LCD Calibration consideration

[Rjmig88]

Hi everyone,

I've been looking around for a new LCD monitor for a new computer build, I've decided on the DoubleSight DS-263N. I am a huge gamer and a college student studying CS so my budget is pretty tight but I think I'm able to afford it. The LCD monitor will also be serving as a central entertainment system for my small apartment, replacing a old(12 or so years) 27'' tv to watch movies with(I only use it for movies, I don't watch that much regular TV). I will also use it for game design work(level making/testing, and graphics engine coding).

I was wondering if you guys thought it would be a worthwhile investment to get a colorimeter to properly calibrate my display or if it wouldn't achieve noticeably different results. I'm considering the X-rite Eye-one Display 2 for $200 shipped. I don't need color perfection, but I personally suck at calibrating monitors and I would like to get the most out the DoubleSight and I don't want anything to be off in what I do. For the games I play and movies I watch, I would like to see what the artist intends for me to see.

From what I've read the software calibration only works if the game or program is color aware. Apparently a lot of games modify the LUT on the graphics card anyways so they can use their own gamma and brightness settings. So it seems the tool may be a bit helpless in this regard. How well would the Eye-one or a similar device help me calibrate the physical settings of the monitor? The DoubleSight seems to have a lot more settings than my crappy LCD I'm using(which only has contrast/brightness). How much better is the performance of using hardware to calibrate vs a free solution(like color bars)?

I've considered other options, the college I go to is a small, heavily focused on the math/science/engineering disciplines, we don't have any other graphic design folks or an AV club. From personally working on campus at various student jobs they don't seem to care about calibrating their monitors(brightness way up, or overly saturated colors). I am in a small town, about a hour and half away from any major city, there is no display calibration services around here. I suppose I could just buy the eye-one and ebay it when I am done, but if I do get one it would be nice to hang on it for the future/future adjustments... Am I being too anal about all of this?

Thanks for your time

Edit: Forgot to mention I will be using Windows Vista as my main OS, if that makes a difference.

 

[Snowdog]

IMO, calibration for general usage, it is a waste on this kind of panel. You will only get proper calibration in color managed applications (few and far between). You will get a mix of correct and incorrect color and seeing differences all the time will be annoying.

I would instead leave everything default on the computer and try changing the settings in the LCD menus (hopefully minimally) to get something you are happy with. If you can achieve that, then you will have it behave consistently across applications/games/movies. You can adapt pretty easily to a small errors and it will adapt more easily if all applications are consistent.

I am really only jazzed about calibration on panels like the NEC 2490 where you can calibrate internal to the panel and have it be well calibrated on everything. PC color management is a big mess avoid it if you can.

 

[Rjmig88]

Thanks

Any other opinions?

 

[Dunan]

well think of it this way.

if you get a colormeter, its good for life on every monitor you will ever use, not just a one time deal like some ppl think.

it'll make a bigger difference than you think, and make your monitor look 10 times better.

lcd's have crap pictures to begin with and can never be calibrated by eye, so a colormeter (for me) is a "must have" investment.

 

[gersson]

That's the way I thought to justify the price. I'm going to calibrate every monitor/LCD within my reach

 

[Snowdog]

Saying calibrating is 10 times improvement is ridiculous. Many monitors are decent right out of the box show pretty much no difference, some people have even calibrated and got worse results.

Not to mention he is talking about a wide gamut monitor which will result in proper colors only in photoshop after calibration. Other applications will still have over saturated colors. It seems like a waste to spend the money now to calibrate something that really won't show the results especially considering he is a student.

This is poor bang/buck purchase for student to use on one monitor that will barely benefit. It can wait.

 

[Dunan]

Saying calibrating is 10 times improvement is ridiculous. Many monitors are decent right out of the box show pretty much no difference, some people have even calibrated and got worse results.

Not to mention he is talking about a wide gamut monitor which will result in proper colors only in photoshop after calibration. Other applications will still have over saturated colors. It seems like a waste to spend the money now to calibrate something that really won't show the results especially considering he is a student.

This is poor bang/buck purchase for student to use on one monitor that will barely benefit. It can wait.

sure its an exaggeration, but it will improve the colors quite a bit. i think anyone who has gotten worse results than the factory with a colormeter had no clue what they were doing. i've never used a colrmeter on any monitor and got reverse results.

the benq in my sig has horrible black crush problems out of the box and oversaturated colors and the one eye cleared that right up. literally night and day difference.

if he is on a tight budget, i would say wait also

 

[10e]

My advice is as follows:

See if you can find an ICM profile for use that someone has created for this monitor with a colorimeter. It may not be perfectly customized to your particular screen or settings, but you will see if it makes a change in the way you want it to. If you are happier with that result, then by all means, the X-rite is considered a very good LCD colorimeter.

Ask around on the DS263N thread. I have sent people G2400W profiles to try out and see what they thought, as well as the Westinghouse L2410NM.

Snowdog is right. Calibration cannot help every app. I found it does not do anything for games whatsoever, as the LUT of the card is reset with the game developer's gamma values.

I have found that calibration can help my visuals on FireFox, as it seems to be color aware. I am using 2.0.0.14.

Generally the 26" Planar and Doublesight have average calibration in reviews that I've read. Not great, but not horrible. They do use a great panel though.

Calibration will do nothing for the strongly saturated colors of this monitor, but you can turn down saturation from what I've read in the manual (I hope).


