Datacolor User to User Support Group.

CD - Thanks for this reply. I hate to admit that I don't understand everything in it, but here's my best try:

In my copy of Spyder3 Elite, there is no "Calibration Settings" choice to make. However, in "Current Settings" there's a drop-down dialog from which I can choose. The choice I made was  "2.2-6500-120-LCD default".

I dimmed down the ambient light a bit, but it was still listed as "Moderate" when I did these next maneuvers:

Now, when I re-check the *target* luminance values, I get confirmation that they are 0.38 for black luminance and 120 for white.

When I re-check the "ReCal" screen I get the following values:
current WP 0.314  0.330 luminance 102.8
previousWP 0.312  0.328 luminance 102.8
target  WP 0.313  0.329 luminance 120

black luminance is listed as 0.38, which looks like the target value.

The current and previous luminances, of course, are listed as "unacceptable" - but I'm reluctant to change the current luminance because I must have been using this same luminance when I edited my last several hundred images. I don't want to have to re-edit them all and re-print those which were printed.

I'm hoping that the answer lies in your phrase  "you MSG have been configured for native luminance, not a targeted luminance" . I don't know what MSG is. I'm guessing that even though the Colorimeter tool measured 120 candelas just after my calibration in March, it's somehow okay that it measures 102.8 now (and, on the ReCal screen, it looks like it measured 102.8 in March, even though the Colorimeter tool read 120 then. The Tools/Colorimeter tool now reads 98 to 100 candelas (several readings). Thus, the colorimeter reading has dropped way down, but the apparent brightness of the monitor hasn't changed noticeably. Could I have just misread the Colorimeter tool in March, or could I have recorded it incorrectly? What I actually recorded is "120.147" so it looks like I was seeing something specific.

Does any of the that make sense? I went ahead and re-read the color patches with the Spyder and saved the results as a new monitor profile. I haven't printed anything from that new profile yet, but as best I can tell, the brightness and color balances are the same now (in September) as they were with the monitor profile in March.

Bill Hansen





--- In datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com, C D Tobie <CDTobie@...> wrote:
>
> >>I've been using Spyder3 Elite to profile my HP 2065 LCD monitor. I last profiled this monitor in March 2010. Since then, profile checks have indicated that there is no need to re-profile. The agreement between monitor appearance and print appearance has not changed as far as I could tell.
> 
> If the checks didnt warn you about not being able to reach your target white luminance (brightness), then the only way the display could have dimmed in the mean time would be if you calibrated without a target white luminance in the first place. In older versions of Elite the default settings would not have included a brightness, newer versions do.  
> 
> 
> >> Even so, perhaps foolishly, today I decided to re-profile the montor anyway.
> 
> Not foolish, it will force you to run the full process about every six months anyways, so you were about due. 
> 
> >>Ambeint lighting was Moderate, as it is every time I print or edit photos.
> 
> Acceptable, if a bit higher than ideal...
> 
> >>Using the monitor controls, I re-set the brightness and contrast of the monitor and then proceded to attempt to re-profile. I was surprised to see that the previously available screens for adjustment of brightness and contrast are not visible. I don't know how to access them again.
> 
> You would need to set them in Calibration Settings, of if you want something really exotic, in Advanced Settings. This may not come up if you already have a configuration chosen.  
> 
> >>To check the brightness another way, I used  Tools/Colorimeter to check the candelas of the screen. They were at 68 - very low. I readjusted the monitor controls to the settings they'd had just before I attempted the re-calibration. Candelas were now 88. I readjusted brightness to the maximum possible, and caldelas were then 100.
> 
> That display is marketed as offering 300c/m2, so if setting it to max brightness only gets you 100, that's not a good sign.  Still could calibrate at that brightness, but it would be too dim for use at Moderate lighting...
> 
> >>When I made that monitor calibration back in March, candelas were at 120, so something has gone very wrong. The monitor appearance itself does not seem to have changed in the past several months.
> 
> Well, if it can't hit 120 now, and CheckCAL was happy, you MSG have been configured for native luminance, not a targeted luminance, or you would have flunked.
> 
> >>Is this a matter for a support ticket, or can someone in the group steer me back on the right course?
> 
> See if any of this helps you. But the bottom line is that this display should be much brighter than that... Check your configurations!
> 
> C. David Tobie
> Global Product Technology Manager
> Digital Imaging and Home Theater
> Datacolor inc. 
> cdtobie@...
> www.datacolor.com
> 
> On Sep 13, 2010, at 12:27 PM, "bill_hansen20012001" <b2hansen@...> wrote:
> 
> > I've been using Spyder3 Elite to profile my HP 2065 LCD monitor. I last profiled this monitor in March 2010. Since then, profile checks have indicated that there is no need to re-profile. The agreement between monitor appearance and print appearance has not changed as far as I could tell. Even so, perhaps foolishly, today I decided to re-profile the montor anyway.
> > 
> > Ambeint lighting was Moderate, as it is every time I print or edit photos.
> > 
> > Using the monitor controls, I re-set the brightness and contrast of the monitor and then proceded to attempt to re-profile. I was surprised to see that the previously available screens for adjustment of brightness and contrast are not visible. I don't know how to access them again.
> > 
> > To check the brightness another way, I used  Tools/Colorimeter to check the candelas of the screen. They were at 68 - very low. I readjusted the monitor controls to the settings they'd had just before I attempted the re-calibration. Candelas were now 88. I readjusted brightness to the maximum possible, and caldelas were then 100.
> > 
> > When I made that monitor calibration back in March, candelas were at 120, so something has gone very wrong. The monitor appearance itself does not seem to have changed in the past several months.
> > 
> > Is this a matter for a support ticket, or can someone in the group steer me back on the right course?
>