PhotoLab 4 with X-rite i1Display Studio display calibrator

What can I say? I have all the documentation that came with the display, including a large cable drawing showing what’s what, and I have the display in front of me to verify that things are right, which they are. I will copy the correct drawing later tonight, or tomorrow.

Thank you for all your interest and help; if you wish, I’ll take a photo of the back of the display to send you. The online manual I posted may or may not be the right manual - I never got a manual, just the large printout with all the setup and use information, including this:

Aha! I didn’t know you meant that. For editing on the ASUS, since I can see just about everything, all the rectangles, maybe my contrast is correct. Now that I know what you mean, I’ll check tomorrow when I’m more awake. If I change the contrast, do I need to re-do the calibration? I assume you want me to lower the contrast slightly, right?

Yes and that is when you will find out what luminance you’ve ended up with.

I can’t tell which way it needs to go or even if it needs changing. That has to be up to you when looking at the steps in the test images.

Yep, I glanced at a few pages, got lost, put it away, and figured I would try again when I was more awake.

As to the cable connections, it’s irrelevant what that or any other manual does or does not say. I’ve got the actual device and the setup page that came with MY device, many years ago. Never trust what you read on the internet, until you make sure it is valid for your specific purpose.

I’ve got a three-foot by three foot printout in 32 different languages for different locations around the world, and my (special) Display Port cable goes into the Display Port connector as shown above, and the other end of the cable is a mini-display-port connector that goes to my iMac.

I haven’t read the manual I linked to - it “should” be the correct manual according to what the web page said, but again, I never trust those things to be right.

Anyway, none of this is relevant, if Joanna thinks my images are acceptable. She seems rather brilliant at these things, undoubtedly from a lot of experience, and when it comes to this kind of stuff, I’m still in kindergarten. Fortunately, I’m also very stubborn, or I would have given up on this long ago.

…and I’m also VERY grateful to all the people here who are helping me understand PL4 by showing me better ways to do things using my own images. I’m no expert, and may never be an expert, but PL4 is getting easier and easier to take what I think, and make it appear on the screen. I just hope I’m not boring too many people by asking what is probably very simple questions. Then I get to try the things they show me.

On this note, it’s now past midnight, and I’m off to sleep. :slight_smile:

Joanna, how do I find that value?

Screen Shot 2020-12-30 at 00.16.14

If I run i1Studio, will it show me this information?
I’ll stop it before it runs, of course.

Yes, see the screenshot I posted here

You need to run the calibration until you get to this screen.

[Edit]

But I have to say that, if your latest images are anything to go by, you don’t need to do much, apart from thinking about what you would do if you wanted to print. Web viewing and sending files for us to see seems fine now :blush:

Assuming you have calibrated your screen, I don’t have much of a problem viewing your images here. They don’t look too dark.

However, to my eye, they do look a bit “dull” or “flat” so I’ve taken your images and reworked them slightly, not because of any screen difference but because I wanted to show you some different ways of editing them to give them a bit more life. Of course you may not want that effect so feel free to disregard the overall appearance but take a look at how I achieved it in case it comes in useful.

If I were you I would create a new folder and copy the files plus my .dops, so that you don’t confuse PhotoLab’s database by conflicting different .dops.

Here is a jpeg export of my version

And here is the .dop file, which contains both your and my versions.

_MJM2242 | 2020-12-29-Biscayne, boats.nef.dop (40,9 Ko)

With this shot, I noticed that unedited, it looked too dark and that you had added 1 stop of extra exposure to compensate for under-exposure in the camera.

With my version, I haven’t added any exposure compensation! Instead, I started, once again, by using the Spot mode smart lighting tool (medium intensity) to establish the darkest and lightest areas that I wanted to have detail…

Then I modified the Tone curve to better “fill” the histogram, placing the brightest point as near to the right as I could without provoking the over-exposure warning

Capture d’écran 2020-12-30 à 08.50.31

This then gave…

Rather than being brighter (by adding exposure) but still flat, this technique has brightened it by adding contrast.

Instead of using ClearView Plus to add detail, I tend to use the Advanced Contrast palette…

Capture d’écran 2020-12-30 à 08.59.37

This allows me to choose the type of detail and whether it affects the whole image or focuses on the highlights, mid-tones and/or shadows.

