Best Mac monitor calibration for LR

Could anyone suggest the settings they are using below when calibrating a 23" Cinema Display using a Spyder2? I'm printing with LR using an Epson R2400 and my prints are somewhat darker than the screen version.
Brightness Measurement on Display:<........X........>
Gamma:
White Point:
Thanks In advance!
Dave

Similar Messages

What is the best mac to get for downloading over 30,000 photos?

what is the best mac to get for downloading over 30,000 photos?

Download from where into what? What are you going to do with the photos?
I agree with Larry that a Mac with an SSD boot drive and addtional standard drive is blazingly fast. I have an iMac setup that way and it boots in 14 seconds. With the system and applicaitons and iPhoto library on the SSD drive and most other documents, backup photos, etc. on the std. drive. it works beautifully. However, I do not let the free space on the SSD drive get less than 50 GB.
I also have an external HD that I sue with Time Maching to backup both my SSD and standard drive in the iMac.
OT

Monitor Calibration For Vista Issues?

I am looking for information about the current state of custom monitor calibration for Vista particularly concerning whether or not the profiles "stick". This forum has a link to this Microsoft knowledge base article about the problem and a link to a patch from May, 2008. The forum thread also contains assertions that certain nVidia "items" loaded at startup cause the same problems.
So, for those who use Vista and monitor color calibrators, are you still having this problem? Did the patch fix it. Did the latest nVidia drivers fix it? Do those with ATI cards have the same problem?
Thanks in advance.

Had problems with a Vista (laptop), ATI graphics and Spyder2express calibrator.
I would calibrate using Spyder2express, but every time I booted, the profile would load for a few seconds and then unload.
Apparently, it's a startup sequence problem. The S2E profile would load and then the ATI profile would over-ride it.
The only solution I could find was to prevent the Catalyst Control Centre from starting up.
Now everything runs fine.
Steve

Suggesting on best Mac set up for home photographer

looking for suggesting on best Mac set up for home photographer and video editor using iPhoto and CS6 products for example. I have a 8 year old Mac and looking to start with a new clean build. I don't need to get too fancy can be a out of box Mac solution

Any Mac will be faster than an 8-year old one (especially since that Mac is almost certainly PowerPC-based).
You've posted in the Mac Pro forum, but ironically that's the one Mac that wouldn't really make sense (they're very expensive and are generally overkill for most home applications).
The iMacs are probably what you want to look at - I would go into an Apple Store and look at the two sizes to determine what works best for you. The 27" has expandable RAM; the 21" doesn't, so you are advised, if you buy the smaller, to max out the RAM from Apple to 16GB when you buy it.
Don't forget that they lack optical drives now, so you'll need an external USB drive if you use a lot of CD/DVDs. (Doesn't need to be an Apple Superdrive.)
Matt

Monitor Calibration for Photobook

Hello Forum:
I going to work on a hardcover photobook using Aperture 2.1 on my 2nd generation Apple MacBook (2 GHz Intel Core Duo)
1. Which monitor calibration product do you recommend?
2. What adjustments in Aperture should I make to my images to ensure best results?
+Info about images:+
Camera: Canon 30D (8 megapixel)
File type: JPEG (at the largest JPEG mode)
Color Model: RGB
Pixel Size (prior to cropping): 3504 x 2336
Thanks,
Steve

I've heard good reports about Colorvision Spyder 3 Pro and I was impressed at a recent demonstration of the product. Also, it does not seem too expensive (about £100 here in the UK). There is also a higher spec version called Spyder 3 Elite.
I find it hard to answer your second point. Once you are happy that your monitor is giving you faithful colour representation, colour management is in the hands of the the processing lab that Apple has chosen to use, and this varies with region, of course. if it's any comfort, I have always been very happy with the results that I get back. However, the Photobooks that I have put together have all been for non-critical social and family purposes, rather than for any serious or professional use.

What's the best multi-monitor solution for macbook air?

