![]() ![]() ![]() As far as say colorists would count "accurate". Have you done a puck/software calibration of your monitors, or simply using a software calibration regime? The later of course doesn't tend to be nearly as accurate. I do suggest people try and wind their way through them as there's a mountain of information there. Steve Shaw of LightIllusions calibration software has many "white papers" on their site concerning proper setup for monitor calibration and use. Most colorists I know simply deliver everything that isn't HDR (and there's not that much delivered pro in HDR yet) in Video sRGB/Rec.709/gamma-2.4/100-nits-brightness according to b-cast standards. Period.įor "bright viewing environment" expectations a gamma of 2.2 will work fine, and some prefer it. That is what nearly all pro colorists set for, as that is the broadcast and streaming standard. The i1Display Studio (150) from X-Rite (replaced the ColorMunki Display in 2019) or the Spyder X Pro (150) from Datacolor. It offers a really extended and useful documentation that covers almost everything you need to know. There are basically two consumer level manufacturers someone who has never done screen calibration should consider. creating essentially an expected result of gamma 2.4. Displa圜AL is probably the best software for monitor calibration. Video sRGB standards involve both the camera or "scene-referred" gamma, and the display-referred gamma. For calibration, well be using Displa圜AL, which is an excellent free tool that covers all the basics and even some advanced functionality for display calibration. video should never be considered straight "photo" sRGB. It would all be done correctly for you by the calibration software. I like the way you're testing things, that's a good process.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |