|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/19/2008 07:16:26 AM · #1 |
So, I've finally taken the jump into hardware-calibrating my monitors with the i1 Display 2.
I'm a little sketchy on how to select my desired calibration white point, though. The instructions with the i1 make very nebulous statements like "choose the appropriate white point for your industry." Say what? I would expect my white point selection would be more scientific -- based on ambient light readings and/or a corresponding white point for my output device/printer/etc.
The only other references online I can find blindly say to use "6500K for photographic editing," with no explanation why.
Does anyone have any real explanation for a methodology for choosing a white point color temperature? If anyone says "just pick what looks good" I will virtually throw something heavy at you. ;)
Yes, I've read Adobe's "A Color Managed Raw Workflow" whitepaper, several times -- unless I'm just missing it, that doc does not address this specific question.
|
|
|
|
09/19/2008 10:31:39 AM · #2 |
It's a complicated, long story, but essentially, 6500K is roughly the color of daylight. More or less. Or at least as close as we can get with a broad brush, "set it to this" kind of answer.
Anyway, set it to 6500K and go on with the calibration. Take some pictures. Enjoy. |
|
|
|
09/19/2008 11:26:20 AM · #3 |
Originally posted by Ann:
It's a complicated, long story, but essentially, 6500K is roughly the color of daylight. More or less. Or at least as close as we can get with a broad brush, "set it to this" kind of answer.
Anyway, set it to 6500K and go on with the calibration. Take some pictures. Enjoy. |
Thanks for the reply!
I'm an engineer -- I like long stories and lots of numbers and details. Not that I don't trust you or anyone else in particular -- but I'm happy to hear and understand the specific details as why this is the case. I assume you are referring to standard illuminant D65 (6504K), which makes sense, but then it seems that same white point should be followed on all devices -- why have nebulous assertions like "use the white point for your industry," etc.?
To add some confusion to the matter, I was just in touch with the lab I use for 99% of my prints, as I figured it made the most sense to match settings with my "output device" (in this case, a Fuji Frontier lab printer). They (the printing lab) advised me to use 5000K with a gamma of 1.8 (vs. 2.2 which X-Rite advised).
I'm not trying to over-analyze all this. I just want to get it right.
|
|
|
|
09/19/2008 12:45:40 PM · #4 |
I'm an engineer, too. I think we're the only ones who care about this stuff at any level of detail...
_Real World Photoshop CS2_ has a sidebar that discusses this for about 2 pages, if you want to find that. They mention trying to match colors when viewing prints on D50 light tables, but say that in real usage, 6500k is actually a closer match to what you'd see on a D50 light table than 5000K is. The reasons have to do with a combination of how the eye perceives color coming from paper vs monitor, and the difficulties monitors have in reproducing colors at the blue (I think) end of the spectrum.
The best answer I can give is to experiment. Set it to 6500K, gamma 2.2, and have something printed. Then 5000K, gamma 1.8, adjust the image as necessary, and have it printed again. See which one matches the monitor best. Or which one you like best, even if it doesn't entirely match, which in my mind is a better determinant.
My off the top of my head expectation is that you'll find the gamma 1.8 print darker than you expect. You may find that 5000K works better than 6500K with your lab, but viewing color on prints is a nebulous as setting color temp on your monitor, unless you have a light table. Choose someplace consistent to look at the prints (I use my bathroom window.) |
|
|
|
09/19/2008 03:08:20 PM · #5 |
Bear in mind the white point doesn't actually affect the overall colour that much, it does affect the white areas (obviously) but when I started out with a calibrator I was under the impression I had to get it WHITE and was shooting for the high end 7000k even 7500k, however I soon realised that the white point on the monitor is replicating how printed medium will look when viewed in `normal` circumstances.
6500k with a gamma of 2.2 really is the best option for most activities. |
|
|
|
09/21/2008 12:05:20 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by Ann:
I'm an engineer, too. I think we're the only ones who care about this stuff at any level of detail... |
:P Entirely too true! I was hoping you'd feel like talking tech about this. I'm a huge fan of your Triumph! Tutorial, too -- thanks so much for that!
Originally posted by Ann:
_Real World Photoshop CS2_ has a sidebar that discusses this for about 2 pages, if you want to find that. They mention trying to match colors when viewing prints on D50 light tables, but say that in real usage, 6500k is actually a closer match to what you'd see on a D50 light table than 5000K is. |
I went to a bookstore last night looking for that, and while they didn't have that book in stock, I did plow through a few other PS books with sections on color management. All agreed on that parameters as well, with different degrees of explanation -- I read enough to convince myself it was the right thing, also. ;)
Sooooooo, my last bit of confusion I'm interested to see if anyone wants to weigh in on would be using the 6500K white point vs. "native" white point for LCD screens. I use all LCD screens (both on my laptop built-in and external screens for my laptop and desktops), and so I'm torn between two "rules" given by every reference I've found on this...
First, I should have the same white point across all my monitors. That makes perfect sense, and I agree -- okey-dokey!
Second, I should use the native white point for LCD screens. But, errr, umm, what about having them all match? The native point for one laptop, for example, is measuring at 5600K, and the attached LCD external monitor measures native at 6700K.
Which should I follow? Calibrating them all the same at 6500K, or using the native point for each display?
I assume the first; as the comments I've read about using the native white point don't go into any mention of synchronizing monitors, etc. -- so I *assume* they make that statement assuming you don't have any other monitors to synchronize with, etc.
Clear as mud?
Originally posted by Simms:
Bear in mind the white point doesn't actually affect the overall colour that much, it does affect the white areas (obviously)... |
Really? I wonder if I'm doing something else wrong in my calibration, then -- my profile calibrated at 5000K vs. my profile at 6500K is pretty obviously different (to me) across overall colors.
|
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 12/27/2025 10:48:09 AM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 12/27/2025 10:48:09 AM EST.
|