I am trying to create a 3 monitor setup for my MBAir 13" Late 2011, and also a 2-monitor setup for my wife's 2013 11" MB Air. What is the best solution to accomplish this? I have already narrowed down my monitor selection to the Dell Ultrasharp U2414H with the micro-bezel.
What should I use to connect the laptops to the monitors? Matrox Triplehead2Go DP edition? Any experience would be greatly appreciated here!
Thanks!
Rich

There are no good cheap solutions due to Macbook Air's only supporting thunderbolt 1 regardless of what your User Manual may say. U2414H is not capable of daisychaining on Macbook Airs', only 2013 Macbook Pros and later. Your Two choices are Lg 34um95 and daisy chain those with thunderbolt cables or Apple's Thunderbolt display. If you dont care about quality of your second and third monitor external (meaning tearing and slow frame rates). Get a USB 3.0 to (HDMI or DVI) ( Your prefrecnce between HDMI and DVI (Make sure that the device you pick is Mac Compatible)) and a usb 3.0 hub with an AC outlet of preferably 12V, 5V may be too little. for your second and third external monitor and a thunderbolt to (HDMI or DVI) for the first monitor. USB 3.0 Does not have great video performance in viewing your screens. Watching Movies or Playing games using USB 3.0 will result in video tearing. I only recommend using the usb 3.0 adapter screens for Typing or web surfing.
Basically
1st external monitor( Fast Normal Framerates and no Video Tearing) <----Thunderbolt to HDMI/DVI adapter
2nd and 3rd external Monitor ( Slow Framerates with Video Tearing)(USB 3.0 to HDMI/DVI) connected to USB 3.0 12V Adapter Hub connected to 1 macbook air usb 3.0 Port.

Best Mac Pro Configuration for LR?

For various reasons I'm planning on migrating from my home desktop pc ( 4 year old core2 2.4 ghz xp pro sp 3 32bit accessing 2.93 out of 4 gb ram) to a new or (lightly used recent) Mac Pro desktop. The Mac Pro is available in a lot of different configurations and I would appreciate advice on how many cores and how much ram I actually need to comfortably run LR3x and its eventual upgrades (within reason) and PS3 for now and later probably whatever is current. I'm a reasonably advanced amateur photographer; I shoot what interests me and now use LR for 90-95% of my post processing of my raw Leica and Canon image files. I do use some add-ons (SilverEfex Pro2 and such).
I understand from reading some articles that too much muscle in the Mac Pro can actually slow down LR, so if this is true I'd like to stay svelte; also economic issues are somewhat a concern.
I have already considered a laptop or an iMac and decided the Mac Pro is what I want. The question is just 'what will work best for me'?
Thanks in advance, and if you need more information just let me know.
--Bob
p.s. Is the Search Function disabled in this Forum? I couldn't get it to work.

