2012 27" iMac color profile - try it out!

Discussion in 'iMac' started by WilliamG, Feb 2, 2013.

  1. WilliamG, Feb 2, 2013
    Last edited: May 8, 2013

    macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2008
    Location:
    Seattle
    #1
    For those interested, both my old 2012 27" iMac and this new replacement 2012 27" Mac calibrated nigh-on identically. I went back and forth between the calibration, and could barely tell the difference, indicating pretty darn consistent panel temperatures/gamma/color etc between the devices (assuming my two units bought almost 2 months apart are any indication!)

    If you want to try my calibration out, feel free. I'm including it with this post. Just put it in your User/ Library -> Colorsync -> Profiles folder and then activate it in Display Preferences. You'll be surprised by the difference. The calibration is for 7 blocks of brightness up from the lowest (and actually, my colorimeter required the same for both the old and new 2012 iMac to get 120cd/m2).

    You'll see a massive reduction/elimination of crushed blacks, which is a major issue (in my opinion) with these 27" 2012 iMacs.

    Easy way to test for reduction of crushed blacks - look at the rear fan in this image with your default iMac profile and then my calibration.

    http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/.../MacRumors/ReferenceImagesRGB_zpsbf645ba5.jpg

    *EDIT May 8, 2013*

    Finally got an i1Display Pro, and here is the profile:

    D65, 120 cdm/2 (seven brightness levels up from "zero")

    ICC profile
     
  2. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    #2
    That profile turned my whites purple :confused:
     
  3. thread starter macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2008
    Location:
    Seattle
    #3
    You sure you have a 27" 2012 iMac?
     
  4. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    #4
    I agree.

    It makes my 2012 27" iMac's whites appear a light shade of purple.
     
  5. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    #5
    Yup, purchased in Jan - 27" 2.9GHz with 1TB fusion.
     
  6. macrumors G3

    Apple fanboy

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2012
    Location:
    Behind the lens, UK
    #6
    This device isn't supported in Mountain Lion as it requires Roseta I believe. I would recommend anybody wanting to calibrate their iMac get hold of a calibration device themselves. Using somebody elses profile is not going to assist in colour accuracy.
     
  7. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2012
    #7
    Turned whites purple for me as well . . .
     
  8. thread starter macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2008
    Location:
    Seattle
    #8
    It absolutely is supported!

    http://www.xrite.com/custom_page.aspx?PageID=264

    I'll look into why people are seeing purple. Very strange... And as I said. I had two 27" 2012 iMacs which were identical in terms of profiling. This calibration will be much closer than no calibration. I'm curious as to this purple, though...
     
  9. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2007
    #9
    If your two screens were similar, that's just coincidence.

    The 2012 imacs are actually individually calibrated at assembly. It's one of the selling points of the new model.
     
  10. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2013
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #10
    Purple here too.
     
  11. macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    #11
    Absolutely correct.
     
  12. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    #12
    I *LIKE* purple! :)

    Seriously, I really appreciate your posting the color profile, WilliamG; it's a very helpful thought for those of us who don't want to shell out for a calibration tool. Maybe it just needs a bit more tweaking?

    Or maybe people just have different eyes.... ;)
     
  13. thread starter macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2008
    Location:
    Seattle
    #13
    Well I can't tell you what Apple's standard is for their calibration, but it's awful. That is, going by my two units...

    Sorry this isn't working out for you all. I wonder if the file got messed up when it uploaded. Will tinker some more..
     
  14. macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    #14
    Don't bother; if the color is calibrated for your systems, it won't be if you tweak the profile somehow. The variables in displays make this a futile and counterproductive effort.
     
  15. macrumors 603

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #15
    The i1 display 2 is an older one unless you mean the i1 display pro. It used to be made by Gretag Macbeth before X-Rite bought them out. It wasn't designed for the era of LED backlighting and wide gamut displays. If you google it, you'll find results aren't always so great. Beyond that these displays are not consistent enough from unit to unit even when new to guarantee your uploaded results will always work well for others.

    Well they might be able to set the default hardware values. All you're doing is rewriting a profile. This is necessary to maintain some amount of consistency over time and because default brightness isn't always optimal.

    Bleh I think I misinterpreted your post. i1 profiler does have a couple tweaking tools if I remember correctly, but those would be there for fine tuning one display to look like another if it's close but just slightly off.
     
  16. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA
    #16
    really wanted it to work on mine, but purple tones here too
     
  17. thread starter macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2008
    Location:
    Seattle
    #17
    Just very odd! I've been out and about, so when I get home I'll see what's going on. There's absolutely no reason that comes to mind why everyone is seeing purple!
     
