PDA

View Full Version : Correct color production on screen(s)



Enfade
01-09-2007, 05:08 AM
I recently bought a extra screen. Something i should have done ages ago and can advice to anyone. But this also has given me a small problem and something i never really gave much thought about. (i know, bad bad me :P)
The colors are way off. The fact I had to buy a different brand of screen doesnt much help im afraid (sony stopped making screens so i had to buy a iiyama)
When looking at work on both screens at once it looks radicly different. Now getting my 2 screens to align isnt the problem. But it got me thinking. Which do other people see if i publish it. Which one, if either, is the right one.
So my question is. Is there a "universal setting" of sorts for this or a way to make sure that what i see and create is also the way it would look if viewed by others. Any help in this matter is apreciated.

Thanks in advance,

Paul Baptist

Limbus
01-09-2007, 05:15 AM
You will need to calibrate your screen with something like an Eyeone color 2 or similar device. Unfortunately you can only calibrate one monitor under windows with most graphics cards. And calibrating your screen wont help anyone else so you cant be sure how they will se your images.

Florian

kilvano
01-09-2007, 05:56 AM
i had this for 2 years cause one of my screens was running from dvi and the other from vga outputs.

As soon as i got 2 x dvi cables everything was fine.

Signal to Noise
01-09-2007, 08:27 AM
It's still a good idea to color calibrate screens whether you're a CG artist, photo editor, or...heck...even a gamer.

I use Colorvisions Spyder2 Pro and it will work for dual monitor set ups, in a roundabout way. Makes a huge difference, imo.

theo
01-10-2007, 07:45 AM
It's still a good idea to color calibrate screens whether you're a CG artist, photo editor, or...heck...even a gamer.

I use Colorvisions Spyder2 Pro and it will work for dual monitor set ups, in a roundabout way. Makes a huge difference, imo.

There is some controversy about what is commonly referred to as "monitor calibration". I would agree that in general a monitor should be calibrated. Whether one should use expensive software to achieve this is another matter entirely.

Frankly this is a very complex and vast territory and it involves many conundrums all of which an experienced color person can relate in a small book.

To actually use color generated by even the best of monitors can be a pure crapshoot depending on WHERE the final image will end up.

If the image will result in online page display you quite literally can use a shi$$y monitor since the graphic has the potential of being viewed by thousands of other shi$$y monitors, in which case YOUR calibration settings benefit one person- you.

If your file is heading to web offset printing or ink jet then a calibrated monitor is a potential enemy because it is common to rely on the calibration, which is a mistake. In this case a "generally" calibrated monitor paired with a serious understanding of how your inks will end up on paper, which is based on a thorough understanding of CMYK and RGB values, is your best bet.

Limbus
01-10-2007, 08:02 AM
There is some controversy about what is commonly referred to as "monitor calibration". I would agree that in general a monitor should be calibrated. Whether one should use expensive software to achieve this is another matter entirely.


I never heard of any software to calibrate a monitor professionally. Hardware is used for this because it can accuratly measure hte colors of the monitor.


To actually use color generated by even the best of monitors can be a pure crapshoot depending on WHERE the final image will end up.

If the image will result in online page display you quite literally can use a shi$$y monitor since the graphic has the potential of being viewed by thousands of other shi$$y monitors, in which case YOUR calibration settings benefit one person- you.

And other people who use calibrated screens. BTW calibrating a monitor wont enhance its abillity to display a bigger colorspace. It just makes shure that colors and luminance are displayed correctly.


If your file is heading to web offset printing or ink jet then a calibrated monitor is a potential enemy because it is common to rely on the calibration, which is a mistake.

I disagree completely. If your imges are going to be printed, calibrating your monitor is a must. But it isnt enough. THe whole workflow from image generation (cgi, foto, scanner) to output must be color managed. And even then you would do dome proof prints for important stuff.

Florian

Signal to Noise
01-10-2007, 08:27 AM
... If your images are going to be printed, calibrating your monitor is a must. But it isnt enough. The whole workflow from image generation (cgi, foto, scanner) to output must be color managed. And even then you would do dome proof prints for important stuff.

