Monitor Colour Profiles

Status
Not open for further replies.
GingeraMan

GingeraMan

Amateur Photographer ~ 4 years experience
Joined
Mar 27, 2016
Messages
99
Location
Canberra, Australia
Lightroom Experience
Intermediate
Lightroom Version
Cloud Service
Hey Everyone..

I have a 97% aRGB gamut Dell U2711 with Windows 10. Do I need to do anything special to use aRGB? When I look under Colour Management there is a U2711 colour profile listed there, so I assume it's being used, and when I click on Calibrate Colour - I receive a warning that this device is using a wide gamut colour profile.

The monitor has a 'aRGB' preset (for colour shifting / calibration) - although when I've used this things look a little blueish or something - perhaps I need to ensure working space is set to aRGB - as well as embedded JPEG previews and smart previews. I guess that's all part of a 'properly calibrated workflow'.

That being said - I understand the recommendation is to work in ProPhoto for future compatibility - however I'm now mostly shooting in RAW (converted to DNG on import) so I understand it makes little difference there - except for JPEG's. I do shoot in RAW / JPEG though - which I think I will set to sRGB to output the simultaneous JPEG's in sRGB for compatibility - while working / printing from the DNG's.

I like to print at Officeworks too - and they have Photoshop so perhaps I can just give them DNG's to print from and they can then print to whatever their printers can handle.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
The color profiles that come with your monitor should be used to adjust the monitor to the approximation of the colors that it is capable of rendering. You can tune the monitor more precisely with a color calibration tool. The result will be a new color profile that is tuned specifically to your monitor at this point in time. It is more specific than the generic profile for a Dell U2711 monitor.
A color profile (icc file)describes a color space. An image will have associated with it a color profile specific to a color space for transmissive media (monitors) or a color space for reflective media specific to a specific printer and paper.

There are three colorspaces (envelopes) that are important. The smallest is sRGB, The next envelope id AdobeRGB and the largest is ProPhotoRGB. In the diagram below, the all encompassing horseshoe shape represents all of the colors that the human eye can see. The red triangle represents the color that most monitors are capable of rendering. The black triangle represents generically the colors that print media is capable of rendering (AdobeRGB) It also is close to the capability of your monitor. The largest envelope (ProPhotoRGB) is a computational envelope to accommodate colors that might be calculated and fall outside of sRGB or AdobeRGB. You want to use ProPhotoRGB in LR and Photoshop to calculate accurate colors even though your intended media can't display them. When you generate a derivative image you will need to consider the intended purpose of the exported image. If it is for a print, you will need to export it with a color profile that matches the printer and paper being used to generated the print. If you do not know this printer information, you can use a generic color profile called AdobeRGB. If you are going to export to a website where everyone can view your image on browsers that may or may not manage the color, you should export with the sRGB color profile. Even though your monitor has a wider gamut, you still should export sRGB because you don't want to create an image that may have colors that fall outside the capability of your audience hardware.
If LR stores a rendering of your image that falls inside the ProPhotoRGB color space, you will export it and apply the generic sRGB color profile that will convert any colors that fall outside the sRGB color envelop to a color that is inside the envelope. The same is true for AdobeRGB color profiles.
Colorspace.png
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Hi, I apologise for taking so long to respond :) A few issues along the way. But since this I have decided to invest in a ColourMunki Smile - an apparently reasonably priced calibrator as the unanimous view seems to be that this is quite necessary. For now I have the default U2711 profile enabled in Windows 10 colour settings, and the AdobeRGB monitor preset left on pretty much permanently as I generally use a smaller sRGB monitor for day to day use and entertainment (endeavouring to reduce wear on the prized U2711 at the same time).

I have also been often warned about hassle and 'limited benefit' from pursuing this path and often warned off it which only strengthens my resolve to master colour management. This will be simplified however by swearing off ever getting involved with printing. I will save many thousands of dollars and hours of grief by just outsourcing printing to experts - if I can just master colour workflow to the point of printing.

So a year in I've ploughed in to Lightroom and have been learning everything I can. And.... have made a few mistakes along the way e.g.a prized landscape picture (one of the two or three I take a year that are truly print-worthy) coming out horribly dark at the printer compared to my vision and screen. So, a calibrator is clearly required if only to calibrate brightness.

