# Getting accurate colors on monitor =S



## Primoz (Apr 18, 2012)

Hey guys!

I am pretty frustrated with how my prints are coming out and have decided to do someting about my monitor in terms of calibration...

So I have two monitors:

Samsung SyncMaster 193Plus         (older)
Samsung SyncMaster BX2240 LED   (newer)
1) Which one should I use for photo editing? - which one will be able to present most accurate color AND how would you rate this monitor from 1 to 10 (10 being a professional photo editing monitor) Is it colorwise accurate enough for an entusiastic amateur?

2) Which device would you recommend for monitor calibration? What are the features, the cheaper ones don't support?
I don't want to spend too much money, but I want to buy something high quality and I don't want to buy another one in 3 months because I realised I need a better one...

3) Why are colors I see in Lightroom different (better) to what I see in other Photo Viewing Software (Microsoft Picture, especially Picasa has very flat colors) Is there a way to fix this problem?

4) When I have a calibrated monitor, do I have to send any data about my color profile to the print shop to get an acurate print?

5) As I understand you can manage colors in the monitor as well as in the graphics card... Does the monitor calibrator take care of all these settings?

Thank you! =)


----------



## mjhoward (Apr 18, 2012)

You want something like Spyder 3 monitor calibrator which will calibrate your monitor.  The best type of monitor to use for photo editing is one with a IPS panel.  The other thing you need to do once you've edited your photo is make note of what color space you've exported it under.  Then, make sure your lab is using the same colorspace.  Or you can just find out what colorspace your lab is using and export all your photos with that colorspace.


----------



## TCampbell (Apr 18, 2012)

Are you JUST worried about the colors you see on screen?  Do you print images yourself or do you always send them out?

You have to create a complete color-managed workflow if you want everything to work.

That means accurate white balance in your camera (use a gray card -- or if you REALLY need accurate colors, use a color card because even a correctly white balanced shot from the camera can have issues with color accuracy of certain colors.)  You would then color-calibrate your monitors.  If you do any printing of your own, you'd also want to color-calibrate the printer(s).   Printing gets even trickier because each different type of photo paper will throw the accuracy... as will different types of inks.  As you create color profiles, you get to name them.  I always name the profile for the printer/paper combination I intend to use (I usually don't use different types of inks.)

I use an X-Rite Colormunki Photo.  It's one of the more popular systems, but I noticed X-Rite doesn't seem to market it anymore (even though you can still find them.)  If you JUST need to adjust your monitors and don't print images yourself, then you could buy a less expensive unit that just handles monitor calibration.

The calibration tool usually requires that you install software and drivers -- but mostly these are only used to perform the calibration.  Once the calibration has been performed, the output is a color "profile" for your computer.  I use a Mac -- but the file it creates is a standard.  I could un-install all the special software and drivers used by the calibration tool and JUST keep the display "profile" that it generated and everything would work fine.  Printer profiles work similarly except that color profiles for printers can either be stored in the printer OR in the computer.  Generally I create the profile for the printer/paper/ink combination and I put that on my computer.  I then tell the printer NOT to perform color correction.  You want to make sure you've disabled all color calibration (on both the printer and the computer's print driver) when performing the calibration test.  This way the output file it generates will create a proper correction for the printer.  

If you send images out for printing, then your printer should have developed color calibration profiles based on the printers, papers, and inks that they use.


----------



## Big Mike (Apr 18, 2012)

> 1) Which one should I use for photo editing? - which one will be able to present most accurate color AND how would you rate this monitor from 1 to 10 (10 being a professional photo editing monitor) Is it colorwise accurate enough for an entusiastic amateur?


As mentioned, the better type of monitor for photo editing is likely going to be an IPS (in plane switching) monitor.  These have much more consistent viewing from different angles, among other benefits.  I don't know anything about your two monitors, you will have to read up on them.



> 2) Which device would you recommend for monitor calibration? What are the features, the cheaper ones don't support?
> I don't want to spend too much money, but I want to buy something high quality and I don't want to buy another one in 3 months because I realised I need a better one...


Datacolor Imaging Solutions - The World Leader in Color Innovation
ColorMunki - ColorMunki Design
Eye-One Display 2



> 3) Why are colors I see in Lightroom different (better) to what I see in other Photo Viewing Software (Microsoft Picture, especially Picasa has very flat colors) Is there a way to fix this problem?


Probably because you are not exporting your images from Lightroom in the sRGB color space.  Most other software (including internet browsers) only knows sRGB, so if you are going to view the images outside of Lightroom/Photoshopt etc., then you need to convert/output it in sRGB.



> 4) When I have a calibrated monitor, do I have to send any data about my color profile to the print shop to get an acurate print?