Hope that helps,

10e

Hi everyone,

I've been looking around for a new LCD monitor for a new computer build, I've decided on the DoubleSight DS-263N. I am a huge gamer and a college student studying CS so my budget is pretty tight but I think I'm able to afford it. The LCD monitor will also be serving as a central entertainment system for my small apartment, replacing a old(12 or so years) 27'' tv to watch movies with(I only use it for movies, I don't watch that much regular TV). I will also use it for game design work(level making/testing, and graphics engine coding).

I was wondering if you guys thought it would be a worthwhile investment to get a colorimeter to properly calibrate my display or if it wouldn't achieve noticeably different results. I'm considering the X-rite Eye-one Display 2 for $200 shipped. I don't need color perfection, but I personally suck at calibrating monitors and I would like to get the most out the DoubleSight and I don't want anything to be off in what I do. For the games I play and movies I watch, I would like to see what the artist intends for me to see.

From what I've read the software calibration only works if the game or program is color aware. Apparently a lot of games modify the LUT on the graphics card anyways so they can use their own gamma and brightness settings. So it seems the tool may be a bit helpless in this regard. How well would the Eye-one or a similar device help me calibrate the physical settings of the monitor? The DoubleSight seems to have a lot more settings than my crappy LCD I'm using(which only has contrast/brightness). How much better is the performance of using hardware to calibrate vs a free solution(like color bars)?

I've considered other options, the college I go to is a small, heavily focused on the math/science/engineering disciplines, we don't have any other graphic design folks or an AV club. From personally working on campus at various student jobs they don't seem to care about calibrating their monitors(brightness way up, or overly saturated colors). I am in a small town, about a hour and half away from any major city, there is no display calibration services around here. I suppose I could just buy the eye-one and ebay it when I am done, but if I do get one it would be nice to hang on it for the future/future adjustments... Am I being too anal about all of this?

Thanks for your time

Edit: Forgot to mention I will be using Windows Vista as my main OS, if that makes a difference.

 

[pedophilekiller]

If you're gonna see your monitor very time you use your PC, might as well make it easy on the eyes. I know for LCD and plasma TVs there are professional color correction services. Calibration for LCD monitors, however, is a niche market. You might have to buy a A/V DVD and tinker it yourself, which I recommend.

 

[Snowdog]

I have found that calibration can help my visuals on FireFox, as it seems to be color aware. I am using 2.0.0.14.

Not my experience. When testing profiles on my 3007-HC. Firefox 2.0.0.14 did nothing. I used it as the baseline to compare with firefox 3.0beta5.

Even using firefox 3beta, you have have to configure it for (about:config filter for gfx) colour management and restart it. After that was done, you could see a massive difference between color in FF2 and FF3. Saturation was lowered a lot in FF3, but since I tweaked the graphics card to tame the desktop a bit, the color managed FF3 now looked downright anemic.

But if you want something to test profile results give FF3 beta a whirl, you can switch color management on and off (need to restart between).

Basically color management rots on the PC. Once you start down that road you are in the territory of difference results in different desktop applications, different results in video players, different (zero control) in games.

If you are serious about color management, get a monitor that supports it internally like one of the 90 series NECs. Otherwise it is a hodgepodge of support and non support. I would rather have it the same uncalibrated state in every application that I can get used to, than calibrated in some and not in others.

Your most consistent results will be had in the monitor, either with: A) an internally calibrating monitor, B) internal monitor controls, or C) Doing nothing.

 

[10e]

Maybe I'm using a utility that helps in this like DisplayProfiler, because I can have a Firefox screen up, change profiles on the fly, and see the picture change in color through the browser.

I do know that when doing this with my ATI card, the second I go into Catalyst the LUT values get reset instantly.

I'll try out 3.0b5 and see what happens.

Obviously I agree that updating the monitor's LUT is best, which is pretty much why I bought the LCD2690.

Regards,

10e

Not my experience. When testing profiles on my 3007-HC. Firefox 2.0.0.14 did nothing. I used it as the baseline to compare with firefox 3.0beta5.

Even using firefox 3beta, you have have to configure it for (about:config filter for gfx) colour management and restart it. After that was done, you could see a massive difference between color in FF2 and FF3. Saturation was lowered a lot in FF3, but since I tweaked the graphics card to tame the desktop a bit, the color managed FF3 now looked downright anemic.

But if you want something to test profile results give FF3 beta a whirl, you can switch color management on and off (need to restart between).

Basically color management rots on the PC. Once you start down that road you are in the territory of difference results in different desktop applications, different results in video players, different (zero control) in games.

If you are serious about color management, get a monitor that supports it internally like one of the 90 series NECs. Otherwise it is a hodgepodge of support and non support. I would rather have it the same uncalibrated state in every application that I can get used to, that calibrated in some and not in others.

You most consistent results will be had in the monitor, either with: A) an internally calibrating monitor, B) internal monitor controls, or C) Doing nothing.

 

[Snowdog]

What is display profiler? it may be applying gamma changes to the desktop, but it is very unlikely it is applying any gamut remapping. Otherwise this would be a solution for the non color managed application issue.

FF2 is NOT color managed, it is one of the highly touted feature of FF3 and like I said even there you have enable it and restart FF3.

Thankfully I am done dealing with PC color management. I am getting a standard gamut panel next and it will either internally calibrate or I wont calibrate at all.

 

[Dunan]

FF2 isnt color managed, FF3 will be