Workflow with NEC PA271 - Color Gamut Questions

[dave_gustafson1]

<p>Just bought this monitor and have a couple questions. I'm using the Spectraview II software with a Spyder 3 sensor. My printer is the Espon R2880.<br>

First, the color gamut it's showing me after calibration seems to be way off. Or maybe more accurately isn't closely aligning with the AdobeRGB color space. I've attached a couple images showing the overall results and the color gamut. I've run Spectraview II multiple times and it is always the same. I know that NEC does not recommend using the Spyder 3. Is this what is causing this? If I don't have to buy an i1 display pro I'd prefer not to but if that's what's causing the problem, the Spyder's got to go. Can I use the Color Munki sensor?<br>

<br />Second, with my previous monitor I always soft-proofed before printing using the paper profile and made tweaks to contrast before sending to print. With the NEC I have the option to calibrate to a "print standard" target. How will this affect my workflow? Should I follow my old method where I use the photo editing profile and then soft proof? Or do I use the print standard profile to do my soft proofing?</p>

<p>Thanks in advance!</p>

<p><img src="http://studioindigo.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/NEC1.png" alt="" /><img src="http://studioindigo.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/NEC2.png" alt="" /></p>

[howard_m]

<p>what does the color tracking tab look like?</p>

<p>No, you cannot use the ColorMunki Display 'puck' w/ Spectraview.</p>

[monika_epsefass]

<p>I'm using the same monitor with ColorMunki.<br>

First of all, have you tried working and printing using the generic AdobeRGB or sRGB setup which is addressed directly from their software? I've noticed that images will be printed precisely like they look on screen, and have to make no modifications. Using ColorMunki, I have the impression that a calibration is not changing anything. (Which is why my Munki has moved to the back of the drawer really....)<br>

BTW: I'm working from a Mac. Don't know whether working with Windows will affect all this - I've heard that the color rendition is much much more precise when working with Mac. The only drawback is when working from a Macbook with a Twin-DVI connection - sometimes, when switching the monitor on, it will run through some color renditions and then resort to noise, which forces you to switch off and on again for a second time. Upon inquiring with the NEC helpdesk (as I thought the monitor had a defect), all they said was "Ah, you work from a Mac. This explains it already, doesn't it". Aha.</p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>First, the color gamut it's showing me after calibration seems to be way off.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It does look odd! I think it's the Spyder. Not the best product out there to drive this display by far. Exactly which other instrument do you have? X-rite's naming is so silly. There is a ColorMunki <em>Spectrophotometer</em> that should be supported and do a much better job. Then there's the ColorMunki <em>Display</em> which I'm not sure is supported. The software will either detect what you have or not. So try that other puck. If you need to replace it, get the NEC branded i1-Display Pro from NEC. Should be less then getting the X-rite branded unit although the later can also be used on other systems (but don't expect the qualities of this SpectraView system with the same colorimeter). </p>

[digitaldog]

<p>Forget Print Standard, you want to use max gamut, then for white point and cd/m2, you'll have to pick a setting which produces a visual match to the print next to the display (we have no idea how that's illuminated). See: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/why_are_my_prints_too_dark.shtml</p>

 

[User_3607948]

<p>Dave,<br>

I don't have a direct answer although I did read a suggestion to uninstall the Spyder II software when using NEC SpectraView. I started with the Spyder II but then found a NEC puck. I changed more for my benefit, much for the reason you now are in: how do I distinguish between a characteristic vs a fault in the calibration process. <br>

The following site helped me gain an understanding of the NEC monitor and calibration ( I should read again actually!)<br>

http://www.imagescience.com.au/kb/questions/142/How%20To%20Calibrate%20An%20NEC%20Monitor%20With%20SpectraView%20II</p>

<p>Oh ... check for updates to the SpectraView. I'm working on Version 1.1.16. <br>

Joe</p>

[wayne_larmon]

<blockquote>

<p>If you need to replace it, get the NEC branded i1-Display Pro from NEC. Should be less then getting the X-rite branded unit although the later can also be used on other systems (but don't expect the qualities of this SpectraView system with the same colorimeter).</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm not quite sure what you are saying here, but if you are saying that the NEC branded i1 Display Pro works better with Spectraview than the retail i1 Display Pro, then Will Hollingworth (of NEC) says otherwise:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Since you already have the SpectraView II software, you just need a color sensor if you feel you need to upgrade.<br /><br />You could either go with the the full X-Rite iOne Display Pro package (sensor+software), or the alternate is to get the NEC SpectraSensor Pro sensor for $200.<br /><br />So the extra $50 would get you essentially the same device, but with the addition of the X-Rite software (which you wouldn't use with the LCD2690WUXi anyway).<br>

