Calibrate Monitors or Not?

[Only RF]

iMac and Macbook. I used X-rite I1 Disable Pro and recently it became CaliBrite. The puck still works. Yes the calibrators do make the screen darker to match the print. Source of light vs reflected light. I notch it up by one after because for web it is a little dark for me.

I worked in print media. In the days and when we still used the Gutenberg Press we had that problem when everything started going computer. Customers would compare the printed product to the monitors which made things difficult. They started to tone down the monitors brightness most likely by calibrating them. I was not in prepress so I can't say for sure how the did it. The were always X-Rite products in the prepress and pressroom. I think a licences for PS was somewhere between $75,000 and $150,000 when it first came out.

 

[RedCobra]

Everyone's photos look fine on my Calibrated (Spyder Pro Calibrator) Dell monitor. I recalibrate when the software advises me to, although it doesn't seem to change much. I always recalibrate after a trip where I am bringing back thousands of images.

 

[Jake Shoots Birds]

Just tossing this out there (I calibrate). I was involved in a site that had team photography competitions/challenges and I was on a team with a bunch of great people of all levels who were willing to both take and give honest criticism. One of them was a retiree who traveled extensively and specialized in landscapes. He shot Leica and had an amazing computer system that he kept calibrated. Every shot he submitted to the team looked dark. It didn't look dark to him as he processed it and he told me it must be my monitor. I opened his shot in Photoshop, added a Levels adjustment layer, and grabbed a screen shot showing that the light information was non-existent above around 215-230 depending on the shot (brights maximize at 255). Sure, there are conditions where you'd want that, but not in the examples submitted. He added a levels check to the end of his processing flow just in case (and maybe to appease me LOL).

I say this to point out that calibration is only a part of the solution. Understanding how limiting light information in the file can impact other viewers is critical as well, and looking at a levels adjustment is probably one of the easiest ways to understand and communicate if something is "dark" or just "darkly toned" (midpoint too far right).

 

[ACEkin]

Just tossing this out there (I calibrate). I was involved in a site that had team photography competitions/challenges and I was on a team with a bunch of great people of all levels who were willing to both take and give honest criticism. One of them was a retiree who traveled extensively and specialized in landscapes. He shot Leica and had an amazing computer system that he kept calibrated. Every shot he submitted to the team looked dark. It didn't look dark to him as he processed it and he told me it must be my monitor. I opened his shot in Photoshop, added a Levels adjustment layer, and grabbed a screen shot showing that the light information was non-existent above around 215-230 depending on the shot (brights maximize at 255). Sure, there are conditions where you'd want that, but not in the examples submitted. He added a levels check to the end of his processing flow just in case (and maybe to appease me LOL).

I say this to point out that calibration is only a part of the solution. Understanding how limiting light information in the file can impact other viewers is critical as well, and looking at a levels adjustment is probably one of the easiest ways to understand and communicate if something is "dark" or just "darkly toned" (midpoint too far right).

Very true! Calibration software generally uses a set luminance level. It may be right or not, depending on the work environment. That's one reason why I suggest running simple empirical tests to evaluate the screen brightness. For example, calibrating my main screen, a 27" NEC, I set the luminance level to 100, down from its suggested 125 I believe. It may take more than one calibration session at the beginning, so I advise patience.

 

[chipman]

With my macular degeneration everything looks dark. At first it was just shots in one eye. At times I could blink my eyes back and forth and see a one stop difference in lighting. Now both eyes are getting shots, with new medicine these are every 12 weeks.
If you are over 50 I strongly suggest you get tested. The sooner they catch it the less it will mess up your photography.

 

[ACEkin]

With my macular degeneration everything looks dark. At first it was just shots in one eye. At times I could blink my eyes back and forth and see a one stop difference in lighting. Now both eyes are getting shots, with new medicine these are every 12 weeks.
If you are over 50 I strongly suggest you get tested. The sooner they catch it the less it will mess up your photography.

I remember you mentioned it in passing when I wrote I could see the blue flowers when I look away from them. Sorry to hear about your vision issues, I can relate to that as my wife is legally blind with minimal visual field. Glad to hear that the shots seem to help.

 

[PKM-UK]

Well there you go, calibration carried out (Calibrite Display Pro HL) and I‘ve looked on here at some of the images we posted recently and re-edited/ compared a couple of files with Karen. Our preliminary conclusion? My original edits look too dark…



Cemal (and Karen’s dad!) good point, well made. Thank you. I think that moving forward my edits should now be improved.

Further evaluation and comparison tests to follow, but the first look seems pretty conclusive and it’s been money well spent.

Phil

 

[MikeZ]

I now need to decide between CaliBrite and Spyder. Though they seem the same on first blush, I'm sure that there are differences (some significant) in operation. I'm using a Dell U2415 UltraSharp monitor to which Dell "offers" their Dell UltaSharp Color Calibration System software. I've yet to confirm, but I think that application is compatible to the CaliBrite device. Now whether that makes any difference is currently beyond me. If anyone has any insights or suggestions, I am completely open and listening.

​

 

[ACEkin]

Well there you go, calibration carried out (Calibrite Display Pro HL) and I‘ve looked on here at some of the images we posted recently and re-edited/ compared a couple of files with Karen. Our preliminary conclusion? My original edits look too dark…



Cemal (and Karen’s dad!) good point, well made. Thank you. I think that moving forward my edits should now be improved.

Further evaluation and comparison tests to follow, but the first look seems pretty conclusive and it’s been money well spent.

Phil

You will not regret your decision, Phil and Karen. Please carry out the steps to confirm the level of brightness even if you have to have a sample image printed by a friend in case you do not do any printing. The sample images should not be adjusted, just printed and compared to the screen image under proper lighting.

 

[ACEkin]

I now need to decide between CaliBrite and Spyder. Though they seem the same on first blush, I'm sure that there are differences (some significant) in operation. I'm using a Dell U2415 UltraSharp monitor to which Dell "offers" their Dell UltaSharp Color Calibration System software. I've yet to confirm, but I think that application is compatible to the CaliBrite device. Now whether that makes any difference is currently beyond me. If anyone has any insights or suggestions, I am completely open and listening.

​

I have been using devices either made and sold by X-Rite or later purchased by X-Rite like Monaco Optix. None has failed or disappointed me. I have no experience with the Spyder products.