Ok, I didn't realise that.Originally Posted by JimD
 |
  |
 |
Thanks useful information: 9
Ok, I didn't realise that.
My PBase site: http://www.pbase.com/lance_b
My Flickr site: https://www.flickr.com/photos/35949907@N02/
Are these things easy to use as in you don't need a 747 pilots licence to get your monitors and printers calibrated?
Simple as Pi.
The software prompts you with what to do next at each step.
Last edited by Lance B; 09-03-2013 at 4:37pm.
I recently purchased the Spyder 4 Pro from an ebay shop for about $160 I think.
You do need to read the instructions properly, and be sure to calibrate your display under the same conditions you'll likely do your photo editing (e.g. I edit at night, not during the day with the sun shining on the screen).
I have calibrated my desktop and ultrabook no problems. Apparently the Pro version and above can also be used to calibrate your TV...something I'll probably look at later in the future..
I guess it works, but I'll probably only find out when it comes time to print...
Last edited by Sifor; 09-03-2013 at 9:36pm.
Cheers, Troy
D800; AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G; AF-S 50mm 1.8G; SB-910; ||
120-300mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM 'S'; APO Teleconverter 2x DG ||
Phantom 2; H32D Gimbal; 5.8Ghz FPV LCD GS
Thats right , If you dont have multiple monitors , The Express will work fine, Easy peasy to use as well , Once installed , I just set mine to remind me every 60 days , Get the express version Jim, Makes a big difference and you can be assured what you see on screen will be the same as the print
PS : I use the Spyder Express 3
Canon : 30D, and sometimes the 5D mkIII , Sigma 10-20, 50mm 1.8, Canon 24-105 f4 L , On loan Sigma 120-400 DG and Canon 17 - 40 f4 L , Cokin Filters
I have gotten into printing of late (only A4 size but I'm really enjoying it) and the majority of my prints come out colour acceptable to me. The odd one regardless of how I print it I can't get a satisfactory outcome.
I thought that a monitor calibrater was something that literally 'guarenteed' that what I see on my monitor is what I will see in print.....hence the usefullness of owning such an item.
I've been doing some reading and it seems a little more involved than just calibrating ones monitor and then bingo - perfect prints.
Threadstarter
No a monitor calibrator means that what you see on your calibrated monitor is the same as what I see on mine. It is about setting a standard for monitors. Not Printers! If you want to colour match properly for printing you need a printer calibrator, like http://spyder.datacolor.com/printer-profiling/
"It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro
Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
Nikon, etc!
RICK
My Photography
An impossible task to do with a one size fits all solution. As Rick said, a monitor calibration device will give you a close to ideal view of your images, which will be close enough to the same for all calibrated monitors. Of course this is never going to be an exact science neither, as there will be slight variations between monitor types and brands, and the devices used to calibrate them.
But for 99.9% of instances they'll be close enough.
So in reality is that calibrating your monitor helps to achieve similarly produced prints, if the printing is outsourced to an external source.
i.e what you see on your monitor is the same as what the printing company will see.
When it comes to printers, the variables of printer manufacturer, model of printer, types of papers, types of inks ... etc ... they all require profiling of the printing device itself.
Yours will (most likely) come with canned profiles to suit particular types of papers and inks you have, and a pro printing company will profile their printers to do the same.
If you want exactness in your monitor to print production, you can either tune it as you go(trial and errors) .. or you can use a hardware device that will also calibrate your printer as well.
And that printer calibration profile will only work for one type of paper too.
as an example: imagine the unlikely extreme of printing a photo on glossy white photo paper, and then the same print done on a glossy black matte paper ... the two photos will look completely different won't they.
This is where printer profiling comes into it.
A while back, just for a bit of fun, I used to have a cheap end Canon inkjet printer, mainly used for home-office duties, but capable of printing decent quality A4 photos. I used to print a small 4x6 print on a particular paper before I then printed up the A4 version.
I have only 1 print for myself, but had printed up to about 10 prints for my parents, so it wasn't ever regular thing for me.
The printer died and I replaced it with a colour laser printer, which I've only printed 3 4x6 prints to see what the quality looked like and it's nowhere near as good as the cheaper Canon inkjet was.
I trialled the photo quality papers that came with the printer using their canned profiles, but still to no real advantage! I still have the A4 sheets filed away, never to be used!
Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
{Nikon}; -> 50/1.2 : 500/8 : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8 ais : 105mm f/1.8 ais : 24mm/2 ais
{Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
{Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC
{Yongnuo}; -> YN35/2N : YN50/1.8N
Got an XRite i1 Display 2, and I've never really liked the interface - and Gretag Macbeth's website is absolutely disgraceful.
Thinking of making the switch to Spyder when I upgrade next...
I've got the Eye 1 Display 2. It works much better with third party software. BasICC color and Color Eyes Display Pro are both much better and very easy to use and give detailed validation reports.
I'd give it a shot...I suspect mine might be developing some faults, as per my thread in this forum, but can't hurt to try some other software.
