ICC Profile Questions

[Citizen Snips]

While shopping around for a new monitor I have come across ICC profiles for the first time and am not sure I understand them correctly. Normally I can make adjustments to my monitor's color, brightness, etc. via the OSD settings or the display properties control panel in Windows. Is an ICC profile just a "preset" of those settings that is supposed to give the most accurate color, or is the ICC profile manipulating color settings that are different from what is being adjusted through the OSD and Windows control panel?

If I use an ICC profile, is there any point/benefit to also adjusting the OSD/control panel color, brightness, etc. settings, or is the ICC profile supposed to be an all-in-one solution?

I have read that ICC profiles are ignored when using full screen programs such as games. Is that true? Can this be worked around if I run the game in borderless full screen mode? If so, do all games support this mode?

 

[Armenius]

An ICC profile fine tunes the displayed color at the software level. It goes hand-in-hand with adjusting the monitor's settings. Typically when calibrating a monitor you change the monitor's settings first based on the sample taken by the colorimeter and then let the calibration software generate an ICC profile to be used by Windows.

Yes, it is true that some programs ignore the ICC profile, as there is a flag in Windows programming that allows you to do so. It is most common in games, as artists and developers believe that the way the image is presented to you is an artistic expression that shouldn't be messed with. You cannot get around this by running in windows or borderless "full screen." Professional level monitors, however, typically have built-in hardware that overrides anything the software says to ensure you're presented the same color profile every time.

 

[Meeho]

Yes, it is true that some programs ignore the ICC profile, as there is a flag in Windows programming that allows you to do so. It is most common in games, as artists and developers believe that the way the image is presented to you is an artistic expression that shouldn't be messed with.

Respecting calibration profiles is the very thing that insures you get as close image as possible to the one the artist envisioned. Without it one sees a blue jacket as teal, another as purple...

 

[Meeho]

While shopping around for a new monitor I have come across ICC profiles for the first time and am not sure I understand them correctly. Normally I can make adjustments to my monitor's color, brightness, etc. via the OSD settings or the display properties control panel in Windows. Is an ICC profile just a "preset" of those settings that is supposed to give the most accurate color, or is the ICC profile manipulating color settings that are different from what is being adjusted through the OSD and Windows control panel?

If I use an ICC profile, is there any point/benefit to also adjusting the OSD/control panel color, brightness, etc. settings, or is the ICC profile supposed to be an all-in-one solution?

My understanding of this is limited, but here is how I believe it works:
First you use your monitor's controls to get the image as good as you can (most often limited to black level, peak brightness and white point) and then let the profiling software make an ICC profile. The most important part of it is the LUT that gets loaded into your GPU and does the majority of work to get accurate colors and gama.

There is additional information in the ICC profile for color conversion in supporting apps for even better results but I never quite understood how that part works.

After profiling and loading the LUT you get a color accurate image on your monitor. The problem with games is they reset the GPUs LUT so you lose your calibration. Supposedly widowed/borderless avoids this and there are some injectors that fix it, but I haven't got experience with either.

Monitors supporting hardware calibration modify their own internal LUT and so are not affected by any software messing up with the GPU. It's also usually more precise and has less banding problems (I believe GPUs is 8bit only).

 

[MaZa]

Respecting calibration profiles is the very thing that insures you get as close image as possible to the one the artist envisioned. Without it one sees a blue jacket as teal, another as purple...

Thats what I though too. If the game overrides the ICC profile the result is often anything but accurate to the artists vision, depending on how accurate the monitor is after basic adjustments. Which in consumer displays is quite bad.

While shopping around for a new monitor I have come across ICC profiles for the first time and am not sure I understand them correctly. Normally I can make adjustments to my monitor's color, brightness, etc. via the OSD settings or the display properties control panel in Windows. Is an ICC profile just a "preset" of those settings that is supposed to give the most accurate color, or is the ICC profile manipulating color settings that are different from what is being adjusted through the OSD and Windows control panel?

If I use an ICC profile, is there any point/benefit to also adjusting the OSD/control panel color, brightness, etc. settings, or is the ICC profile supposed to be an all-in-one solution?

I have read that ICC profiles are ignored when using full screen programs such as games. Is that true? Can this be worked around if I run the game in borderless full screen mode? If so, do all games support this mode?

No, ICC profile is not all in one solution. Its for finetuning after everything is set as accurately as possible on TV end. If ICC profile needs to do drastic changes to get correct calibration the result can have a lot of banding and other nasties. Contrast ratio can be reduced too if white point is way off from where it needs to be and ICC profile tries to fix it on software end.