thewhitedog wrote:
@ Bob: I think you may be have acquired some misinformation somewhere. There is no such thing as "too much muscle" in a Mac Pro in relationship to Lightroom - or any other program. OS X allocates resources to applications as they need them. Unused resources remain idle or are utilized by other applications.
Adobe posts the minimum system requirements for their applications, but these should just be taken as a starting point. In my opinion you should buy the best Mac Pro your budget can handle - and maybe a little bit more. The computer is an investment, after all, not a luxury. That said, what you need to run Lightroom efficiently and what Jay needs to do video editing are not necessarily the same. For video rendering more cores are better. For Lightroom the question of the number of CPU cores is less critical. Whereas, CPU speed is more relevant. For both, the amount of RAM can make a big difference.
I recommend as a starting point, at least a quad-core Mac Pro with 4GB of RAM. That would do if you were looking at an iMac as well.
I can understand, though, how looking at the current line-up of Mac Pros can be confusing. The older Nehalem powered Mac Pros look faster for less money, but this is now old technology. The new Intel Westmere CPUs offer significant improvements in performance. Unfortunately, they are also much more expensive than any previous Mac CPU upgrade. But if you want to "future proof" your new Mac, one with a Westmere CPU is the better way to go. The 8 core model Jay went with seems to be the best value, with two quad-core 2.4GHz Westmere CPUs. However, for just $200 more you can get the 6 core 3.33GHz Westmere CPU. For the purposes of Lightroom, the faster CPUs in the 6 core model will make more of a difference than the two extra cores in the 8 core version. And the 6 core version will handle just about any multi-tasking job you throw at it; that it, using Lightroom in conjunction with Adobe Photoshop, for example.
To confuse the issue a bit more, however, if using Lightroom is your primary concern, a Mac Pro may be overkill. The new iMacs, which came out since you started this thread, are excellent machines. You could get a lot more for your money with a 27" iMac, BTO with a quad-core 3.3GHz Intel Sandy Bridge CPU, 8GB of RAM and a 2TB hard drive for roughly $1,000 less than the Mac Pros you're looking at. Along with a capable computer you get a beautiful 27" screen on the iMac. I'm not sure why you think you need the Mac Pro. The iMac can now take up to 16GB of RAM. If you were to get one with 8GB factory installed by Apple - as a BTO option - there would still be two empty RAM slots available for a future upgrade. You could add an SSD to the iMac and still pay less than you would for the Mac Pro.
And the new iMacs have a Thunderbolt port; in fact, the 27" models have two Thunderbolt ports. These offer much better throughput and greater flexibility than any previous I/O connection. With an appropriate adaptor you can use almost any external device, including eSATA, FireWire 400 and 800, USB 1, 2 and 3 and even Ethernet and an external monitor. Of course the iMac still has a Firewire 800 port and four USB 2 ports, and an SDXC memory card slot. For what it may be worth, I suggest you give the iMac another look. Your budget will thank you.
TheWhiteDog,
Kinda, Sorta, Maybe... :-) The cost differential between the 8 and 6 cores is $200 when comparing new to new. I picked up the 8 Core Westmere 2.4 for under $3000 because it comes up on the Refurbished side... So now we're talking $700 difference. the difference in price can be used for memory (I got 4GB for $50 at OtherWorldCmputing's "Garage Sale), a drive.. any number of things. Since Apple treat refurbs as new for warranty purposes (including AppleCare), I didn't see any reason not to go with the refurbished model..
I agree a higher clock speed is better, but as you said, I also do video so more cores helps (amazingly helps).. Yes, for LR 6 3.33 cores may outperform 8 2.4s, but the 8 core machine flies with LR.
As for iMacs vs. Mac Pro.. the biggest difference is that you find with any desk top vs. a "fixed" machine like the iMac. The upgrade as far a internal (and external) drives on a Mac Pro is so much better as well as to upgrade video if I want to in the future as well. As for Thunderbolt, clearly a lot of potential, but it is a daisy chain design and the slowest device in the chain can slow down everything if not done right. There's also not a lot out there for Thunderbolt yet.. and I'm not 100% sure that there won't be an PCI card for Mac Pros for Thunderbolt (although it could be a system board feature only).
At under $3000 with 6GB of memory and a 1TB 7200 drive, combined with growrh potential and the Mac Pro I think has a longer shelf life vs. the iMac. Without those Thunderbolt adapters in the market place, you're stuck with FW800, which is a lot slower than even eSATA for external drives. Since most all the LR recommendations are to split the catalog away from the cache and away from the images themselves, it's a trickier and more costly venture on the iMac.. The 27" screen in nice, but I'm not a big fan of glossy screens. I don't think any of those allow you a matte finish option like on the Macbook Pro.
Bottom line Bob is there are different choices for different budgets... Heck I went with a 17" Macbook Pro for a long time, using an inexpensive Expresscard 34 to hook up external eSATA drives and a second 24" Dell monitor.. Great combo and I always had the portability aspect of the 17" for client work, being tethered, etc..
Jay

What's the best Mac Pro config for Fireworks?

What's the best Mac config for Fireworks?
I can pretty much get whatever Mac I want at work... My boss is sick and tired of watching Fireworks crash all the time... I figure a hefty processor and lots of RAM and maybe a SSD will help…
I should get a Mac Pro right? Which processor?
• Two 2.40GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon processors (12 cores)
• Two 2.66GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon processor (12 cores)
• Two 3.06GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon (12 cores)
Should I get 24GB RAM?? Or is that overkill?
I'll get a 2TB serial hard drive…
I should get a 512 GB solid state drive offered by Apple right?
Or is it possible to get a larger better 3rd party SSD?
And then maybe two 21" Displays… Two 27s seems a little much… or does it?
Thanks in advance.

Oh and what about video cards? Or is Apple's default ok? (I'm not doing hard core PhotoShop retouching or anything).

Best Mac monitor for CS3?

Hope this isn't an old topic.
Which is the best monitor for Photoshop...that is the truest color? Matte front glass?
Is Apple planning upgrades to their current offerings..The 30" is tempting...

You might want to look at the 26-inch NEC MultiSync LCD 2690WUXi-SV (which has a matte screen and comes with SpectraView calibration software and puck).
I have one and I am delighted with it.