  18. macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    #18
    Aside from that, generally speaking, editing display profiles seldom leads to a good result.

    ----------

    It's because they don't have your display! There is no mystery here.
     
  19. thread starter macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2008
    Location:
    Seattle
    #19
    Yes there is a mystery. Your logic doesn't hold up. Everyone is purple? So everyone else has the same purple?! Something else is going on here I guarantee you.
     
  20. macrumors 603

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #20
    If your display is a bit on the green side, the output instructions will try to lower the green values giving a more magenta appearance. This is assuming a correct measurement result and calculation. As I mentioned the i1 display 2 is not ideal for newer displays. If I remember correctly, the original design for that model came out over 10 years ago. Colorimeters are limited in range by their nature, so they are essentially designed around whatever hardware is appearing on the market at that time. Some proprietary display software that makes use of generic colorimeters will have custom lookup tables per colorimeter to help compensate for their generic and limited nature.

    I agree with that. Profiles break really easily, and editing them can in some cases cause increased banding.
     
  21. thread starter macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2008
    Location:
    Seattle
    #21
    There's something else going on here. I will figure it out. Mark my words!

    (Or I might not figure it out.. - we'll see!)
     
  22. thread starter macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2008
    Location:
    Seattle
    #22
    OK so testing out the original iMac profile and my calibrated profile, there's no question the whites are warmer. I'd be curious to see a photo of someone's "purple" whites, because maybe they're just your not being used to a more "accurate" color profile.

    Apple calibrates these displays from the factory, so they are actually pretty darn close (from what I can tell) to each other. That would explain why my color profile from iMac 1 worked perfectly on iMac 2. The difference was negligible.

    I'm going to guess that "purple" is just the change, but obviously I can't prove that.

    Now, as it happens, I absolutely agree that one calibration cannot be used as a 100% guarantee on a different display. That's unquestionably true, and I've chastised others on the boards for wanting profiles. However, because the Apple factory calibration is so far off from D65, I thought it would be fun to se what people's results are.

    As far as the i1 Display 2 vs i1Display Pro goes, I do photography professionally, and print out my own prints for customers. I need my display to match as close as possible so that my prints look the same. I've never had a single issue with my i1 Display 2. It doesn't surprise me that in 2011 XRite decide to release a new model. Maybe it is a tad better than my model. But let's be honest, many professionals have been using LED-backlit display for years and years before the Pro model came out.
     
  23. macrumors 603

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #23
    That's good. I had issues with that one on certain displays. The same goes for the old DTP-94 with Adobe RGB gamut displays. LED backlighting initiated in notebooks, televisions, and low end desktop displays. Displays designed for photography, graphic design, etc. have only started to shift toward LED in the past year with the exception of Apple. Apple was one of the earlier adopters of LED backlighting, but that display was designed to accompany their notebooks (note the short cord), so they went as consistent as the technology would permit. It was still a half baked solution in terms of color management at that time. In 2010, the norm was to buy CCFL, and the typical suggestion with LED backlit was to use a spectrophotometer instead.

    I get that you need prints for customers to look good. You can take it even further, matching the viewing lighting to the temperature of the display. It's a closer match because the display emits light while the print can only reflect what falls on it. It doesn't matter later as it will always be viewed in the context of ambient lighting. If the lighting was really warm, a white wall in that room would still look yellowish, so while the print wouldn't look as intended, it would look normal due to lighting context. Make sense? The difference isn't as bad today as printer manufacturers have attempted to reduce metamerism as much as possible. A few years ago it was a much bigger issue.
     
  24. thread starter macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2008
    Location:
    Seattle
    #24
    Can't say I disagree with anything you have said! I actually was an owner of the original Apple Cinema Display, and I had considerably more trouble calibrating that than I do the new iMac. I think the fused nature of the new iMac really helps, for one thing.

    The viewing lighting is definitely real trouble, especially when you edit in your office and show people prints... not in your office. In that regard, what I see on my screen never "matches" what I print due to this reason, but it's good enough, especially under a normal household lamp/lights. I edit under normal room lighting for this very reason!
     
  25. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    #25
    @WilliamG

    I calibrated my 2012 iMac 27" with a i1 Display Pro in i1Profiler and choose the following options:
    - White LED (background lighting)
    - 120cd/m2
    - D65
    - Brightness at 50% on iMac

    When i switch between my profile and yours, yours is far more purple than mine. My white is slightly warmer than the standard profile what makes sense, because Apple calibrates colder.
    You are right, the standard profile is not very good and you get better results with calibration respectively profiling.

    Probably it is your i1 Display 2 Pro, because afaik this colorimeter use organic filters that age and makes a calibration useless over time.
     

Share This Page