![]() The z27x has in-built software that supports a few kinds of probes, but not the z24x. Hi Steve, as far as I can see, there is no "in-built monitor calibration" for the z24x. If you see any colour variation corner to corner, top to bottom, side to side you have a problem. To check, look at a selection of grey full frame images, from black to white (full frame images, not a ramp!) If it is not good any calibration will be irrelevant. However, I would check the screen uniformity forts and foremost. The 'bit depth' comments are basically irrelevant. So the ICC profile calibration IS loaded into the display.īut, the accuracy is not good as a 1D LUT and 3x3 matrix can never be as accurate as a true 3D LUT. However, Dreamcolor displays has 1D LUT and 3x3 matrix capability in-built. Gamut is the 'software' bit of the ICC profile operation. In the film and TV world we do not used ICCs, as they are inaccurate, difficult, and suffer many issues when compared to the far simpler, and far more accurate LUT based calibration.Īs a result, the graphics card calibration is just grey scale, not gamut. ICC calibration requires that the 'software program' understand ICCs, and how to apply them. Yep, correct - but also incorrect in what is actually happening. Whether the hardware calibration is done with a $100 or $5000 calibrator doesn’t matter: no actual calibration occurs (the display does not actually change other than perhaps contrast and brightness), Rather, 8 bits on the video card approximate Thus “calibrating” an Apple display or other brand is actually not calibration at all, but a laughably crude lipstick on a pig effort that is often worse than the stock Apple profile supplied by Apple. ![]() But even 8 bits is woefully inadequate, certainly so in a 3D color space. This is impossible to do well in 8 bit, particularly in darker tones, where there are only a few bits to work with (not even 8 bits!). Instead, 8-bit video card data is altered in an attempt to produce an image that approximates the proper intensity and color, using repeated measurements. With most so-called “calibration”, the display itself cannot and does not change. The actual behavior vs specified target is then measured, and a profile is generated that describes the differences. The term “calibration” is abused: true calibration means bringing the hardware device (the display) to a specified target state. If this is the case, it means that the HP calibration solution is the only way to go. Is this true? The web page is at and I paste the relevant section below. universal solutions like ColorMunki that does not alter the display in any way) is lacking to the extent of being called "faux calibration". However, I came across an article about calibration which states that video card-based calibration (i.e. At the same time, the Windows 8.1 interface remains in nice original color. This was a relief because I had previously read on this forum that the first batch of this display might have various issue (however I have not checked display uniformity-no unevenness stood out but I haven't checked it with all lights out etc.) In any case, after calibration in the z24x's User colorspace, the display shows good gradation and no signs of clipping on a bunch of wide gamut images I collected (strawberry, fall colors, flowers, etc., you know the drill). ![]() My z24x and ColorMunki Display arrive yesterday, and my initial results with them are pretty good.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |