[R Lowery Participant Posts: 8]

Basic Color vs. Other Profiling Software

on: August 8, 2021 at 10:03 pm

Elliot Puritz wrote:

Wonderful article Mark, and many thanks.

The basic question:  Will the results of the profiling workflow produce calibration that is noticeably better than provided by the software sold as part of the new iProfiler Pro instrument or Spectra View Software which is from NEC?  Both of these programs are simple and intuitive to use and in my admittedly informal testing provide results that are very similar.  Basic Color Software is costly.  Demonstrably better calibration?

 

 

I have one workstation with an NEC PA271Q monitor, and another with an NEC PA272W, and all I had used for years up until a few months ago was the included Spectraview software, and it’s good. But I do find the basICColor Display 6 software to be an improvement. Unless the price has changed, Display 6 is not expensive at all. I believe I paid $75 – $80. One license I purchased from a dealer. The other I purchased direct from basICColor. I don’t foresee using Spectraview anymore. You do need to have a measurement device, like an i1 spectrophotometer to use Display 6. I do not believe Display 6 can use the included puck that comes with the NEC Spectraview monitor package.

[Elliot Puritz Silver Member Posts: 77]

Re: Basic Color vs. Other Profiling Software

Reply #1 on: August 8, 2021 at 10:41 pm

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

Would you mind sharing what you believe Display 6 does better that the Spectraview Software?  How were you able to confirm that your profiles were better?

Thanks for the added information, i.e., if one has the”puck” then the price of Display 6 and Spectraview are the same…but both are more that the free Calibrite software which is free to those who purchase the puck.

 

Elliot

 

Thanks

[Mark D Segal]

Re: Basic Color vs. Other Profiling Software

Reply #2 on: August 8, 2021 at 10:52 pm

Here’s a list of the instruments basICColor Display 6 supports:

Quote:

<Due to the switch to 64bit (Mac Catalina/Big Sur), some old measurement instruments cannot be supported any more – but we added some new ones, here is a list of supported instruments:>

– Colorimeters

basICColor DISCUS

basICColor SQUID 3 (X-Rite i1Display Pro)

Datacolor Spyder 3 (Windows only)

Datacolor Spyder 4 (Windows only)

Datacolor Spyder 5

Datacolor SpyderX

EIZO Swing

EIZO Calibration Sensor

Klein Instruments K10-A

Klein Instruments K-80

Klein Instruments K-8

Klein Instruments K-1

NEC SpectraSensor Pro (X-Rite i1Display Pro)

X-Rite i1Display Pro

X-Rite i1Display Pro Plus

– Spectrophotometers

Konica Minolta MYIRO-1

X-Rite ColorMunki

X-Rite 11Studio

X-Rite i1 Pro

X-Rite i1 Pro 2

X-Rite i1Pro 3

X-Rite i1Pro 3 Plus

Mark D Segal Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8, SilverFast HDR, Adobe Photoshop Lightroom and Adobe Photoshop". Please check the PhotoPXL Store for availability.

• This reply was modified 2 years, 1 month ago by Mark D Segal.

[Mark D Segal Silver Member Posts: 836]

Re: Basic Color vs. Other Profiling Software

Reply #3 on: August 8, 2021 at 10:57 pm

Elliot Puritz wrote:

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

Would you mind sharing what you believe Display 6 does better that the Spectraview Software?  How were you able to confirm that your profiles were better?

Thanks for the added information, i.e., if one has the”puck” then the price of Display 6 and Spectraview are the same…but both are more that the free Calibrite software which is free to those who purchase the puck.

 

Elliot

 

Thanks

Ya, but there’s no free lunch – Calibrite Display Pro is an integrated package of hardware and software that costs $260.

Mark D Segal Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8, SilverFast HDR, Adobe Photoshop Lightroom and Adobe Photoshop". Please check the PhotoPXL Store for availability.

[R Lowery]

Re: Basic Color vs. Other Profiling Software

Reply #4 on: August 8, 2021 at 11:40 pm

Elliot Puritz wrote:

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

Would you mind sharing what you believe Display 6 does better that the Spectraview Software?  How were you able to confirm that your profiles were better?

Thanks for the added information, i.e., if one has the”puck” then the price of Display 6 and Spectraview are the same…but both are more that the free Calibrite software which is free to those who purchase the puck.

 

Elliot

 

Thanks

I do fine art repro for a living for some years now, and images of paintings on my monitor were a better match to my viewing station than with Spectraview, which sped up my workflow. Not a scientific comparison, I’m afraid. And I also changed out some viewing bulbs around the same time that I installed Display 6, so there’s that.  And basICColor is using my i1Photo Pro 2 whereas Spectraview uses the included puck. Still, at only $85 for Display 6 (current price at Digital Transisitons), it was an easy decision for me. Had some initial issues getting the license activated, but they sorted that out. I didn’t really necessarily need Display 6 for my second workstation, but got the license anyway to support the fine folks behind basICColor software. I started with a 14 day trial, and I would recommend anyone give the trial version a go. You can test it out, compare and see for yourself.

• This reply was modified 2 years, 1 month ago by R Lowery.

