explain monitor calibration?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by james, Sep 18, 2008.

  1. james

    james Guest

    When you run a monitor calibration software, two things happen:
    it produces a LUT (look up table) that is loaded into the monitor (either
    software or hardware), and it spits out a color profile.

    What is the LUT suppose to do and what is the color profile supposed to do?
    Is the LUT supposed to change your monitor gamma to 2.2? Does the LUT affect
    color in any other ways? E.g if the monitor had tinted grey scale, is it
    also corrected by the LUT?

    A monitor that is calibrated is said to be more accurate. But accurate in
    what respect?

    If I'm surfing web, I'm benefiting from the LUT, in what way? Do I also
    beneift from the color profile? Or do I have to be in certain application
    like photoshop to take advantage of the color profile?

    People say that calibrated monitor displays photos better. Since photos are
    setup for sRGB color space, I assume that means a calibrated monitor is
    calibrated to the sRGB color space, but I'm told this is incorrect. I don't
    get it.

    And what is linearizing?

    Could someone explains this better?
     
    james, Sep 18, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. james

    saycheez Guest

    The primary purpose of calibration is for a color managed program like
    Photoshop to be able to translate the colors you see on screen to the best
    match in a print.
    It is impossible to do any serious image processing/printing without monitor
    calibration and color management.
    Neither your monitor nor your printer fully and accurately displays any
    particular color space, be it sRGB, AdobeRGB or the venerable NTSC standard.
    Additionally it is a virtual certainty that your eyes/brain do not see color
    the way you think you do. The most obvious example is that your eye/brain
    auto white balances whereas dumb things like cameras and monitors require
    some form of calibration to find a white point. You will see a fluorescent
    lit room as normal in color but it is actually green.
    Because your eye/brain will "normalize" colors your prints, derived from
    what you process based on the monitor image, may seem wildly off color when
    in fact they are accurate reproductions of what is on the monitor (as
    opposed to what you think you see).
    The monitor profile you derive from calibrating is translated by Photoshop
    into the printer/paper profile stored on your computer at the time of
    printing; the process is more accurately described as mapping one profile
    onto another. Printer manufacturers, e.g. Epson, install paper/printer
    profiles with the printer driver. There are other sources for these profiles
    or you can create them yourself if you have a printer calibration device
    (not the same as a monitor calibration device).
    Calibration has been extended to try to get video displays to correspond as
    best as possible to the NTSC standard. Since the NTSC standard derives from
    CRTs and has not been updated for LCDs (and probably cannot be "updated"
    because of the wide range of flat panel technologies) calibrating monitors
    for passive viewing is not necessarily all that desirable.
    The NTSC standard delivers what to most observers is a slightly dark,
    slightly cool image compared to most manufacturer's HDTV settings. In truth,
    unless you are professionally preparing video or have invested upward of
    $20k on a home HDTV monitor and are utterly anal on the subject calibrating
    your monitor simply for passive viewing purposes is worthwhile to some,
    pointless to most. Magazine reviewers make a big deal out of it, and for
    them it provides a more objective basis for comparing HDTVs, but for normal
    viewing HDTV calibration is not a big deal. Just set up your HDTV the way
    you like.
    Calibrating a computer monitor simply for viewing purposes is delusional if
    you consider what you will be looking at and where it comes from.
     
    saycheez, Sep 18, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. james

    Guest

    On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 17:56:53 -0700, in rec.photo.digital "james"
    <> wrote:

    >When you run a monitor calibration software, two things happen:
    >it produces a LUT (look up table) that is loaded into the monitor (either
    >software or hardware), and it spits out a color profile.
    >
    >What is the LUT suppose to do and what is the color profile supposed to do?
    >Is the LUT supposed to change your monitor gamma to 2.2? Does the LUT affect
    >color in any other ways? E.g if the monitor had tinted grey scale, is it
    >also corrected by the LUT?
    >
    >A monitor that is calibrated is said to be more accurate. But accurate in
    >what respect?
    >
    >If I'm surfing web, I'm benefiting from the LUT, in what way? Do I also
    >beneift from the color profile? Or do I have to be in certain application
    >like photoshop to take advantage of the color profile?
    >
    >People say that calibrated monitor displays photos better. Since photos are
    >setup for sRGB color space, I assume that means a calibrated monitor is
    >calibrated to the sRGB color space, but I'm told this is incorrect. I don't
    >get it.
    >
    >And what is linearizing?
    >
    >Could someone explains this better?


    http://www.colorremedies.com/realworldcolor/index.html
     
    , Sep 19, 2008
    #3
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Arawak
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    775
    ProfGene
    Jul 12, 2004
  2. Jim Dalton
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    958
    Marvin Margoshes
    Jul 18, 2003
  3. Guest

    Printer & Monitor Calibration

    Guest, Sep 13, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    378
    Guest
    Sep 13, 2003
  4. antonius

    monitor calibration

    antonius, Oct 21, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    417
    Bill Hilton
    Oct 21, 2003
  5. Haydon
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    508
    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!)
    May 23, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page