Has anyone used a monitor profile

[Pretzelboy]

I'm curious about this. I ran several variations of searches but didn't find anything on this.

I work for a company that sells, among other things, large format printers. We happen to also sell profiling equipment for color management. I work in a remote office and I asked the person in charge of equipment if I could borrow our demo equipment for this and we happened to be in the same place the other day and she passed it along to me.

So, I've been profiling all my desktop and laptop monitors and I got to thinking about the television I use with my Sage box. Before I started using Sage I would periodically use my Avia calibration DVD to adjust my television. Since any Windows computer runs monitor profiles I decided to run the profiler on my television.

I have a Toshiba 50" HD RPTV that's about 4 years old now. The best it does it component connections. Eventually I'll switch. I selected the "CRT" set-up of the profiler and used the colorimeter on the screen. It did it's thing and I can say, without a doubt, that the results were nothing less than remarkable.

I've never been able to achieve inky blacks or paper whites with the RPTV but, from my understanding, that was just the nature of rear projection and nothing short of Duvatyne lining in the cavity or tech-level internal adjustments would get me anything that was satisfactory. Using the profiler certainly changed my tune. I now have outstanding blacks and whites. The colors now look perfect and saturations are excellent. I'm really amazed at the results for about one minute of 'effort'. At the end of the profile generation it allows you to switch back and forth between the original computer set-up and after the new monitor profile has been applied. It was striking.

I happen to be using Gretag Macbeth i1(eye one). The bundle I'm using is meant for monitor and print calibration and runs about $1500 but there's a much cheaper monitor-only version.

I'm curious if anyone else has gone down this road before. I'd sure be interested in seeing the different results for a LCD, plasma, or DLP.

[Opus4]

Windows (or at least XP & earlier) doesn't actively use profiles when images are displayed on the screen; it is up to the program, such as Photoshop, to use the profile when it displays an image that has a profile assigned to it.

However, going through the profiling process can help anyway, because if the monitor has the controls, you can adjust the monitor's RGB levels during the calibration process to try to get the monitor to hit your chosen color temperature target. Some monitors don't have RGB controls, so this part may be skipped or you can at least adjust brightness/contrast. After that, the software reads the colors on the screen to build a profile. While booting, the i1 software will load the calibration info into your video card so you are starting out with an optimized/adjusted display. (Photoshop uses the profile to display images correctly on the calibrated monitor.)

I don't know how this compares to the process of adjusting a TV w/o such profiling software + hardware, but I would think it would adjust the TV display better, in the same way that it is better than visually adjusting a monitor for color critical work, such as for digital photography.

ColorVison has a product they market for TV calibration, but I don't know what it offers beyond 'normal' monitor calibration packages, since it has been a while since I've kept up with the latest in that field.

- Andy

[Pretzelboy]

Originally Posted by Opus4

Windows (or at least XP & earlier) doesn't actively use profiles when images are displayed on the screen; it is up to the program, such as Photoshop, to use the profile when it displays an image that has a profile assigned to it.

I'd have to disagree with this because it's obvious that the opposite is the case. As I noted, at the end of the profiling process it allows you to view a before and after. When you leave the profiling software the monitor doesn't revert back to the 'before.' It remains at the profiled settings. There's such a striking difference that's it's obvious that it was not the monitor profile being used before. As I noted, I couldn't get accurate blacks but rather greys. It's obvious in sage that blacks are now black. I changed nothing.

I believe this has to do with the hardware profile of the monitor being used by the video card. Every computer I have profiled using the i1 has remained at its post-profiled settings. The Adobe Gamma plug-in also sets permanent changes if you've ever used it in the control panels.

After doing a quick Google I discovered I am correct. Display properties> settings> advanced> color management. There you will find the monitor profile (if there is one).

The text right above the profiles states:

These setting let you select the default color profile for your monitor. This affects the colors that your monitor displays.

While booting, the i1 software will load the calibration info into your video card so you are starting out with an optimized/adjusted display.

So, with this line you're actually confirming what I have stated. So, which is it? Windows doesn't actively use profiling or it pre-adjusts upon boot to correct? It would appear you said the opposite of your first line. The i1 software isn't loading anything. Its purpose is complete now. The software only creates a profile.

[Opus4]

Originally Posted by Pretzelboy

I'd have to disagree with this because it's obvious that the opposite is the case. As I noted, at the end of the profiling process it allows you to view a before and after. When you leave the profiling software the monitor doesn't revert back to the 'before.' It remains at the profiled settings. There's such a striking difference that's it's obvious that it was not the monitor profile being used before.

I didn't mean to get this off the basic idea that it can help for TV viewing & I should have skipped the mention of profiles, I suppose... but please note that I said the i1 software loads the calibration data into the video card when Windows boots. This came up all the time (and probably still does) on color management forums.... the calibration data is not the profile. Profiling a monitor is a 2 step process: 1) calibrate the monitor, 2) profile the monitor. The calibration process puts the monitor into a known/optimized state and is optional. You can do step 2 (profiling) w/o having done calibration, but the profile results will be better after calibration. For TVs, you want the calibration process, so that isn't really optional here.

The calibration data causes the video card to output colors in a known state to the monitor... or at least known to the profiling software. i.e: when the system sends RGB=(125,37,236) to the monitor, the lookup tables allow the video card to output the color the same as it was during the profiling process (step 2, above).

A profile tells profile-aware software what RGB color to send to the display for a specific RGB color in an image that has a color profile. Photoshop actually converts each pixel it sends to the video card, which then sends the appropriate signal to the monitor, resulting in the proper color.

Windows itself does not use the profile. It associates it with the monitor so that programs that wish to use it can find out which profile to use. If you have Photoshop, you can load an image with a profile attached to it & it will be displayed according to that profile. Assign a different profile, but don't change any pixel values & the image will be displayed differently. Save the same image w/different profiles attached to it & load those images in any non-profile using software, such as internet explorer (v6; not sure about v7) and those images will be displayed the same because their profiles are ignored. I've been through this discussion many times on other forums, have taught color management classes, and still do some professional portrait work from time to time. The prints on my Epson 4000 closely match the images on my screen, which closely match what I photographed.

Now... I probably should have ignored the whole profile discussion because the profiles themselves don't apply to the videos... unless something has changed & videos now include profiles.


The important part of this is the calibration process to get your monitor or TV to display colors in an optimized manner. And, you then have to have the i1 software loads this calibration data because, again, Windows does not use it automatically by itself. The adjustment of the monitor/TV controls during the calibration process PLUS the loading of this calibration data into the video card is what modfies how your display looks.

Again, ColorVision markets products for TV calibration in a HT setup. But, I don't know how it compares to a 'regular' product like the Eye-One series of products in terms TV calibration. (For photography & monitor calibration/profiling, I know that the i1 products were more accurate.)

- Andy

[Opus4]

Let's try this in a shorter version w/o all the talk of profiles.

I agree: calibrating your TV via the use of a hardware colorimeter to measure the TV's output is, I'm sure, a lot better than trying to adjust it visually. Your eyes are easily fooled, while the hardware _should_ work the same each time.

(I wish I could find my links to interesting vision tricks involving color perception...)

- Andy