A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Featured Equipment Deals

Latest Equipment Articles

Choosing a Mobile Photo Printer Read More

Choosing a Mobile Photo Printer

In today's mobile, digital world, we carry hundreds or even thousands of pictures around on our smartphones and tablets. Tom Persinger looks at 4 different mobile photo printer options for getting...

Latest Learning Articles

Advanced Printing with Lightroom (Video Tutorial) Read More

Advanced Printing with Lightroom (Video Tutorial)

Building upon last week's Basic Printing with Lightroom video tutorial, this advanced printing tutorial will teach you to print contact sheets, print multiple images at a time, use Lightroom's present...


color cast after using colorvision spyder2express

Steven Chan , Jul 20, 2006; 11:03 a.m.

I just purchased Spyder2express to calibrate my CRT driven by a Thinkpad T41p with an ATI Mobility FireGL T2. After the calibration, the monitor shows a blue cast. I'm not sure if the blue cast is just my perception because I have been using this monitor at 5000K and Sypder2express calibrates it at 6500K. I have an ICC profile from MPIX for their prints, along with an actual print and CD with the image on it. The image on the calibrated monitor doesn't look anymore accurate that what I was able to achieve with Adobe Gamma. Did I just waste money on this product, or am I doing something wrong? The image on screen looks close to the print, but not exactly. I'm not sure how good of a match to expect. And the blue color cast is concerning as well. Any ideas?

Responses

Erik de G. , Jul 20, 2006; 05:36 p.m.

If you were used to 5000K the 6500K will look quite blue. How does your screen look when calibrated to 5000K with the Spyder?

Regarding prints compared to images onscreen: even with a calibrated monitor they will look different, because the print reflects light and the monitor emits it. That has a huge effect on the contrast. You should, BTW, compare your print with a softproof preview in Photoshop, using the printing profile as a target.

Steven Chan , Jul 20, 2006; 08:58 p.m.

Unfortunately, the version of Spyder I have only supports 6500K, so I don't know how it will look calibrated at 500K. Yes, I am using the soft proof option. My conern is that calibrating the monitor using Adobe Gamma gives me as close a match as Spyder2express.

Serge Cashman , Jul 20, 2006; 10:40 p.m.

Download an older version of Spyder2Expess software from Colorvision. It uses Native white point target instead of 6500K - which is ideal in your case.

http://www.colorvision.com/sup_dl-upgrades.shtml

Erik de G. , Jul 21, 2006; 06:32 p.m.

Gosh, I didn't exect the Spyder software to be so limited. I wouldn't know what to do without the ability to choose my own color temperature, or gamma. Perhaps worth a warning for people considering the purchase of a calibration device. I'm using GretagMacbeth's iOneMatch, which is considerably better equipped with options.

Serge Cashman , Jul 21, 2006; 06:45 p.m.

It's a Spyder2Express. It costs $70. Same device as in Spyder2 Pro but with "no options" software. If you buy Spyder2 Pro bundle ($240) you get more features than in eye one Display2 ($180, an excellent package in it's own right). There are a couple of other Spyder2 versions in between.

It all depends what those features are worth to you. If you need them you can buy them. But most people would calibrate to 6500K/2.2 anyway... Or Native/2.2 if they are informed about 8 bit LCD issues...

Tim Lookingbill , Jul 21, 2006; 08:52 p.m.

White points don't influence color appearance that profoundly anyway. It's how different brightness level combined with color cast between your viewing environment prints are viewed under compared to your display's brightness and color cast. The farther apart the two, the longer your eyes will take to adapt.

Since they only make 5000K lighting that's accurate enough, balancing your display to 6500K will be close enough. LCD's, if they're bright enough, can tolerate a reduction of the blue channel to get closer to 5000K. CRT's usually have to be calibrated to a brighter 1.8 gamma to compensate loss of luminance to get the yellowish look of 5000K.

But I can tell you from experience, editing color in a room lit with a 3000K incandescant soft white living room light will create more work than you care to deal with. Whatever number you pick in your calibration software make sure it looks reasonably neutral compared to your 5000K lighting.

It doesn't have to be perfect because the eyes adapt quickly to white point color cast. Usually modern displays are color balanced at the factory so you can use native settings in your calibration software to get close enough. Don't be too concerned about acheiving exact WP numbers because the chromatic adaptation LUT adjustment Photoshop performs to CM previews will be very subtle when it reads WP numbers that aren't exact to the appearance recorded in the final display profile. It's so subtle your eyes will adapt to it as well.

Back to top

Notify me of Responses