Color problems on LCD monitor

Hi c0elacanth,

First and foremost, you need a good monitor profile. There's the cheap way, and the fairly inexpensive way.

Cheap (free) method: Open the System Preferences and click on Display. Then click the Color tab. Click on the "Calibrate..." button. You may notice your monitor change color and/or brightness. Turn the check box on for Expert Mode. Click Continue and follow the onscreen instructions. Of course, you've tried this and seen that it doesn't work very well.

The fairly inexpensive method: When it comes to calibrating your monitor, there simply is no replacement for a hardware/software solution such as the X-Rite Optix XR monitor calibrator. If you do a lot of prints, $300 is a cheap investment for color matching.

Why do this rather than the free method?

No matter how much you move the sliders or other controls around in the free method, your Mac still does not know what the phosphors of your monitor actually look like. All you're doing in the Monitors control panel is shifting the preset LAB values of a basic profile. This produces a profile that is still not based on your monitor's actual display. What a good colorimeter and its software will do, such as the Monaco Optix XR, is read the real LAB values the RGB phosphors of your monitor are capable of displaying and then create a profile based on those values.

For either method you choose, the settings for white point and gamma depend on what you can live with. The default gamma for the Mac is normally 1.8. This gamma most closely simulates the reflective density of paper. Most Windows computers use a default gamma of 2.2. This a much richer and darker gamma, but it's also pretty much impossible to reproduce on paper; photographic, inkjet or otherwise.

For white point, the default is 6500K, which is daylight white. Again though, this is a very bright bluish white that cannot be reproduced with paper. A white point of 5000K is much closer to what you can print in regards to light, vibrant colors and is closer to paper white. The higher (and bluer), the white point, the brighter and richer light colors become on screen but gets you further from paper white.

About that 5000K white point. Compared to a default monitor setup, 5000K looks yellow in comparison though it's actually just neutral. It may take you a little while to get used to after looking at a 6500K screen for years. If using the free method produces an orange colored white when you set it to 5000K, you're actually looking at a white point much lower than 5000K. That's because the free method has no idea where you have the white point on your monitor set to. If it's already set to a low Kelvin point, then dropping the slider to 5000K may give you something more like 4000K, which is orange. If it still looks too blue, then your monitor is probably set to 9500K and moving the slider to 5000K is leaving you somewhere around 6500K.

In other words, the free method is practically useless. Not really trying that hard to push you into purchasing a monitor calibrator, just presenting the facts.

So, your choices are:

1) Use a 6500K white point along with a 2.2 gamma for images on screen that really pop, but will look flat and with less color saturation on your prints in comparison.

2) Use a 5000K white point along with a 1.8 gamma that will cause your monitor to look somewhat flatter and a bit less colorful, but will match your prints much closer as your monitor is set up to more closely simulate a print.

Actually, if you are in printing, then you need to use the D50 setting rather than 5000K. While both use a 5000K white point, the method used to create it is different, resulting in an equally, but slightly different gray ramp.

Using and LCD monitor for colour critical viewing or work is NOT and option.

Mark

I have to disagree, Mark. I'm using a LaCie 321 LCD for high end color work for both CMYK (my main work) and RGB. Color is very accurate for both. It has a very high viewing angle, so color and brightness barely shifts as you get away from center. I love it.

You'll find that CRTs are not only getting hard to find (the ridiculously expensive Sony Artisan is pretty much the only one available over 17") but they are going to be obsolete in just two or three more years. No one is going to be making CRTs.

I'll check that monitor out sometime.

But you say that it barely shifts so my comment stands that LCD's are unsuitable for Colour Critical work and this will remain the case for a long time yet.

When I saw the New Apple Cinema Displays I could see things were coming along, but until they sort out the colour shifting and the viewing angles then the fact is they are unsuitable. Granted they can be good but for high end work no way. You'd have to setup a very expensive and stringently controlled environment for it to be anwhere near suitable, regular hardware calibration, daylight lighting etc.

Mark

so my comment stands that LCD's are unsuitable for Colour Critical work

That's what I used to think. But to each their own.

When I saw the New Apple Cinema Displays I could see things were coming along, but until they sort out the colour shifting and the viewing angles then the fact is they are unsuitable.

The 30" Cinema displays are indeed not very good for color work. I've used them in freelancing situations where they have a shop full of those. The color shifting is pretty bad. Plus they have what I would almost call a frosted surface. Dulls the color and makes things look slightly out of focus. The LaCie 321 has almost no shifting. Not perfect, but not distracting either.

You'd have to setup a very expensive and stringently controlled environment for it to be anwhere near suitable, regular hardware calibration, daylight lighting etc.

That's true no matter if you're using a CRT or LCD. Controlled lighting is a must to have any consistency of color. I work out of my home in a room painted neutral gray with neutral gray work tables. The only lighting is a D50 GraphicLite SOFV-1e viewing box. Using an Optix XR and Monaco profiler to set the monitor to D50 gives me a perfect match of the 33% gray background I use as my desktop picture to the gray of the light box. Everything else pretty much falls into place. Although I did build a custom CMYK inks table for Photoshop. But I always do no matter what type of monitor I'm using. As the saying goes, "If it's gray, it's okay".

Cool setup.

I'm fussy that's all take no notice 🙂

Mark

I'm fussy that's all take no notice 🙂

Heh! Same here. I think pretty much all of the best color/retouching operators are fussy.

Cheers!

Eizo ColorEdge Monitors are the only TFTs suitable for serious color work. Only if correctly calibrated, just like any other CRT monitor.

Be honest to yourself, if your whole workflow fully calibrated? How long ago since you recalibrated? Moved your equipment? So don't be fussy... 🙂

Sidenote on (horizontal) viewing angles: How often do you find yourself sitting at 90° or more angle to the monitor you're working at? My guess is about zero times...
MacLemon

Eizo ColorEdge Monitors are the only TFTs suitable for serious color work.

The only one? A highly snobbish remark. There's quite a few other monitor manufacturers who would very much disagree. Not to mention that I know of no one, or even any of the larger print shops around here who will spring for the more than $5000 one of those monitors cost.

Only if correctly calibrated, just like any other CRT monitor.

No kidding. That goes for any monitor. Whether it's a CRT or LCD. Or whether you paid $100 for it or $1500.

Be honest with yourself

I'm quite honest. Why do you assume you're talking to a novice? I've been in digital color and retouching for almost 23 years starting on the proprietary Scitex systems. Seven years before there was even such a thing as Photoshop 1.0.

is your whole workflow fully calibrated?

Of course. Every bit of it. Did you not notice that I use Monaco Profiler? Hardly a justifiable expense simply for doing monitor calibrations. I also have the hardware and targets to profile my scanner, printers and everything else. I don't use canned profiles for anything.

How long ago since you recalibrated?

Whenever anything drifts from optimal target values.

How often do you find yourself sitting at 90° or more angle to the monitor you're working at? My guess is about zero times...

What's your point? Of course I sit directly in front of it. I already said it doesn't bother me that the brightness dips a bit towards the outside edges of the monitor I'm using. How much useful viewing angle you have is more important to the client sitting at your left or right who can't get a straight on look at the screen without you getting out of the way. The higher the viewing angle, the better for the both of you.

Was there a point to your post other than to be a salesman for EIZO? Sorry if this all sounds a bit harsh, but the smiley at the end of your main sentence didn't match the tone of the questions.