I really really love Lightroom btw - I practically live in it when not at my day-job. I understand Lightroom will just just render according to the ICS profile in use by the OS - which if that's the U2711 profile - should be Adobe RGB. So, I am right to just leave the monitor preset on AdobeRGB and go from there. I don't notice any difference overall when switching colour profiles, but perhaps that's because only Lightroom really makes use of it.

Still, it would be wonderful if I could see what profile is actually in use. It's like some sort of dark magic to determine if sRGB or aRGB is in use.

Perhaps only a calibrator can help me there.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A proper calibration tool is the only way to go if you want consistency across multiple devices GingeraMan.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Gingerman. Did you run the colormunki? If it is anything like his bigger cousin (I use the i1 display) it should first let you get close with monitor controls So switch the monitor to the Adobe setiing. Adjust brightness etc as prompted, then run the profiler. The colormunki will measure the on screen colours and generate a profile. You will then be prompted to name this profile and save it. W10 should load this specific monitor profile (the xrite software installs a utility for that). After that, don't touch the monitor controls. After the reminder period, repeat.


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Upvote 0 Downvote
I also use the i1 Display Pro (same as i1 Display?) for an aftermarket aRGB 17" laptop panel.

You definitely want to make a custom profile. And yeah, for raw, the color space makes no difference at all - it's not baked in like it is for jpg, tiff, etc.

Once you learn enough (or even straight away), you may want to delve into Argyll with the DisplayCAL frontend GUI (I got sick of command-line many ages ago :)).. And let it install it's own monitor color profile installation utility - for better control, and results, than letting Windows install the profile. Also with the DispCal frontend, there will be no doubt as to which profile is installed - or which one to install.. As there is a drop-down selector right when you start it up, that always shows the current profile. (I, too, found the Windows way to be somewhat ambiguous to comprehend.)

Personally, I think the DisplayCAL/Argyll combo offers far better results than the software that comes with the i1 Display Pro. For instance, you can have it measure up to ~11,000 patches if you want (but I wouldn't recommend that - I do about 6-to-8,000 or so). There are also MANY advanced options, but you can keep them hidden when you're starting out.
Although my opinion on it being better isn't based on any hard evidence... It's largely based on how far down the rabbit hole one can go, in regards to the level of detail and control it offers.. Something that the software that comes with it can't come close to.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
GingeraMan said:
I really really love Lightroom btw - I practically live in it when not at my day-job.
Click to expand...

Yeah, my first year or two with LR I seriously did always get a 'warm, fuzzy' feeling when thinking about how I finally found a utility for organizing all my photos - and what? - it edits too!?! :woot: :humble:

It's largely gone away.. But every once in a while - when I think of my current camera gear, in conjunction with LR to manage it all, I may still get it. :love:
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Yeah thanks Robert and Hoggy. Thankfully I had not actually purchased the Colour Munki yet, and thankful for that seeing it can't handle wide gamut. And yeah the Windows colour management GUI is hopeless. It astounds me that a corporation with more budget than India used to send a probe to Mars can struggle to create a decent colour management GUI after twenty years of development. Anyhow this DisplayCal thing looks interesting. Happy to support the dev by buying through Amazon too. Looks like the i1 DisplayPro for around US$250 - $300 is the way to go.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
GingeraMan said:
...And yeah the Windows colour management GUI is hopeless. It astounds me that a corporation with more budget than India used to send a probe to Mars can struggle to create a decent colour management GUI after twenty years of development...
Click to expand...
This is not a budget issue or lack of technical ability on Microsoft's part!

One simply cannot do self-referential colour calibration.
How does an operating system know exactly what colour is emitted from a monitor? All an OS can know is that it sent a command in the form of an RGB triplet for a particular colour - whether that colour is in fact emitted is not something the OS can know.
That is why hardware is required in the form of colorimeters to actually measure what comes out from the monitor.

Calibration in this instance is nothing more than comparing a RGB triplet sent to a monitor with the RGB triplet actually emitted by the monitor, and then altering the look-up tables in order to produce an accurate colour. (Slightly simplified, but the concept is valid.)

Unless someone comes up with a software application that can directly read what a monitor is emitting without requiring a colorimeter (or similar hardware) then this remains an unbreakable envelope.