Florian

Agreed. That's why I also use PrintFIX Pro for printer calibration. Expensive but works. A good printer is highly recommended, tho'. I use an Epson R1800 printer :thumbsup:

theo
01-10-2007, 09:21 AM
I disagree completely. If your imges are going to be printed, calibrating your monitor is a must. But it isnt enough. THe whole workflow from image generation (cgi, foto, scanner) to output must be color managed. And even then you would do dome proof prints for important stuff.

What you state is totally innacurate, in terms of matching screen color to what will be printed. The ONLY way this is useful is if you have the printing device sitting directly in your office. Outside of that you are at the mercies of the press people.

And if anyone here has done any amount of professional printing then you know the issues that can be encountered when sending files to a printer, no matter what their level of expertise. Particularly gang printers where a perfect calibrated monitor is a non-issue, period.

When a color file in PS is converted to CMYK and you understand what percentages of CMY (black is of little consequence in neutrals) values make a gray color and you understand what your ink limit in total should be for shadows and you get the fact that, in most cases, fleshtones, for whatever culture, should be a certain combination of CMYK percentages and you grasp that there are standard ink levels that need to be adjusted within the CMYK channels for specific colors, then and only then does one realize that calibration is somewhat useful, NOT critical.

If you want to take the calibration thing to its proper environment then the reality is, you need to remove any and all color absorbing and reflecting objects from the room that can skew what you see on screen. The walls should be a medium to light gray and the lighting should be totally neutral. You should NOT be wearng color in your clothing because this can cast a hue onto the screen throwing off your perfect calibration. My, this makes for a very attractive work environment, doesn't it?

Even the kings of calibrated environments, which are service bureaus, are incredibly inconsistent when it comes to color management.

Limbus
01-10-2007, 10:06 AM
What you state is totally innacurate, in terms of matching screen color to what will be printed. The ONLY way this is useful is if you have the printing device sitting directly in your office. Outside of that you are at the mercies of the press people.

I will never be able to match screen to print if I dont calibrate my monitor in the first place. I really dont know what is "totally innacurate" about that. But when I print something I am not at the mercie of the press people because I normally can work together with them quite well. They profide a profile, do some proof prints etc...


When a color file in PS is converted to CMYK and you understand what percentages of CMY (black is of little consequence in neutrals) values make a gray color and you understand what your ink limit in total should be for shadows and you get the fact that, in most cases, fleshtones, for whatever culture, should be a certain combination of CMYK percentages and you grasp that there are standard ink levels that need to be adjusted within the CMYK channels for specific colors, then and only then does one realize that calibration is somewhat useful, NOT critical.

I would only convert to CMYK befor printing if I had the correct colorprofile for the printer and paper used. But even then I would rather leave it up to the printer operater to do the conversion and just do a softproof in PS. Converting to CMYK without a proper profile for the printer is absolutely the worst thing to do. If you do this, you might as well not calibrate your monitor.


The walls should be a medium to light gray and the lighting should be totally neutral.
What kind of neutral do you mean? D50 or D65 or something else?

Florian

theo
01-10-2007, 10:42 AM
I will never be able to match screen to print if I dont calibrate my monitor in the first place. I really dont know what is "totally innacurate" about that. But when I print something I am not at the mercie of the press people because I normally can work together with them quite well. They profide a profile, do some proof prints etc...


I will hit this one comment and I have to head out of the office.

Profiles and proofs are fine and necessary, somewhat. But a proof is NOT ideal for matching screen images. A proof is ideal for adjusting CMYK or RGB values to get what you want from final print. Hence, the need for understanding a file at the CMYK or RGB level. Profiles are spotty unless they are up to date and a lot of times they may not be, which is why I do not trust them.

I never send RGB files to a printer. You may be much more confident than I in this regard. I have had too many issues with files conversions over the years.

Thomas
01-10-2007, 11:51 AM
Limbus and Theo...

I agree with both of you, in a way. :D

You have to have a calibrated monitor.
You have to get hold of a pre-press person that knows his (or hers) job (that's part of what you're paying them for).
You have to have a dialog with said person, period.
You have to get their CMYK-profiles.