This is actually only 100% true if both you and i use the SAME calibration system - as they all use different methods to gain the calibration.
Pentax K-5iis, DA* 50-135 IF SDM | Sigma 18-125 3.5-5.6 | Sigma 70-210 4-5.6 |Sigma 28-80 3.5-5.6 Macro |Pentax-FA 28-80 3.5-4.7 |Pentax A 50 1.7 |Pentax DA 12-24 | Pentax DAL 55-300|Sigma 28-300 3.5-6.3 and other stuff
Threadstarter
Even then it may not be true. I might use natural light in my editing room, you might use LED, or Fluorescent, or incandescent or any other form of room lighting that will also affect the outcome. But the only way to ensure we are even getting close is to use a calibrator.
This is the general idea behind calibration on a consumer level.
The idea is to get close enough to a standard colour, contrast and luminance level across all monitors.
The 2 or 5% difference in colour, contrast or luminance between our respective monitors is not generally noticeable (or even worth mentioning) .... unless a direct comparison is made.
So if you walk into Rick's study and view your images on his PC, and then walk into my study and view your images on my PC ... to you, I and almost everyone else they will look as you remember them on your PC too.
This is my first post as a new member. I found this thread to be very informative. I'd like to thank arthurking83 for simplifying the information. It makes more sense to me now. I will do some research about calibration devices to further update my understanding.
There is good news and there is bad news:
First the good news: my two big Samsung monitors don't drift at all, or at least so little that I can never tell any difference, so it's a complete waste of time recalibrating them at all often. Now the bad news: this means that I seldom use the Spyder and now I can't find it. Now the really bad news. I have had a new Thinkpad for nearly two months and I really need to calibrate it, and I have looked everywhere! I just can't find the Spyder 3. I had a Spyder 2 which was OK but I couldn't find it when I bought my last Thinkpad four years ago and, after a lot of frustration I finally gave up and bought the Spyder 3. But there is also good news - I finally discovered the old Spyder 2 just a few months ago, filed neatly away in a perfectly logical place where I would never have thought of looking. I didn't care too much for the Spyder 2 'coz the software was pretty awful, but any port in a storm, hey. Alas, the bad news is that, after I found the Spyder 2, I still had the Spyder 3, so I sold the Spyder 2 for $50. Now I can't find the damn Spyder 3 and I'm going to have to buy a Spyder 4!
Is another Spyder the best answer?
I generally need to calibrate six or eight monitors on three or four different systems, all within the same household so a multiple-system, non-professional licence is fine. I only do them once a year or so; can't see much point in spending more than I need to.
I do NOT need to do printers, projectors, or anything else. I might want to calibrate an Android tablet one day (if I ever buy a tablet, which I probably won't) but that is a low priority. Nor do I need all that silly ambient light stuff that the Spyder 3 offered (who really and truly works in a darkened room?) but you probably get that whether you want it or not and it's pretty harmless. All PCs, no Macs.
So: basic colour management, multiple PC systems. Spyder 4? Or should I look at a different brand instead? What are people recommending these days?
Sounds like you have quite a spyder conundrum. I'd recommend one of these...
ImageUploadedByTapatalk1376826802.407549.jpg
Or this..
ImageUploadedByTapatalk1376826827.153715.jpg
On a more serious note, how do you find the colour accuracy on the Samsung panels?. My Dell (with a Samsung S-PVA type panel) is 6 years young and wont calibrate well anymore so might be time for a replacement.
Kaiser, the only thing stopping me from marrying one of my 214ts is that the other one might get jealous! I have never used a monitor I like better. Of course, you can't buy them any more now, nor can you buy anything with a decently useful aspect ratio (i.e., with a bit of height in it, it's all so-called "wide screen" rubbish - which gives you less and less usable area the "wider" it gets). Both developed the same power supply fault at about 4 or 5 years of age. I had them repaired (didn't cost much, two or three hundred maybe) and they have been excellent ever since. Lord only knows how long I've had them for. Eight years maybe?
On my old Thinkpad, they were always very good, colour-wise. In fact the calibration didn't change them much at all - they were pretty close straight out of the box. On the new one ... well, I don't know what to blame and I've been going cross-eyed trying to calibrate them by eye as a temporary measure. Tonight I drove into the office and got the other one so that I could run them side-by-side, one on the old system, the other on the new, trying to callibrate the new PC by eye. After a bit I threw my toys out of the pram and decided to buy a new Spider. Or other brand maybe - but the more I look at the truly awful website design that stands behind X-write/ColorMonkee (I've seen 80,000 tonne container ships that load up faster) the less impressed I am. If their website is that bad, why would their software be any good? I think I'll just get a Spyder. The II was pretty clunky but the III was OK, so the IV should be fine. I hope.
I never was a fan of the X Rite software. I always use Color Eyes Display Pro which has been fantastic.
My Spyder 4 arrived today. I am not happy. It doesn't seem able to achieve anything like a consistent white balance across different monitors.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
