Quote:
Originally Posted by iwantchixx
I'm just using an Xrite ColorMunki Display (Lite)
It's a good machine but it lacks ambient light sensors and profile selection between day/night uses. it also doesnt do white-ballance so when possible, one of our main producers uses a white-balance card and I just let Lightroom do the magic. Another main producer already corrects his finished work, which is nice, but its still smart to keep my monitors calibrated so when I output, they stay as accurate as possible.
If you get one, get one of the higher-end Xrites so it does All the calibrations.
Edit: Before getting the tool, I was using those web-based sliders, too, the difference once using an xrite was night and day.. those tools are kinda useless considering your monitor needs to be already tuned for the full effect
|
Good solid advice. You know what your talking about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickey1952
If your a good shooter none of that matters. light it properly and shoot it right..
|
Yes to a point if your good and shoot JPG. But not if you shoot RAW and implement your own color profile as I do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcop
|
Thats exactly what I do. You absolutely can't go wrong with that work flow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grapesoda
|
99% of my customer base may not have calibrated monitors, but also keep in mind that same customer base are not working with exact color profiles that need to be graded with extreme accuracy.
Look at it like this: When you shoot RAW, there is no color profile. You must make your own in post production.
So If your monitor is more blue than it would be calibrated, and you try and warm up a photo, when your clients get it; he is going to think that you suck as a photog. Why Because the pic is going to be way to orange. And that happened because you over compensated for the uncalibrated Blue you saw in the monitor.
It happen to me 9 years ago with a one client. And I have had good friends get fired because they made color corrections based on uncelebrated monitors.
I run two 27 inch monitors, they are both calibrated and look identical. But the settings that make them match are not the same. Why? Every monitor is different and they all shift with in a month to one color or another. Thats why they need to be calibrated regularly.
If you shoot jpg, white balance, and light very well; you don't have to sweat monitor color calibration. Why? When shooting jpg, you can choose to have your color profile baked into the file and when your done shooting, your done. Down side; 8 bit color, less room to fix if you fuck up.
If you shoot RAW, color calibrated monitors are absolutely key. If you do any color calibrating or video color grading on content, color calibration is imperative. Why? RAW has no color profile baked into it and you still need to run the pics through post. Thats the downside I guess. But the upside is with RAW, even if you royally fuck up with your lighting, over expose, under expose, etc, the information is still there and you can recover and fix mistakes in post.
One last thing: jpg is 8 bit color. 10 bit color is double the colors of 8 bit. 12 bit color is double the colors of 10 bit. 14 bit is double the colors of 12 bit. 16 bit is double the colors of 14 bit.
Good cameras that I and other high end shoots are using are 14 and 16 and higher. Why would you ever want to shoot jpg?
Keep in mind when you add color or do color grading of any type, you are taking away information from the file.
I know this is a lot of info, but i thought I would share a bit about what I know about color and monitor calibration.
If its for business and you make money with it, Buy the very best Xrite color calibrating system you can buy. don't chinch out! The cheaper ones need to be replaced every 3 years or so. The good ones last a long time.
Hope that helps. I know my stuff when it comes to color and monitor calibration. Would love to hear what Dean Capture has to add. I know he knows his shit! lol
Just Dave