>*makes you mentally ill*
>*makes you mentally ill*
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
>*makes you mentally ill*
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
>witnessing mental illness
Witnessing complete mental breakdown
I'am witnessing the lack of free health care
Useful for photographers, artists, etc. A retarded meme for anyone else.
If the content you're viewing has been produced on calibrated displays, why wouldn't you, as a consumer, want a calibrated display?
Because frankly each person has different preference for their image. Accuracy isn't king. I know a guy who always maxes out the saturation. I myself like my image far cooler than even neutral.
1. It doesn't matter unless you have a wide gamut monitor and have to view wide gamut content (rarely happens unless you're a photographer)
2. Most consumer monitors are already 99%-99.9% sRGB accurate which means the settings of your operating system are fine.
3. ICC profiles create measurable input lag.
>2. Most consumer monitors are already 99%-99.9% sRGB accurate which means the settings of your operating system are fine.
Most monitors COVER THAT RANGE. That doesn't make them accurate.
It makes them good enough. At the 1th percentile range you're not going to notice any inaccuracies in color rendering. It's just impossible because human eyes are flawed and not "color accurate" to begin with. Most content you're going to see on screen is going to sRGB, just stop fretting about it like a mentally ill retard.
>At the 1th percentile range you're not going to notice any inaccuracies in color rendering.
The displayed colors could be widely inaccurate while still achieving 99% gamut coverage. Gamut coverage doesn't tell you anything about color accuracy. They're not related measures.
It's like saying you sell roses in all colors from red to purple so the yellow roses I'm holding must be the red roses I asked for.
No they wouldn't. I beg of you, check yourself into a mental ward.
>3. ICC profiles create measurable input lag.
Surely you have a source (other than your ass) for such a bold claim
Entirely posted out of ignorance.
Most content is consumed in limited gamut nowadays, REC709/sRGB mainly so having a calibrated monitor is a must especially if for content creation as you'll now what your content will look like on the target that all manufacturers try to accomplish, effectively being at the center of mass of all displays.
Also gamut coverage doesn't mean much compared to colour accuracy, the screen being capable of producing colors at the edge of the gamut doesn't mean the gradient to get there is going to be accurate, and that's precisely where critical information, like natural tones, lies in any content.
I don't see how anything you've posted contradicts what I've said. Most good monitors are already ideal for sRGB viewing straight out of the factory.
They do for normies if they put them in sRGB mode but for content creation they can deviate pretty hard
you dumb lil shitstain
1. it does matter. correct color temp and gamma alone already make a huge difference
2. all 120+hz ips & va monitors use a wide color gamut (up to 130%) which means colors can be off by up to 30%, most obviously in the red color
3. you don't use icc profiles you dumb ape nagger. you use the built-in cms of the display. and if its a piece of shit without cms you have to use dwmLut or reshade for games to apply a 3D lut to the whole image.
There's also this https://github.com/ledoge/novideo_srgb
because unless you're a professional colour calibrator how the fuck are you going to know that your tv/monitors colours a slightly off?
That's what the device in OP is for.
because it's designed to be watched on uncalibrated displays
>they designed it on calibrated diaplays for uncalibrated displays which will have a random distribution of color accuracy
Most "consumers" will be viewing content on their uncalibrated sRGB displays because surprise, no one owns a colorimeter. Hence why 99% of applications will ignore your meme gamut profile and just force everything to render in sRGB anyways.
Yep. While creatives use calibrated monitors for their work, they have to color correct to take into account all the shit displays people will be viewing their content on.
>Hence why 99% of applications will ignore your meme gamut profile and just force everything to render in sRGB anyways.
Gamut profile is not a thing.
If you have a wide gamut monitor you NEED an icc profile, simple as. This is why wide gamut monitors are garbage. They're overpriced, and have horrible fucking response times and input lag. AND you won't even be able to take advantage of the wide gamut coverage because everything is designed around the assumption that everyone has an sRGB display.
Wide gamut monitors are no more in need of ICC profiles than any other monitor. I have no idea what makes you think this.
And basically all modern content is produced to accomodate wide gamuts.
Wide gamut monitors need ICC profiles because otherwise you'll have saturation issues with the operating system's defaults. Meanwhile sRGB is the standard for every piece of computer content, so sRGB displays with high sRGB coverage will look good right out of the box, and might only need some slight tweaks from the monitor's OSD. But at the very least you're not raping your input latency by applying a worthless ICC profile.
>Wide gamut monitors need ICC profiles because otherwise you'll have saturation issues with the operating system's defaults
Just put the monitor in sRGB mode you twat.
More than likely it's already going to be that way because 95% of wide gamut monitors are HDR displays which are going to clamp to sRGB until it receives HDR metadata.
