Colorvision OptiCal on Win 2000

I use Colorvision OptiCal 3.7 to calibrate my monitor on a Windows

2000 (+ sp3) computer.

After calibration OptiCal asks if the profile should be the default.

If confirmed, it shows a message that the profile has been set as the

default monitor profile.

The calibration process activates the profile it generated in Win2000

Color Management (Display Properties/Advanced/Color Management). A

message there states: "The default profile affects the colors you see

on your display".

Optical installs what appears to be a gamma loader in the windows

startup folder.

When it loads, after I logon, the color of my monitor shifts a bit to

red.

Do I need both the profile in Win2000 color management and

Colorvisions loader in the startup folder ? Don't they both do the

same thing ?

Photoshops gamma loader is not in the startup folder.

While on the subject, what is the difference between the menu items

profile and calibrate and the calibrate button in the OptiCal SW ?

Thanks for your help,

I've found OptiCal not good at "setting the default monitor profile". I downloaded the latest version on the website (which said it fixed a bug for this), but it didn't seem to work properly.

It could be that the profile you created still isn't set as the default monitor profile. To check on the desktop right-click and select Properties. In the Display Properties pop-up, select the "Settings" tab at the top right. Now selected Advanced at the bottom right. In the new pop-up, select the Color Management tab. If your profile is not there, select Add to find your profile. Now that your profile is there, make sure it is highlighted and select Set As Default.

On W2K profiles are stired in C:\WINNT\system32\spool\drivers\color. The startup folder should only have the ColorVision program - no other color management program (like Adobe Gamma).

Hope that helps,

Scott

Jan,

Check if OptiCal made a valid profile for you. I have had innumerable problems with the ColorVision software on Win2K. Run Photoshop, open the color settings dialog box, and expand the RGB Working spaces list. Scroll upwards until you come to the line "Monitor RGB - xxxx". If "xxxx" is not the file you generated with OptiCal, you have an invalid profile. IMPORTANT: click Cancel in the Color Settings dialog to discard any craziness. You do not want to use the monitor profile as your RGB working space!

Neither Windows nor OptiCal appear able to tell if a profile is hosed, and will happily load it and display strange colors. If the profile is valid, call ColorVision. They seem to sell more than their fair share of bum Spyders. Also, what is the size (in bytes) of the profile file OptiCal made for you?

I've searched both Colorvisions and Adobes sites, both recommend to open the OptiCal profile in Adobe Gamma and save it without change so that PS assumes it as it's default profile.

After this it appears as the monitor profile in PS color setup, just like Ethan explained.

I've been playing with different profiles and reached the following conclusions:

In my simple view (!) color profiles hold both gamma information and color gamut information (RGB coordinates, whitepoint, etc.).

Win2000 color management doesn't do a thing to the global appearance of images on the system, no matter what profile I installed.

The OptiCal loader in the startup folder only adjusts the global gamma of the display.

PS depends on a gamma loader to adjust the display gamma.

PS adjusts the gamut of all images to fit the displays gamut described in the current monitor profile, unless the images color space is the current monitor profile, or if you're proofing in monitor colors (both being essentially the same thing and no translation is needed).

I other words the gamma part of the active display profile is the responsibility of the gamma loader and the gamut part of the profile is handled by PS.

Image outside PS (eg in internet explorer) are only gamma corrected and colors are not accurate.

Am I right about this ? ? ?

I red in another thread that IE for Macintosh does recognize embedded profiles, is there any image viewer for windows that will correctly interpret embedded profiles, and show the correct colors, other than PS ?

Thanks again, cheers, Jan

->I've searched both Colorvisions and Adobes sites, both recommend to open the OptiCal profile in Adobe Gamma and save it without change so that PS assumes it as it's default profile.

<p>

If you save the profile, Adobe Gamma fixes it up. Looking at one of my Win2K systems, OptiCal made a 524 byte profile. Opening this profile in Adobe Gamma and saving it without changes bumped the size to 2140 bytes. This made the profile something Photoshop could use, and I did not see any differences in the gamut map. What the extra 4x in information is, I do not know. This does point to ColorVision's dodgy software, however. The tiny size of the profile also corresponds to its relative lack of accuracy. On Win XP, OptiCal produced larger (4K) profiles, but these were still not in the same league as those made by a good monitor profiling package such as Gretag's Eye-One. The Gretag profiles are ~100x larger sized files than the OptiCal ones, and are more accurate. A <a href="http://www.drycreekphoto.com/Learn/monitor_calibration.htm">comparison of several hardware profilers</a>, including details onthe Spyder is available on our web site. The attached image shows the on-screen colors produced by calibration with a Spyder and a Gretag Spectrolino. The desired colors were white and mid-gray. The Spyder gave a blue cast.<p>

->In my simple view (!) color profiles hold both gamma information and color gamut information (RGB coordinates, whitepoint, etc.).<p>

Profiles hold this basic informationas well as (in theory) details on exactly how your monitor maps input to output colors. This allows color-savvy applications such as Photoshop to accurately display images on any platform. If both displays are accurately calibrated and profiles, images viewed in Photoshop on a gamma 1.8 Mac appear identical to those seen on a gamma 2.2 PC.<p>

You are right about the rest of your points. Win2K and XP have hooks to allow for color management, but are still color-stupid operating systems. The gamma loader adjusts your gamma, and should also load the rest of the calibration adjustments made to your video card LUTs. This should put your display in a calibrated state. If a middle gray background appears with a significant color cast, call ColorVision. Their products are not the best available, but their willingness to offer replacements or refunds is as good as it gets.

<p>You still need profile aware applications to get all colors displaying the way they should. All color space information is ignored by applications such as Internet Explorer. The raw RGB information is thrown at the screen, and what you see is not what you get. OS/X is color profile aware, and allows color managing all windows. If you want a PC platform viewer that is color space aware, the best I have seen is <a href="http://www.proshooters.com/dp/index.html">DigitalPro</a>.<div></div>

Ethan,

I red your review on profilers before I purchased the Colorvision spyder + Optical. Guess that 80% will have to be good enough for now.

I'm not a color whiz, and haven't got a lot of knowledge / means to peek inside profiles.

Haven't been able to find a lot of color utilities for windows, guess Windows is lacking in this area also.

A neat resource I did find, on chromix.com, is a Photoshop file in Lab space, called GamutView, that together with PS's soft proof and gamut warning shows the gamut of profiles.

I've used it to compare the Colorvision profile to sRGB (for no reason). I know it's a 3D kind of thing, but I did just one luminance level.

Is there any kind of conclusion to be drawn from this ? My monitor is a Sony Trinitron.

Thanks again for the time taken to answer,

Cheers,<div></div>

Comparing gamuts gives you an idea of where your monitor can have problems with common colors or has rage to spare. The best test is your eyes. Set the screen background to neutral gray. If possible, adjust your monitor to slide the visible area slightly upwards. This exposes a strip at the bottom of the screen that will be as black as your monitor can produce. Preferably, view the screen in a dark room. Is the background neutral? If there is a distinct color cast, you may well have a bad Spyder. If the cast is subtle, this may be as good as you can get. Don't forget to reste your screen geometry.

Another test is best performed with either a portable 5000K light, if you have one, or under natural light. Hold a gray card next to the screen. Any obvious casts? If you have a Macbeth ColorChecker, download an electronic version thereof and compare it to the real thing when displayed in Photoshop.