Recommend me a monitor calibration device

architectfadi

architectfadi

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,436
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

I am new to this and I have never used one before. Googled it and from the majority of devices I have seen it seems that the best are Datacolor Spyder5Pro and Datacolor Spyder5Express. Are they the best out there? I have two different make monitors at home (Apple and LG) and I would like to have them both colour calibrated.

Any help is appreciated.

Thanks
 
The best? ... I don't know but the Spyder5 Express works great for me :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
I vote for i1 display pro. Had the spyder3pro but was not happy with the calibration on osx.

I could not get both my dell 2209 wa's to be the same.1@
 
Last edited:
I had the exrite color monki for the calibration screen and printer. FORGET IT !!!!. to do the printer you have to print out a colour chart twice on the photographic paper you use. Scanning across the printed colour chart you do is a nightmare. Scan too fast or too slow wont work nor the wrong pressure on the scanner. then you have to use the measurement in your computer calibration that it puts in not the printer calibration or the monitor one. If my memory seves me right it even asks for existing calibrations to be taken off your computer. Absolutelyt terrible bit of kit.
Oh and if doing under different lighting conditions you have to go through the whole process again.

£300 wasted and I sold it after cost load of ink and photo paper

This is the one. Ome posted the wex one as an example, no complaints about WEX

http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-...pgjtirk6tgn7rh-smjblpfdawzfzv6jp0kaagu28p8haq

Do not buy from anyone
 
Last edited:
Thanks all. I m running Windows 10 with an Apple monitor and a LG one. I am not sure about my budget yet but surely don't want to pay £300 for that.
 
X-Rite ColorMunki Display I've with no problems at all
 
Colormunki photo computer screen calibration not much of a problem, it is calibrating a printer that is. But even calibrating a monitor depends on the surrounding light. Daylight you set it up for but come night under a house light it needs to be recalibrated , and this has to be done each time, a right pain in the backside. That light recorder detects the ambient light going onto it first, and there lies the problem unless you keep working under the same lighting conditions
That is not mentioned until you buy the product and read the instructions
 
Last edited:
That's just the reality of how light works though.
 
I went old school with my eyeballs, trying to match them to what I see. Clearly incorrect but works well enough, until i have to print the resulting image! :-)
 
I use the X-Rite ColorMunki Photo - much maligned by realspeed above.
Excellent piece of kit. If you want to use third party paper (eg Ilford paper in an Epson printer) then you must use the appropriate ICC profile. The ColorMunki allows you to create your own ICC profile to ensure the colours from your printer/paper combination are accurate. You can also download an ICC profile from Ilford's website and not bother to develop your own.
If you use Epson paper in an Epson printer then the printer driver handles the issue for you as there are ICC profiles for Epson paper embedded in the driver.
Calibrating the monitor with the ColorMinki is a doddle.
I don't very often post or respond on this forum but I could not let the criticism of the ColorMunki stand.
I think it's possible that realspeed does not fully understand the colour management process - no offence intended.
 
Me again!
Sorry for dominating this thread but I'm trying to help - yes, really.
First, you MUST calibrate your monitor. Most monitors are set too bright and contrasty so that they have showroom appeal at the point of sale. If you process your image so that it looks right on the monitor the image file itself will be too dark, as it's brightness and contrast is being boosted by the monitor. When you print it on a calibrated printer (or send it to a printing company, which will be using printer carefully calibrated to internationally agreed standards) it will be too dark and the colours will almost certainly fail to match those displayed by the monitor. In my experience, once a modern LCD monitor is calibrated it's relatively stable. All the pros will throw up their hands in horror at the assertion, but I'm talking about domestic usage. In other words, if you can borrow a monitor calibration device for a day, or so, you can calibrate your monitor and forget it from that point on.
For printing, you can use the printer manufacturer's paper (AND INK!) and output should be acceptable because the driver will understand this combination.
If you prefer to use third party paper like Ilford, Fotospeed, Permajet, they all offer downloadable ICC profiles which you can install to ensure acceptable results with your chosen printer/paper combination. In my experience, using the ColorMunki Photo to develop my own ICC profile give slightly better results, but YMMV.
realspeed's observation that ambient light affects the issue is correct. This is a fact of life, and not a shortcoming of the ColorMunki. All pros will post process their images in a controlled environment with standardised lighting and a hood on the very expensive monitor. Only you can decide if you want to go this far.
Hope this helps, and no offence intended to anyone who thinks differently.
Calibrate you monitor or you will waste paper and ink.
 
yzfmike said:
Me again!
Sorry for dominating this thread but I'm trying to help - yes, really.
First, you MUST calibrate your monitor. Most monitors are set too bright and contrasty so that they have showroom appeal at the point of sale. If you process your image so that it looks right on the monitor the image file itself will be too dark, as it's brightness and contrast is being boosted by the monitor. When you print it on a calibrated printer (or send it to a printing company, which will be using printer carefully calibrated to internationally agreed standards) it will be too dark and the colours will almost certainly fail to match those displayed by the monitor. In my experience, once a modern LCD monitor is calibrated it's relatively stable. All the pros will throw up their hands in horror at the assertion, but I'm talking about domestic usage. In other words, if you can borrow a monitor calibration device for a day, or so, you can calibrate your monitor and forget it from that point on.
For printing, you can use the printer manufacturer's paper (AND INK!) and output should be acceptable because the driver will understand this combination.
If you prefer to use third party paper like Ilford, Fotospeed, Permajet, they all offer downloadable ICC profiles which you can install to ensure acceptable results with your chosen printer/paper combination. In my experience, using the ColorMunki Photo to develop my own ICC profile give slightly better results, but YMMV.
realspeed's observation that ambient light affects the issue is correct. This is a fact of life, and not a shortcoming of the ColorMunki. All pros will post process their images in a controlled environment with standardised lighting and a hood on the very expensive monitor. Only you can decide if you want to go this far.
Hope this helps, and no offence intended to anyone who thinks differently.
Calibrate you monitor or you will waste paper and ink.
Click to expand...
Thank you for taking the time and I very much appreciate your input.

I don't print at home and tend to send my work to printing companies with mixed results but very acceptable in general. Most of my prints recently have been no larger than an A3 sized prints but as I want to start printing larger I would like to get it right.
 
If you don't intend to print at home you don't need a Colormunki Photo. There are cheaper Colormunki devices designed to calibrate monitors without the capability of creating ICC profiles for printing. There are also perfectly adequate devices from other suppliers. £100 should buy you something suitable.
 
i don't call having to use 2 sheets of A4 good quality photo paper to calibrate a printer as you do with the X-Rite ColorMunki Photo.Under one light condition calibrate amd then calibrate again under another lighting condition. I stand by what I said £300 odd pound on a load of rubbish let alone cost of paper and ink. It also suggest deleting the computer profile which is totally wrong in my opinion. You can spend more time trying set it up by getting ambient light reading first, then monitor calibration ,then printer calibration. So after 2/3 hours getting it right you may be lucky and produce a hard copy which is acceptable.
Again running the hand light meter across the printed colour charts you have just made depends on the speed and pressure on it, and that is after the ink has dried.
So basically it could take 2 days to calibrate a printer if you don't use a quick drying photo paper. By that time the lighting conditions may have changed so you have to go through the whole process again.

As a serious hobby photographer I , like most, won't have a room set aside to produce the same ambient light as a commercial photographic company
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top