Watch out: most papers have UV optical brightners in them that give them whiter (bluer) look. You need to use a neutral gray card to do any visual matching. Daylight temperature is highly dependent on the time of the day. D65 is the average of an overcast sky at noon facing north. Also, without a colorimeter you can't really colour profile your monitor which is way more important than getting the white point right.
Exactly this! Also emitted color and reflected color are two separate beasts, please don't use a sheet of paper for color calibration, just rent a colorimeter for a few bucks ang get a perfect result.
Did you miss the part where he displayed the results of this method and proved that you can get reasonably close to the same results as using a colorimeter?
@@JTshoot Like I asked the guy you are responding to. Did you miss the part where he displayed the results of this method and proved that you can get reasonably close to the same results as using a colorimeter?
@@angrysocialjusticewarrior you can't even get an icc profile out of the process, what are you talking about? This method might work for a monitor already close to sRGB and the specified brightness but nothing else. Tone response curves are not linear. Gamut coverage is never perfect. You need a colorimeter.
Almost all $150+ monitors are factory calibrated to some degree, so just adjusting the white point usually gives pretty good results. I usually use my smartphone as reference. It has white point adjustment. As i'm quite picky about the white point, I regularly finetune it. For office screens i use a bit of blue tint to keep me focused, around 6000k, those yellow screens puts me to sleep. The office has huge windows and a lot of natural light.
Take a new OLED smartphone (Galaxy, iPhone, etc) pull up an image on the phone and on your monitor and adjust the monitor to match the phone's display, since good smartphones cover 99%+ of the colorspace, the only issue comes from "eyeballing it" but if you're just trying to play games or view media it gets pretty darn close. If your display is older or it's a cheap low end this may not work as well.
@@ProfessorKalkylussexactly, I don’t know where the idea that they’re calibrated came from. Even in a phone store, you just have to look at two different test phones of the same model and you’re very likely to notice that, although similar, the colors definitely don’t look exactly the same.
If you need colour accuracy then you do need an accurate calibration. If you want a rough approximation the online tests are fine and useful. If you want your screen to look nice for TV or games just set it how it suits you. Easy tip for setting monitor whiteness: look at a white screen for a few seconds then leave the room for a few minutes, do this as many times as you need, your eyes adjust and fool you if you look at the screen for a period.
I watched many youtubes videos within the last 15 years. This has to be one of the best tutorial videos so far. great execution, great story telling, great tools. Didn't thought you were a non native speaker until the very end. keep the videos coming.
Thank you for always including monitor calibration recommendation for the monitor you review. Most review doesnt include that and it is quite helpful that you include them for us peeps that doesnt know how the best possible calibration to make the viewing experience better. Keep up the great review Also, I hope you consider reviewing the Lenovo G24-20 (the big brother of G40-10). I heard it is a much better improvement than its little brother. And is it worth to consider as one of the best 1080p monitor right now
When I'm using Lagom's gamma calibration slide, I usually adjust my monitors' contrast, rather than gamma, to get the right values to appear in the charts on the slide. It seems to work pretty well because contrast has a direct effect on the gamma curve.
If you touch the contrast settings, be sure to check for black and white clipping. For many modern LCD monitors the "contrast" setting actually adjusts white peak values and if you adjust it too much, the checkboard pattern that's supposed to have e.g. checkerboard from 253 to 255 (for 8 bit channels) goes all white meaning you lose all details in close to white values because values close to max already clip to 100%.
I was having issues with mainly the clarity. The brightness slider (solely) wasn't much help unfortenately. I followed these steps 1 by 1 and the monitor looks so much better than it was. I never would've thought that adjusting the Gamma would make so much difference. Also never really 'dared' to touch RGB-sliders, because a screw-up is easily made. But these and at last the brightness was the best. Massive thanks!
Helped me a lot! I'm an intermediate artist, so colours do matter to me, but since I don't earn that much yet I couldn't allow myself to invest in a very percise screen, nor in a colorimiter... Thanks for the vid!
This is such perfect timing; I just bought my new monitor and have been looking EVERYWHERE for a good guide to color calibrate with pure eyeballing. I just tried it out while watching the video and while I can't attest to its accuracy with my amateur eyes, the whites on my screen aren't so yellow-ish anymore! It doesn't seem like my AOC 24G2 V1 is able to adjust gamma settings outside of preset ones but even the paper trick alone made some noticeable improvements, so this was a HUGE lifesaver, thank you so much!!
Hi yes i can totally understand you pain with that monitor I just brought one from amazon. a little trick I figured out was to put it on gamma 3, open the windows calibration program along side the nvidia control panel and adjust the gamma while looking at the circle image thing. what did you come up with the rgb values? its driving me nuts
manual gamma calibration has always been tricky. the best one i know of is the trusty old signal bars used by tv stations. since gamma was mostly designed to control the shadows, this method using dark squares until they disappear is probably the best you can do under the circumstances. as for max nits of the monitor, going over 100 nits doesn't make much sense because rec. 709 uses that as broadcast standard. 300-400 nits is psuedo hdr or super-bright sdr and doesn't have an actual SMTPE viewing environment. as for getting max nits by hand, because your eyes eventually adjust to the viewing environment. any max nits calibration would need to compare against another white source to work, imho wouldn't work without an outside light source. windows has a strange concept that max nits is how much black gets washed out.
Interesting to see how close the visual calibration came to be. Next step is to profile the monitor (eg make sure the reds are not too blue or yellow) Some more advanced monitors let you dial this in also but its going to be harder to do by eye. If you have a good generic profile supplied by the manufacturer then that would sort it for you. I bought a colorimeter as I print for other pople but you only need to buy one amongst a group of people if you mainly do things for fun. A D65 calibration will be good for posting to social media and other screen based presentation but if you print on paper you may find your image prints warmer than expected, a white point of nearer 5800K will allow you to better see how an image will print.
You can create your own gamma correction charts, but you HAVE to make sure the grey reference RGB values are CORRECT. The grey reference RGB values for gamma 2.2 are 187, 187, 187. You can't always trust gamma correction charts you see online because you don't know if the gray reference is correct. Uploading images online can alter the colors, so the grey you are looking at may not be correct.
The RGB values 187, 187, 187 are indeed 50% grey (should match pure black and white checkboard) if you have sRGB color space. Some wide gamut monitors have AdobeRGB or some proprieatary color space and you should first toggle the monitor to sRGB settings before trying to adjust the gamma this way. And make sure that the image has correct colorspace. Modern browsers convert from image colorspace to monitor colorspace if operating system settings claim that the monitor or source image is not sRGB.
@@MikkoRantalainen Yep that is correct! 187 is the grey sweet spot because display cards tell the monitor 187, 187, 187 is what 50% Black and 50% white is supposed to look like.
@@alwaysemployed656 Yes, for 8-bit variant of sRGB color space. My point was that RGB != sRGB and if somebody speaks about RGB instead of sRGB, you shouldn't assume those are the same.
@@MikkoRantalainen Oh I'm aware of that. As a matter of fact, sRGB is very outdated. Still, I use sRGB as the START pivot point when calibrating to reach a wider gamut. My final calibrations are obviously way much bigger than sRGB.
@@MikkoRantalainen And also my personal brightness nit sweet spot is 275 nits when displaying pure white on the screen. I find 275 nits to be the closest to looking like real life. I calibrate my monitors to resemble real life, not to match prints.