It doesn’t seem to make much difference in this screenshot but on the full-sized image it is as detailed as using ClearView Plus, but subtler.

Finally, I set the white balance to the same as you have it, to give the finished result you see in the first jpeg of this post.


By the way, for some reason, the distortion correction palette was activated and set to Barrel/100. To start with, this didn’t appear to be altering the image from no correction but, when I deactivated and re-activated it, it did show up as pincushion distortion. This seems like a minor bug in PL but you just need to be aware of it in case it does alter one of your images.


If you click on the image in the post, it will fill the browser window with a dark grey background :wink:

Now to the second image…

Here is a jpeg export of my version…

Once again, I have not sought to simply make the image brighter but I have used the same techniques as with the jet skier to better fill the histogram and, thus, increase the contrast and level of detail.

This time, I haven’t used Smart lighting because there are no obviously dark or light areas to “level out”

But I have altered the tone curve…

Capture d’écran 2020-12-30 à 09.22.55

… and the advanced contrast…

Capture d’écran 2020-12-30 à 09.25.26

… instead of ClearView Plus.

Here is the .dop file with both versions…

_MJM2284 | 2020-12-29-Biscayne, boats.nef.dop (23,1 Ko)


Finally, the sunset…

With this image, all I’ve done, in addition to what you have done, is to add Spot mode Smart lighting (Slight) with two zones: one over the sun and the other over the side of the boat…

… mainly to overcome the over-exposure and flare out around the sun. Like you I wouldn’t want to bring out too much detail in the shadows.

And I added the slightest of tone curves to deepen the shadow tones and put a tad more detail in the sky …

Capture d’écran 2020-12-30 à 11.19.42

Oh, and I added DeepPRIME NR.

Jpeg export of my version…

And the .dop file with both versions…

_MJM2328 | 2020-12-29-Biscayne, boats.nef.dop (23,0 Ko)

Dear @mikemyers,

I take a short look into the ASUS_PB278QR_UserGuide_English.pdf.

Maybe you will give the factory setting sRGB a chance

And be sure that none of the following settings in the Image menu is active

  • VividPixel: ASUS Exclusive Technology that brings lifelike visuals for
    crystal-clear and detail-oriented enjoyment. The adjusting range is from
    0 to 100.
  • ASCR: Select ON or OFF to enable or disable dynamic contrast ratio
    function.

best regards

Guenter

Joanna, I think I will copy the NEF images (only) and start off new, trying to do what you have done in the same order. To avoid confusion in the future, I plan to create a new 2021 folder, and starting in January, to leave all this “old” stuff where it is.

Just one more comment for now (just woke up), I got an email from one of my friends regarding the sunset photo, that he feels it hurts his eyes while looking at it. I guess it fooled him into thinking it was real. To me, the brightest that spot can ever be is just pure “white”, but I too look at the image as it is now, and part of me also wants to look away from it.

One last question - have you heard of the software program “Camtasia”? You could install it on your computer, and leave it running, along with a microphone in front of you. Camtasia can make a copy of everything that showed up on your screen, from any program, and nature your advice as you use these tools, explaining what you’re doing, or changing and why. We all could then see what you do through your eyes, hearing your voice explanations of why you are doing something. If It took you 20 minutes to complete an image, Camtasia will create a 20 minutes long video of what you did, and your voice explaining why you do something.

I’ve got the program - maybe I’ll try this. It won’t “teach” anyone what to do, but you can all get a good laugh watching me through the process. And every window that opens up on that display will also be captured in the Camtasia video. I just need to buy a decent microphone, or wear my headset.

Guenterm,

Since I don’t yet know what I have now (probably the original settings as when I got the display) I’m not yet ready to make changes until after I document what the current settings are.

I’m wondering though - after all the recommendations to use AdobeRGB, would setting the display for sRGB Mode conflict with that?

Now I am starting to understand why the display cost around $500 the many years ago. At the time, I had a Windows computer, and it became my main (and only) display.

Thanks for taking the time to check all this out.

(It would be great if this forum has a “favorites” function, where I could save posts such as what you wrote with an organized index to find them in the future. I would also be creating my own “training” folder with the posts from Joanna and others explaining how/why to do things.)