Tony Jay
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Appreciated. I guess I mean more so that the MS colour panel is confusing and challenging to determine what is actually being used. It seems short of a calibrator as you say it is impossible to determine what profile is actually being used by the monitor and in effect by the OS.

I understand one also requires a supportive video card? I have an Nvidia GTX card + DVI anyway so I hope that will work.

So Lightroom will just display-clip out of gamut colours when rendering RAW?

It would just be so handy to know what is actually being used for display. I guess it will remain that way until I acquire a calibrator, which thanks to this forum I now have an idea what to push for.

In looking at monitors I came across 'lookup tables' specified in some models too. Clearly another concept I need to familiarise myself with at some point.

On another note, is it actually possible to pull up technical information about RAW files in Lightroom or other utility? E.g. bit depth per pixel type thing. Doesn't seem it's used anywhere. I know my Canon 70D should use 14 bit for example, however it would be interesting to see more technical information on files I take myself or work with.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
You should not be using any utilities offered by the OS for colour calibrating your monitor.

Just get an XRite i1 Pro or an up to date Spyder calibration system - they come with their own software.
In my case the NEC monitors I have came with their own calibration software (it works with either of the two brands of puck mentioned above.)

Tony Jay
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
GingeraMan said:
It would just be so handy to know what is actually being used for display. I guess it will remain that way until I acquire a calibrator, which thanks to this forum I now have an idea what to push for.

On another note, is it actually possible to pull up technical information about RAW files in Lightroom or other utility? E.g. bit depth per pixel type thing. Doesn't seem it's used anywhere. I know my Canon 70D should use 14 bit for example, however it would be interesting to see more technical information on files I take myself or work with.
Click to expand...

I'll leave the other Q's for someone that may be able to go into more detail.. But for these:

You should be able to download and install both Argyll and DisplayCal (both free) without the calibrator. It should still show which profile is currently being used - which in your case, will be a generic one (likely located in %system%/spool/drivers/color).

For the second, (for bpp) it should show that info in the metadata panel in the Library module.. By selecting the info you want to see in the box that's RIGHT ON the Metadata Title (NOT the Preset area!). It may show it for proprietary raws, but I know for sure it does if your files have been converted to DNG (under the DNG item). If you want to avoid DNG - and the metadata area doesn't show it for proprietary - you MAY be able to use that item in a smart collection - not sure though (under the "Color" item). Otherwise a utility like Exiftool or PhotoME should be able to give that info for proprietary.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
GingeraMan said:
Yeah thanks Robert and Hoggy. Thankfully I had not actually purchased the Colour Munki yet, and thankful for that seeing it can't handle wide gamut. And yeah the Windows colour management GUI is hopeless. It astounds me that a corporation with more budget than India used to send a probe to Mars can struggle to create a decent colour management GUI after twenty years of development. Anyhow this DisplayCal thing looks interesting. Happy to support the dev by buying through Amazon too. Looks like the i1 DisplayPro for around US$250 - $300 is the way to go.
Click to expand...

You will not be disappointed with the i1 DisplayPro, for sure. As Tony already mentioned, it comes with its own software, but it is also one of the most widely recognized devices, should you ever want to use third-party software. Good luck.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
@GingeraMan Glad you started this thread; came at the right time for me.

I'm also going to purchase the i1 for my MacBook. It should cover all bases if I acquire a different or dedicated display.

@Tony Jay Just wondering if, out of curiosity, you've tried calibrating with your monitor's software and with the i1 software just to compare the results? You'd hope they'd not be too dissimilar.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Paul B said:
@Tony Jay Just wondering if, out of curiosity, you've tried calibrating with your monitor's software and with the i1 software just to compare the results? You'd hope they'd not be too dissimilar.
Click to expand...
I don't think it would make a difference.
The reason why is that it is the accuracy of the colorimeter (the puck) that is the only discriminator.
What the software does is create a profile based on the differences between colours sent to the monitor and colours measured by the colorimeter.
If the same colorimeter is used then I don't see that there will be much difference.

Tony Jay
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tony Jay said:
If the same colorimeter is used then I don't see that there will be much difference.
Click to expand...
Both programs would get the same data from the device. But it's how that data is interpreted and used by the software. In theory there shouldn't be much difference.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I don't think that there is much interpretation in fact.
All the software does is change the look-up tables and then re-challenge the monitor with the altered look-up table in operation.