“That you’ll probably only use once.” Depends who you are and what you’re doing. Displays change as they age and need to be calibrated periodically as a result. This is why calibration software offers to remind you every few weeks or months. I do t do anything professionally with my displays, so I only recalibrate once a year. Every single one drifts a little bit during that year. CRTs, LCDs, and OLEDs. One of the first steps is setting the RGB balance, and none of those settings has ever landed back on the same settings I used the last time. It always changes a little. Will it matter to you? This of course depends on what you’re doing and why. Some professionals recalibrate at the start of each new job, even if that’s every day. Will it change much in a day? Not likely. But to some people, they’d rather start from a known point than waste time assuming something is right only to find out it wasn’t and have to redo stuff.
You are right. We don't calibrate our monitor with colorimeter but with spectrophotometer (long live to X-Rite). Secondly, if our monitor's color/brightness uniformity sucks (which happens quite often on LCD monitors), the calibration process is pointless for obvious reasons. You can bring a DE 0 on everything to the point where the spectro reads but what good does when 1 inch to your left you have 7500K and 1 inch to your right 5500? Color and brightness uniformity is the No1 prerequisite for those who would like to calibrate their devices.
I think the setup should be fairly simple. Without any devices, just a monitor and your eyes. For example, in Adobe products like Premiere Pro. It's easy to find the gamma limits there. Set indicators in the program when dark and light details begin to disappear, then adjust the monitor so that you can see these details with your eyes, and not just on the highlights graph. Sorry if I confused you, English is not my forte.
Thank you for sharing this Video, I am a professional Advertising Photographer. To be honest with you, the color calibrator device is essential for my daily work, and it is crucial if you work with photos or videos color correction. The most important thing is that it will adjust your monitor brightness according to the surrounding ambiance light then maintaining the color accuracy But nothing of this will happen if you are using an 8bit monitor , since the color range is narrow so you will not notice the difference You need to use a 10bit monitor for this purpose
Thanks for your input! Though I have to say that I kinda disagree with your statement about 8 bit. Color range in the sense of color gamut volume isn't directly related to the color depth aka 8/10 bit. It's easily possible to have an 8 bit monitor that has a bigger color gamut than a given 10 bit monitor. Though the graduation between colors is much more coarse the less bits there are. So it's generally a good idea to have 10 bits+ when the monitor has a wide color gamut to avoid banding. I have to say though that for typical color gamut volumes of consumer monitors (up to give or take 150% sRGB) 8 bits really are sufficient for general use. Of course for you as a professional photographer a 10 bit monitor makes much more sense. In that case I'd probably also get a 10 bit+ monitor just to be extra sure that any banding that might occur is in the photo and not caused by the monitor.
Not only that, but as a photographer with a Canon photo printer, I use an x-rite to calibrate both the monitor and the printer for each set of ink cartridges and different ICC profiles for each paper and that’s the only way I’ve ever gotten my soft proofs to look like the hard copy proof.
Can I ask something? Let's say you edit a photo and make it look good, alright, but then that photo will be spread to millions of different drvices, most of them will have way off color configuration and your colors will be altered strongly. Considering what I said, why does it matter to have a perfectly (very well) calibrated display?
People used to do colour work since well over 25 years ago in 8-bit ecosystem, 10-bit support is fairly recent. If you get the WP and gamut in the ballpark before you start straining the numerical precision of the interface or RAMDAC, you can be totally fine with 8-bit. Though 10bit is still a substantial improvement, well recommended.
@@sashabagdasarow497 You still need a quality reference. If some content consumer is using a device that is wildly off-colour, they'll just have to suffer similarly degraded colours on everything, they've probably gotten used to it, their brain might start cancelling out the distortion, and with properly coloured content, it could look to them as-expected. Content that is badly coloured will look off to them, because it doesn't look the way they're used to seeing it. If you have a colour-correct device that you author on, your consumers will suffer mere single colour distortion, always, as determined by their device. When you aren't using a colour correct device for authoring, they will suffer worst case double colour distortion, that of their device plus opposite of that of yours. So that's another way of looking at it. To give some simplified examples, say your monitor has its gamma a little too bright, and your consumer's is a little too dark; then instead of looking a little too dark, your content looks to this person MUCH too dark and is distinctly uncomfortable to view. If you buy a monitor today, odds are, it might be just a tad too green; but if someone has had theirs for a while, maybe it's a little too purple, and you risk making something that looks MUCH too purple. Beyond some threshold, people get very sensitive to skin colours, people can look sick if they're either too purple or too green. Then to be kept in mind that you're not always working against the unknown, there are a lot of colourproof workflows, where you're taking the full device chain into account. You can get a calibration from your printer/ink if you have a colorimeter. You can get a calibration from your offset printing house, they for sure do calibration sheets. You get an ICC profile that you can use to view the colour in your authoring software specifically as it will appear on the final product. But you need a calibrated display as well, or the result is going to be meaningless and probably won't look like that at all.
I use horizontal black to white gradient image. then adjust brightness and contrast so white end be as white as possible and dark as dark as possible. also dark and bright sides should not have large areas of same brightness (large black/white area) difference should be noticeable. more even gradient is more better
The challenge I have (and spent many hours in), is to calibrate a projector image on a white wall. Trying to have a good color accuracy and brightness/contrast. Sometimes seems it is good, but then comes a particular situation where i see it is not good. (I have tried to compare to the colors of what i see on a oled phone screen, but i never manage to match it.) When the projector is on hdr mode, many image controls also become locked.
The problem with projectors is that unless your whole room is black, the light that reflects from the screen to the room and back towards the screen causes major difference to the resulting image depending on the surfaces of all the stuff in the room. And to calibrate a projector, you would really need a spectrophotometer with camera-style optics and those things are insanely expensive.
The bad thing about the colorimeters isn't the cost, it's that they expect you to only use it on one computer at a time, install/uninstall the software every use. They should work on every computer you plug them into, without having to put in serial numbers, activate, deactivate, etc. It's hardware, the software should come with it.
I don't get it I'm pretty sure displayCAL is free right. Or do they hardware lock the colorimeter? Or are you talking about the software that the colorimeter company ships with the product? I still use my old ass spyder 3 to calibrate my monitors with display cal. I know this isn't optimal since the lenses on those break down over time, but it's still accurate enough, since i don't do any professional work.
You deserve many more sub, my man. The production quality top notch, your voice is so soothing and of course the depth of your knowledge and the way you share it with us. Thank you so much for doing this. After watching your reviews i bought Gigabyte G24F, working like a charm. Love from India.
i'm skeptical of thie first instructions in this video. 2:14 A huge mistake is thinking your room ambient lighting is color correct. Even when you introduce sunlight into the room the color of the walls, ceiling, floor and furniture will reflect their own color.
Thanks sir, you saved me a lot because I can't effort that calorimeter. I want to calibrate my laptop monitor and my extended monitor to make digital painting but many youtube video using calorimeter
People say that a proper calibrated monitor to 6500K temperature looks like it has a yellow tint, the white is yellowish. If you try to calibrate to a sheet of paper, it will always be too blue.
