have to check out different models because in some of them you can see the pixels at that size/res combo, but some models seem to have tighter pixels.

Sorry I'm confused, which question are you responding to Spy Black?

If you can live with HD resolution you can get a TFT TV and use it as a monitor. These are IPS units and have computer inputs. The smallest units I've seen are 32-inch models going for around $500. You have to check out different models because in some of them you can see the pixels at that size/res combo, but some models seem to have tighter pixels.

Drab said:
My Spyder 3 is a step up from my Spyer 2.

First let's talk about your monitor's "Adobe RGB calibration". Worth little.
The color displayed on your screen is a factor of three major variables and a handful of secondary ones. The major variables are:
1 - Backlight white balance - the base color of the white light produced by your monitor.
2 - LCD dyes - the colors your panel is able to add (subtract really) to that base color.
3 - Video card output stage.

We can see off the bat even if your have a LED backlight (or have a fresh factory CCF) that said monitor calibration only covers 2/3rs of the major variables. Not to mention the minor variables such as monitor drivers and ambient light conditions. While it should be true in this day of pure digital display chains (you are using DVI or HDMI, no?

Yes, HDMI.

If not fix that aspect first.) that the output stage of a video card should be neutral. This is often not the case. A profile for monitor A produced on system 1 likely will be close, but not a perfect match if monitor A is plugged into system 2.
And, yes, this can go out of sync over time, though much less today with a pure digital solid state display chain than in days of old with fluorescent backlights and an analog video card stage. If your printer puts a purple fringe on B/W images a monitor profile likely won't help - that is likely to be a head alignment issue.

I resonably frequently run the printer utilities program (Head alignment/Nozzle check etc) so i'd be be surprised if it was that. I have however got a strange issue with a faint line showing up at about 1cm regular intervals on colour printing, strange because printing the nozzle test print pattern doesn't show a problem? This wasn't the problem on the photo I refered to though.

Think of profiling as map matching. You have two paper maps, one is the native capability of the device, and one is a standard map. Profiling simply overlays the native capability of the device over top of the standard, rotates and scales it to best fit the standard. If there is non-linear distortion that won't be fixed. As far as printer correction goes, I gave up on it. Even the dingiest drug store tends to have a calibrated photo printer today, and sells prints for less than I can produce them.

Yes, I've been using online/shop printing up to now, but sometimes it's just quicker to do it yourself if it's just a small job.

My Spyder 3 is a step up from my Spyer 2.

First let's talk about your monitor's "Adobe RGB calibration". Worth little.
The color displayed on your screen is a factor of three major variables and a handful of secondary ones. The major variables are:
1 - Backlight white balance - the base color of the white light produced by your monitor.
2 - LCD dyes - the colors your panel is able to add (subtract really) to that base color.
3 - Video card output stage.

We can see off the bat even if your have a LED backlight (or have a fresh factory CCF) that said monitor calibration only covers 2/3rs of the major variables. Not to mention the minor variables such as monitor drivers and ambient light conditions.

While it should be true in this day of pure digital display chains (you are using DVI or HDMI, no? If not fix that aspect first.) that the output stage of a video card should be neutral this is often not the case. A profile for monitor A produced on system 1 likely will be close, but not a perfect match if monitor A is plugged into system 2.

And, yes, this can go out of sync over time, though much less today with a pure digital solid state display chain than in days of old with fluorescent backlights and an analog video card stage, much less CRTs.

If your printer puts a purple fringe on B/W images a printer profile likely won't help - that is likely to be a head alignment issue.

Think of profiling as map matching. You have two paper maps, one is the native capability of the device, and one is a standard map. Profiling simply overlays the native capability of the device over top of the standard, rotates and scales it to best fit the standard. If there is non-linear distortion that won't be fixed.

As far as printer correction goes, I gave up on it. Even the dingiest drug store tends to have a calibrated photo printer today, and sells prints for less than I can produce them.

EDIT: fix typos.