Then there's no point to buying a wide gamut monitor and wasting your money. Thanks for proving my point autismo.
Also, there are plenty of SDR displays that have gamut coverages that are wider than sRGB despite not being advertised as professional/wide gamut monitors. So the idea that all of them are HDR displays is fucking bullshit. Maybe in the next 3-4 years.
>Also, there are plenty of SDR displays that have gamut coverages that are wider than sRGB despite not being advertised as professional/wide gamut monitors.
And so apparently they need ICC profiles, too.
Yes? They're wide gamut monitors. Your point about ALL wide gamut monitors being HDR is retarded bullshit that you could deboonk yourself with 5 minutes of research.
That wasn't my point and it wasn't his point. You're just dumb.
So the monitors that require ICC profiles are nebulous.
>That wasn't my point and it wasn't his point. You're just dumb.
Don't argue for other people. He can speak for himself and back up his point about 95% of wide gamut monitors being HDR. Your opinion is worthless in this discourse.
>Why would you not want your colors accurate?
Your eyes are not accurate to begin with, it's a pointless metric to chase unless you're a photo editor.
>Especially if you spend hundreds of dollars on a monitor?
Does that mean you have to spend 150+ dollars on a colorimeter too? Nice sunk cost fallacy. Tame your autism.
That makes zero sense.
Also, no input lag, what the hell.
>Also, no input lag, what the hell.
I'm trying to find some good data on this and I'm mostly getting claims in reddit threads, no hard evidence and even people saying that certain custom ICC profiles reduce input lag.
You're gonna have to back up your claim. I don't notice any added input lag on my PC from an ICC profile.
Aren't most decent display panels nowadays wide gamut? If it doesn't have 100% dp3 or near total Adobergb support, what kind of shite panel is that?
Yes, that is not a gamut profile.
Yes it is. You just don't understand what any of the terms are, or how color management works.
No, it's an ICC profile. It has it right there in the URL.
It's not. Content is produced on calibrated displays so that it only looks slightly shittier on an uncalibrated one. it's like mastering music with Apple earbuds.
Seethe harder poorfag.
Your eyes are uncalibrated. You will never reach true color accuracy. I hope this triggers your autism.
because I don't want to buy a thingamadoodad to calibrate it
it's not very expensive
Because, using a colorimeter isn't a set-and-forget thing. You calibrate *every viewing session*. any time the light in the room you're in shifts, or over time, like the start of every day. You need to be in a dimly lit room with controlled lighting that won't change over time to even bother doing it.
If you want to be autistic about it, and calibrate your TV every time you use, go ahead, spend the money and time. At most, it will just neutralize the greyscale, and set the gamma to whatever profile is specced - most of which aren't designed for watching TV.
Unless you're editing video and photos, calibration is a waste of time. Most modern TVs and monitors get you close enough to where it doesn't matter, it won't improve anything you're doing, except maybe soothe your autism.
I calibrate for the most neutral conditions in my room, daylight, and then update the profile every once in a while.
Seeing lighting and drift will affect the display regardless of calibration, it's still better to calibrate it occasionally than not at all.
If anything, he started arguing for me. But anyway, respond to the post, not who you think the poster was.
You literally cannot calibrate a display for sunlight, idiot.
That's not what... You know what, you just won't understand.
>you cannot calibrate the colors of your screen according to the average color of the sunlight
or you can just do it every now and then and/or have multiple profiles for different times of day/wheather conditions and the results will still be better than if you did nothing at all
You waste time for minimum gain and may not even like it toward the end.
The thing matter that most for average consumer is contrast and gamma. You dont need to go full autism for that
Because I'm not going to print out my videogames
Why are people seething so hard at this post? I agree.
Poorfags will seethe and sour grapes anytime there's anything they could buy that would improve things but they can't afford it
Because this board is full off
They forget that this site is for autists obsessing over their hobbies.
>Why are people seething
they spent hundreds of dollars on a colorimeter
1) A good display is calibrated fro the factory. The deviation you get from the display aging is not that big in the first 3-4 years, even on OLED
2) Proper calibration is expensive. You need a colorimeter, a spectro-photometer to calibrate colorimeter and CalMan licenses. Even if you rent a spectro, these add up fast.
>A good display is calibrated fro the factory
sadly most displays aren't good, let alone affordable ones
you'll spend much less on a colorimeter than on a good display
A good [email protected] IPS display from LG (e.g. 27UL500) is like 300$ and has an sRGB mode that's good enough for photo editing. An i1 display pro colorimeter (that I own) is ~150$ and requires you to rent a spectro to generate a correction profile.
I wouldn't consider that "much cheaper". Also, if you have an HDR display you can throw all of that out the window, since HDR windows calibration is a shitshow.