But as far as correcting colors go, even there ICC profile is quite limited. It can correct colors only in color managed applications. Meaning only photo editing programs. For everything else the only thing ICC profile can do is fix gamma, color temperature and greyscale. Which for games are the most important things, much more important than fixing that particular red color because it is bit over or undersaturated or slightly wrong hue... But for OCD people, if absolute color accuracy is needed everywhere from movies to games, ignore ICC profiles. 3DLUTs is where its at then.

 

[Citizen Snips]

OK, I did some more searching and found this article that answers most of my questions:

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/icc_profiles.htm#calibrate (scroll down to the "Calibrating Your Screen - What to Know" section.)

Specifically:

In general when you load up a game or movie your graphics card will abandon the calibrated ICC profile anyway and revert to some default settings, gamma ramps and the likes. Not a problem for most people for the aforementioned reasons, but a pain for those who actually want to retain the calibrated profile and settings from their colorimeter / ICC profile. One way around this is to have a screen where you are able to calibrate the hardware LUT itself (within the monitor). In such cases the profile is stored in the monitor and so is retained no matter what the use is. These screens are generally expensive and hardware calibration is reserved for high end displays so isn't a viable option for most. There have been other methods explored to try and retain ICC profiles for games and movies at a graphics card level. You may wish to read here for more information.

Also this:

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/guides/how-to-calibrate-your-monitor

Specifically:

Please note that some games and applications will override calibrations and Control Panel tweaks. To workaround this problem, you can try CPKeeper and Color Sustainer.

 

[amenx]

ICC profiles made on displays other than your own are too often hit and miss. Ideally profiles are made on your own display to avoid variances that other displays may have. Even more ideal is if you can achieve your desired target or calibration parameters from within the displays settings alone. A colorimeter can be used to measure the results. If RGB levels good (6500k usual target) and gamma 2.2-2.4 and a delta E of less than 1.0, you would have no need for a color profile. No game or full screen app can over-ride your displays settings.

 

[Citizen Snips]

ICC profiles made on displays other than your own are too often hit and miss. Ideally profiles are made on your own display to avoid variances that other displays may have. Even more ideal is if you can achieve your desired target or calibration parameters from within the displays settings alone. A colorimeter can be used to measure the results. If RGB levels good (6500k usual target) and gamma 2.2-2.4 and a delta E of less than 1.0, you would have no need for a color profile. No game or full screen app can over-ride your displays settings.

For some reason, the Dell monitors I'm looking at don't allow you to adjust gamma from the OSD. Combine that with the fact that the S2716DG apparently has too low of a gamma (according to the TFTcentral review) and the only way left to adjust it is to use either an ICC profile or the Nvidia control panel settings.

 

[MaZa]

In that case, you need a colorimeter. Copying someones settings and ICC profile is not a good idea. People often do it, but more often than not it makes matters worse. They just dont know it and do it all on faith that it could be "better than nothing", but when measured the results can be horrible. Factory calibration on consumer displays is very loose and native colors between two displays of same model can be very different (hell, they may even have two different panels from different factory), making shared monitor settings and ICC profiles completely useless. Just a while ago there was a person with two same monitors asking why the other one looked noticeably more yellow than the other. If accuracy is important to you and you want to have a calibrated monitor and create ICC profile or 3DLUT file for it, you need to spend money on colorimeter and learn to calibrate.

 

[amenx]

For some reason, the Dell monitors I'm looking at don't allow you to adjust gamma from the OSD. Combine that with the fact that the S2716DG apparently has too low of a gamma (according to the TFTcentral review) and the only way left to adjust it is to use either an ICC profile or the Nvidia control panel settings.

Thats the problem with many monitors unfortunately, inadequate settings. In that case you may have to calibrate and use a profile if not satisfied with what you got. I have 3 korean monitors, 2 with no settings at all, I have to calibrate and use profiles for these. The one that does have settings, I get good results with these without a profile. A big issue I have with profiles is that they can negatively impact displays contrast. This is a part of the profiling process, to correct the deficiencies in the display and get accurate colors, desired gamma, etc, some compromises have to be made, one being that contrast can be slightly impacted. If calibration required is minimal (ie, you have a good near accurate display), the profile requires less adjustments, so less impact and better results. But overall, a good profile can improve far more than it takes away from, so they are not only needed but absolutely required in many cases.

 

[Citizen Snips]

Would it be overkill for someone who doesn't do color-critical work for a living to invest in a X-Rite i1Display Pro (https://www.amazon.com/X-Rite-i1Dis...=1486322541&sr=8-1&keywords=xrite+colorimeter, $220, same model used by TFTCentral) to ensure accurate calibration on all future monitors I own? I've never calibrated a monitor in my life, didn't even know what monitor calibration was until I started shopping for a new monitor about a month ago, and never felt like my displays were lacking in any way, but maybe this is a case of not knowing what you're missing out on? The Geforce article I linked above says:

The only way to get 100% technically-perfect results for your monitor is to buy, rent, or borrow a professional color calibration tool, such as Datacolor’s Spyder4, Pantone’s ColorMunki, or x-Rite’s i1Display Pro. They’re not cheap (prices start at $99), but if you’ve already invested in a G-SYNC Surround setup or 4K monitor the extra cost will ensure you get the absolute best results.