I wanted to return my new Acer Predator on tuesday. This is an Acer what you have there and my Acer XB283K is way too green also. White has green tint or white gamma is greenish If this is correct english but I am only on console, so it is hard to adjust it my likings. I lowered green for sure too and turned up blue but after your video am not so sure anymore. I try the paper test when there is daylight. Can it be that it is maybe not fully fixable due to being a low blue light panel?
That's a similar way to how i figured out monitor calibration pretty much decades ago... except brightness calibration, but then i would say ideal brightness is situational anyway, i change it like 10 times a day. I have a little software installed on Windows to help with that, Win10_BrightnessSlider, but there's like a dozen others, this actually goes into the monitor's settings via DCC and changes the value, same as adjusting it via menu, just comfier. So while good to know, i don't think app based thing has been all too helpful for me. To be kept in mind as well, display backlight will drift under spec or independent test brightness with time. Was hoping for more fresh tricks. I mean it stands to reason that the camera sensor of a smartphone might be useful to calibrate gamut and gamma. My primary monitor doesn't seem to urgently need gamut calibration, but monitors with brighter or narrower gamut could benefit from it a lot, but you'll be fighting against monitor's internal tables so there wouldn't really be a handful of convenient values you could tune by hand, and you have no way to synthesize the ICC either. LEDs work very poorly for light reference and CFLs even worse. Halogen can be useful. Though by all reason it shouldn't work. I mean the 20W halogen bulb is what 2800°K, well short of the target; but white paper is a weird material, it's actually laced with brightener which emits some cyan light from incident light, but how it reacts to different lights can differ a lot. If i were to guess Halogen is at least good enough to tell if you're too green or not green enough, while the other two tend to be different shades of too green.
i recieved the best advice ever it really helped me its very simple to do, think of someone with white skin, Boris Johnson for example, put his face on the screen now turn the color up, when his face starts to go orange go back till it looks white again and thats it it really does help the colors for everything else no money or tv expert required.
*white paper reflection* I realize you said the ambient light is "hopefully close to daylight.." but it's important to realize that a LOT of lights, especially older LED-based lights tend to emit a poor representation of normal light. It's usually quite blue.
Worse, LEDs and CCFLs both tend to have an overpronounced green in order to boost efficiency. If you get red-blue balance wrong, that's just a different colour temperature; wrong amount of green is much worse for colour work. Then also paper has a little bit of optical brightener, something that collects ambient energy, downshifts it and emits cyan light, to counteract a little bit of beige tinge of cellulose. Of course the brightener responds differently to different light sources, it doesn't just shift the colour evenly.
When you're measuring brightness on a monitor like that you have to do it more towards the centre of the screen. There was quie bad fall off at the corners and edges so I think if you'd gone a little further in you would have hit the brightness mark exactly.
I did something with the Splendid settings on my ASUS VP249QGR that made things look much more vibrant, especially in games. I found out that if I enable Shadow boost while having the Game Mode preset on, it corrected the dull looking surfaces in darker areas that you get when you enable game mode while everything looked more vibrant and colorful. The differences between this and default look almost like HDR vs SDR.
I prefer the windows built in gamma calibration settings. The pattern is very clear and you get to run a slider back and forth until the patterns merge.
Optimizing for a D65 (daylight) white point is a bad idea. Our eyes (and therefore also digital cameras) adapt to the color temperature of the environment. So things that look white in daylight will look very blueish in artificial light, and things that look white in artificial light will look very yellowish in daylight. The correct solution is not to use a fixed white point but to have a display that has a light temperature sensor and automatically adjusts the color temperature of the screen to the environmental lighting, like a camera or the human eye. Apple actually does do this. They call it "True Tone" (because Apple always invents names for things).
Looking for your advice. I purchased a few laptops a couple from Walmart, Target, and Costco. They are basically the same/similar laptops, HP 15.6/14 in the cheaper options with i5, but they have iRisX graphics from Intel. I am not a photographer, but it seems laptops from WM have very much washed-out screens, not saturated dark/black images and much so when looking from the top/side. This is not the case in laptops from Costco/Target. Is it too much gamma? I tried adjusting in Win 11 using the built-in calibrater, but after a bit of adjusting, Win 11 keeps on switching back to the washed/whiter images. What can I use to calibrate and overwrite Windows' presets, and make the changes "stick"? Thank you
The Nvidia color correction controls are useful especially since you can adjust gamma separately for each color (I was able to set Gamma for 3 different brightness levels using the brightness/contrast levels independently for each color). Unfortunately I use AMD now and AMD doesn't have anything that is equivalent or works as well as far as I can tell. I could download these correction curves from the graphics card using DispCal and use them as a profile, but again I can't find anything I can use this way with AMD. It is amazing when you get it looking like your monitor is just a portal to a different place.
Well, I got a calibration tool and tested it after calibrating it manually using my eyes and the difference were very minor, the gamma needed a bit correction tho but other than that everything was pretty good
If you think a colorimeter isn't worth it, it's because you don't even use your monitor for important color-accurate purposes. A colorimeter is only necessary if you rely heavily on accurate colors for print and editing images, or video editing. If you're just a casual user of the monitor for gaming or mild youtuber'ing, then you never needed accurate colors in the first place, and the standard out-of-box calibration is probably fine. If you need accurate colors in use of the monitor, then JUST GET A COLOR CALIBRATION COLORIMETER DEVICE. If you fit into that scenario, you'll find the money for such a device and probably will use it once a month for constant color accuracy.
i got a guy to calibrate my monitor (it wasnt for free) ... after he did i spend an entire afternoon settings things as i had set them up before. Apparently the calibration should be made by the set of eyes that will spend the most time looking at the monitor.
Whats your opinion on the nvidia color settings or default color settings in the "change resolution" tab in the nvidia control panel? Should you use the "nvidia color settings", use highest color depth and full dynamic range or dont change anything there und use the "default color settings"? ( calibrated or not calibrated)
But what's the point if the display's color transfer characteristics are usually irregular? And to make the display represent the near-to-correct colors, you need to do hundreds of measurements, including tracking the primary colors.