I usually ask for profiles in advance so I can edit them in RGB 16-bit with a preview in CMYK. I then convert the files to my (calibrated) printers colorspace (I don't trust PS when it comes to printing) and print out a "proof". I'm converting copies here, not the original RGB 16-bit, I save them for backup. Just in case the client needs printing on another printer, paper or whatever...

I CMYK the files and send them over, ask the printer to do a proof as well.

If all is well, it's just to send the invoice, otherwise it's pretty easy to compare the proofs against the screen and correct them if need be.

The most important thing is to find a workflow that suits both you and the printer. This is my workflow and it hasn't let me down (yet).


Regards
Thomas

theo
01-10-2007, 07:13 PM
What kind of neutral do you mean? D50 or D65 or something else?


A neutral color, in a CMYK image, is any shade of gray that has equal magenta and yellow, with a higher level of cyan. The black ink is irrelevant.

In an RGB image the neutral will be a gray where all three channels are equal.

Limbus
01-11-2007, 02:15 AM
A neutral color, in a CMYK image, is any shade of gray that has equal magenta and yellow, with a higher level of cyan. The black ink is irrelevant.

In an RGB image the neutral will be a gray where all three channels are equal.

Please reread your original post. You where not talking about neutral CMYK but about neutral lighting and I would like to know what kind of neutral that would be.

Florian

theo
01-11-2007, 06:05 AM
Please reread your original post. You where not talking about neutral CMYK but about neutral lighting and I would like to know what kind of neutral that would be.

Florian

Yes, I WAS talking about neutral CMYK. Referencing Post #8:

and you understand what percentages of CMY (black is of little consequence in neutrals) values make a gray color

Neutral lighting is just that. Interior lighting that does not cast glares, harsh shadows. or color casts.

bgolden
01-11-2007, 06:06 PM
The beginning of this thread spoke directly to a problem that I am currently wrestling with . . . "how to design something in Lightwave and know that the person on the other end is seeing the same colors, hues, contrast, luminance, etc.". My company provides archviz services and I've had several recent projects where the clients had specific color requests, but weren't seeing the colors on screen matching the color chip call outs. I've come to the conclusion that it's just darn near impossible for clients to see what you are seeing and I tell them that it is due to inevitable color shifts from monitor to monitor. It's not until I print out proofs on my end where I can compare and match against their color choices and only when I send them these printouts that I know, 'we're looking at the same thing'. It's definitely a problem and possibly not soon solved until [if ever] some form of standard is developed. Hmmmm.

T-Light
01-11-2007, 06:11 PM
It's not Newtek's problem.

Problem's have existed since the beginning of printing.
Try googling 'Pantone' for more info. :)

roctavian
01-12-2007, 07:49 AM
EasyRGB can be one answer.
http://www.easyrgb.com/index.html

Digital Hermit
03-11-2007, 05:37 PM
Well, if I recall from my "Graphics Design Prof." the true or "Color Fast Standard" for accurate printing and calibration is the "Pantone Color System".

What I have seen at Frye’s (a computer superstore) is some new calibration devices that lie on top of your computer monitor (LCD/CRT - for calibration purposes, not all the time - heh) and accurately calibrate your monitor to the "Pantone" standard. They ranged from about (huey) $90.00 USD to (eye one) $250.00 USD. But for me, the huey looks good enough proper calibration, but if you need something more precise, they have it.

Personally I am looking at getting the Huey Pro.

Here is a link to web site:
http://www.pantone.com/pages/products/product.aspx?pid=79&ca=2

Here is a Huey demo video:
http://www.colorguides.net/play_huey_movie.html

DH

radams
03-11-2007, 05:48 PM
The beginning of this thread spoke directly to a problem that I am currently wrestling with . . . "how to design something in Lightwave and know that the person on the other end is seeing the same colors, hues, contrast, luminance, etc.". My company provides archviz services and I've had several recent projects where the clients had specific color requests, but weren't seeing the colors on screen matching the color chip call outs. I've come to the conclusion that it's just darn near impossible for clients to see what you are seeing and I tell them that it is due to inevitable color shifts from monitor to monitor. It's not until I print out proofs on my end where I can compare and match against their color choices and only when I send them these printouts that I know, 'we're looking at the same thing'. It's definitely a problem and possibly not soon solved until [if ever] some form of standard is developed. Hmmmm.

