Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

dmcnickle · Dec 30, 2007, 08:33 PM

I have a 17" MacBook Pro and have decided that I need to calibrate the display. I have tried to use Apple's calibration method and would like to be more accurate because I had a hard time determining what is neutral in those steps (neutral as compared to what). I work with photographs and need to be more accurate. I have used the Color LCD display and when I set it to Nikon Apple Apple RGB or Nikon AdobeWide RGB I was shocked with the difference. The calibration I came up with using Apple's is somewhere in the middle. The Color LCD seems to have a more grey cast to it when looking at the menu bar of Safari and folders. The LCD calibrated and Nikon Apple profile has more blue to the menu bar of Safari and folders. Maybe the white balance is just more accurate with the Nikon Apple and the calibration I attempted.

Any advice or similar experiences?

-Denise

EndlessMac · Dec 31, 2007, 03:50 PM

I use ColorVision's Sypder color calibration system. For the price it's pretty accurate and it does all the work instead of you making subjective choices with your eyes. It's one of the more relatively affordable systems. If you want superior accuracy you will have to spend a lot more, but it's good enough for my needs which is also photo editing.

Apple's calibration is only good for the general public because it does get you closer to accurate colors but it's still not as accurate as a calibration system you buy. Apple's calibration is free though. Actually IMO everyone should calibration their monitors especially if they buy items on the internet and want an exact color. If everyone calibrated their monitors to the same standard then what you see on the internet will be more accurate to what you will receive when it comes to color.

Cadaver · Dec 31, 2007, 11:59 PM

^^ Yep.
I also have a Spyder. $99 at the Apple store a few months ago. Its great. Fully automatic and gives great results. Comes with software for the Mac and for Windows.

For software-based calibration, you could try an application called SuperCal. I've never used it personally, but I've heard the name mentioned quite a bit.

Veltliner · Jan 5, 2008, 05:11 AM

A word against the spyder. I have heard a lot of complaints and about unreliability.

Hands off 100$ units. Don't buy anything with the word "lite" in it. If you want good calibration, that comes at a price of 200$ plus.

Widely regarded as one of the best is the Eye One Display 2.

If you additionally invest in the Color Eyes Software, you have the best. Color Eyes is also available with the Monaco Optix Pro sensor, which, unfortunately, will go out of production. You might snatch one up at a good price.

OreoCookie · Jan 5, 2008, 05:55 AM

@Veltiner
AFAIK the difference between different versions of the Color Spyder is not the hardware, but only software … or am I wrong here?
I have a Color Spyder 2 Express and I can recommend it. In any case hardware calibration > software calibration

dn15 · Jan 5, 2008, 09:04 PM

I have a Pantonue "Huey Pro" and have been very happy with the results.

Veltliner · Jan 7, 2008, 12:08 AM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

@Veltiner
AFAIK the difference between different versions of the Color Spyder is not the hardware, but only software … or am I wrong here?
I have a Color Spyder 2 Express and I can recommend it. In any case hardware calibration > software calibration

I could not imagine that this would be the case. But I must say that after my research into calibration I decided to not to buy any spyder. My decision was between the Monaco Optix and the Eye One.

Huey, and Huey Pro use the same hardware, that's correct, but they both are not in the least pro.

Regarding calibration tool, even I might sound like a record grinding the same groove: none of the light, lite, or express calibration tools can be recommended.

It's like with all kind of technical instruments: there is a price level that cannot be undercut if a company does want to deliver a great tool. For marketing reasons, companies do try... adding to the large amount of things out there that are well priced, and useless.

@ OreoCookie: make sure about the hardware. If that IS the same as the spyder pro (even though it is doubtful), upgrade to better software.

The best software for calibration is the Color Eyes software. But it is a really complex piece of software, and costs 170$ extra, so I decided to go Eye One Display 2, which is a great tool.

OreoCookie · Jan 7, 2008, 06:14 AM

You're right, you've helped me with your expertise in my thread on color consistency. Despite the problems, a very cheap hardware calibration tool is better than software calibration: the el cheapo ColorSpyder makes a big difference compared to a software-calibrated screen.

Next time, though, I plan on investing more in a color calibration tool, though. So if you can (afford it), Veltiner's suggestion is worth thinking about.

Bwa · Jan 9, 2008, 01:36 PM

What's the minimum calibrator product for multiple monitors? I had read on Spyder's site that the cheapest version doesn't support multiple displays... does anyone know what that really means?

OreoCookie · Jan 9, 2008, 03:15 PM

It works with multiple monitors. You just have to calibrate one screen at a time and rename the profile in ColorSync Utility. (Otherwise you have several Spyder2Express profiles and you don't know which is which anymore.) I also recommend that you add a date to the name. This way I always know which profile is the latest one and can compare to the previous one.

Bwa · Jan 11, 2008, 11:05 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

It works with multiple monitors. You just have to calibrate one screen at a time and rename the profile in ColorSync Utility. (Otherwise you have several Spyder2Express profiles and you don't know which is which anymore.) I also recommend that you add a date to the name. This way I always know which profile is the latest one and can compare to the previous one.

Great, thanks!

Cadaver · Jan 12, 2008, 02:55 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

You're right, you've helped me with your expertise in my thread on color consistency. Despite the problems, a very cheap hardware calibration tool is better than software calibration: the el cheapo ColorSpyder makes a big difference compared to a software-calibrated screen.

Next time, though, I plan on investing more in a color calibration tool, though. So if you can (afford it), Veltiner's suggestion is worth thinking about.

True. If your livelihood depends on accurate color rendition, then by all means spend the money for a top quality unit. If you simply want a decent looking image on your screen so you can see well what the kids look like in their halloween costumes in iPhoto, then something like the $100 Spyder works fine, and as Oreo says, is much better than trying to do it by hand with Apple's built-in software ("squint and move the slider until the colors match").

I'm not a graphic artist or professional photographer. If you are, then this thread likely wont teach you anything you don't already know. If you're an average Joe who wants a better image than you get by default, then its up to you if you want to spend $100 or $250+ on a calibration device.

For me, I want the whites on the screen to be white - not pink, not blueish... but white. And the improvement my little $100 gadget provides is well worth it. Calling the Spyder "lite" garbage just because its not a professional unit doesn't help anyone. Same can be said for all sorts of devices - $99 graphics tablets versus $800 tablets with build-in color LCDs, the $79 Apple "Pro" keyboard versus the $200 Matias TactilePro, Dell displays versus Eizo displays, etc.