accuracy varies between panels. some monitors may show warmer temperature with the app despite being 65k. It’s actually very accurate on LG WOLEDS though, probably because of the full gloss
u need one if u need to do repeatable work, whiches kinda what theyre more for, consistency, not necessarily to get a better image than what a human eye can do
I would argue that the short answer to the question "Can You Calibrate a Monitor WITHOUT a Colorimeter?" is "no". A bit of a scholastic point maybe, but that's because of the verb "calibrate". Try to calibrate your micrometer (measurement instrument for measuring length) by eye and using simple "references". Your Din/ISO quality certification inspector will give you a total fail for that. Left implicit, there are other problems with this approach. "Daylight" varies a lot in colour temperature across seasons, geographic latitude, and orientation towards the sun. Look at photos taken in the golden hour (sunrise/sunset) when the direct sunlight is rather or very warm and in these shots, look in areas of shade - these are extremely blue. So if your editing studio is facing North ( in the Northern hemisphere), then you are in the blue zone of shade where the blueishness varies during the day. Painters (the artists) prefer an atelier with such Northern light. So a visual "~calibration" in such light really depends on these factors and you understanding what you are doing. For the people in the Southern hemisphere, London-Amsterdam-Berlin is about 52 degrees North - compare Ushuaia 54.8S, Bluff-NZ 46.6S, Dunedin 45.9S, Hobart T/Au) 42.9S. Higher latitudes will make the light's colour temperature lower (and we call that warmer), but an overcast sky diffuses the light to a point that it becomes more neutral - clouds remove the dispersion effect of the golden hour. While we arguably can do a pretty good job with the naked eye, or may use a monitor calibration device, this leaves printer/ink/paper calibration and e.g. projector calibration. You may argue that your professional paper brand gives you a colour profile for your printer (but it makes assumptions about the ink). If you print via a professional print house, then they may have their colour correction profile that you can apply to your proofing but this assumes a monitor calibrated to neutral and if you want to visually ballpark monitor calibration, send images to the print house in order to calibrate between monitor and prints - different papers have different profiles and even different batches of the "same" paper may have different profiles. I would argue, when you work as a pro (earn your income from photography and have tax-deducible expenses) then buy a calibration device that can calibrate your entire tool suite. If you are printing a lot yourself with "fine art" ambitions and prices, then invest in a professional calibration tool. The whole point is between your monitor and prints that you want "What You See on the Monitor Is What You Get from the printer". Or, if you are a total amateur, say collector of bird images, and want to print your shots, then relative to your many thousands of Western currencies spent on a fast 600 or 800 lens, the calibration device is laughably cheap. As you discuss monitor calibration, don't forget in this mirrorless age, that your camera may have viewfinder calibration setting options as well. And as your camera can generate SOOC JPEG images, it may have picture control profiles that define how the raw to JPEG conversion is done - someth8ing you may want to calibrate too and potentially define your own profile for that (between different camera models you may need different profiles even from the same brand). The elephant in the room then is that many people are colour blind (in my language we call them, that, "colour weak") but sill shoot in colour. Famous - if you like - US photographer Joel Grimes self-admittedly is one. He works in a generally desaturated palette, and you would assume that "colour" may not be very important to him, but I presume he is very finicky about his version of WYSIWYG. The other elephant in the room is that some people see the humanly visible spectrum in 4 bands, not 3. All of colour photography is on 3 bands (red, green, blue) but these 4-banders may see colours differently. The anatomy of the brain is on the X chromosome (which is not the same as intelligence, character, personality) and men only have this from their mothers -well, as most colour weak people are men who see in 2 spectral colour bands, my guess is that the anatomy of the cones in the retina is also on the X chromosome and the women that see in 4 bands may have 2 bands on each chromosome (all sons will be colour weak), or three on one and two on the other (some sons will be colour weak). To their daughters then the biological father's genes become an important factor. A colour weak father passes his weakness on to all his daughters. Genetics aside, if you are colour weak and never decided to go "black and white only", then you may want a calibration device, if only to get proper colours for your family and clients that do see in 3 bands. Finally, between the monitor and the prints, you have to understand your monitor's maximum colour space and your printer/ink/paper combination's. You may be able to print a larger colour space than your monitor can render and now you really need (a) in-depth training and (b) serious calibration. My EIZO monitor's colour space is at least 100% Adobe RGB, which is more than sRGB that most monitors can render. Note here that colour space without contrast envelope (dynamic range available to one image) is meaningless. "Dynamic contrast" is best switched off in still image editing. This is a trick in backlighting LCD monitors where LEDs behind the LCD are made brighter or dimmer, but the LEDs light a region that is much larger than a single pixel. While you may be able to switch this off, also note there are monitors that fake higher bits per channel by making subpixels flicker. In that sense an 8 BPC monitor may be 6+2, or a 10 BPC one may be 8+2. My EIZO does 10 BPC without that and does not have problems with "difficult" colours. Not to brag, but if eyeballing for calibration is not good enough, take this all into account.
Well, for the cheap and medium class monitors, adjusting anything, except the backlight, leads to loosing color resolution. This is very visible with color gradients and grey scales. Adjusting color temperature most likely will give you grey scale tracking errors, bigger and more visible than with the default settings. Also, you will loose color brightness steps. I guess, this is because adjusting is done digitaly, by modifying the input data, not by altering the actual panel voltages..., which I think is not so easy, given that the panel is probably not characterized and/or the manufacturer does not provide any data for such adjustment. Regarding the colorimeters - they are a gimmick IMHO. Gloryfied 3 pixel cameras with primary color filters. Only spectrometer can give you meaningfull reading, especially for the modern monitors with all kinds of backlights and gamut "widenesses".
Watch out: most papers have UV optical brightners in them that give them whiter (bluer) look. You need to use a neutral gray card to do any visual matching. Daylight temperature is highly dependent on the time of the day. D65 is the average of an overcast sky at noon facing north. Also, without a colorimeter you can't really colour profile your monitor which is way more important than getting the white point right.
Exactly this! Also emitted color and reflected color are two separate beasts, please don't use a sheet of paper for color calibration, just rent a colorimeter for a few bucks ang get a perfect result.
Did you miss the part where he displayed the results of this method and proved that you can get reasonably close to the same results as using a colorimeter?
@@JTshoot Like I asked the guy you are responding to. Did you miss the part where he displayed the results of this method and proved that you can get reasonably close to the same results as using a colorimeter?
@@angrysocialjusticewarrior you can't even get an icc profile out of the process, what are you talking about? This method might work for a monitor already close to sRGB and the specified brightness but nothing else. Tone response curves are not linear. Gamut coverage is never perfect. You need a colorimeter.
Almost all $150+ monitors are factory calibrated to some degree, so just adjusting the white point usually gives pretty good results. I usually use my smartphone as reference. It has white point adjustment. As i'm quite picky about the white point, I regularly finetune it. For office screens i use a bit of blue tint to keep me focused, around 6000k, those yellow screens puts me to sleep. The office has huge windows and a lot of natural light.
Take a new OLED smartphone (Galaxy, iPhone, etc) pull up an image on the phone and on your monitor and adjust the monitor to match the phone's display, since good smartphones cover 99%+ of the colorspace, the only issue comes from "eyeballing it" but if you're just trying to play games or view media it gets pretty darn close. If your display is older or it's a cheap low end this may not work as well.
disable any vivid or enhance mode before though.
My pixel 4a has a neutral mode and so does the oled switch
nice idea 🙂
Yeah but no. Phone screens are not calibrated.
@@ProfessorKalkylussexactly, I don’t know where the idea that they’re calibrated came from. Even in a phone store, you just have to look at two different test phones of the same model and you’re very likely to notice that, although similar, the colors definitely don’t look exactly the same.
@@raiistmar exactly
"I happen to have a pair of eyes" This is how you know the video is going to be good! XD
Gay
Jesus loves you all.
lol, das "bis zum nächsten Video" am Ende, kam sehr überraschend. Danke für die Tipps. Sehr gutes Video. Weiter so! :)
If you need colour accuracy then you do need an accurate calibration.
If you want a rough approximation the online tests are fine and useful.
If you want your screen to look nice for TV or games just set it how it suits you.
Easy tip for setting monitor whiteness: look at a white screen for a few seconds then leave the room for a few minutes, do this as many times as you need, your eyes adjust and fool you if you look at the screen for a period.
this is the same thing that happens with the ears when mixing audio. One has to stop for a while and come back.
Jesus loves you all.