Monitor calibration for aperture

can anyone suggest to me the best calibrator I can buy for under £100? I need to calibrate PB G4, Cinema Dispaly and LCD monitor.
Or is there nothing under £100 that is worth it? Do i have to spalsh out big time?
Cheers,
Svendo

I got the Pantone Huey, under $80.
Very happy with the results, it even has an ambient light sensor to adjust your display's brightness according to it.
The only problem is that will allow you calibrate one display at a time. Can be solved if you call your secondary monitor "primary", calibrate it. Locate the profile just made and copy somewhere else. Switch back your main display as primary and calibrate it. Go to Preference panel, display and on your secondary display set the profile to the previous one.
Can't make it cheaper

Best Mac Pro Configuration for Editing

Hey guys. I'm looking to upgrade my editing capabilities from a iMac G5 to a Mac Pro computer system. I pretty much want to go all out on this thing, as I don't look to upgrade again anytime soon. I will be working with a fresh copy of Final Cut Studio 2.
I was wondering, however, about what would be a good configuration for the hardware itself, more specifically the video cards that are available now.
Which video card would be the best for HD video editing and manipulation? I was thinking about just getting the most expensive one, but I have heard some video cards are made for one thing more than another, and I want to make sure that I get the right configuration the first time.
Again, money is not too much of an issue as this will be an expense for my business.
Any help would be appreciated.
Message was edited by: Troy Minassian

Well I'll try not to be too vague here but I think it's going to be easier for me to give you a few hints but mostly talk about where to do more research.
First: Formats -
With good ol' DV, any off-the-shelf, completely stock, Mac Pro will handle it - absolutley NO sweat. Just add 1 (or more) iternal SATA drives for capturing media, and you're off to the races. HDV...this could go either way. In theory, again, a basic Mac Pro can handle this. The format's total throughput is no more than DV. However, my thought is that using straight HDV in it's "native" format can be a real pain in the butt. Cruise over the Final Cut forum and do a search for a phrase like "HDV" & "Yuck" and you'll end up with a big long list of issues. I'll not go too far into detail, but HDV is a highly compressed format with a GOP-structure. Dealing with GOP-structured media in an NLE is not pretty.
The good news is if you're even considering something like an Io HD then the HDV issues can be conquered with it. You would use the Io HD to transcode the HDV to Apple's ProRes codec on the fly. That's what the IoHD does. It's an external capture card whose form factor makes it nice and portable. So you'd come out of your camera or deck - into the Io HD - and out via firewire to your computer. The one "trick" is: you're married to ProRes. That's the one & only codec this box does. (To the best of my knowledge, that is.) Anyway, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Just good to know going into it. Here's a review of the Io HD over at the creativecow.net. And by the way, if you've never hung out over there, note that it's a great resource for help. Tons of in-the-know pros hang out there.
As far as AVCHD, I'm personally not too familiar with it. I know that it too is not very intensive to deal with - per se. But the whole tapeless concept is still somewhat new and as such has it's share of "gotchas". For that I'd do a search over there on Apple's Final Cut forum. I know a search for AVCHD is going to turn up many many posts.
Regarding the RED. Again, it's so new it's got it share of workflow bumps to be aware of. (Personally, I love the concept of what this camera is all about. I checked it out and NAB and was really impressed with where they're going with it.) But for better info on that, I'd steer over to the Final Cut forum here and the Final Cut form over at the COW. Further, the camera has it's own forum over at the COW. And another great source of info is reduser.net. This camera is sweeping the industry. But it's changing the workflow quite a bit too.
Second: Processing -
As far as overall CPU power goes....Sure! A higher clock speed is basically going to be a faster machine. Here's some stats. But what's the cost? The 3.2 is faster than the 2.8. Is this worth $1600 to you? Only you can answer that question. For me: I just spent a month vacillating over a new machine purchase. I had originally "decided" months ago to get a new Mac Pro Eight 2.8. Then I thought I might save some loot and buy a G5. Then I thought, No! That's a dumb idea.... I could spend only about $600 more and get a refurb'ed 2.66 Quad core. Then I figured I could spend $800 more than that and end up - right back where I started - with a new 2.8 8-Core. So for me, the $1400 more, to go from a used G5 to a new 2.8 Octo, just made sense. But the point is: it's a completely personal decision. For me, that overall margin of money/performance made a lot of sense! On the other hand, did it make sense for me to spend $1600 more and get the 3.2 instead of the 2.8? Not at all! So only you are going to be able to decide if $1600 buys you enough of a performance hike.
Then, Extras -
Too, you're going to want to add as much RAM as you can afford. The other big question is storage. You've mentioned a spectrum of formats. On the one hand you've got your DV. Again a single SATA drive will be more than enough to capture to and playback from. But with ProRes HQ you're getting more demanding on the drives. For this, you'd want to now add, let's say, 3 more internal drives and stripe them together into a capture RAID. But you could even go up a few steps and get something like the CalDigit HD Pro and get multiple streams of HD playback with the security of a hardware-controlled RAID 5 scenario. So there's a couple of different ways to go here....However, if you start with very very fast, reliable drives, you're setting yourself to handle higher-end formats. Drive speed can be a killer. But if you start at the top you can basically head off any format woes for the future. (For a while....Nothing's completely future-proof in this game.)
Finally, Monitoring -
You've got to figure out how to look at/hear the media outside-of-the-computer. Meaning - you're going to need external monitoring equipment: Video and Audio. Again this will open more questions for you. But these items are key to your knowing what you're REALLY working with. So you really need a NTSC monitor, an audio mixer/control surface of some sort and some powered speakers. The Final Cut forums will be good places to research what others are using in these arenas.
Anyway, good luck with it all! You've already discovered a great resource: this forum. If I were you, I'd start to spend more time on the Final Cut forums. These types of queries will get solid answers over there. I'd recommend establishing the habit of performing a search when you've over there though. The chances of someone else, already asking the same thing that you're investigating, is quite high. Almost guaranteed. Enjoy!

