Subrata Senn wrote:waltervolpatto wrote:Subrata Senn wrote:Here is how that can be done:
1. Get one high end computer monitor which can be calibrated to 100% sRGB.
2. Calibrate the monitor to sRGB with 2.4 gamma and D65 through a proper probe and software.
3. Locate the .icc/.icm profile in your computer.
4. Convert the .icc/.icm profile into a sRGB to Rec 709 3D LUT using free DispcalGUI software or Briz LuT Converter software (
http://www.brizsoft.com/lut-converter/). The second option is available only for Windows.
5. Copy the created LUT in the LUT folder of Resolve.
6. Apply the LUT in Resolve for your viewer.
And now, the viewer will work in Rec 709 color space, just like a broadcast monitor.
Walter, since you go by mathematics quite often, tell me if I've gone wrong mathematically.
late to this thread but thought I chime in...
Subrata, first of all thank you for stating that Resolve has an option to "calibrate" the viewer. Lots of peeps have complained about that, and as you demonstrate there is an approach.
But - as others have stated - that won't make the viewer remotely as good as an external reference grading panel.
If you are on a shoestring budget and that's the best you can do, so be it.
But as Marc has pointed out, the hardware of low end panels is crap. You will run into many issues (gamut, LCD backlight contamination, light leakage, viewing angle, non-proper i/o, not true 10-bit etc etc) that your eyes cannot see but that will be there and it will affect your grading decisions...
screen uniformity is one of your biggest problems... see here, why OLED is absolutely recommended for professional grading:
http://displaycalibrationtools.com/disp ... omparison/ look at the Qnix QX2710 results (very popular cheapo display, great GUI screen for the price).... devastating compared to the FSI LCD, which in turn is destroyed by the FSI OLED... u can only imagine how many bad grading decisions u will make because of bad uniformity...
Plasmas will have the ABL issues, IR issues and bad uniformity... I have three 65VT60s here (all 65^3 calibrated)... u can use them as a client "real world" reference display, but not for direct grading... and now that Plasma is obsolete, not so much "real world" anymore...
I sincerely doubt the broadcast Plasma perform better...
maybeone can use a larger cheaper computer display for editing and to spot non-color related errors...
but spotting critical color errors on a display with horrible uniformity (which introduces color AND luminance errors) is impossible b/c one will never know what a real "problem" is until u check the footage on real reference screens...
As Walter has already mentioned, the ICC profile won't be as good as a real 3D LUT created from the original profiling data... and the conversion just makes it worse... but to back up ur point, simply do NOT create an ICC profile, go directly to creating a 3D LUT from the original display profile...
which brings up the next problem: Resolve had problems in the past with LUTs... not saying it has now, but how would YOU know your (viewing) LUT is 100% correctly applied ?
that is why the Pro approach is always to use 3D LUT memory inside of the ref screens or external LUT boxes when it comes to the actual
display calibration...
besides that, you are not getting true 10-bit out of any of these low-end displays...
my tip for the budget approach: spend some of the money u're saving on quality calibration probes...
btw, the suitable "computer panels" that you mentioned may exist because Resolve manual says that "most panels" are not suitable, will be (if any) the Eizo (models w/ 3D LUT memory)...
I may do quick comparison of viewer calibrated vs. ref panel calibrated... i got all of that setup and I still have the original display profile (10,000+ points) of the GUI screen - I actually created the ICC from the LS 3D LUT via Spaceman... I'll update here...
- M