I watched many youtubes videos within the last 15 years. This has to be one of the best tutorial videos so far. great execution, great story telling, great tools. Didn't thought you were a non native speaker until the very end. keep the videos coming.
Wow, thanks! 🙂
Are you deaf to accents?
@@thischannelisdeleted People can have accents and still speak English as their first language
@@firstlast9500 True, but it's typically not a GERMAN accent, you fool.
@@nohero178 hey be nice
it really fucking boggles my mind why lcd pc monitors aren't precallibrated before hitting shelves
they are but not with perfection, which is the weird part like its avoided on purpose to sell higher end models
They but the displays vary between each other so what works for one wont work for the other
Jesus loves you all.
@@WSPSIMONDev jesus isn't real
Thank you for always including monitor calibration recommendation for the monitor you review. Most review doesnt include that and it is quite helpful that you include them for us peeps that doesnt know how the best possible calibration to make the viewing experience better. Keep up the great review
Also, I hope you consider reviewing the Lenovo G24-20 (the big brother of G40-10). I heard it is a much better improvement than its little brother. And is it worth to consider as one of the best 1080p monitor right now
Jesus loves you all.
When I'm using Lagom's gamma calibration slide, I usually adjust my monitors' contrast, rather than gamma, to get the right values to appear in the charts on the slide. It seems to work pretty well because contrast has a direct effect on the gamma curve.
If you touch the contrast settings, be sure to check for black and white clipping. For many modern LCD monitors the "contrast" setting actually adjusts white peak values and if you adjust it too much, the checkboard pattern that's supposed to have e.g. checkerboard from 253 to 255 (for 8 bit channels) goes all white meaning you lose all details in close to white values because values close to max already clip to 100%.
Jesus loves you all.
I was having issues with mainly the clarity. The brightness slider (solely) wasn't much help unfortenately. I followed these steps 1 by 1 and the monitor looks so much better than it was. I never would've thought that adjusting the Gamma would make so much difference. Also never really 'dared' to touch RGB-sliders, because a screw-up is easily made. But these and at last the brightness was the best. Massive thanks!
Jesus loves you all.
Helped me a lot!
I'm an intermediate artist, so colours do matter to me, but since I don't earn that much yet I couldn't allow myself to invest in a very percise screen, nor in a colorimiter...
Thanks for the vid!
This is such perfect timing; I just bought my new monitor and have been looking EVERYWHERE for a good guide to color calibrate with pure eyeballing. I just tried it out while watching the video and while I can't attest to its accuracy with my amateur eyes, the whites on my screen aren't so yellow-ish anymore! It doesn't seem like my AOC 24G2 V1 is able to adjust gamma settings outside of preset ones but even the paper trick alone made some noticeable improvements, so this was a HUGE lifesaver, thank you so much!!
Hi yes i can totally understand you pain with that monitor I just brought one from amazon. a little trick I figured out was to put it on gamma 3, open the windows calibration program along side the nvidia control panel and adjust the gamma while looking at the circle image thing. what did you come up with the rgb values? its driving me nuts
A N I M E
N
I
M
E
manual gamma calibration has always been tricky. the best one i know of is the trusty old signal bars used by tv stations. since gamma was mostly designed to control the shadows, this method using dark squares until they disappear is probably the best you can do under the circumstances. as for max nits of the monitor, going over 100 nits doesn't make much sense because rec. 709 uses that as broadcast standard. 300-400 nits is psuedo hdr or super-bright sdr and doesn't have an actual SMTPE viewing environment. as for getting max nits by hand, because your eyes eventually adjust to the viewing environment. any max nits calibration would need to compare against another white source to work, imho wouldn't work without an outside light source. windows has a strange concept that max nits is how much black gets washed out.
Interesting to see how close the visual calibration came to be. Next step is to profile the monitor (eg make sure the reds are not too blue or yellow) Some more advanced monitors let you dial this in also but its going to be harder to do by eye. If you have a good generic profile supplied by the manufacturer then that would sort it for you.
I bought a colorimeter as I print for other pople but you only need to buy one amongst a group of people if you mainly do things for fun. A D65 calibration will be good for posting to social media and other screen based presentation but if you print on paper you may find your image prints warmer than expected, a white point of nearer 5800K will allow you to better see how an image will print.
I've been waiting for a video like this
You can create your own gamma correction charts, but you HAVE to make sure the grey reference RGB values are CORRECT. The grey reference RGB values for gamma 2.2 are 187, 187, 187. You can't always trust gamma correction charts you see online because you don't know if the gray reference is correct. Uploading images online can alter the colors, so the grey you are looking at may not be correct.
The RGB values 187, 187, 187 are indeed 50% grey (should match pure black and white checkboard) if you have sRGB color space. Some wide gamut monitors have AdobeRGB or some proprieatary color space and you should first toggle the monitor to sRGB settings before trying to adjust the gamma this way. And make sure that the image has correct colorspace. Modern browsers convert from image colorspace to monitor colorspace if operating system settings claim that the monitor or source image is not sRGB.
@@MikkoRantalainen Yep that is correct! 187 is the grey sweet spot because display cards tell the monitor 187, 187, 187 is what 50% Black and 50% white is supposed to look like.
@@alwaysemployed656 Yes, for 8-bit variant of sRGB color space.
My point was that RGB != sRGB and if somebody speaks about RGB instead of sRGB, you shouldn't assume those are the same.
@@MikkoRantalainen Oh I'm aware of that. As a matter of fact, sRGB is very outdated. Still, I use sRGB as the START pivot point when calibrating to reach a wider gamut. My final calibrations are obviously way much bigger than sRGB.
@@MikkoRantalainen And also my personal brightness nit sweet spot is 275 nits when displaying pure white on the screen. I find 275 nits to be the closest to looking like real life. I calibrate my monitors to resemble real life, not to match prints.
@techless von wo hast du die wallpaper her? 3:50
“That you’ll probably only use once.” Depends who you are and what you’re doing. Displays change as they age and need to be calibrated periodically as a result. This is why calibration software offers to remind you every few weeks or months. I do t do anything professionally with my displays, so I only recalibrate once a year. Every single one drifts a little bit during that year. CRTs, LCDs, and OLEDs. One of the first steps is setting the RGB balance, and none of those settings has ever landed back on the same settings I used the last time. It always changes a little. Will it matter to you? This of course depends on what you’re doing and why. Some professionals recalibrate at the start of each new job, even if that’s every day. Will it change much in a day? Not likely. But to some people, they’d rather start from a known point than waste time assuming something is right only to find out it wasn’t and have to redo stuff.
This channel is golden, worth a sub!
You are right. We don't calibrate our monitor with colorimeter but with spectrophotometer (long live to X-Rite). Secondly, if our monitor's color/brightness uniformity sucks (which happens quite often on LCD monitors), the calibration process is pointless for obvious reasons. You can bring a DE 0 on everything to the point where the spectro reads but what good does when 1 inch to your left you have 7500K and 1 inch to your right 5500? Color and brightness uniformity is the No1 prerequisite for those who would like to calibrate their devices.
Thank you for such a very clear and informative video. I have to say you look so much better than before I made the adjustments!!
I had brought BenQ EX2510 before 3-4months by watching your video and your suggestion to my comment , just using your settings and it works AMAZING
Thanks for all the amazing reviews and helpful videos. Keep going, you've got great future ahead of you.
