Monitor Calibration

[Phil]

Although still pretty quick, my laptop is now pushing 4 years old, and I've always had a certain arrogance in believing that the screen was pretty near perfect. In the passed I've probably printed a total of 6 images, but this has all changed with the arrival of Bella. Some of you will have seen the photos I posted, on my screen they looked perfect, so I ordered a few prints. Imagine my disappointment when the photos arrived and looked totally different to what I thought I'd ordered.

Earlier this week I took the plunge and purchased a second hand Spyder 3 Elite from the Bay. I calibrated my monitor and everything suddenly went yellow, or at least I thought it had. Turns out that for 4 years I've been viewing a monitor with a massive blue cast. I did a couple of cheapo test prints at Tesco and, apart from a slight difference in brightness, what I'm seeing now is what gets printed.
This is a massive lesson learned and a severe slap on the wrist!

Incidentally, calibrated images look identical on my iPhone6 as they do on the lappy, but the iPad's screen is off by quite a bit.

Below is a before & after comparison. Both have been edited using Photoshop CC 2015, the before image looked perfect on my uncalibrated screen.
Please remember, if your screen isn't calibrated then the After may appear incorrect, as it would have done to me a week ago

 

[ChrisLumix]

For me, the After shot looked wrong (dark, unsaturated and ever so slightly green). Then I remembered that I have my monitor on half brightness normally so I turned the brightness up to full. The difference is not massively dramatic but it is significant. Now the right hand shot has a better dynamic range, the colours are more natural looking, and there is more detail, than in the Before shot. 

Having said that, there are two other things : 1) having the pictures side by side makes the right hand one suffer more by comparison (duller?) and 2) although the left hand picture is too contrasty, I rather like the red bias in it, as it gives a warmth that suits the subject.

Edited July 25, 2015 by ChrisLumix

[Phil]

I appreciate your comments, Chris.
My main reason for posting is that I wanted to emphasise that before calibration the Before image on my screen looked similar to the After shot here, it wasn't until receiving the prints that I became aware that something was dramatically wrong.

Under normal circumstances I would probably warm the image a tad too

Have to admit though, after 4 years of staring at my blue screen this is taking some getting used to.

[Clicker]

I print a lot of my own images Phil  and as you said ....you'd only printed about half a dozen...so you obviously would have noticed a lot earlier had you not been viewing your work mostly on a screen. Yup you need a slapped wrist. ... I 'm quite sad that so few hard copies of our art are being made nowadays. I use an Hp photosmart printer for one off work and V*s*aprint for bulk prints or books of photos. 

Edited July 25, 2015 by Clicker

[Ryewolf]

I do like to print off my images, the local print place does 12x8inch prints for 1.99, I have about 12 framed on my walls at any one time - plus 80-90 printed ones which I vary. I've noticed that the prints I get back are very close to what I see on screen. All my monitors are Dell of one sort or the other (a 20, 21, 24 and 30inch version), yet each look slightly different.. but my new laptop everything looks far too bright, so I'm thinking one of these calibration thingies will be useful.

I can see quite a big difference in the before/after shots - particularly the background on the after which has more a neutral grey colour where the before is quite a warm grey

[Clicker]

 Just an aside  Phil ....Were you standing on a chair/ the stairs when you took that shot ....or are you just very, very tall ?

[Phil]

Were you standing on a chair/ the stairs when you took that shot ....

Flippy-flappy screen, marvellous invention

[Clicker]

I'm just 4ft 11 ins so my articulated screen  still doesn't get me as high as that above my subjects Phil ... I mean that in a non regal way of course !!

[ChrisLumix]

I appreciate your comments, Chris.
My main reason for posting is that I wanted to emphasise that before calibration the Before image on my screen looked similar to the After shot here, it wasn't until receiving the prints that I became aware that something was dramatically wrong.

Under normal circumstances I would probably warm the image a tad too

Have to admit though, after 4 years of staring at my blue screen this is taking some getting used to.

Wow, they looked the SAME? Whether my monitor is calibrated "correctly" or not, I could nevertheless see straight off that those pictures were very different.

 

I print a lot of my own images Phil  and as you said ....you'd only printed about half a dozen...so you obviously would have noticed a lot earlier had you not been viewing your work mostly on a screen. Yup you need a slapped wrist. ... I 'm quite sad that so few hard copies of our art are being made nowadays. I use an Hp photosmart printer for one off work and V*s*aprint for bulk prints or books of photos. 

