Hi,

I'm using a spyder2 to calibrate my monitor and the default is 6500k. Isn't this a little on the warm/yellow side?

What's the standard color temp that most people are using?

PS: Why is everything so complicated.....I just want to take nice pictures of little birdies.....

Marc

No, that is considered the standard and correct value as a starting point prior to calibration but regardless of what you pick, the calibrator will try, if possible to correct it to the right value.

As EJ mentioned it depends. Mine is after calibration somewhere near 7000.

I just got lost.

Last night I calibrated my wife's Eizo LCD using their Color Navigator software and an eye-one pro. The software sets the profile on the monitor, not the video card, like most calibration.

My target values were Brightness 80cd/m2, white point 6500 and gamma 2.2. The results of running the calibration 3 times showed a white point that varied each time, but less than 10 points either side of 6500.

I don't understand why a monitor calibration with a target of 6500K would lead to a result of 7000K.

Just doing more reading for the Spyder2 Suite...It seems it only has 3 presets of color temp.....

As far as brightness values that are included in this thread, may I ask where you get those?

My first experience with the callibrator offered no "values" to brightness instead got me to adjust the brightness initially then adjust the RGB values while trying to set the proper 6500k values. It then proceeded to read a bunch a different shades of RGB...White and Black then congradulated me on a job well done

Maybe I'm missing something?

Unlike older CRT monitors where white point was typically set during calibration by independently adjusting the R, G & B output of the display, LCD monitors come with a wired in "native" white point (in large part because of the color temperature of the backlight). While many can be adjusted independently with R, G & B controls like a CRT, the default recommendation for most LCD's is not to do that and simply calibrate to whatever the native white point is. (Often it is close to 6500K anyway, although in some cases it's further out from there.) This is a trade-off in order to avoid reduction in available luminance levels leading to possible gamut reduction & banding issues, given 8-bit LUT's, video card limitations, LCD's that in fact may only be 6-bit, etc.

Candew, your Eizo model is probably a lot better than what 95% of people are using. It's designed for color critical work, has a 10- or 12-bit monitor LUT, etc. With a model like that I'd say yeah, shoot for an absolute target white point rather than using native. Search google for "5000K vs. 6500K" and you'll find all sorts of info, but the general opinion is stick with 6500K.

Re: the original question, there is debate about whether to calibrate for 5000K or 6500K. Most people use 6500K and in general this is fine. Going for 5000K as the target may again produce issues by moving the display away from its native white point. And in fact images may not match prints as well as one might think, under normal viewing conditions. But this depends on a slew of variables, and is also somewhat subjective.

Marc, the Spyder2 is not the best example of a monitor calibration system. The Monaco Optix Pro (now discontinued but the associated DTP94 puck is still very good), Gretag-Macbeth Eye-One Display2 (now replaces the Monaco), ColorEyes software (with DTP94 or i1 puck), etc. all offer more & better levels of control and generally produce better resulting profiles.

There is also the Spyder2PRO which I believe offers target luminance control and so on. Possibly you don't have the PRO version? Or you have an older version that you could upgrade? From your description, you have a very entry level software package.

In any event, although you don't say what monitor you have, I assume it's an LCD. So I would recommend not adjusting the individual R, G & B controls during calibration for reasons described in the previous post. Leave it at the native white point at least until you get other matters resolved. In fact, if your Spyder2 software does not give the option of profiling for native white point, this is probably an old version of the system that was even less well designed in terms of LCD support. If that's the case, IMO you should consider an upgrade since I'm not sure you're going to be able to get a very good result.

Tks for the great info Royce!

I just went out and bought a 20" Apple Cinema Series LCD which replaces my 15" NEC CRT monitor.

As much as I would like to buy the best callibrator out there, I must stop somewhere...According to my wife

I will however upgrade to the Spyder2Pro and see what resutls I get from there.

The Spyder2 did give me a option of selecting the native white point....I'll read more on that.

Tks again.

Marc

Marc, I'd suggest you to go for Color Eyes software in combination with your Spyder2. It works like a gem!