 

[amenx]

Would it be overkill for someone who doesn't do color-critical work for a living to invest in a X-Rite i1Display Pro (https://www.amazon.com/X-Rite-i1Dis...=1486322541&sr=8-1&keywords=xrite+colorimeter, $220, same model used by TFTCentral) to ensure accurate calibration on all future monitors I own? I've never calibrated a monitor in my life, didn't even know what monitor calibration was until I started shopping for a new monitor about a month ago, and never felt like my displays were lacking in any way, but maybe this is a case of not knowing what you're missing out on? The Geforce article I linked above says:

Depends on how much it matters to you. The iDisplay Pro is one of the best (for the money) imo. But the ColorMunki Display (also from X-rite) is identical to it, only slower in calibration time. The Pantone ColorMunki (also from X-rite) is a spectrophotometer and more than your needs or purposes at this point in time. All these devices are far better than anything from Spyder.

For some, the extra $100 for the iDisplay Pro over the ColorMunki Display might not be worth it. The iDisplay Pro, aside from being faster, also has a more advanced software suite. But many who use the X-rite devices tend to not use their software as there is a better alternative which is free (DisplayCal). WHile X-rite devices are top notch, their software imo does not measure up to same standard. DisplayCal (which I use with ColorMunki Display) is excellent and is the front end for ArgyllCMS which is considered to be one of the best calibration softwares around. For measuring the results of the calibration, HCFR is excellent in drawing up charts with all the critical data you may need.

All this stuff may be daunting when you first get into it but the basics can be easy to learn.

ColorMunki Display vs iDisplayPro: http://blog.xritephoto.com/2012/11/colormunki-display-or-i1display-pro/#sthash.K4OqpVu0.dpbs

Pantone ColorMunki Design: http://www.xrite.com/categories/calibration-profiling/colormunki-design

DisplayCal: https://displaycal.net/

HCFR: https://sourceforge.net/projects/hcfr/

 

[Citizen Snips]

Depends on how much it matters to you. The iDisplay Pro is one of the best (for the money) imo. But the ColorMunki Display (also from X-rite) is identical to it, only slower in calibration time. The Pantone ColorMunki (also from X-rite) is a spectrophotometer and more than your needs or purposes at this point in time. All these devices are far better than anything from Spyder.

For some, the extra $100 for the iDisplay Pro over the ColorMunki Display might not be worth it. The iDisplay Pro, aside from being faster, also has a more advanced software suite. But many who use the X-rite devices tend to not use their software as there is a better alternative which is free (DisplayCal). WHile X-rite devices are top notch, their software imo does not measure up to same standard. DisplayCal (which I use with ColorMunki Display) is excellent and is the front end for ArgyllCMS which is considered to be one of the best calibration softwares around. For measuring the results of the calibration, HCFR is excellent in drawing up charts with all the critical data you may need.

All this stuff may be daunting when you first get into it but the basics can be easy to learn.

ColorMunki Display vs iDisplayPro: http://blog.xritephoto.com/2012/11/colormunki-display-or-i1display-pro/#sthash.K4OqpVu0.dpbs

Pantone ColorMunki Design: http://www.xrite.com/categories/calibration-profiling/colormunki-design

DisplayCal: https://displaycal.net/

HCFR: https://sourceforge.net/projects/hcfr/

Do you use your monitor for color-critical work, or do you just like having an accurate display?

 

[Meeho]

I found the purchase of a meter a great investment as I'm able to calibrate all my computers and TVs. I like accurate displays and find the picture a great deal better. More so on the TVs.

 

[amenx]

Do you use your monitor for color-critical work, or do you just like having an accurate display?

Well I have 3 monitors. 2 without OSD settings to adjust colors/gamma. And being a stickler for image quality, I felt I needed a colorimeter to ensure was getting the best out of my monitors.

 

[Citizen Snips]

Thats what I though too. If the game overrides the ICC profile the result is often anything but accurate to the artists vision, depending on how accurate the monitor is after basic adjustments. Which in consumer displays is quite bad.






No, ICC profile is not all in one solution. Its for finetuning after everything is set as accurately as possible on TV end. If ICC profile needs to do drastic changes to get correct calibration the result can have a lot of banding and other nasties. Contrast ratio can be reduced too if white point is way off from where it needs to be and ICC profile tries to fix it on software end.