I think the setup should be fairly simple. Without any devices, just a monitor and your eyes.
For example, in Adobe products like Premiere Pro.
It's easy to find the gamma limits there. Set indicators in the program when dark and light details begin to disappear, then adjust the monitor so that you can see these details with your eyes, and not just on the highlights graph. Sorry if I confused you, English is not my forte.
Calibration is way more complicated than that. For example ICC profiles created with colorimeters have 3dimensional color correction data.
Thank you for sharing this Video,
I am a professional Advertising Photographer. To be honest with you, the color calibrator device is essential for my daily work, and it is crucial if you work with photos or videos color correction.
The most important thing is that it will adjust your monitor brightness according to the surrounding ambiance light
then maintaining the color accuracy
But nothing of this will happen if you are using an 8bit monitor , since the color range is narrow so you will not notice the difference
You need to use a 10bit monitor for this purpose
Thanks for your input!
Though I have to say that I kinda disagree with your statement about 8 bit. Color range in the sense of color gamut volume isn't directly related to the color depth aka 8/10 bit. It's easily possible to have an 8 bit monitor that has a bigger color gamut than a given 10 bit monitor. Though the graduation between colors is much more coarse the less bits there are. So it's generally a good idea to have 10 bits+ when the monitor has a wide color gamut to avoid banding. I have to say though that for typical color gamut volumes of consumer monitors (up to give or take 150% sRGB) 8 bits really are sufficient for general use. Of course for you as a professional photographer a 10 bit monitor makes much more sense. In that case I'd probably also get a 10 bit+ monitor just to be extra sure that any banding that might occur is in the photo and not caused by the monitor.
Not only that, but as a photographer with a Canon photo printer, I use an x-rite to calibrate both the monitor and the printer for each set of ink cartridges and different ICC profiles for each paper and that’s the only way I’ve ever gotten my soft proofs to look like the hard copy proof.
Can I ask something?
Let's say you edit a photo and make it look good, alright, but then that photo will be spread to millions of different drvices, most of them will have way off color configuration and your colors will be altered strongly.
Considering what I said, why does it matter to have a perfectly (very well) calibrated display?
People used to do colour work since well over 25 years ago in 8-bit ecosystem, 10-bit support is fairly recent. If you get the WP and gamut in the ballpark before you start straining the numerical precision of the interface or RAMDAC, you can be totally fine with 8-bit. Though 10bit is still a substantial improvement, well recommended.
@@sashabagdasarow497 You still need a quality reference. If some content consumer is using a device that is wildly off-colour, they'll just have to suffer similarly degraded colours on everything, they've probably gotten used to it, their brain might start cancelling out the distortion, and with properly coloured content, it could look to them as-expected. Content that is badly coloured will look off to them, because it doesn't look the way they're used to seeing it.
If you have a colour-correct device that you author on, your consumers will suffer mere single colour distortion, always, as determined by their device. When you aren't using a colour correct device for authoring, they will suffer worst case double colour distortion, that of their device plus opposite of that of yours. So that's another way of looking at it.
To give some simplified examples, say your monitor has its gamma a little too bright, and your consumer's is a little too dark; then instead of looking a little too dark, your content looks to this person MUCH too dark and is distinctly uncomfortable to view. If you buy a monitor today, odds are, it might be just a tad too green; but if someone has had theirs for a while, maybe it's a little too purple, and you risk making something that looks MUCH too purple. Beyond some threshold, people get very sensitive to skin colours, people can look sick if they're either too purple or too green.
Then to be kept in mind that you're not always working against the unknown, there are a lot of colourproof workflows, where you're taking the full device chain into account. You can get a calibration from your printer/ink if you have a colorimeter. You can get a calibration from your offset printing house, they for sure do calibration sheets. You get an ICC profile that you can use to view the colour in your authoring software specifically as it will appear on the final product. But you need a calibrated display as well, or the result is going to be meaningless and probably won't look like that at all.
Shower thought: Take a color on the screen. Print it. Now match both colors.
Idk if that'll actually work. Was just thinking
but printers also print colors differently dont they>
Can take the screenshot to a phone tho, or any other reference display of friends and stuff if they look good ig
I use horizontal black to white gradient image. then adjust brightness and contrast so white end be as white as possible and dark as dark as possible. also dark and bright sides should not have large areas of same brightness (large black/white area) difference should be noticeable. more even gradient is more better
The challenge I have (and spent many hours in), is to calibrate a projector image on a white wall. Trying to have a good color accuracy and brightness/contrast. Sometimes seems it is good, but then comes a particular situation where i see it is not good. (I have tried to compare to the colors of what i see on a oled phone screen, but i never manage to match it.) When the projector is on hdr mode, many image controls also become locked.
The problem with projectors is that unless your whole room is black, the light that reflects from the screen to the room and back towards the screen causes major difference to the resulting image depending on the surfaces of all the stuff in the room.
And to calibrate a projector, you would really need a spectrophotometer with camera-style optics and those things are insanely expensive.
The bad thing about the colorimeters isn't the cost, it's that they expect you to only use it on one computer at a time, install/uninstall the software every use. They should work on every computer you plug them into, without having to put in serial numbers, activate, deactivate, etc. It's hardware, the software should come with it.
I don't get it I'm pretty sure displayCAL is free right. Or do they hardware lock the colorimeter?
Or are you talking about the software that the colorimeter company ships with the product?
I still use my old ass spyder 3 to calibrate my monitors with display cal. I know this isn't optimal since the lenses on those break down over time, but it's still accurate enough, since i don't do any professional work.
You deserve many more sub, my man. The production quality top notch, your voice is so soothing and of course the depth of your knowledge and the way you share it with us. Thank you so much for doing this. After watching your reviews i bought Gigabyte G24F, working like a charm. Love from India.
Thanks for the links in the description to the sites you mentioned
awesome video mate!
Where do you get those slick wallpapers?
i'm skeptical of thie first instructions in this video. 2:14 A huge mistake is thinking your room ambient lighting is color correct. Even when you introduce sunlight into the room the color of the walls, ceiling, floor and furniture will reflect their own color.
Facts that what I thought immediately too. How can you be sure/ trust that the environmental light to be having a perfect white balance? 😅
Hi great content, thank you. Curious to know what wallpaper you have in the begining of the video.
Thanks sir, you saved me a lot because I can't effort that calorimeter. I want to calibrate my laptop monitor and my extended monitor to make digital painting but many youtube video using calorimeter
Hi, I used a phone appliction to "calibrate" laptops monitor(WB), its called Light meter.
People say that a proper calibrated monitor to 6500K temperature looks like it has a yellow tint, the white is yellowish. If you try to calibrate to a sheet of paper, it will always be too blue.
Thank you so much for this video. Currently shopping for a decent monitor and your videos help out a lot!!
I wanted to return my new Acer Predator on tuesday. This is an Acer what you have there and my Acer XB283K is way too green also. White has green tint or white gamma is greenish If this is correct english but I am only on console, so it is hard to adjust it my likings. I lowered green for sure too and turned up blue but after your video am not so sure anymore. I try the paper test when there is daylight. Can it be that it is maybe not fully fixable due to being a low blue light panel?
What's the point in doing proper color calibration, if you're going to surround the monitor with the RGBT lighting.
what is wallpaper on monitor in background called
I'm a huge fan of your channel
but what about the contrast? But Wow ... this works perfect for me in an old LCD, ... thank you. Liked and subscribed.
Thank you I finally got it to be almost perfect
thanks to that 1 tip
not change one RGB and to not go over what the manufacture put as default
I didn't even knew that monitor calibrating is a thing until this video popped up in my recommendation
That's a similar way to how i figured out monitor calibration pretty much decades ago... except brightness calibration, but then i would say ideal brightness is situational anyway, i change it like 10 times a day. I have a little software installed on Windows to help with that, Win10_BrightnessSlider, but there's like a dozen others, this actually goes into the monitor's settings via DCC and changes the value, same as adjusting it via menu, just comfier. So while good to know, i don't think app based thing has been all too helpful for me. To be kept in mind as well, display backlight will drift under spec or independent test brightness with time.
Was hoping for more fresh tricks. I mean it stands to reason that the camera sensor of a smartphone might be useful to calibrate gamut and gamma. My primary monitor doesn't seem to urgently need gamut calibration, but monitors with brighter or narrower gamut could benefit from it a lot, but you'll be fighting against monitor's internal tables so there wouldn't really be a handful of convenient values you could tune by hand, and you have no way to synthesize the ICC either.
LEDs work very poorly for light reference and CFLs even worse. Halogen can be useful. Though by all reason it shouldn't work. I mean the 20W halogen bulb is what 2800°K, well short of the target; but white paper is a weird material, it's actually laced with brightener which emits some cyan light from incident light, but how it reacts to different lights can differ a lot. If i were to guess Halogen is at least good enough to tell if you're too green or not green enough, while the other two tend to be different shades of too green.
Awesome tutorial! Thank you very much!
i recieved the best advice ever it really helped me its very simple to do, think of someone with white skin, Boris Johnson for example, put his face on the screen now turn the color up, when his face starts to go orange go back till it looks white again and thats it it really does help the colors for everything else no money or tv expert required.
*white paper reflection*
I realize you said the ambient light is "hopefully close to daylight.." but it's important to realize that a LOT of lights, especially older LED-based lights tend to emit a poor representation of normal light. It's usually quite blue.
Worse, LEDs and CCFLs both tend to have an overpronounced green in order to boost efficiency. If you get red-blue balance wrong, that's just a different colour temperature; wrong amount of green is much worse for colour work.
Then also paper has a little bit of optical brightener, something that collects ambient energy, downshifts it and emits cyan light, to counteract a little bit of beige tinge of cellulose. Of course the brightener responds differently to different light sources, it doesn't just shift the colour evenly.
Great! More of this would be very interesting! Cheers!
When you're measuring brightness on a monitor like that you have to do it more towards the centre of the screen. There was quie bad fall off at the corners and edges so I think if you'd gone a little further in you would have hit the brightness mark exactly.
Luv your down to earth ways my man, that's some of the most relevant information to be used. Thank you so much
Very helpful, appreciate it!
another useful video, thanks
I did something with the Splendid settings on my ASUS VP249QGR that made things look much more vibrant, especially in games. I found out that if I enable Shadow boost while having the Game Mode preset on, it corrected the dull looking surfaces in darker areas that you get when you enable game mode while everything looked more vibrant and colorful. The differences between this and default look almost like HDR vs SDR.
I prefer the windows built in gamma calibration settings. The pattern is very clear and you get to run a slider back and forth until the patterns merge.
Optimizing for a D65 (daylight) white point is a bad idea. Our eyes (and therefore also digital cameras) adapt to the color temperature of the environment. So things that look white in daylight will look very blueish in artificial light, and things that look white in artificial light will look very yellowish in daylight. The correct solution is not to use a fixed white point but to have a display that has a light temperature sensor and automatically adjusts the color temperature of the screen to the environmental lighting, like a camera or the human eye. Apple actually does do this. They call it "True Tone" (because Apple always invents names for things).
Setting up gamma is a headache and I can't decide which gamma to set through the built-in Windows display calibration setting
Looking for your advice. I purchased a few laptops a couple from Walmart, Target, and Costco. They are basically the same/similar laptops, HP 15.6/14 in the cheaper options with i5, but they have iRisX graphics from Intel.
I am not a photographer, but it seems laptops from WM have very much washed-out screens, not saturated dark/black images and much so when looking from the top/side. This is not the case in laptops from Costco/Target. Is it too much gamma? I tried adjusting in Win 11 using the built-in calibrater, but after a bit of adjusting, Win 11 keeps on switching back to the washed/whiter images.
What can I use to calibrate and overwrite Windows' presets, and make the changes "stick"?
Thank you
That's a very cool video, thank you!
An iPhone and the natural light feature turned on (most default) will give a very good white point.
Thanks for your videos. You can also test in wide gamut monitors if the software clamping methods work to make it color accurate.
No matter what rgb i set i only see grey, any help?
Is there a way I could borrow a colorimeter?
The Nvidia color correction controls are useful especially since you can adjust gamma separately for each color (I was able to set Gamma for 3 different brightness levels using the brightness/contrast levels independently for each color). Unfortunately I use AMD now and AMD doesn't have anything that is equivalent or works as well as far as I can tell. I could download these correction curves from the graphics card using DispCal and use them as a profile, but again I can't find anything I can use this way with AMD. It is amazing when you get it looking like your monitor is just a portal to a different place.
does this also work for tv's if u wanna use them as a pc screen? great vid btw, thanks a lot!
@techiess
Can you compare if eizo's gamma test, works better than the lagom gama calibration bars? Is it more accurate?
Well, I got a calibration tool and tested it after calibrating it manually using my eyes and the difference were very minor, the gamma needed a bit correction tho but other than that everything was pretty good
what do you recommended for gaming and little editing sir @techless Gigabyte G24F or MSI OPTIX G241?
Comparing the gamma correction from EIZO and Lagom the EIZO one seems more on point.
If you think a colorimeter isn't worth it, it's because you don't even use your monitor for important color-accurate purposes. A colorimeter is only necessary if you rely heavily on accurate colors for print and editing images, or video editing. If you're just a casual user of the monitor for gaming or mild youtuber'ing, then you never needed accurate colors in the first place, and the standard out-of-box calibration is probably fine. If you need accurate colors in use of the monitor, then JUST GET A COLOR CALIBRATION COLORIMETER DEVICE. If you fit into that scenario, you'll find the money for such a device and probably will use it once a month for constant color accuracy.
What is the wallpaper?
Be sure to turn off windows night light before anything to your monitor.
Goes for low blue light modes in the display OSD as well.
ICH WUSSTE DASS DU BESTIMMT DEUTSCH SPRICHST, DANKE FÜR DIE BESTÄTIGUNG AM ENDE JETZT KANN ICH SCHLAFEN
What calibration tool that he used after the white paper adjustment?
I just match my G24F with my iPhone 11 by eye. Very satisfied with the results.
i got a guy to calibrate my monitor (it wasnt for free) ... after he did i spend an entire afternoon settings things as i had set them up before. Apparently the calibration should be made by the set of eyes that will spend the most time looking at the monitor.
Interesting video, thanks for sharing.
Can you do this all with a laptop?
Would you recommend this for a Tv? I can't get the TV I'm my room to look right.