<a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=55382.msg476865#msg476865">http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=55382.msg476865#msg476865</a></p>

</blockquote>

<p>The extra $50 for the retail i1DP is well worth it IMO, because you can use it to calibrate non-NEC monitors (using XRite's software.) The NEC branded i1DP only works with NEC monitors. Otherwise, they are "essentially the same device".</p>

 

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>I'm not quite sure what you are saying here, but if you are saying that the NEC branded i1 Display Pro works better with Spectraview than the retail i1 Display Pro, then Will Hollingworth (of NEC) says otherwise:</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No I didn't say that. It's less expensive. It's the same hardware. IF you go X-rite you can use the instrument and their just OK software on <em>another</em> device <strong>as well</strong> as the NEC. But you'll pay more and you're unlikely to see the same results as the NEC for a number of reasons. </p>

[dave_gustafson1]

<p>Thanks for all the advice folks! This is going to be my approach. I'm going to buy the xrite i1 display pro. It's on sale right now so not that much difference between it and the NEC branded one. Hopefully that will correct my funky color space.<br>

Next steps will be:</p>

<ol>

<li>Set up viewing environment.</li>

<li>Calibrate monitor</li>

<li>Print the test image supplied by Andrew with the appropriate icc profile</li>

<li>While viewing the print under the viewing environment, tweak white point, luminance and contrast ratio and recalibrate. Repeat until the image viewed under the appropriate photoshop soft-proof conditions matches the physical print.</li>

</ol>

<p>So basically, I'm starting with wherever the physical print is at and then tweaking the monitor to match?<br>

Here's a wrench. The above describes the process for my personal printing at home. But for our business we use WHCC lab. They provide soft proofing profiles for their various paper types. Do I send them the test image to make a print? Then follow the same process, but with their print of the test image? So when working for clients I would use the profile created with the WHCC print? And when doing that initial print to screen match use the full color space?</p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>So basically, I'm starting with <strong>wherever</strong> the physical print is at and then tweaking the monitor to match?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Close. The physical print is next to the display otherwise it's impossible to view both and determine if there is a visual match. Once the display is out of the equation, the print should appear quite acceptable under a well behaved illuminant which is why the print viewing conditions need to also be under similar conditions. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>They provide soft proofing profiles for their various paper types. Do I send them the test image to make a print?<br /></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes as you can build a target for that output. You can build multiple calibration targets with SpectraView. But the question becomes, will they provide the actual profile used for the conversions or demand you send them sRGB or similar? IOW, is the profile really used and if so, how (what rendering intent)? Using ACE? If they don't allow you to actually convert the data, the profile is not useful even for soft proofing. We don't know if it describes the actual output conditions. </p>

[dave_gustafson1]

<p>I thought I had a pretty good handle on color management but I'm getting a little confused. </p>

<p>Do I really care what the rendering intent is that WHCC uses? They'll print the image using whatever rendering intent they use and when I receive the print I'll match the monitor to that print. As long as they don't change their rendering intent and I use the same Adobe RGB 1998 working space (which they say they can handle) and settings shouldn't I continue to have a match? </p>

<p>Thanks in advance!</p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>Do I really care what the rendering intent is that WHCC uses?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Try toggling between Perceptual and RelCol and tell us if you see a difference on-screen. IF yes, then you should care. </p>

[dave_gustafson1]

<p>I'm going to contact WHCC and see if they will give me some info. If you're working with a print lab what is the information you need to know in order to make sure it's an appropriately color managed environment?</p>

<p>Thanks - Dave</p>

[dave_gustafson1]

<p>I'm going to contact WHCC and see if they will give me some info. If you're working with a print lab what is the information you need to know in order to make sure it's an appropriately color managed environment?</p>

<p>Thanks - Dave</p>

[digitaldog]

<p>You need the ICC profile that's actually used to conver the data to the printer and you have to be able to actually use it yourself, not simply send sRGB and assume the rest. </p>