No, if you are calibrated you should be able to assume that the lab is calibrated as well and you should get fairly accurate results.  That being said, what you can do, is get the profile *from* the lab and use that for soft proofing.  Soft Proofing: Matching On-Screen Photos with Prints

5) As I understand you can manage colors in the monitor as well as in the graphics card... Does the monitor calibrator take care of all these settings?
Depends on your equipment.  Higher end monitors have their own 'Look Up Tables'.  So this means that the monitor calibration (profile being applied) happens at the monitor.  This is the best system, but requires a high end monitor.  If your monitor doesn't have LUTs, then the calibration profile is applied via the video card.  


Tutorials on Color Management & Printing


----------



## Primoz (May 17, 2012)

Thank you for the wonderful answers and useful links...
An IPS monitor is a bit out of my budget right now (I am investing in a Manfrotto 055cxpro3 =P). So I am worried that when in a few years I look back at the old images at the calibrated monitor they will all be "off" in colour...
How do you cope with such problems as a beginner photographer (since you can't have all the good equipment since day 1)... And how bad can my monitor be anyway? When I print images in a cheap laboratory, the colours are hideous (so I guess they aren't calibrated that well...) Once I printed a large poster in a high quality lab in the colours were quite good (as long as you don't compare them closely to the monitor =P)

Is there a way to come colorwise as close as possible without a fancy monitor and calibrator? (so that when I buy proper equipment in a few years I won't notice too much difference)

BTW: I should use the LED monitor for editing photos, right? (it is the better and newer one from the two?)


----------



## KmH (May 17, 2012)

Primoz said:


> Is there a way to come colorwise as close as possible without a fancy monitor and calibrator? (so that when I buy proper equipment in a few years I won't notice too much difference)
> Yes. You have a print made, and then hold it next to your display and adjust the display by eye to match the print. However, a display is back lit, and a print is fore lit, so you have to light the print to the same brightness as your display. You also have to allow for ambient light falling on the display and print.
> Many people have their display turned up way to bright.
> 
> BTW: I should use the LED monitor for editing photos, right? (it is the better and newer one from the two?)


 Yes. That is what I do with my dual display setup. I edit on my IPS display, while all my Photoshop work pallets, tool options bar, and tools bar are over on my TN display.


----------



## BlueMeanieTSi (May 17, 2012)

You also need to look at the photo under white light, typical incandescent or even the newer LED/CFL are a yellow warm light.


----------



## Primoz (Jul 10, 2012)

Hey  it's been a while since I started this thread, but I have another question.
I have read quite a lot about color management since and I am now able to rent a monitor calibration device from my photography club. It's an i1 from x-rite.
I have some thoughts regarding settings:
I set Gamma to 2.2, because I have been told that is the industry standard. 

1) But what about White balance? Here the opinions are not so exact anymore... some say 6500K, some say 6000K, I even watched a youtube video that claimed that 5000K is the setting if you wanna match your prints... What do you recommend?

2) The software also asks me to adjust single RGB channels on my monitor to set the white point... but if I want to increase the Red channel so that it goes near the "correct" setting everything gets ridiculusly red... I just can't figure it out so that the calibration device is happy with it... Should I just leave it the normal setings? (50%,50%,50%)

3)I have set Luminance for 90 - is that ok?

4) Just wondering... After monitor calibration is there anything else I should adjust in Lightroom or Photoshop to complete it?

BTW: I am now working on the Samsung SyncMaster BX2240 LED...


----------



## Garbz (Jul 12, 2012)

1) Well what are you matching to? 5000K sounds like a good setting to match to prints .... if you have a calibrated light box that lights up your prints at 5000k. You eyes will colour balance themselves providing your room is setup correctly. That is your monitor should be the brightest thing in the room and the room should be lit with <70lx. Like putting on a set of yellow sunglasses your eyes will adjust to the monitor regardless of what setting you set. So with that in mind you should set "Monitor Default" as the colour temperature. If you insist on setting something manually then measure the default on the monitor and set it to the nearest 500k. The reason behind this is that further you go from your native white point the more you push your monitor and the more of a quality hit you take in the form of reduced resolution (number of possible colours your monitor can display). The only time you really need to set the white balance is if your room is bright (think lots of daylight) or you are comparing to prints (in a calibrated lightbox naturally) or you have two monitors and need to set them to a common value.

2) Really? This sounds like a throwback to the days of CRTs. Most programs don't ask you to adjust any RGB values on LCDs. As mentioned see if you can figure out a way to set it to monitor default or something close to it.

3) What luminance, monitors? Rooms? 

4) Lightroom and Photoshop will automagically read the colour profile from windows. Other programs not so much so. You may start noticing slight variations between LR/PS and other programs. If so trust LR/PS.


----------