Well one help would be sending them the print outs...but also doing direct presentations of the materials on calibrated monitors/projectors....

Also if your client can give you their system info...you might be able to better conform to their systems (thou still a long shot)...

There are options with CineSpace...once you have a monitor's profile, etc...then you can better match and exchange corrected data...also with Iridas' XML based 3D LUTS,

Cheers,

Digital Hermit
03-11-2007, 05:58 PM
Well, if I recall from my "Graphics Design Prof." the true or "Color Fast Standard" for accurate printing and calibration is the "Pantone Color System".

What I have seen at Frye’s (a computer superstore) is some new calibration devices that lie on top of your computer monitor (LCD/CRT - for calibration purposes, not all the time - heh) and accurately calibrate your monitor to the "Pantone" standard. They ranged from about (huey) $90.00 USD to (eye one) $250.00 USD. But for me, the huey looks good enough proper calibration, but if you need something more precise, they have it.

Personally I am looking at getting the Huey Pro.

Here is a link to web site:
http://www.pantone.com/pages/products/product.aspx?pid=79&ca=2

Here is a Huey demo video:
http://www.colorguides.net/play_huey_movie.html

DH


PS... Now if a client says to you... "the color looks too dark or wrong, etc..." You can honestly say, "Then it is your monitor!" :p

Limbus
03-12-2007, 01:33 AM
Well, if I recall from my "Graphics Design Prof." the true or "Color Fast Standard" for accurate printing and calibration is the "Pantone Color System".

For printing you will need the correct colorprofile of the machine that will print the images. The pantone color system is defines colors so it is easyer to talk about them and everyone knows what color they are talking about. And pantone is compatible with CMYK although there are alot of Pantone colors that can not be printed without special inks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantone

Florian

Digital Hermit
03-12-2007, 03:36 AM
For printing you will need the correct colorprofile of the machine that will print the images. The pantone color system is defines colors so it is easyer to talk about them and everyone knows what color they are talking about. And pantone is compatible with CMYK although there are alot of Pantone colors that can not be printed without special inks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantone

Florian

Well, if one is a graphics pro or one is getting their graphics done professionally, then the facility should have pantone capability and of course would have the special inks. Beyond the printing aspect, is the point I want to make.

Would it not seem wise to have a standard across the board, esp. when doing any "color correction" with a 2D application? Even better, making sure the LW colors accurately represent some sort of real world standard? What better than a fixed standard like Pantone?

Sorry, my professor would never let me cite Wikipedia as credible source. <joke> ;)

Limbus
03-12-2007, 04:21 AM
Well, if one is a graphics pro or one is getting their graphics done professionally, then the facility should have pantone capability and of course would have the special inks. Beyond the printing aspect, is the point I want to make.

The probably will have the special inks and they sure will charge an extra large fee for it.


Would it not seem wise to have a standard across the board, esp. when doing any "color correction" with a 2D application? Even better, making sure the LW colors accurately represent some sort of real world standard? What better than a fixed standard like Pantone?

Sorry, my professor would never let me cite Wikipedia as credible source. <joke> ;)[/QUOTE]

Just read the link and you will understand what pantone is and is not. If you do color correction there is no one standard and there can not be one because the different output media have totally different color spaces. 3D might end up on TV, transfered back to film, offset printed, inkjet printed and so on. You can only make sure that colors look correct on you screen and then do a softproof with the correct profile for the intended output. Every good printer will have a profile especially made for his printing machine.

Florian

andywright
03-12-2007, 11:31 AM
[Edited....]
If the image will result in online page display you quite literally can use a shi$$y monitor since the graphic has the potential of being viewed by thousands of other shi$$y monitors, in which case YOUR calibration settings benefit one person- you.

If your file is heading to web offset printing or ink jet then a calibrated monitor is a potential enemy because it is common to rely on the calibration, which is a mistake. In this case a "generally" calibrated monitor paired with a serious understanding of how your inks will end up on paper, which is based on a thorough understanding of CMYK and RGB values, is your best bet.