But as far as correcting colors go, even there ICC profile is quite limited. It can correct colors only in color managed applications. Meaning only photo editing programs. For everything else the only thing ICC profile can do is fix gamma, color temperature and greyscale. Which for games are the most important things, much more important than fixing that particular red color because it is bit over or undersaturated or slightly wrong hue... But for OCD people, if absolute color accuracy is needed everywhere from movies to games, ignore ICC profiles. 3DLUTs is where its at then.

Are both ICC's and 3DLUTs generated from the same colorimeters?

 

[MaZa]

Are both ICC's and 3DLUTs generated from the same colorimeters?

Yes. Its the software that generates them based on the measurements taken by the colorimeter.

 

[Citizen Snips]

Depends on how much it matters to you. The iDisplay Pro is one of the best (for the money) imo. But the ColorMunki Display (also from X-rite) is identical to it, only slower in calibration time. The Pantone ColorMunki (also from X-rite) is a spectrophotometer and more than your needs or purposes at this point in time. All these devices are far better than anything from Spyder.

For some, the extra $100 for the iDisplay Pro over the ColorMunki Display might not be worth it. The iDisplay Pro, aside from being faster, also has a more advanced software suite. But many who use the X-rite devices tend to not use their software as there is a better alternative which is free (DisplayCal). WHile X-rite devices are top notch, their software imo does not measure up to same standard. DisplayCal (which I use with ColorMunki Display) is excellent and is the front end for ArgyllCMS which is considered to be one of the best calibration softwares around. For measuring the results of the calibration, HCFR is excellent in drawing up charts with all the critical data you may need.

All this stuff may be daunting when you first get into it but the basics can be easy to learn.

ColorMunki Display vs iDisplayPro: http://blog.xritephoto.com/2012/11/colormunki-display-or-i1display-pro/#sthash.K4OqpVu0.dpbs

Pantone ColorMunki Design: http://www.xrite.com/categories/calibration-profiling/colormunki-design

DisplayCal: https://displaycal.net/

HCFR: https://sourceforge.net/projects/hcfr/

Is the end result of using any colorimeter/software combination an ICC file, and the quality of the colorimeter and software determine the quality/accuracy of the ICC file?

Also if I don't do any color-critical work and am only interested in correcting deviations in a display's default setup (gamma too low, for example), is the speed of the calibration time really a factor? Won't I just set it once per display and forget it, or is calibration something that must be periodically repeated, even if one isn't using their displays for color-critical work?

 

[chenw]

From my limited experience, the type of panel seem to have an effect as well.

Using the same software (Displaycal) and same sensor (tried with bith ColorMunki Display and Spyder4Pro), and the exact same colour temperature settings, my PG278Q (TN) always looks higher temp than my BL3201PT (IPS) for some unexplainable reason. I plan to do more investigation into this though, as it is really annoying me that both monitors do not calibrate to the same white level even though they were SET at the same white level, and really sticks out like a sore thumb because the IPS monitor looks a little on the yellow side, the tint I hate the most.

I tried calibrating PG278Q as 6500k, then reading off the white level after calibration, then have displaycal calibrate it to the same white level, no dice. It looks a bit better, but the temperature is still too low, and the TN's Gamma is still too high (looks too pale). I don't remember them being this bad before on the PG278Q though.

Gonna try doing it in reverse and see if it helps any, and probably will have to offset the colour temps.

As for colour critical work calibration, I have never done anything remotely close, but AFAIK, that involves an extra step of getting the sensor to read a colour accurate printout and have the monitors calibrate to that, since every sensor is a little different. I only briefly skimmed through it because it is not a need of mine, my need was to get both monitors look as close to each in Gamma and white point as possible, and so far failing miserably.

 

[NamelessPFG]

Wow, I wish someone told me about DisplayCAL sooner! I've been using i1Profiler the whole time, thinking the alternative software options were expensive stuff like CalMAN and so forth.

Some of you might've noticed that I was thinking my FG2421 was only hitting under 3400:1 static contrast this whole time. Well, that's what i1Profiler says... but a DisplayCAL verification report reads 4946.5:1 instead, much closer to the advertised 5000:1. Peculiar, but at least now I know I don't have a totally bottom-of-the-barrel panel here.

It's also much more flexible with the calibration options. You can even go nuts with the patch count if you've got a few hours to burn, and that's factoring in the i1Display Pro's faster measurement speeds!

 

[euskalzabe]

Personally I've been using a Spyder5Express for the past couple years and love it. It cost us a bit over $100 and it's been amortized long ago - we've calibrated all our displays at home (5 so far) and other friends' screens too, everybody is happier with much better looking colors. Now, when I see a non-calibrated screen it sticks out like a sore thumb. I'm probably also going to bring the Spyder to work so I can calibrate my work monitor...