Hello,
I checked the specs and Asus wrote “… 2560 x 1440, 100% sRGB-Abdeckung”…and that’s a predefined setting, but you have to deselect also your (maybe wrong profiles).
To use Adobe RGB isn’t wrong, but if your display only supports sRGB, you use the photos only for web presenting or small prints and so on, you will get a lot of recommendations to use sRGB. If you send your photos to an online print service, adjusted them on a real WideGamut AdobeRGB monitor, the online printer normally uses sRGB. Converting from ARGB to sRGB within the printing process will give you different Colors then.
I have learned to go back to the basics when poking at the fog, and then build the environment step by step with all the things you have learned and understand.
The last time I discussed with @Joanna I’ve done the same way. Reset all, calibrate my Dell U2413 (ARGB) new, talked to the manufacturer of my prints(because the next big thing is printer and paper profile :grinning:) and ticked off all the items. In the meantime I bought a new Eizo EV2456 (sRGB) calibrate it and the 2 monitors looks very similar in greytones and colors.
For favorite function in forum check
Thread
Thread2

best regards

That puts you in the same boat as JMW Turner or Joseph Wright of Derby, both of whom managed to paint light that seemed too bright to be just paint on paper.

Sorry, that’s just not going to happen. I might have presented technical computer programming talks in the past but I would not be comfortable when I can’t see the audience reaction to guide me on what to do or say next.

Your iMac screen contains a mic that should be good enough.

Which mode are you using at present? The Standard mode? Certainly you don’t want to be using any of the other fancy modes.
See what @Guenterm has to say about that.

Mike, your picture

is way underexposed (lifting exposure by more than 2.0 and still far from overexposure warning).
The JPG is also too dark, even with screen set to 120 cd/m².
Wolfgang

I produced a version with absolutely no exposure compensation at all.

See my post here - PhotoLab 4 with X-rite i1Display Studio display calibrator

The reason it “hurts” my eyes isn’t because it is too bright - the real reason is that the scene looks too “real” and my brain thinks I’m actually looking at the sun! I’m sure it sounds silly, but I’m remembering yesterday, when it was uncomfortable looking through my viewfinder. I’m good (or is it bad?) about stuff like this - the content of an image sometimes has a huge effect on me. They bring up emotions sometimes. In reality, the “white” of the sun in that image is not as bright as the white on my iMac display as I’m typing this message.

OK, I did as you suggested, and here are my current settings:

When I tried to do a “screen capture”, the “121” changed to “25”. I took a photo with my iPhone of what was actually on my screen. Very strange, but something to remember if I’m doing a screen capture while testing - don’t.

That’ll be because the rest of the screen not being captured is veiled :wink:

That’s the penalty from taking a “grab shot” using a manual camera, still set for a very different screen. There was no time to adjust anything other than the focus. My Df is good about things like adjusting the exposure, but I’m not fast enough to look in the viewfinder for the suggested exposure, while simultaneously focusing manually, and trying to get a pleasing composition.

Most of my shots from yesterday I had time to think about, re-adjust if needed (from looking at histogram) and re-shoot. Not this one - I just pivoted to get the jet ski in view, and took a few photos at what I hoped were good moments. All of this happened in under two seconds.

I just had to post this by Joseph Wright of Derby…

… to inspire us to go beyond just getting it right technically :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:


Nonetheless, it wasn’t beyond recovery and therefore can be classified as a good shot :clap:

1 Like

As far as I know, I’m using whatever mode the ASUS came with from the factory. I don’t recall ever going through the settings before.

You wrote: … to inspire us to go beyond just getting it right technically

About the image you just posted - to me, getting it right “technically” is not my main priority. This got me in trouble writing back and forth to Gregor, but for ME, it’s “composition” and “timing” at the top of my list. If those are poor, no matter how good the image is technically, to me the image is not acceptable.

It’s like a book - a book can be dog-eared, with the pages yellowing, and falling out of the book, but it’s the STORY that I relate to. The photos I posted yesterday - I wanted to share how I felt while taking them, or more precisely, how I reacted to what I was looking at. The art photo you just posted - BEAUTIFUL!!!