[Elliot Puritz Silver Member Posts: 77]

Re: Basic Color vs. Other Profiling Software

Reply #5 on: August 9, 2021 at 11:22 am

The information and messages from those who are discussing the matter of monitor profiles are appreciated and illuminating.  A sincere thanks for taking the time and effort to craft such amazing responses…

Might I now add another observation:  Even if one achieves a perfect congruence between the print and the monitor which has been calibrated to the viewing conditions that one decides are optimum the print as such is viewed in the conditions of one’s home ( or the home of a client ) will likely not match the viewing conditions of the studio/environment in which the print has been made.  I do not see a way that one can avoid reprinting an image until such is satisfactory in the location in which it will be viewed.  How can buyers of prints seen on line have any expectation that such images will look the “way” that such prints appear on their monitors?  Indeed, my current workflow involved making a print and putting such on a table in a room lit by a combination of outside light and ambient light from the home….I will periodically pick up the print and walk from room to room evaluating the results in various light…it is amazing that a print that looks perfect in one room will be absolutely flat in another!

Given the wish to have a print where such is “displayed” appear as one hopes, should one vary the monitor calibration settings to mimic the conditions in which the print will actually be exhibited?  I have not used Image Print Software but note that they provide profiles that are tailored to the “conditions” (sic) of exhibition.  I have heard that some accomplished analog black and white photographers will only exhibit their images in studios or exhibition spaces that mimic the conditions in which such photographers have evaluated their images after completion, i.e., the image as it is seen in the artist’s environment must match the lighting in which the image is to be exhibited.

In sum and substance, it seems that the best that I can do is to match the print as best as possible to the monitor…and go from there….reprint as desired or needed…and rip up the other prints.

[Mark D Segal Silver Member Posts: 836]

Re: Basic Color vs. Other Profiling Software

Reply #6 on: August 9, 2021 at 11:41 am

Museums and galleries have largely adopted the D50 standard as best representing how photos would look under their usual lighting conditions. The other most commonly used standard is D65 which is cooler, more representing daylight conditions. You can adjust both your display calibration and create printer profiles matching either standard. For displays basICColor provides for other options as well.

Also take into account that human visual adaptation allows for a lot of flexibility in terms of what we consider to be acceptable results in different viewing conditions, as long as the differences between them are not huge.

I for one would be loathe to go through cycles of reprinting and ripping up – firstly it’s wasteful, secondly it’s environmentally unfriendly,  and thirdly a number of papers are in short supply. So it’s best to determine what the most likely and usual viewing conditions for the prints will be both for you and anyone else to whom you will be providing the prints, and print once to more or less meet those conditions.

Mark D Segal Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8, SilverFast HDR, Adobe Photoshop Lightroom and Adobe Photoshop". Please check the PhotoPXL Store for availability.

[Andrew Rodney Participant Posts: 329]

Re: Basic Color vs. Other Profiling Software

Reply #7 on: August 9, 2021 at 11:52 am

Elliot Puritz wrote:

Hi Andrew:  Hope you are doing well.

Can you expand on your comments, i.e., which panel are you alluding to?

 

Elliot

Any NEC (now Sharp) SpectraView display that can utilize that software.

Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com)”

[Andrew Rodney Participant Posts: 329]

Re: Basic Color vs. Other Profiling Software

Reply #8 on: August 9, 2021 at 11:54 am

Elliot Puritz wrote:

 

 

Might I pose another question?

 

Referring to Spectraview and other profiling software:  Is it preferable to set the white point and contrast ratio different for different papers?   I suspect that the Photoshop setting that enables one to turn “paper color” on and off is meant perhaps to obviate the need for multiple monitor profiles for multiple papers.  Do you find the “paper color” box at all useful when soft proofing?

Yes if they need such targets for a visual match. Which SpectraView allows as it controls the electronics in the panel, it can update the calibration targets on the fly and load the associated ICC profile for the system to use it.

Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com)”

[Mark D Segal Silver Member Posts: 836]

Re: Basic Color vs. Other Profiling Software

Reply #9 on: August 9, 2021 at 12:02 pm

As I may have demonstrated in one of my previous articles, basICColor also provides for rapid switching to allow softproofing for print conditions through the display software. This is particularly handy for those without other software providing the required soft-proofing capability. Those using Lightroom and/or Photoshop and who have the printer profiles relevant to the photos being soft-proofed can just as well soft-proof there. Simulating paper color and ink in softproofing is necessary for the simulation to match the paper white point and generally portray the kind of tonality you can expect from the printer.

Mark D Segal Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8, SilverFast HDR, Adobe Photoshop Lightroom and Adobe Photoshop". Please check the PhotoPXL Store for availability.

[Andrew Rodney Participant Posts: 329]

Re: Basic Color vs. Other Profiling Software

Reply #10 on: August 9, 2021 at 12:08 pm

I’m referring to far more than just switching Mark; Spectraview has proprietary control over the panel electronics.

Yes, you can use another product, but I wouldn’t. I’d use (and do use) the full functionality between SpectraView hardware and software.

Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com)”

[Elliot Puritz Silver Member Posts: 77]

Re: Basic Color vs. Other Profiling Software

Reply #11 on: August 9, 2021 at 12:27 pm

Thanks Mark and Andrew:  I now understand what Andrew has alluded to:  Spectraview will indeed easily allow me to move from one set of proof conditions to another .  The proof parameters once accomplished are stored and can be easily and quickly recalled and loaded.  If the saved parameters are “outdated” then the program issues a warning that in effect advises recalibration.  I gather that Basic has the same feature.

[Author]

Posts