Jsykes wrote:
I have a couple of questions regarding the above topic.
1. “WHITE BALANCE” color calibration
• My wife and I both shoot with Canon RPs and we are probably best described as “somewhat beyond novices”
• We both shoot in AWB for subsequent adjustment in post
Do you shoot RAW or JPEGs?
RAW allows for a lot of post-process color and exposure tweaking. JPEGs, not so much.
While RAW records the color temp and tint at the time of exposure, it's not "baked in" yet. You are free to change it in post-processing software, during the RAW conversion.
All digital cameras initially take a RAW image, if you have your camera set to save JPEG then the image is quickly converted from that RAW and a lot of the original data is simply thrown away. Now you have "baked" the image according to the settings of the camera (not just white balance... also many other things including contrast, saturation, sharpening, etc.)
Jsykes wrote:
2. MONITOR Color Calibration
Currently I do not print images, but images when shared are via social media. Conventional wisdom suggests that if one plans to print a lot of images (which I have started to think about) then besides investing in a "high-quality printer" it is recommended that one calibrates monitors and printers, set paper profiles etc. One assumes that irrespective of printing, even for predominantly sharing via social media following post, monitor calibration is recommended
br 2. MONITOR Color Calibration br Currently I do... (
show quote)
Monitor Calibration is a key starting point, because computer screens are generally not accurate, plus they change over time with use and age.
Monitor calibration mostly does two things.... First it sets monitor brightness. This is critical because many monitors are optimized for purposes other than photography. They tend to be overly bright. This causes people to adjust their images too dark. I see it all the time here on UHH, people proudly displaying their images, which are one or two stops darker than they should be. They are probably unaware of that because they've never calibrated their monitor. The images look fine to them on screen but will REALLY show up too dark when they print them!
Once brightness is set, monitor calibration software and hardware runs a series of color tests that allow it to analyze the accuracy of the monitor, which the software then creates a profile to correct. This assures what you see is what you get when you print.
You really don't need to get into printer and paper profiles unless you use custom papers and inks. "Photo quality" printers from Epson and Canon used with their own papers and inks are pretty reliable. They have profiles that are provided with the printers. Sure, some fine tuning may be possible. But it is mostly just when you get into using specialty papers from other manufacturers that you need to worry.
Some print services also provide profiles that you can download and install. These just dictate how your software "soft proofs" images. In fact, that's the primary purpose of printer profiles, whether for your own printer at home or a service you send images to for printing. The profile's purpose is to show the nuance of any particular paper/ink/printer combinations. I haven't looked lately, but I imagine my Photoshop has 50 or 60 different profiles, though I mostly just use a couple of them.
But, again, you will see the most dramatic difference by far from calibrating your monitor(s).
Jsykes wrote:
2. I daily utilize two computers, a Dell Desktop and a Dell laptop.
3. I have three Monitors
• ~ 30 inch BenQ monitor (which I have linked to my Dell Desktop)
• ~ 16 inch Dell Laptop
• ~ 28 inch Dell monitor (that came with the desktop) but have it linked to my Dell laptop.
When you use multiple screens, it's even more important to calibrate them so that they match as closely as possible. I don't know what specific BenQ and Dell monitors you are using, but they likely have different specs. Just for example, maybe one is capable of displaying the full gamut of sRGB, but only 97% of Adobe RGB color space. The other may be able to show 100% of both color spaces.
Jsykes wrote:
The above provides me with both a dual computer and dual screen capability which I utilize for a range of uses outside of Photography.
• While travelling, which we are fortunate to do frequently, I use the laptop for post editing while on the road and subsequent image sharing via social media.
• At home. I predominantly use the Dell desktop with the BenQ monitor for post LR editing.
• Not surprisingly, there is considerable color variation between the BenQ and Dell desktop monitor, as well as the Dell Laptop display and its linked Dell monitor. So, all three demonstrate a high degree of color variation.
br The above provides me with both a dual compute... (
show quote)
It is tricky using a laptop for image editing. This is because you relocate them to new environments all the time. The color of walls and furniture and the type and intensity of lighting in your work space have a lot of influence on how things appear on screen.
The best way to use a laptop is with an external monitor that your keep and calibrate in one location, with consistent lighting and color "environment". Just as an example, with some friends I used to shoot sporting events and we sold prints on site, during the event. The guy doing the printing is a pro (he works in a top photo lab), but we were having all sorts of problems. Turned out it was the pop-up shade awning we were using, which was a solid green, that was causing all our images to be mis-adjusted. And, even worse, they were JPEGs that didn't allow for a lot of tweaking. (We needed the JPEGs for fastest possible turn-around doing on site printing, but shot RAW + JPEG so that we had the higher quality files if needed later.)
You should be able to calibrate your two larger monitors to match pretty well. By all means also calibrate the laptop's screen... just be aware of its short comings.
If at all possible, set up your "work stations" in fairly color neutral areas away from strong lighting... Ideally somewhere you can dim the ambient light down a bit. I also use a shade on my monitor to keep ambient light off it as best possible. There are shades made for some monitors, but not for others. I ended up just using some matte black, 1/2 inch foam core board that's about 6 or 8" wide to make my own shade over the top and sides of my monitor. It's attached with Velcro. Oh, and I have a little removable "door" in the top, center that allows my calibration device to be attached.
Jsykes wrote:
Obviously, one cannot control what a social media viewer is looking at in terms of color because of the vast variation in how they view any shared image, but at least I can control what I share.
I have Just reviewed a couple of videos. Although both are ~ 2018 and the respective software solutions will have been updated/revised one assumes that they are still relevant
• A YT video demonstrating the SpyderCHECKER Color Chart (Ed Gregory)
• A YT video demonstrating i1 Display Pro i1 monitor calibration software (Mark Denney)
So, after this somewhat long-winded background, I would be grateful on experience with both software solutions and any observations on my hardware set up that may be adversely affecting color accuracy/calibration.
TIA
br Obviously, one cannot control what a social me... (
show quote)
I use a Datacolor Spyder system and it works well. The one I got can also be used to make printer profiles, calibrate projectors, televisions and other devices.
It's been a worthwhile investment. I run calibration about once a month. If you print very much, a calibration device will pay for itself in savings of paper and ink! Keep in mind that your monitor gradually loses brightness and shifts how it renders colors, so will need occasional re-calibration.
You are right that there really is no telling how our images might appear on someone else's screen. There's simply nothing we can do about that. All we can do is make our images as accurate as they can be, using accurate monitors that render them faithfully while we adjust to our liking.