Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I can upload the calibrated profile for my LG screen if anyone cares (each screen being different etc.). I used a Spyder 3 to do it and chose a white point of 6500k, with some ambient lighting present.

One thing that surprised me that the preinstalled profile was already very close to the calibrated one! The calibrated one is just a touch warmer. For my old MBP, the cal. profile was vastly different from the preset!

The more the merrier... subjectively mine looked close to the default after I did the Display preferences eyeball calibration ..I didn't need to adjust very much using that .. The other thing I realized is that, because we have 2 graphics adapters in play in the Retina ( Intel HD and nVidia ..) , I should have specified which adapter was active (or switch to use only 1) .. they could produce slightly different results .. I'll be profiling again in 3 weeks after the display is 'seasoned' ..will post that one and specify which adapter ..
 
I can upload the calibrated profile for my LG screen if anyone cares (each screen being different etc.). I used a Spyder 3 to do it and chose a white point of 6500k, with some ambient lighting present.

Please do :)
 
Generated this profile w/ I1 Display Pro and BasicColor5 profiling software.. this was generated w/ Nvidia Graphics Only set , White Point 6500, Luminance 120 , sRGB Gamma , LG Display .. the usual disclaimer(s) apply; this profile was generated on my RMBP with a combination of hardware and software interactions during generation .. YMMV ..
This has tighter delta E, and IMHO, better white and gray than my initial profile generated with the DisplayRite software .. Report is also attached ..
 

Attachments

  • mikeysrgbbasic.icc.zip
    19.4 KB · Views: 453
  • mikeysrgbbasic-001.png
    mikeysrgbbasic-001.png
    96.9 KB · Views: 147
Here you go, guys. :)

https://dl.dropbox.com/s/qghjdy2icg5srdv/rMBP_LG_6500k_ambient_75bright.icc?dl=1

Goes in your ~/Library/ColorSync/Profiles/ folder.

I've tried all the one's on this page, and whilst I still find this one ever so slightly too warm, it seems to be the most accurate of the lot. It also seems to be the only one that shows all the relevant black boxes on this Lagom test.

http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/black.php

The gradient also shows even colour transition. Colours seem close to accurate too. I've compared it to my professionally calibrated Pioneer Kuro plasma and this particular profile fits closest.

Snoylekim's first is verrry close, but has some odd contrast anomalies at times, and his second seems, based on initial testing, to have a touch too much violent in the whites? Both of these also show up less black squares on the above test, so gamma seems off. The last profile posted by Davieis is just awful lol.

Comparatively, the default color profile seems quite accurate on colours, but way wayy off on black level accuracy, with crushed blacks and shadow detail. On the Lagom test the entire first row was missing....
 
samsung?

Anyone have a nice profile to share for the samsung? I like mine, but always eager to try a new profile.
 
The one quoted on the last post makes my screen turn blue. I don't think my screen looks bad (on the contrary) but I'd like to try other profiles just out of pure curiosity. Does anyone else has more Samsung profiles?
 
I had LG previously on my retina, now Samsung, after calibration the red tint from the screen dissapeared and now is more blue compared to oiginal settings.

It's correct, I got EIZO monitor and this is the correct white balance etc.

I showed it to genius at apple store when I was there and he couldn't believe - I guess some of those people have no photography or color managemenet background.

Bit of advice - don't use other screens color profiles, because it is for one SPECIFIC screen, not yours. Unless you're desperate or don't care about correct color.
 
I've tried all the one's on this page, and whilst I still find this one ever so slightly too warm, it seems to be the most accurate of the lot. It also seems to be the only one that shows all the relevant black boxes on this Lagom test.

http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/black.php

The gradient also shows even colour transition. Colours seem close to accurate too. I've compared it to my professionally calibrated Pioneer Kuro plasma and this particular profile fits closest.

Snoylekim's first is verrry close, but has some odd contrast anomalies at times, and his second seems, based on initial testing, to have a touch too much violent in the whites? Both of these also show up less black squares on the above test, so gamma seems off. The last profile posted by Davieis is just awful lol.

Comparatively, the default color profile seems quite accurate on colours, but way wayy off on black level accuracy, with crushed blacks and shadow detail. On the Lagom test the entire first row was missing....

I agree with you, it seems this one's the best so far. Too bad I don't own any calibration tools to do it myself.
 
Profile Enclosed for rMBP Samsung screen

I've been trying to work out what gamma and white point to use, I was about to get a spyder4express but then I find out that it does not set the gamma or white point.

In the end I just went back to my experience, which was 30 years in the professional hand printing colour industry and calibrated it using the apple software calibration.

I decided that a white point of 6000K and a gamma of 2.2 looked best to me. I then took some shots on my D90 in an Adobe RGB colour space and I eyeballed the shots on my rMBP Samsung screen with the real life shots.

To me it looks pretty good.
 

Attachments

  • 2.2 6000 july 2014.icc.zip
    6.2 KB · Views: 279
You're handling ICC profiles like they were for multiple purposes and this is wrong.

A calibration will create a color linearisation that corresponds within your combination of computer hardware (including graphic card) and your monitor's hardware. Not to mention that manufacturers even use different panels for the same make and model.

Calibrating with a colorimeter (Spyder, etc.) is essential. And also a Spyder4Express is able to calibrate white point and gamma on the contrary to what was posted here. What it won't calibrate is the Brightness and Contrast which is important for printing.

Furthermore, once you calibrate you need to recalibrate each 1-2 months due to lifetime changes of your display.

So if you are able to activate an foreign ICC-Profile, colours aren't really important for your workflow. And if you want your monitor to look "nice", a calibration is also non-sense, a calibration will turn the colors to look "correct", no matter what is "nice" for you, that's a question of taste. Therefore you can try out the different modes of automatic color adjustment of your monitor. :rolleyes:

But if colors really matter, I highly recommend you to calibrate with a hardware device.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.