Forgot to mention that, since I don't have access to a spectro, I haven't been able to even match white point between two different panel types on my desk (e.g VA and IPS).
yuo dont need accuracy saar buy noo appel monitor insted
I do not recommend calibrating your monitor as a consumer. You're way more sensitive to differences close to the middle of what your display can display and you'll just be able to see how most video is tinted green and has slightly off gamma. Worst mistake of my life.
Ironically, it's a sign of someone who is actually sane and cares.
The amount of teeth nashing over factory "calibration" of displays is more mentally ill then someone just buying the tool and doing it themselves.
My monitor may be an outlier, but I have a pair of these "Calman Verified" LCDs and my Spyder said they were right on the money. I do a little photography so it's worthwhile to me.
given that color looks slightly different on individual screens, did he "verify" them all individually?
Calibration is super annoying though. It fucking sucks. I have every right to seethe over a display manufacturer sending a factory calibration that can't be corrected simply with a profile.
God I used to hate doing that shit as a tech monkey.
You have a right to be a spastic. How is a monitor going to correct itself, to a preset? How does it know what the ambient light is around the monitor, so it can adjust the gamma to it?
Oh, that's right, you use a oolorimeter to do that. Or build on into the display.
Start learning how shit works before you start claiming rights to throw a tantrum over it.
nagger if your "pro" monitor isn't a few clicks in the OSD away from being ready to have a profile slapped on it fuck you.
This. Anyone who doesn't understand this fact is a jobless retard with too much free time on their hands. Never settle for mediocre products.
Yeah, someone else who doesn't understand how color management works.
But hey, it's /g. Who am I to stop the daily flood of ingorance from you autists?
Anon there were national print ads that were designed on monitors I calibrated/profiled in my help desk days.
You're confusing someone not subscribing to your brand of autism with autism itself. A common enough problem among autists.
makes perfect sense for me, I do /3/ work and have calibrated all my displays even ones I just watch stuff back on. Makes the image look better even on shittier panels.
Though I don't know why they are calibrating it in a well lit room that's just retarded, proper viewing is always in low light.
literally just check your monitor against any iphone ever
but I learned to just calibrate my monitors by eye with the help of my ipad, but it's still hard because of the wildly different levels of contrast
I just play around with the settings until I think it looks nice
Are you degaussing that shit?
Op was right it does cause mental illness
Why would you not want your colors accurate?
Especially if you spend hundreds of dollars on a monitor?
"Accurate" is a moving target. There are tons of things that can influence the eye, like ambient light. If you're using a monitor with a saturate e-boi desktop image, in a unicorn vomit RGB case, with RGB lights all over the room, that's light pollution, and will be a bigger influence on the eye than the small steps a colorimeter will make to do what it does. And, if you get up to go get chicken tendies, you'll need to recalibrate when you return. If you're in a room with sunlight - it's pointless, because in just a couple of minutes, the sun will move and the calibration will be useless.
Again - colorimeter's are not something you do once in a while. You use it multiple times a day, if you're using it as intended.
Some fart huffing av snobs might use them, but it's just ignorance, and for them, snake oil.
One common reaction people have to a calibrated display is "It looks wrong". Your eyes will get used to it over time, but the minute the ambient light changes, it will "look wrong" again.
Colorimeters are for CONTROLLED environments, not NEET bedrooms.
Which colorimeter should I buy for calibrating my vidya and movie watching displays?
its like eq for audio.
you're better off buying a good monitor in the first place, instead of calibrating a pos.
you cant make a chinkshit rando brand TN display to look like a broadcast PVM monitor.
>and still not mentally ill enough to listen to you
If this thread isn't pure distilled mental illness, I don't know what is.
I was just going to order one to dial in my projector (there's a bit of banding in the red with HDR content)... s-should I not?
Do you want to become like the anons in this thread? Make your choice wisely... you've been warned.
>spending 10 minutes extra when you buy a new screen to have decent colors is mental illness
>spending 10 minutes extra to have all the screens in your house look the same instead of having your desktop and laptop play movies at different qualities is mental illness
this is such a massive self-own
the fact that you don't realize this really shows how you deserve to be medicated and thrown in a mental ward
people who don't notice the movie looks red on the tv and blue on the desktop are mentally ill
acquire better baiting skills
It can't make you mentally ill unless you also got a spectro
I must calibrate because of my work.
I used to have 4 monitors and I managed to calibrate them all to look 90% similar to each other.
I can then compare the looks of the product on all 4 monitors, including my phone and tv.