I never ever print. In the 70s and 80s I mostly used transparency film, and those have to be backlit for projection. I am therefore used to - and prefer - seeing pictures with light behind them, and only on a monitor can you achieve that (except with very fancy and expensive footwork to light prints). Also being disabled and stuck in front of a computer all day  long, I don't miss not seeing pictures hanging round the home.

[Phil]

 

Wow, they looked the SAME? Whether my monitor is calibrated "correctly" or not, I could nevertheless see straight off that those pictures were very different.

I'm not sure you're grasping my meaning. 

Before calibration the Before image appeared on screen as the After image does after calibration and not side by side, that would defeat the object of the comparison.

[JamWheel]

You can get ICC profiles from decent printers which will allow you to 'soft proof' for the type of paper and printing process on screen (the paper will make a huge difference to how certain colours come through and how strong blacks are etc)

Monitor calibration and ICC profiles combined make for a much less trial and error printing experience.

One thing to note on a laptop though, an important part of the calibration is the ambient light falling on the screen - something that will change frequently on a laptop

[Phoenix]

I've just been on a huge learning curve about all this stuff - I've learnt that most computer monitors are for games/ office work, but a proper monitor that is designed for image manipulation makes a huge difference. Its really difficult to calibrate a cheap monitor. I have also learnt about downloading a paper profile, allowing lightroom/ PS to choose the color management (not the printer) to coincide with the downloaded paper profile. 4 weeks ago this stuff was all gobbledygook to me but its worth persevering as the results are just amazing. Now what I see on the screen is actually what comes out of the printer (that feels AMAZING). Also it's important to NOT have any direct lighting on the screen while you calibrate. I use a desk-light pointed away from the screen as my 'ambient light'. So if your printed images are disappointing and don't match your screen, then you have a problem and if your computer is not calibrated properly, then your EDI images will look poor on someone else's computer (ie here). Just a thought. 

and BTW, Phil, your second image looks fabulous

[Phil]

Thanks for the advice, JW and Phoenix.

I was aware of the majority of your comments, my main problem is that I don't print at home. I have tried it in the passed but I can't justify the cost of the dried up inks for the 2 or 3 prints I make a year. I do appreciate that because of this there is likely to be a slight discrepancy between screen and print, but providing it's not too massive I can live with it.
I went for the Elite version of the Spyder because it monitors 'ambient light' (providing you have it plugged in of course )

What I'm finding really embarrassing now is, going back through 4 years worth of photos and seeing how poor they actually look, my monitor really was a long way off. Not to mention the comments/'helpful edits' I've made here on the forum.... 

[ChrisLumix]

I've just been on a huge learning curve about all this stuff - I've learnt that most computer monitors are for games/ office work, but a proper monitor that is designed for image manipulation makes a huge difference. Its really difficult to calibrate a cheap monitor. I have also learnt about downloading a paper profile, allowing lightroom/ PS to choose the color management (not the printer) to coincide with the downloaded paper profile. 4 weeks ago this stuff was all gobbledygook to me but its worth persevering as the results are just amazing. Now what I see on the screen is actually what comes out of the printer (that feels AMAZING). Also it's important to NOT have any direct lighting on the screen while you calibrate. I use a desk-light pointed away from the screen as my 'ambient light'. So if your printed images are disappointing and don't match your screen, then you have a problem and if your computer is not calibrated properly, then your EDI images will look poor on someone else's computer (ie here). Just a thought. 

and BTW, Phil, your second image looks fabulous

I use a Mac  

[Phoenix]

so what's special about a Mac that means you don't need to calibrate the monitor? or are you suggesting that the Mac monitors are better quality (which they probably are). I guess many of us started our with a computer/ monitor set up without really understanding what calibration or image manipulation really meant.

[ChrisLumix]

so what's special about a Mac that means you don't need to calibrate the monitor? or are you suggesting that the Mac monitors are better quality (which they probably are). I guess many of us started our with a computer/ monitor set up without really understanding what calibration or image manipulation really meant.

I guess that yes - they are usually better quality than most (not all!) of their rivals, but more than that, calibration via System Preferences is so easy. It was more of a teasing comment though..