How do I set one monitor calibration for the whole system and users?

I'm really angry because when I logged into my first default account, My settings where normal, but I logged into my alt account, the settings where all messed up (NO ONE TOUCHED MY COMPUTER, AND THE ACCOUNT HAS A STRONG PASSWORD) The white balance was that slightly blue one. So, I changed it, and logged in to the alt account again to see it was okay. I want to my main account and used screenlock, and noticed on the login screen (I logged out of the account after I saw to see this same thing) it was the light bluer white balance. So I logged in and calibrated AGAIN and it finally when back to the default on the login screen (2:2 or something and native white balance) and my preferences for my accounts (television gamma, and native white balance) I just want it system wide to be:
-2:2 TELEVISION GAMMA
-Native White Gamma
Or at-least the login screen, and my two accounts, and that settings to be the system wide default.

Thanks for helping me make it worse.
First off, if you want help, act like an adult. We're all just other users you're talking to, not Apple employees. Such angry behavior will only ensure that no one will respond to any questions by you in the future.
Second, there's nothing wrong with Kappy's advice. The /Library/ColorSync/Profiles/ folder is accessible by all user accounts. So putting one common monitor profile there and setting it in each account is what you want to do.
What you're seeing is a known issue when switching users without restarting. I don't know if there's ever been a true solution for it.
One of many articles on the subject:
http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=20060103162354164
I know the linked article is about Tiger, but the bug persists through Leopard.

What's the best mac configuration setup for Logic?

I think that I didn't configure my Mac good enough to work with Logic and I hear that there is a special configuration that should be used to have everhything work together as best as possible in terems of memory use etc. But what are the best settings? And where do i configure them?

Are you talking about within logic or the actual system?
as far as logic is concerned, the preferences / audio tab will offer you most of the controls to optimize logic for your system.
as far as the actual mac, the best would obviously be a 12 core mac pro, speced till it would spec no more LOL.
but a I5 imac and that much ram is still a reasonable beast in the home studio stakes.
the best way to use all the RAM is to run logic in 64 bit,
find logics icon in the finder, and either right/ctrl click and click get info or press cmd-I.
this will bring up the get info dialog, and uncheck run in 32bit.
hey presto, logic can get to 16gb of RAM (in theory).

Best Mac Pro Setup for Photoshop CS5

I've read around that it's not needed to have the fastest (and costliest) Mac Pro to run Photoshop CS5 at it's best.
However, there doesn't seem to exist any discussions involving the latest models (Feb 2012).
Which would be the optimal Mac Pro available today for running large files (1GB and up) in Photoshop CS5?

LOTs of RAM, fast 6-core 3.33GHz for starters.
Mac Pro Photoshop CS5 and Lightroom 3
Optimize Photoshop CS5
Optimize CS5 CS4 Mac OS X
http://www.macperformanceguide.com

Monitor calibration for 27 in imac

I need to know how to calibrate my monitor so that I know what my photographs are going to look like before they get printed. Either that or would it be better to buy a third party calibrator, like X-rite?

You proably would get better results with the 3rd party device but the built in calibrate supplied by the system can be brought up by clicking the Color tab in the Displays system preferences.

Best Mac monitor calibration for LR

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for