Colormunki Photo/display Calibration

[Tudor]

So, @Roy Sletcher , I used dispcalGUI to calibrate/profile my display using these settings:



After 2 hours running I fell asleep and when I woke up, 4 hours later, there was a popup window asking me to move the dial to the calibrating position... I don't know when exactly it happened, so the process took somewhere from 3 to 7 hours.



With the Xrite software the process took 2 minutes:



I don't know how relevant this is, because xrite used Perceptual and dispcalGUI Relative Colorimetric, but here are some comparisons (left Xrite, right dispcalGUI):

 

[Tudor]

And the 3D model comparison:



Zip-ed 3D-model attached.

 

[Emulator]

Hi Tudor, you might try uploading a scanned printout of a profile patch chart, printed through each of the two profiles, to show any obvious differences.

 

[Tudor]

These profiles are for my display. I don't understand how to print using them. Could you give more details, please?

 

[Emulator]

Sorry Tudor, my mistake, I thought you were on printer profiles.

 

[Tudor]

@Emulator : I'm waiting for the conditioning patches to dry.

 

[3dogs]

My guess is that you folks will start to cotton on to the fact that I have too much time on my hands, AND I was/am Spike Milligans GREATEST fan.
A CONUNDRUM.

I had a Canon 40D and used a 24-105 f4L to make some really nice images. One actually got first prize at the local Camera Club. Bit later I upgraded?? to a 5DII, using the same lens. Full of enthusiasm and in the glow of divine fervour for the new Canon submitted once more to the Club comp, announcing to all THAT WERE SILLY ENOUGH TO LISTEN that the new 24mp 5DII was really nailing images and had taken my image making to a new level.
The one image I submitted won, a SECOND gong, this time truly the 5DII did it for me.

Imagine my condition folks , when a couple of weeks later I was filing my Club images for posterity and by mere chance, glanced at the metadata for the second winning image. Me, the GOOSE! had in error submitted an image made on the 40D.......a clearly inferior platform!!

It is in the light of this still PAINFUL, EMBARRASING, misadventure, I pose this question.

Does one REALLY get a better colour gamut, smoother graduation etc. by taking a profiler away from its native patches, adding zillions of third party patches, apply 3D simulation and on and on?

BECAUSE if the answer is 'YES' I had better get out of here, stop typing and start thinking about cranking the Colormunki's profile a bit further.

Note : not intended to give offence or belittle technology, AM I MISSING A BOAT HERE ?

In desperatum

Andrew

Ps Spike Milligan has absolutely NOTHING to do with this post, I just hope that some of you remember his beautifully silly humour, I miss him.

 

[Emulator]

I think profiles are pursued as a way of escape from the prints that fail to live up to expectations, then you find a whole new activity that absorbs hours of your time and promotes endless discussion.

 

[The Hat]

Now I know why I don’t bother profiling, my expectations don’t live up to my prints..

 

[Roy Sletcher]

My guess is that you folks will start to cotton on to the fact that I have too much time on my hands, AND I was/am Spike Milligans GREATEST fan.
A CONUNDRUM.

I had a Canon 40D and used a 24-105 f4L to make some really nice images. One actually got first prize at the local Camera Club. Bit later I upgraded?? to a 5DII, using the same lens. Full of enthusiasm and in the glow of divine fervour for the new Canon submitted once more to the Club comp, announcing to all THAT WERE SILLY ENOUGH TO LISTEN that the new 24mp 5DII was really nailing images and had taken my image making to a new level.
The one image I submitted won, a SECOND gong, this time truly the 5DII did it for me.

Imagine my condition folks , when a couple of weeks later I was filing my Club images for posterity and by mere chance, glanced at the metadata for the second winning image. Me, the GOOSE! had in error submitted an image made on the 40D.......a clearly inferior platform!!

It is in the light of this still PAINFUL, EMBARRASING, misadventure, I pose this question.

Does one REALLY get a better colour gamut, smoother graduation etc. by taking a profiler away from its native patches, adding zillions of third party patches, apply 3D simulation and on and on?

BECAUSE if the answer is 'YES' I had better get out of here, stop typing and start thinking about cranking the Colormunki's profile a bit further.

Note : not intended to give offence or belittle technology, AM I MISSING A BOAT HERE ?

In desperatum

Andrew

Ps Spike Milligan has absolutely NOTHING to do with this post, I just hope that some of you remember his beautifully silly humour, I miss him.

To answer you last question first: YES

Secondly, if you are truly a fan of Spike Milligan, you have been around long enough to know that results from entering club level print competitions tell you more about judges, judging, and petty jealousies than about the relative merits of the images submitted.

I also have too much time on my hands, but am so busy I don`t know how I ever had time to work.

Have finally come to the conclusion my printer hates me.

Also owning a printer is like owning a pet, or going to the dentist. The guy to whom you write the check (Cheque for the Anglo members) for services rendered, seems to calculate your payment based upon his accelerated need to buy a new BMW this year.

All in good fun and tongue firmly in both cheeks. Don`t let the B___ get you!

RS