I agree with this...you need to understand what your output will be and how you will produce it. You can get some really dissapointing results with home inkjets if you have colours at the edge of their colour space.8~

There is a nice article on this at :
http://www.pcphotomag.com/how-to/printing/color-spaces--printer-profiles-revealed.html

andywright
03-12-2007, 11:41 AM
[/QUOTE]

Just read the link and you will understand what pantone is and is not. If you do color correction there is no one standard and there can not be one because the different output media have totally different color spaces. 3D might end up on TV, transfered back to film, offset printed, inkjet printed and so on. You can only make sure that colors look correct on you screen and then do a softproof with the correct profile for the intended output. Every good printer will have a profile especially made for his printing machine.

Florian[/QUOTE]

Yes, remember that even the colour profile isn't the end of it, if you are printing, the white is your paper, and the type and quality of your paper will have a major effect of the colour of your print.

Limbus
03-12-2007, 11:46 AM
Yes, remember that even the colour profile isn't the end of it, if you are printing, the white is your paper, and the type and quality of your paper will have a major effect of the colour of your print.

Thats what a profile is for.

andywright
03-12-2007, 11:59 AM
Thats what a profile is for.

I know :hey:

Its just that for home printing, you can get a custom colour profile for your printer, and sometimes the user assumes this will work on anything with that printer.

However, as you alluded, the true profile even includes the paper you buy (and if you change the ink manufacturer, then that too will affect it).

If you don't understand this, then you can be very dissapointed at the output from even an expensive printer.

Obviously, a commercial printer should have standardised all of that, but many of us are hobbyists, and our final work may literally just end up on our websites or printed off on a home rig :D

theo
03-12-2007, 01:34 PM
Thats what a profile is for.

I produce a LOT of printed media and use profiles little, if at all. I have produced massive full-color wall murals printed with me sitting at the RIP and STILL did not use a profile and ended up with awesome results.

All of you guys who are interested in web offset "printing", please listen: If you use a gang printer, a profile AIN'T gonna do you a whole lotta good, IF you can even get one. Get your CMYK values set perfectly in the final file or at least close to perfect and you will end up with great results. DON'T send out RGB files unless you fully understand the CMYK conversion process.

I don't use a heavily calibrated monitor, I don't use profiles and YET I produce a LOT of beautiful, printed media for high-paying clients with web offset and large format printers. HOW? In just a couple of words... Dan Margulis and the RIGHT printing companies (and, of course, ten years of experience helps as well).

Buy Dan's book, particuluarly his latest "Professional Photoshop". If you are new to heavy-duty PS work then expect to spend many days in the thing. But as you emerge from the reading you will come away with a totally new understanding of the print process.

Best-

cholo
03-13-2007, 02:55 AM
AFAIK Pantone is useful for graphic designers so logos have the same color across the board: business cards, stationery, etc... Pantone has swatches to check the color outside of a computer monitor under whatever lighting conditions you want. Of course, logos tend to have few colors and techniques like serigraphy is where you're most likely to find the use of pantone inks.

Matt
03-13-2007, 03:24 AM
I kinda have to agree with Theo on this one, we send stuff to print all the time, and it's usually when we start messing with esoteric print profiles things start going wrong!

Like Theo I've send standard CMYK, with basic Photoshop CMYK profile and everything looked fine! Euroscale Coated works well too (for us).

I have a Pantone Eyeone calibrator for my monitor, which does help a lot in making sure what I see on my monitor resembles the way colours should look (thinking Pantone here) in real life, but I had an issue recently where a client complained about the colour of some JPEGs I sent him.

I tried to explain (nicely) that they looked fine on my monitor, so it must be his setup!

The only way to be fully confident is by using proofs.

Digital Hermit
03-14-2007, 06:09 PM
...I tried to explain (nicely) that they looked fine on my monitor, so it must be his setup!

The only way to be fully confident is by using proofs.

Thank you... that is kinda my point.... I think that having a standard, which everyone goes by, is a good thing... A "Calibration Color Standard" i.e. Pantone - should be a given, especially for those who hate the “guess work” when adjusting & viewing their monitor… even when printing is not involved.