Whats your opinion on the nvidia color settings or default color settings in the "change resolution" tab in the nvidia control panel? Should you use the "nvidia color settings", use highest color depth and full dynamic range or dont change anything there und use the "default color settings"? ( calibrated or not calibrated)
Always max out the Nvidia settings
But what's the point if the display's color transfer characteristics are usually irregular? And to make the display represent the near-to-correct colors, you need to do hundreds of measurements, including tracking the primary colors.
I use an app called color temp meter on my phone to get the perfect d65 white point. You just use your phone camera it works perfect
accuracy varies between panels. some monitors may show warmer temperature with the app despite being 65k. It’s actually very accurate on LG WOLEDS though, probably because of the full gloss
Hello, please tell me which monitor is better to choose from my LG UltraGear 24GN600-B/HP X24ih/MSI Optix G242 /ASUS TUF Gaming VG259QR stores?
u need one if u need to do repeatable work, whiches kinda what theyre more for, consistency, not necessarily to get a better image than what a human eye can do
Like for the wallpaper used in this video.
Great video. Thanks a lot
I would argue that the short answer to the question "Can You Calibrate a Monitor WITHOUT a Colorimeter?" is "no". A bit of a scholastic point maybe, but that's because of the verb "calibrate". Try to calibrate your micrometer (measurement instrument for measuring length) by eye and using simple "references". Your Din/ISO quality certification inspector will give you a total fail for that.
Left implicit, there are other problems with this approach. "Daylight" varies a lot in colour temperature across seasons, geographic latitude, and orientation towards the sun. Look at photos taken in the golden hour (sunrise/sunset) when the direct sunlight is rather or very warm and in these shots, look in areas of shade - these are extremely blue. So if your editing studio is facing North ( in the Northern hemisphere), then you are in the blue zone of shade where the blueishness varies during the day. Painters (the artists) prefer an atelier with such Northern light. So a visual "~calibration" in such light really depends on these factors and you understanding what you are doing. For the people in the Southern hemisphere, London-Amsterdam-Berlin is about 52 degrees North - compare Ushuaia 54.8S, Bluff-NZ 46.6S, Dunedin 45.9S, Hobart T/Au) 42.9S. Higher latitudes will make the light's colour temperature lower (and we call that warmer), but an overcast sky diffuses the light to a point that it becomes more neutral - clouds remove the dispersion effect of the golden hour.
While we arguably can do a pretty good job with the naked eye, or may use a monitor calibration device, this leaves printer/ink/paper calibration and e.g. projector calibration. You may argue that your professional paper brand gives you a colour profile for your printer (but it makes assumptions about the ink). If you print via a professional print house, then they may have their colour correction profile that you can apply to your proofing but this assumes a monitor calibrated to neutral and if you want to visually ballpark monitor calibration, send images to the print house in order to calibrate between monitor and prints - different papers have different profiles and even different batches of the "same" paper may have different profiles.
I would argue, when you work as a pro (earn your income from photography and have tax-deducible expenses) then buy a calibration device that can calibrate your entire tool suite. If you are printing a lot yourself with "fine art" ambitions and prices, then invest in a professional calibration tool. The whole point is between your monitor and prints that you want "What You See on the Monitor Is What You Get from the printer". Or, if you are a total amateur, say collector of bird images, and want to print your shots, then relative to your many thousands of Western currencies spent on a fast 600 or 800 lens, the calibration device is laughably cheap.
As you discuss monitor calibration, don't forget in this mirrorless age, that your camera may have viewfinder calibration setting options as well. And as your camera can generate SOOC JPEG images, it may have picture control profiles that define how the raw to JPEG conversion is done - someth8ing you may want to calibrate too and potentially define your own profile for that (between different camera models you may need different profiles even from the same brand).
The elephant in the room then is that many people are colour blind (in my language we call them, that, "colour weak") but sill shoot in colour. Famous - if you like - US photographer Joel Grimes self-admittedly is one. He works in a generally desaturated palette, and you would assume that "colour" may not be very important to him, but I presume he is very finicky about his version of WYSIWYG.
The other elephant in the room is that some people see the humanly visible spectrum in 4 bands, not 3. All of colour photography is on 3 bands (red, green, blue) but these 4-banders may see colours differently. The anatomy of the brain is on the X chromosome (which is not the same as intelligence, character, personality) and men only have this from their mothers -well, as most colour weak people are men who see in 2 spectral colour bands, my guess is that the anatomy of the cones in the retina is also on the X chromosome and the women that see in 4 bands may have 2 bands on each chromosome (all sons will be colour weak), or three on one and two on the other (some sons will be colour weak). To their daughters then the biological father's genes become an important factor. A colour weak father passes his weakness on to all his daughters.
Genetics aside, if you are colour weak and never decided to go "black and white only", then you may want a calibration device, if only to get proper colours for your family and clients that do see in 3 bands.
Finally, between the monitor and the prints, you have to understand your monitor's maximum colour space and your printer/ink/paper combination's. You may be able to print a larger colour space than your monitor can render and now you really need (a) in-depth training and (b) serious calibration. My EIZO monitor's colour space is at least 100% Adobe RGB, which is more than sRGB that most monitors can render. Note here that colour space without contrast envelope (dynamic range available to one image) is meaningless. "Dynamic contrast" is best switched off in still image editing. This is a trick in backlighting LCD monitors where LEDs behind the LCD are made brighter or dimmer, but the LEDs light a region that is much larger than a single pixel. While you may be able to switch this off, also note there are monitors that fake higher bits per channel by making subpixels flicker. In that sense an 8 BPC monitor may be 6+2, or a 10 BPC one may be 8+2. My EIZO does 10 BPC without that and does not have problems with "difficult" colours. Not to brag, but if eyeballing for calibration is not good enough, take this all into account.
hey techless, can you please tell me if I should get the benq xl2411k or lg24gn650b for gaming?
Finally the nearsightedness come in handy
You might be able to do the white point, but good luck on Gamma curve
What is I have a color checker card/chart, Is there a way to manually calibrate my monitor to the chart?
You can use that instead of the paper. Will be a bit more accurate probably.
I have a question what about in a display with HDR that mostly locks every settings to chance this
what is the name of this program to change the brightness through the keyboard.. thk
th-cam.com/video/jhE8KJD2CVg/w-d-xo.html ✌️
Could you do a guide or tutorial on TV color calibration? Is it worth doing it these days?
Well, for the cheap and medium class monitors, adjusting anything, except the backlight, leads to loosing color resolution. This is very visible with color gradients and grey scales. Adjusting color temperature most likely will give you grey scale tracking errors, bigger and more visible than with the default settings. Also, you will loose color brightness steps. I guess, this is because adjusting is done digitaly, by modifying the input data, not by altering the actual panel voltages..., which I think is not so easy, given that the panel is probably not characterized and/or the manufacturer does not provide any data for such adjustment.
Regarding the colorimeters - they are a gimmick IMHO. Gloryfied 3 pixel cameras with primary color filters. Only spectrometer can give you meaningfull reading, especially for the modern monitors with all kinds of backlights and gamut "widenesses".
I've been looking for ICC profile for my monitor, ASUS TUF vg289q. Can't find it anywhere can you help?
Amazing Video
why do you make these adjustment in the monitor instead of the OS? Windows even provides a "calibration" tool to do it by eye.