Re: argyll-options

[Pascal de Bruijn <pmjdebruijn pcode nl>]

On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Edgar Scholz <hipescho t-online de> wrote:
> Hallo
>
> Pascal gave me a hint to use GCM, because it´s easy and shure to use. So I
> installed it and created a profile for my monitor. But comparing with my old
> profile, made with dispcalGUI, I saw, that the resulting pictures were a bit
> different. To find out, what comes this difference from, I have some
> questions:

The whole reason I suggested GCM is because is mostly operates on
Argyll defaults, which are reasonably sane.

> - What kind of profile type do you generate with GCM? With dispcalGUI it was
> "xyz LUT + matrix" ( colprof -aX )

In general GCM will generate XYZ Matrix profiles (IIRC -as). Except
for printers which are always (LAB) LUT profiles.

> - What special non-default options are used for argyll ( dispcal, dispread,
> colprof )?

I'm not 100% sure, but I think GCM pretty much uses Argyll defaults.

> - I´m using openSuse 11.4 with KDE 4.6. Is it recommanded to use GCM with
> KDE or can I expect some trouble, when doing this?

Never tried that. But I can't think of any problems.

> I use a Pantone Huey Colorimeter and I adjusted GCM to make a high quality
> profile. My monitor is a BenQ FP937s. The pictures look a bit washed out
> with the GCM-profile. The curves look quite different to dispcalGUI in the
> lower frequencies.

Did you actually follow the advice GCM gave you? Adjusting monitor controls etc?

While I can't judge your particular case, profiles aren't meant to
make your pictures look "better", so "washed-out" does not mean
inaccurate per-se.

That said, in general LUT profiles provide more detail (assuming the
application applying the profiles actually supports the LUT at all, so
even if you load a single profile into multiple application, things
might turn out differently, since some apps might apply the LUT and
some might apply the matrix).

Regards,
Pascal de Bruijn