Limbus
03-15-2007, 04:12 AM
Like Theo I've send standard CMYK, with basic Photoshop CMYK profile and everything looked fine! Euroscale Coated works well too (for us).
There is no standard CMYK. CMYK is a device dependant color space. That means that CMYK is different for every printer and media combination used. The CMYK profiles that come with PS might work but you can never be sure. The best way to be sure is to either leave it up to the printer operator to do the conversion (and leave the image in RGB colorspace) or to get the right profile for printer and media from the printshop.


I have a Pantone Eyeone calibrator for my monitor, which does help a lot in making sure what I see on my monitor resembles the way colours should look (thinking Pantone here) in real life, but I had an issue recently where a client complained about the colour of some JPEGs I sent him.
Calibrating your monitor is nice and important but it cant assure you that the printout will look the same if you do not have the correct CMYK profile. There are plenty of colors that your monitor can display but that can not be printed.



The only way to be fully confident is by using proofs.
Right. If its important stuff I would always do a proof.

Florian

Limbus
03-15-2007, 04:14 AM
AFAIK Pantone is useful for graphic designers so logos have the same color across the board: business cards, stationery, etc... Pantone has swatches to check the color outside of a computer monitor under whatever lighting conditions you want. Of course, logos tend to have few colors and techniques like serigraphy is where you're most likely to find the use of pantone inks.

Exactly!

Florian

Matt
03-15-2007, 04:27 AM
Sorry, by standard CMYK, I meant basic CMYK profiles in Adobe CS!

Matt
03-15-2007, 04:32 AM
Calibrating your monitor is nice and important but it cant assure you that the printout will look the same if you do not have the correct CMYK profile. There are plenty of colors that your monitor can display but that can not be printed.

I don't calibrate my monitor to make sure the prints look okay, it's so colours resemble their real life counterparts (Pantone) as a starting point for picking a decent profile.

So, calibrate monitor so colours are _displayed_ correctly.

Pick a profile that looks good.

Print it and see!

That might not be the way others do it, but I've used profiles actually for our printer that suck, here we use basic Euroscale Coated for most stuff, or even native Photoshop CMYK / Adobe RGB.

Each case is different.

theo
03-15-2007, 07:05 AM
There is no standard CMYK. CMYK is a device dependant color space. That means that CMYK is different for every printer and media combination used.

CMYK ink settings (or percentages) themselves can be considered pretty standard with all things being equal (which in most cases can be difficult to achieve).

For example: the CMY values of a highlight (not a specular) in a printed image should be in the range of 4-C, 2-M, 2-Y respectively, with the magenta and yellow ALWAYS equal. This "standard" for a highlight in its own way sets a measurement that can reasonably assure a proper print across many different CMYK-compatible devices.

And there are other "standard" settings for CMYK values based on fleshtones, shadow, ink limit, neutrals, and specific color hues for our difficult blues, among others.

Limbus
03-15-2007, 09:14 AM
Sorry, by standard CMYK, I meant basic CMYK profiles in Adobe CS!
Well, I would call them gerneric profiles.

Florian

Limbus
03-15-2007, 09:25 AM
I don't calibrate my monitor to make sure the prints look okay, it's so colours resemble their real life counterparts (Pantone) as a starting point for picking a decent profile.

So, calibrate monitor so colours are _displayed_ correctly.

Pick a profile that looks good.

Print it and see!


Trail an (t)error can get expensive.




That might not be the way others do it, but I've used profiles actually for our printer that suck, here we use basic Euroscale Coated for most stuff, or even native Photoshop CMYK / Adobe RGB.


You mean for a inkjet?

Florian

Limbus
03-15-2007, 09:31 AM
That might not be the way others do it, but I've used profiles actually for our printer that suck, here we use basic Euroscale Coated for most stuff, or even native Photoshop CMYK / Adobe RGB.


[I hate the 2min. editing rule]

The genernic PS profiles are also rather old and many modern printers have a larger color space than e.g. Euroscale Coated. So by converting early you loose colors that could be printed. The same is even more true for inkjets. Some newer inkjets even have a colorspace that is partially larger than AdobeRGB.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/prophoto-rgb.shtml

You can neatly compare color profiles here:
http://www.iccview.de/index_eng.htm

Florian