HikeArizona.COM

I have a new (HP) computer, and I am trying to figure out what the most accurate color setting is for the LCD monitor (for the purpose of editing photos). I have a choice of 9300K (looks blue), 6500K (looks yellow), sRGB (lower contrast), Quick View (looks the same as 6500K), or Custom Color (with adjustable RGB). Is there such a thing as a "correct" setting, or is it just a personal choice?

Yes there is a correct setting.

http://www.normankoren.com/makingfineprints1A.html
Set your monitor's color temperature (white point) to 6500K, D65, or sRGB, which is equivalent to 6500K. This is preferable to setting it on video card or monitor calibration software. My monitor selections are 5000K (D50), 6500K (D65), and 9300K. Older monitors with no color temperature setting default to around 9000-9300K, which is far too blue to comfortably match prints viewed under incandescent light, which has color temperatures between 2600 and 4200K. The 5000K setting appears too dull and yellow on most CRT monitors.
.
Note the confusing terminology: Artists call higher color temperatures (bluer) "cooler" and lower color temperatures (yellower) "warmer." The huge variety of available hardware can make setting color temperature confusing. You may have the option of setting color temperature on the monitor (preferred) or with video card or monitor calibration software. Do not set it in both; this may result in an overcorrection-- your monitor will appear dim and yellow. Software settings work correctly if the monitor is uncorrected, i.e., about 9000-9300K. Unless you have a calibrator you'll have to trust your eyes: White and gray images (where R = G = B) should appear tonally neutral, i.e., they should have no visible tint. The Gamma and monitor test patterns are excellent for this purpose.

My strategy is just to view it on several different monitors. It was quite the trial and error process when I first started editing photos on my laptop. Post on the web, view it on my work computer, view it on my parents' computer, view it on friends' computers. At this point I've figured out that my monitor is a bit bright and "cool" compared to most other monitors, so I adjust accordingly when I process.

I've heard several different things about appropriate settings, but the only consistent advice I've heard is to buy monitor calibration software

I got a new computer about six months ago. The first week of set up went fine until I had the great idea to install a software disk that came with my new ViewSonic LCD monitor. Everything was working great before the install disk. Now I was having “color space” issues. What the #@$% is a color space. This was all new to me. A photo would look correct as desktop background and terrible in the windows photo gallery. A technician had to work with me to troubleshoot the problem. He determined that it was a color space issue when he found out it was fine in windows paint. Ahhhh!!! This stuff is way over my head. The main give away with the color space issue was unnatural color and purple sky rather than blue. I had to uninstall the software to correct the issue. The moral of the story was to never install monitor software and to be very careful to ignore windows updates for your monitor. The tech told me that monitors are always “plug & play” and that the install software ends up causing more problems than good.

I don’t like any of the pre-set monitor color settings. Most monitors have a user setting that you can customize. The setting choices are always Red, Green, and Blue. On three monitors in my house, I have noticed a common balance of settings that seems to look good on all of them. The levels differ, but the principal seems to be the same.

Red: 80-90%
Green: 60-80%
Blue: 60-80%

I have basically determined to always keep green and blue equal and always below red. I don’t know if this will work for you, but it is worth a try. Find a minimally processed/altered photo from an area that you have strong memories of and manipulate your monitor colors until the photo looks familiar. Good luck! I hate screwing with this stuff. It’s frustrating.

azpride wrote:It was quite the trial and error process when I first started editing photos on my laptop. Post on the web, view it on my work computer, view it on my parents' computer, view it on friends' computers. At this point I've figured out that my monitor is a bit bright and "cool" compared to most other monitors, so I adjust accordingly when I process.

That is absolutely maddening to realize for the first time. A photo that could look great on your computer could look terrible on someone else’s. Brightness and contrast levels reap havoc on this also. Everyone likely views our photos differently than what we see on our computers. That is a scary thought...

FWIW, it really depends on if you are going to print or keep them in digital format. Few recipients of your digital shots will have their monitors calibrated to the same white balance as yours, for example.

Long ago I researched this extensively being frustrated with the variance between computers. Long story short, I was told the only true way to set precise color is via rather expensive hardware. I have no clue if there's truth to that, it did come up repeatedly down several avenues. Seemed like it was in the 300-500 dollar range to get whatever equipment was necessary. I just couldn't force myself to spend that kind of money on it.

In the end I pretty much go with the standard settings only really adjusting brightness/contrast to be sure I have all the shades on the grayscale chart (at page bottom of every photoset page).

joe bartels wrote:adjusting brightness/contrast to be sure I have all the shades on the grayscale chart (at page bottom of every photoset page).

That’s interesting Joe. I have never really looked at that. I cannot distinguish between 95 & 100 in the white scale along the right side of the screen. Playing with brightness and contrast does not have any effect.

ssk44 wrote:I cannot distinguish between 95 & 100

It's very subtle for me.

...maybe it's not brightness/contrast

I can see an extremely subtle difference if I move my head up and down across the monitor to change the viewing angle.

Monitor viewing angle also has a huge effect on photo viewing with LCD’s.

joe bartels wrote:In the end I pretty much go with the standard settings only really adjusting brightness/contrast to be sure I have all the shades on the grayscale chart (at page bottom of every photoset page).

I had wondered exactly what this reference chart was needed/used for. If this is a good solution then my setup is working properly for me as I can now distinguish between all gray-scale shades on your reference chart. Thanks for the clarification of its use.

This is starting to remind me of the argument about 1080i vs 1080p. The simple truth is that the human eye is incapable of differentiating the two. ;)

Coming from the graphic design/printing industry, I would have to recommend the Pantone "Huey" calibration doohinkey for $90 or so. It even adjusts your monitor settings according to the changes in light. Might be overkill unless you're a perfectionist...