Thanks Tao, right I got a few things from your reply, firstly the ColorMunki definitely DOES calibrate your printer, as i've been able to gleam this from their online tutorials and youtube. I can't see Spyder showing this being done with the Spyder3 though, so I think you need to buy their MUCH more expensive Spyder3Studio SR kit at £410 to do this? You've never found the need to calibrate your printer Tao? Secondly I was surprised to hear that you don't calibrate frequently, maybe it's just scare mongoring but I thought you had to do it every couple of week depending on use to keep things in check? Thirdly, my monitor came with a factory adobe RGB calibration certificate, which is linked to an adobe RGB profile in the menu. Is there any reason to think that this can go out of sink in time? I would imagine that if not, it still doesn't link THAT profile to my output source, which I guess is the point of calibration? The reason I think I now need to get this sorted, is that I recently printed out a nice looking monochrome shot at a wedding I went too, which came out distinctly purple. I'm hoping that buying one of these will correct this issue.

I think they both only due monitors. When you add printing etc. they usually shoot up to $500-1000+. Huey is another one - especially if you have people wanting to match or you print with pantone colors.

I use a Spyder3... something - since I moved (2 years ago)I haven't touched my monitor or hooked it up. Still using the same profile and all looks good. I like the Spyder but I don't have experience with others to compare. Easy to use though.

To be honest, I update my drivers and make sure they are all set right between my monitor, video card, and printer. Doing that right makes a huge difference - pain though. Usually it just takes once and you are good to go. Stuff is off a bit (warmer (even paper can do that- which I like), but not enough for average people to notice. I do have a higher end Samsung (not as good as your dell) but it seems to hold it's color over time really well.

Whichever way you go, make sure it can calibrate laptop monitors as well. Not all do - Something is different about laptops. I learned that painfully after I calibrated a laptop and my entire job came out looking like someone spilled lemonaid all over them - hello yellow.

Hi guys, just a quick vote please, I have lasted this long without buying any calibration equipment but now think I should take the plunge. The two systems that I am looking at are the ColorMunki Photo (£275) and the Spyder3Elite (£135) does the Spyder calibrate the printer as well or do I need to factor in additional expense for that? There are some poor reviews on Amazon on the ColorMunki which was going to be my choice. Just to let you know I normally use CaptureNX2 on my Vista Laptop (yeh yeh I know stop laughing I cant afford it all), which is plugged in to a Dell U2711 monitor. At the moment I only have an old Canon i850 inkjet and an i-sensys LBP5050 colour laser printer. can these be calibrated? I've go my eyes on a Epson Stylus Photo R3000 (no I cant afford this right now either). Suggestions for my first outfit please!

There is a nice website where you can compare different ICC profiles as 3D models (like the one of your monitor with the one of your printer). Google for iccview. You can view some standard ones or you can upload your own profiles.

As TaoTeJared said, you cannot calibrate you monitor (printer, camera, scanner etc) to be compliant to any other color space. But the profile will tell the system (and all the applications that get the information from the system) how to convert sRGB values so that a certain color value will look the same on all calibrated viewing devices (with some prerequisites like that your eyes have to be adjusted to the conditions etc). Having a calibrated system does not mean that it will comply to sRGB or AdobeRGB but it will help to correctly interpret the colors.

mikeo21 said:
However I haven't got any comments on how to manage this in lightroom. This is my main concern.. Is there a way to globally adjust my photos in lightroom? Should I just stop editing photos until I get a new monitor? I used to figure that IF all photos look good on the same setup, then they could be all proportionally adapted to a new one. Now I am afraid that I will calibrate the monitor and have to spend a lot of time readjusting all of the photos individually. That sounds horrible!

You are sort of looking at it backwards. Think of it this way, it is your monitor that is off, not your photos.

There is no work around in Lightroom or any other editing software built in but you could probably build something. I would strongly suggest against it. The main reason is that it is not the software that is wrong. Secondly, to be able to do so could really mess up a ton of photos and create one huge headache.

How far off is your monitor? Single color shift?

If you look on the web you can find a few site with a manual (by eye) calibration that is better than nothing.

rbid said:
Question: is there a way to calibrate the monitor to be sRGB or/and AdobeRGB complient?

Nope - they have to be built to meet the specs. They can be pushed towards a direction though. Most all are sRGB. Einzo, NEC, High end monitors can achieve the AdobeRGB.

@Ade Barkah: You just nailed the calibration topic as required.

