MacBook Pro Display too yellow compared to Studio Display

It sounds like you require professional color control. You'll never get that trying to use any of the canned monitor profiles, or trying to do anything with the built-in Calibrate function.

Purchase a device meant for the job. Either an X-rite or DataColor product. In either case, I would not recommend the cheapest version.

For accurate color, never - and I mean never - use the idiotic default 6500K setting. True color professionals use D50, which is slightly different from 5000K, along with a 1.8 gamma setting. The latter being more important to the printing industry since that gamma setting much more closely resembles what you can put on paper. But if you intend to try and match your screen to print output for artwork, then definitely use 1.8.

Preferred settings:

Luminance - no higher than 80. Your monitor should look like a well lit piece of paper. Not a flashlight.

White point - D50

Gamma - 1.8

You're welcome.

To add: Once you have a device, turn anything and everything off that can change the monitor's settings. TrueTone off. Automatic brightness off. Go into Settings and disable the keys that reduce or increase brightness.

The software that comes with the hardware sets everything. White point color, black point color, gain and brightness. That's the calibration step. Once calibration is done, it then reads a series of color patches to create a monitor profile based on the current calibration.

That means you can't change or touch anything that would change the calibration. Any change to those settings also alters how any given color appears, which means the profile is then useless as the Lab values the panel is emitting no longer matches the calibration. Or as how X-Rite likes to say it, it invalidates the profile.

My guess is no. The displays are different and you have the fix in the above comments.

Finances do not enter into the electronic solution; finances only determines if you are able to afford the electronic solution. And you've already made a decision there.

No matter what I do, the colours don't match at all between my Apple Studio Display and my MacBook Pro.

And you will, literally, never get there trying to do this by eye.

I tried the Reference Modes. Not only are they too dark, they don't look AT ALL the same on the Studio Display and the MacBook Pro.

I also tried the "Fine-Tune Calibration" mode; I was expecting being able to calibrate my monitors like before with the little sliders and everything (Display Calibrator Assistant), but all I'm getting are input boxes...

The built-in Calibration function, as I've already stated, is a complete waste of time. It can only guess what your monitor looks like. When you start the function, it clears the LUT and displays what it can only assume is a perfect 6500K, 2.2 gamma display with a predetermined luminance value.

That might be a fairly accurate guess if the monitor is less than a month or two old. After that, forget it.

Again, no matter what I do, both displays look very different. I'm not expecting them to be 100% identical, but I'm expecting my brand new 7000$ set-up to be a little more plug and play than that.

My EIZO CG279X monitor alone cost $2,300, and I still know it needs to be calibrated and profiled on a regular, scheduled basis.

All monitors drift. There are no exceptions. Doesn't matter how much you paid for it. In an almost 100% manner, LCD and LED monitors tend to drift pink as they age. When you eyeball it back to what looks neutral to you, the OS sees you're adding green. It has no idea why, even though you know it's to counteract the pink cast. The OS only knows you seem to like a greenish gray balance, and that's what you printed grays will look like.

I've been spending countless hours trying to figure things out with no success. As I said, I see the differences mainly when I'm on Safari, TextEdit, or when I'm on the Finder with windows open; the big white windows show the warmth and brightness differences the most. However, when I open my photos in Photoshop, they seem almost identical on both screens. 🤷‍♂️

And that's just one problem with a non-color managed monitor. Some apps don't work well with ColorSync. Others, not at all. On any monitor that has not been properly calibrated and profiled, there's no telling what each app will display.

I'm at a loss. I can't spend more money buying a monitor calibrator. I just want both displays to be closer in appearance than THAT:

Sooooo, you've spent 7 grand on your Mac setups, but you won't spend less than $300 to properly color manage the displays? If you ever expect them to match, you need a monitor profiling system. If you ever expect to get professional color results, there's no way around it.

The Calibrate function can only guess at what you're doing. It has no clue - at all - what the monitor's gamut, color range, gray balance, or anything else actually looks like. In other words, it's pointless to even use it.

A monitor profiling system knows exactly what the panel response is. That's what the hardware is for.

To add: Since you have an Apple Studio display, I would suggest the top X-Rite model. The SL can only handle 1,000 nits. The Pro HL is decent at 3,000 nits. But the Plus HL jumps the accuracy up to 10,000 nits. Then you know for sure it will be able to handle the physical color and brightness response of the monitor. $339 (only $60 more than the Pro HL) isn't that bad, and then you'll have a very capable model for years.

I can't really comment on it other than I know about DataColor's devices. I had one a long time ago, but wasn't happy with the accompanying software. It didn't have a choice for D50, which is more important than it sounds.

X-Rite did a worldwide test some years ago. They recorded the color temperature of light at noon with a clear sky. The average was 5200K. But it isn't a straight 5200K. This is where D50 comes in.

If you look into it, you'll see 5200K is often presented as a photographer's monitor settings. But it also isn't correct. That makes everything 5200K, including the white and black points, even thought the true natural measurement is much closer to 5000K.

This is why using a 5000K setting also doesn't work, which is all the DataColor software I had (from at least 10 years ago) offered. Using that setting makes the entire gray balance 5000K and results in noticeably yellowish gray balance.

D50 uses a 5000K white/black point balance, but also builds a slightly cooler - yes, you guessed it - 5200K mid point gray balance. This is as close to a natural light gray color balance as you can get.

Unfortunately, even looking at the user manual PDF for the Spyder, you can't tell what choices you get. It only (repeatedly) insists the user choose 6500K as the recommended setting. Any true color professional will tell you to never use that setting. It even states this is the color of daylight at noon. This is wrong. Very, very wrong. That number comes from an old test where they measured daylight in a far northern area on a cloudy day. Yeah, of course it's going to be a cold, bluish color.

But literally anyone can disprove that claim by setting their monitor to 6500K. Follow that by taking a shot of you home or front yard on a sunny day and then display it on your computer. You will never - truly, never - see anything out your window as blue as it will look on your monitor. And you can't even adjust that blue color out since the white and black points are fixed at 6500K. Anything on that monitor will be heavily blue. Always.

Nobody here can actually promise you anything.

We can promise we'll be responsible in our suggestions, but promising you a certain outcome shall happen is not reality.

If I made you a promise and it didn't come true, what would you do? It's only a person's recommendation of what he/she feels is a likely outcome, not a declaration of a 100% known future.

Expert mode is still there. You have to hold down the Option key while clicking the + button to start a new calibration.

And why do you think a monitor profiling system would fail? They've been around for decades, and work very well. The last step the software does is save the completed profile (which also contains the LUT to set the matching calibration) and automatically sets it as that monitor's default profile.

Throwing out another option that doesn't cost the and arm and leg of an EIZO unit, as they are silly expensive. I love mine, but I won't be buying another one in the future now that I'm retired. I no longer have a need for that kind of color control.

The Alogic monitors get very good reviews. The Alogic Clarity 27" is only $800. An extra $200 adds a built-in webcam, and $200 more above that makes it a touch screen. But really, who the heck wants to put fingerprints on their monitor, and reach across the table to use it. Anyway, it's cheap compared to the EIZO line, and somewhat less than Apple's Studio Display.

The Studio Display can output 600 nits of brightness. The Clarity, 400 nits. But that's irrelevant as both are maximum output values, and no one in their right mind would ever use a monitor cranked up to either of those numbers.

It's a good choice that doesn't break the bank. One of those and an X-Rite monitor profiling package would put you at about $1150. A few hundred less than the price of the Studio Display alone.

And after all of that, you already have the Studio Display, and it wasn't that much more than the Alogic monitor. Just get the X-Rite or DataColor unit, calibrate and profile both of your monitors, and stop driving yourself nuts.

X-Rite has put together a pretty nice video of how to profile a Studio Display with their colorimeter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_EIy60UBTU

Yes, it's far more complicated that it should be because of Apple's insistence of using reference modes with this monitor. But at least it can be done.

So still no Display Calibration Assistant – Expert Mode to be found.

From what I've been able to determine, you won't find that for a Studio Display. You can only tweak the reference presets and call that a "calibration". But, it should be there for the MacBook Pro. One can't affect the use of the other.

I use Photoshop to work on my calligraphy photos … I tried the Design & Print (P3-D50) preset on both displays, and everything is VERY yellow (the MacBook Pro being even more yellow).

That is a common reaction I get when people try D50. Yes, it does look yellow at first (and for at least a few days), because you're so used to looking at the ridiculously blue color of 6500K. Give your brain time to realize what you're looking at is neutral gray, not yellow.

Per the earlier example of looking out your window, you can do the same thing with a book. Take any book or magazine that uses a good quality paper and view it under normal sunlit conditions. Compare the white of that paper to a 6500K screen. It will be incredibly obvious the book looks nothing like the screen, and never will. Nothing under natural sunlight looks that blue. Ever.

When I use the default Apple Display (P3-600 nits) preset on my Studio Display and the default Apple Display (P3-600 nits) on my MacBook Pro, my photos are magenta/blue on my Studio Display, and magenta/yellow on my MacBook Pro. Also, the default presets are very hard on my eyes.

That comes right back to the presets heavily pushing the gray balance towards blue (6500K). It's also why they're so bright. Those presets push the luminosity way past where it should be. As far as not looking the same with the same settings, we've known that from the very beginning. It's also nothing unusual. Not even a little. Different panels, different color responses. That's where a real calibrator comes in, like the X-Rite unit.

My iPhone is yellow. My girlfriend's iPhone is red. My iPad is blue. My girlfriend's iPad is pretty much neutral.

Normal. iOS devices are not meant to be used for serious color work. They just aren't. There's no method to truly color calibrate them. Only a simple slider in the settings to change the overall balance between warm and cold.

Knowing all of this, it's very difficult for me to know where to position myself and what references are good and what workflow is to be trusted.

I know this is going to sound like a broken record, but you truly need a monitor calibrator. It is literally the only way you will get your monitors to match. It's also the only way the OS will know what the color response of each monitor is since it's directly measured by the device instead of being nothing more than a guess.

At the moment, all I want is for my calligraphy photos to display correctly on the Web (Flickr, Instagram, etc.).

Ah, there's a catch you can't do anything about. Once you have your monitors properly calibrated and profiled, the color on the web will look the same - to you. For anyone else? It will be affected by how well or badly their monitors are set. You can't do anything about the millions of uncalibrated monitors in the world. You can only control your end so it is correct.

Does the X-Rite device offer a user setting for my needs?

Yes. It's all in the video. Though they make it more complicated than necessary by going through the entire method of setting a white point's x y values. If you simply choose D50 from the menu, those values are already correctly and automatically set. You don't need to waste your time manually futzing with the values.

Expert Mode isn't on my MacBook Pro either. :(

That's weird. I can't explain that one.

If I understand your explanation regarding D50 correctly, I should use it even if my intentions are for screen purposes only (I'm not printing my photos, just publishing them on the Web).

Because D50 is the only setting that truly simulates the white, gray and black balance of daylight. It's the reason that setting is the default in the entire printing industry.

So why is the Photography preset using D65?

Because - believe it or not - 6500K/D65 was intentionally chosen as incorrect color. This goes all the way back to the advent of color TV in the 1950's. The color cameras of the time didn't reproduce warm colors very well. But they excelled at blue and other cool colors. So, the decision was made to intentionally broadcast this heavily blue color to get as much out of the equipment as possible. It was then up to the viewer to adjust the tint and color knobs/sliders on their TV to try and balance out the broadcast color to something that looked more natural.

Remember how on old tube TVs rich, bright reds would often look like static with lots of random dark pixels mixed in? That was the result of both ends. Both the cameras at the studio and your TV were clipping the reds because they weren't capable of capturing/displaying the actual color.

And then it didn't help when HP and Microsoft decided (who knows why) to make 6500K the "standard". Apple's default for years was neutral gray. Or at least much closer to D50 as Macs were almost exclusively used in the printing industry during the launch of desktop publishing. It wasn't until much later Apple changed the default to 6500K. For no reason other than to match what everyone else was doing on the PC/Windows side.

Another thing: when I use the Design & Print (P3-D50) preset, my displays get super dark and the brightness adjustment buttons are locked. I know I can adjust the presets and make them a bit brighter, but still... I don't understand the logic behind the brightness being locked.

I'm going to say I'm not liking this Studio Display more and more. Locking any monitor down to specific values can literally never work since the monitor's panel will drift away from optimal. Then what is the user supposed to do? Go out and buy another new one when it isn't really necessary?

However, are the X-Rite calibrations also going lock the brightness adjustment buttons?

The video shows you. You start with one of Apple's reference modes, then adjust the color balance and luminosity to whatever you want using the included software.

I was wondering that myself. The new method Apple uses for their display panels is too restrictive and is getting in the way of users trying to do their own calibrations.

I also just realized yesterday that's what's going on with the MacBook Pro. It's using the same new reference settings rather than the old calibration method - normal or expert mode.

Yes, as I mentioned, you can skip most of the over-the-top steps the video leads the viewer through. Just choose D50 and tell it what luminance you want. He chose 80, which is also what I use. Proceed to how many patches you want it to read (more results in a more accurate profile) and go.

The ColorNavigator software that comes with the EIZO monitors automates all of this. You put in your choices and it does everything. All you have to do is sit back and watch until it's done.

But, I have also calibrated/profiled the monitor using i1 Profiler along with my i1 Pro 3 PLUS spectrophotometer just to see how close the results would be to each other.

As some in the video comments asked, how do you control the brightness so you can get it to your target range? With i1 Profiler, I opened the System settings so the monitor brightness slider was visible. I'd Command+Tab to that, move it a bit and then Command+Tab back to i1 Profiler so it could get the current brightness reading from the spectro. Then you just bounce back and forth with Command+Tab until you have it set correctly.

But it sure sounds like Apple's new system is getting in the way. You go through all of your work and then the OS snaps the monitor back to a reference preset. The only way I could test this issue would be by hooking up a Studio Display to my M2 Pro mini so I'd be working with the same setup. But I have no way of doing that without purchasing a Studio Display or borrowing one. The first I won't do as I already have a high end monitor, and the latter I can't do as I don't know anyone who owns a Studio Display.

You could indeed save about a $100 by getting a ColorChecker Display Pro from various places that still have old stock. As far as X-Rite is concerned, these are obsolete, which is why I didn't mention them. You'll only find the new, replacement devices at calibrate.com . Not that the previous models won't work. They certainly would and would be a good price.