Why does calibration make my monitor look dark?

[kenghor]

Just used Pantone ColourVision to calibrate my CRT mointor.

Expecting to get more vibrant color but it is not so. Everything

looks dimmer and dull.

As a point of reference, my mouse pointer is whiter and brighter

than the white background on this photo.net page.

Did I do something wrong or is it supposed to be so?

[beauh44]

Hello Wee, I believe this is normal. Most people find their displays taking a little getting used to after calibration. The real proof comes when you print and (hopefully) your monitor and prints will match up nicely. Good luck!

[edgar_njari]

The background and the mouse pointer are both pure white.

They are the same brightness, what you see is a perceptive trick

because the pointer has black line around it

[john_shriver]

Yes, the monitor will be much "duller" when it's at 5000K or 6500K.

 

The 9300K (and higher) color temperatures were where the color television manufacturers drifted to make their TV's brighter. (The blue phosphor is the most efficient, and our eyes are very sensitive to blue.) The brightest TV always sells best, even if it is at the cost of corrupted color reproduction and blurry highlights.

 

But now you can make prints that match your screen.

[david_lau3]

The reason is ColorVision recommends only 85 to 95 candelas per square meter on CRT, which is less than people will normally tune up for. See the review by PC Magazine:

 

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1608649,00.asp

[catcher]

One other thing to be aware of: If you have a really old monitor it simply might not be able to display the required range of dark-bright anymore. Of course, if you successfully calibrated, that's probably not the issue. I had a friend recently give me a 21" monitor he found on the side of the road. Why was it on the side of the road? Because it was about 15 years old (I think). I couldn't even get the brightness up to near where it needed to be. Maybe not the issue with you, but worth being aware of. Older monitors are hard (sometimes impossible) to calibrate.

[andrew_rodney1]

85-90cmd2 is ideal for a CRT. Out of the box, you can get up to perhaps 120cmd2 but it's

not going to last very long! If you want a good three years of daily use out of a CRT,

90cmd2 is much more rational although that means working with lower ambient light in

the environment. You also don't want a luminance level so high that the unit gets lower

quickly as that pretty much hoses your calibration between using the colorimeter/

software. Displays age and as they do, the change (that's why you have to calibrate and

profile them on a regular basis). At 100+cmd2 on a CRT, you're asking for the unit to age

faster and prematurely.

[kenghor]

Thanks to all for the clarifications. David, your link is certainly useful!

 

Actually the intention of my purchase is to get accurate colors from the printer as seen on my screen. (I'm planning to get the Canon i9950). Is this ColourVision up to the job? Or should I get something that calibrate both the mointor and printer?

[beauh44]

I find that calibrating my monitor is sufficient. I'm not sure about Canon's profiles, but once I calibrated my monitor with the Gretag-Macbeth colorimeter and used Epson's new 2200 profiles, my prints have done very well. Again, I personally don't see the need to calibrate scanners, cameras, etc. If you can't find a good Canon profile for your paper/printer combination, Cathy's Profiles can do it for you for each paper type that you plan to use. Good luck!

[ian tan]

Heyo fellow Singaporean,

 

I'm using the Spyder with my Samsung LCD screen and i9950 printer. Yes, it is up to the job for correct colours for print. The i9950 is awesome, you won't regret it.