>watching kinos on the kinostation
>day becomes cloudy
>pause movie immediately
>bust out colorimeter and spectrophotometer
>spend 20 minutes calibrating display
>save profile as "cloudy day with 75% humidity at 5:34pm with sun at northern hemisphere rotation.icm"
>10 minutes pass
>clouds clear up
Please tell me you guys are joking
wtf what kinostation lacks blackout curtains
thats a good point. i feel like most people would only have to adjust once, because how many people actually watch tv in a room with natural lighting? i live in a shoebox and even without the luxury of a living room i use a blackout curtain
That's not what anyone here is suggesting you do.
Just remember that every condition that affects how you perceive the color from your display will affect it regardless of whether it is calibrated or not.
Having it calibrated for your most common viewing conditions will then reduce how differently the colors are perceived when conditions differ compared to just not being calibrated at all to begin with.
A homemade home theater in a dark and isolated room with curtains and comfy seets is a kinostation and not your shitty monitor in some cuck corner of the room.
Chances are, you don't have either. So you can stop LARPing as a patrician with your little colorimeter.
I have different monitors from different brands, so I calibrated them to look as similar as possible. Definitely faster than doing it by hand which would take forever.
I fucking hate windows. I need my displays calibrated for work, but I have a tv hooked up to my PC and when I switch from my dual monitors to it, all the profiles get mangled the fuck up and at this point it's impossible to fix because even when I tell windows what to use, it just deletes my settings and insists on using the wrong profiles.
I believe the displaycal profile loader fixes this
It doesn't. Windows keeps overriding it and fucking it up. By the end of the day even the profile loader is using the wrong profiles.
All the calibration you need
I'm going to vomit.
I don't know what are you guys complaining about, I bough some cheap lcd monitors back in 2014 and after color calibration they looked great.
but yeah fuck paying like $200 for a tool you will only use once or twice, that's why you rent one from a place that rents cameras and other photography related articles, but careful because some tool requires specific licenses to use them.
also, fuck video game because most of them don't respect your settings and use their usually shitty own color settings.
I do my graphics work in low blue light eye-saver mode
>show up to printer
>in line with a pure yellow graphic
It was nice knowing you.
i’m color blind so i literally don’t care
I see this with the same logic as
It's still better for the display to be outputting as close to the correct color as possible, regardless of how your color perception or the conditions affect how you see that color, because those things will affect the colors regardless, likely making bad color representation even worse.
Anons with colorimeters how accurate are sites like this one for calibration http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/ ?
Decent if you have a shit-tier display. You also have to take into consideration how you look at the display since off-axis gamma shift exists.
If you have a biological female in your life, I would borrow her eyes for the color calibration part, since they see colors much better than we do. 1/10 men also suffer from some form of color blindness.
If you have a good display, don't bother.
I don't really understand how the gamma test works in this site. It says that good gamme is when you can't see the individual pixels at certain numbers, but regardless of how much I adjust my gamma I can distinguish the pixels.
This must be an old test because LCD quality has increased so much over the years that if you CAN'T notice a single pixel gap, then that's a problem with your monitor.
I don't get the "you need a colorimeter to make your screen look better, bro!" argument. If its something you can't perceive with your eyes then logic dictates its not needed for your own personal use.
Yeah, if were talking about doing something professionally like color grading, that's a different story. But if we're just talking about your personal monitor and trying to make it look better, just tweaking things to look right to YOUR EYES is all you need. If the whits balance looks white to you, then how is that not good?
This is all subjective since your brain will adapt regardless of how good or bad the monitor is calibrated.
So yes you can have shit colors and still think they are good.
Yeah but how "shit" can your colors really be at the end of the day if you can't even tell? That's the point I'm making
so many sour grapes and copypasted opinions from times long past ITT
It's been 30 minutes since your last reply. Shouldn't you be recalibrating your display in accordance with the position of the sun? You don't have the luxury to be replying to this thread. Go on then, before the sun moves again!
>*makes my CRT usable*
IIRC a videogayme developer, Zan, worked without a calibrated monitor while making art for his game. People complained about colors, he proceeded to buy a better one and calibrated it and realized his art had the wrong colors because of his old shitty monitor.
any good budget colorimeter?
do you have a digital camera?
I just would like to diy a color profile so my diferent screens look as close as posible.
Can something be done with a good photography camera?
No, because you would need to view the photographs from a calibrated display.
Na, he wants the displays to look the same, not for them to be calibrated to correct color accuracy.
I really don't think cameras are the best way to do it, partly it is very fiddly to take and check the images.
might be easier.
Point is, my camera display is calibrated
I dont want perfect, just a good aproximation
>my camera display is calibrated
it really isn't
The viewfinder? It is, or was. The big one. No
>making sure the display has a color temperature of 6504 kelvin, a 2.2 gamma curve and is limited to the sRGB colorspace is mental illness