Now, It is clear that the calibration will generate an ICC profile that tools that are ICC-profile aware will use them... but what for the other ones like web browsers you use for looking at photos that your friends share?

Question: is there a way to calibrate the monitor to be sRGB or/and AdobeRGB complient?

Hi Mike,

- The screen on your Dell laptop is likely as good as most Apple or Lenovo laptops. With very few exceptions they all use the same type of LCD panel (TN). Just remember to always tilt the LCD screen to be perfectly perpendicular to your view, since TN panels have a very narrow angle of vertical view. If you move your head too far up or down, the colors and contrast will shift.

- You must calibrate your LCD regularly. Buy / borrow / share a hardware calibrator. Any of these will do, in rough order of preference: ColorMunki (rather expensive), Spyder3 (mid-price), Huey Pro (less expensive).

- Calibration does NOT conform your LCD into any standard color space. E.g., after calibration your LCD will NOT be sRGB or AdobeRGB compliant. This is a common misconception.

- What calibration does is to set your monitor into its own, repeatable neutral state, i.e., at a particular brightness, broad contrast, and neutral colors. Even two very well calibrated monitors might still look different from each other, although they're both "neutral".

- The calibration process will create an "ICC profile" of your monitor, describing the characteristics of your monitor (its own "color space"). It is this profile which allows the accurate translation of colors from standard color spaces to your monitor's color space.

- Therefore, you MUST use "color managed" applications -- those which can apply the ICC profile -- to view colors accurately. Lightroom, Aperture and Photoshop are examples of color managed applications. Windows Photo Viewer, Internet Explorer, and Firefox are NOT color managed and will NOT display colors accurately.

Hope that helps,

-Ade

hey guys,

thanks for the replies.. few things:

-I wish I could buy a monitor right now, but it doesnt make sense because I could move again (potentially across/out of the country). If you guys have opinions on high end laptop screens (mac pro, lenovo etc) I am interested in those. I am a student, graduating in a year.

-On the calibration front, when I researched it the spyder came up (as I mentioned in my post). Seems worth the money. Yes, realize my screen can't just be calibrated up to look like an eizo display.

However I haven't got any comments on how to manage this in lightroom. This is my main concern.. Is there a way to globally adjust my photos in lightroom? Should I just stop editing photos until I get a new monitor? I used to figure that IF all photos look good on the same setup, then they could be all proportionally adapted to a new one. Now I am afraid that I will calibrate the monitor and have to spend a lot of time readjusting all of the photos individually. That sounds horrible!

Can someone please advise me on that? Its my main concern at the moment. So many pictures I want to play with, but if its a waste than I shouldn't bother.

thanks,

Mike

Hmm, I thought I had replied to the thread yesterday about the basics of calibration, profiling, color management and viewing angle for those who are new to the subject, but I guess it didn't go through or was deleted by the moderator. :(

mikeo21 said:
Can anyone advise me on what is a good strategy of calibrating? And once I know how far off my monitor is.. does anyone know whats the best way to apply it in lightroom? I have read you can plug in a "color offset" of sorts and it will shift all the settings on all pictures.

Calibration is applied in your computer's profile and not just in a program. This is also true with adding a second monitor. What can really creates problems is when you are not viewing your Laptop monitor at 90 degrees which can shift colors drastically. There are cheap tools that can help with that as well.

warprints must want to declare a Monitor War - Start up a second thread. You must state what you use now though :)

To be fair, when I was using the Spyder, it was a Spyder2. I've heard that the Spyder3 in a big improvement.

adamz said:
war - I still think that even when You don't have an IPS screen it's worth to calibrate

warprints said:
Tao, I do agree that calibrating any monitor is better than not calibrating.

Uhhhh, yeah. Adamz, did you post before you saw my reply to Tao?

war - I still think that even when You don't have an IPS screen it's worth to calibrate

Tao, I do agree that calibrating any monitor is better than not calibrating. I was really jumping to conclusions, I guess, when I anticipated that OP might think his laptop could give the results that an IPS monitor can attain. However, I might have to open a new thread to contest your suggestion that you can obtain 99% (of what?) with a TN monitor.

Adamz, yeah, I just stopped short of going into all of that, as my point was that without at least an IPS monitor, OP might not get what he's expecting out of calibration.