Tony Jay
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tony Jay said:
All the software does is change the look-up tables and then re-challenge the monitor with the altered look-up table in operation.
Click to expand...
Yeah I guess it may just be that simple; if that's the case there shouldn't be any difference.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tony Jay said:
I don't think that there is much interpretation in fact.
All the software does is change the look-up tables and then re-challenge the monitor with the altered look-up table in operation.
Click to expand...

I would agree that both methods will not lead to a noticeable difference. A good monitor combined with a good calibration device will result in a delta E of < 1, which means virtually indistinguishable from the "true" colors.

Like Tony, I am using a NEC monitor which can be hardware calibrated - before I got the NEC software (which supports hardware calibration), I used the X-Rite software (which supports only software calibration) and I cannot say I did notice a difference - although this was not a scientific exercise. But I would agree that using different colorimeters could lead to different results.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
GingeraMan said:
I guess I mean more so that the MS colour panel is confusing and challenging to determine what is actually being used.
Click to expand...

Think of the MS color panel as a tool to fix the most obvious color issues, at least you might be able to achieve a neutral grey. This is already a good start into color management, but it does not take into account other factors like brightness and contrast, which are also important for the calibration.

GingeraMan said:
I understand one also requires a supportive video card? I have an Nvidia GTX card + DVI anyway so I hope that will work.
Click to expand...

Basically any decent video card manufactured in the past couple of years can be calibrated, be it nVIDIA, AMD or the integrated Intel graphics solutions. Just ensure that the drivers are current.

GingeraMan said:
So Lightroom will just display-clip out of gamut colours when rendering RAW?
Click to expand...

Correct, and you can verify that in the soft-proofing panel: The top left and right corners of the histogram, where you normally see the icons for shadow and highlight clipping, are now replaced with icons for monitor and output device clipping. You can easily see which areas of your picture is not supported by either your monitor or the selected output device (which can be a color space, it does not necessarily have to be a printer profile).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
GingeraMan said:
In looking at monitors I came across 'lookup tables' specified in some models too. Clearly another concept I need to familiarise myself with at some point.
Click to expand...

In simplified terms: think of it as a translation table, after the monitor has been calibrated. For example: To display a grey value of 128,128,128 on the screen, the translation table would tell the software to send the value of 130,132,117 instead - effectively compensating the incorrect monitor output, so the value visible on the screen is 128,128,128. Does that make sense?

GingeraMan said:
On another note, is it actually possible to pull up technical information about RAW files in Lightroom or other utility? E.g. bit depth per pixel type thing. Doesn't seem it's used anywhere.
Click to expand...

ExifTool is probably all you need. It is a free command line tool, but there are GUI interfaces available, for both Mac and Windows. I used it with one of my recent Nikon raw files and I got 296 (!) lines of information about the file, including what you are looking for:

Code: 
Bits Per Sample                 : 12
Compression                     : Nikon NEF Compressed
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Robert Reiser said:
Basically any decent video card manufactured in the past couple of years can be calibrated, be it nVIDIA, AMD or the integrated Intel graphics solutions. Just ensure that the drivers are current.
Click to expand...

And for a little more anecdotal insight about this..

I had an old laptop, Win XP - Pentium4 - 2GB max shared mem, I'd say circa 2003 or so. It was even able to be calibrated and profiled! However my dad's laptop which was purchased a few months to a year after that wasn't able to. I was only able to do 1 of those for that one.. Calibration or profiling, I forget which exactly (I'm thinking profile).
... Even after 5 years with this stuff, I still get confused on some of the specifics.. Though I do know how to hook up the device, start the software, and know a bit more about some more of the options in it than I used to. ;)

With my new laptop of ~2012, AMD A8-3500 w/integrated graphics, I'm also able to do both.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Paul B said:
@GingeraMan Glad you started this thread; came at the right time for me.

I'm also going to purchase the i1 for my MacBook. It should cover all bases if I acquire a different or dedicated display.

@Tony Jay Just wondering if, out of curiosity, you've tried calibrating with your monitor's software and with the i1 software just to compare the results? You'd hope they'd not be too dissimilar.
Click to expand...
IIRC, many of the monitor manufacturers have their bundled software written by Xrite or DataColor, so you may be getting a repackaged version with a feature or two added or removed and relabeled.

--Ken
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top