Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

retta283

Suspended
Original poster
Jun 8, 2018
3,179
3,480
I've been using my PowerBook G4 from the salvage to have a large screen for browsing when working in my garage. I've found though, that's not very vibrant and the black levels are mediocre. This I think is partially due to the age of the CCFL. I was wondering if anyone's made color profiles for this thing that might help me. I tried to make a few myself, while I did get the black levels to a more acceptable level, there is a lot of bleeding. Thanks in advance
 
What I did on my 15" PowerBook (and I think I got it from this forum) was to take the default Color LCD profile and click on Calibrate, and then select 2.2 Television Gamma, followed by Native white point, and finally save to a different name.
This is a much closer profile to that of the modern Intel Macs, and I have found it much better to use especially when editing photos.

Cheers :)

Hugh
 
  • Like
Reactions: z970
What I did on my 15" PowerBook (and I think I got it from this forum) was to take the default Color LCD profile and click on Calibrate, and then select 2.2 Television Gamma, followed by Native white point, and finally save to a different name.
This is a much closer profile to that of the modern Intel Macs, and I have found it much better to use especially when editing photos.

Cheers :)

Hugh
I've used 2.2 since the late 2000s. 2.2 has been the standard gamma of OS X since Snow Leopard. It helps, but it's still not close to some newer MBP (06-08 even) screens
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hughmac
I've used 2.2 since the late 2000s. 2.2 has been the standard gamma of OS X since Snow Leopard. It helps, but it's still not close to some newer MBP (06-08 even) screens
The technology in PowerBook displays is so dramatically inferior to current displays that you're just not going to get a match to a newer laptop. These older displays will have shifted so much in backlight color that you're also not going to be able to trust a profile from a different computer.
 
The technology in PowerBook displays is so dramatically inferior to current displays that you're just not going to get a match to a newer laptop. These older displays will have shifted so much in backlight color that you're also not going to be able to trust a profile from a different computer.
I don't expect it to be able to display the P3 color gamut or anything. I'm just trying to find a profile that would bring it closer to 2006-2008 MBP quality.

People have been sharing color profiles here for a long, long time. I'm an owner of a 2008 Unibody MacBook, which is infamous for its terrible display. There are hundreds of posts here of people sharing profiles for it. While there are variations between all displays, if you have the same panel number you're likely to get very similar results.
 
You may be misunderstanding what profiles actually are for. They’re not inherently there to make your screen look better, in fact a properly calibrated monitor will typically look less appealing than a standard out of the box monitor.

The profiling is done to create a LUT that the computer uses to know the capabilities of the screen, from there you’ll then be able to accurately soft-proof for output profiles, printers, other monitors, etc. In short, profiling your monitor is the first step to making the proofing process more accurate. This typically involves additional hardware to do it correctly.

What you’re trying to accomplish is a screen that is more appealing to look at. And that will likely be a personal preference that will be influenced by your working environment’s lighting, viewing angle, etc. I wouldn’t expect a shared profile from an unrelated display to get you what you want.
 
You may be misunderstanding what profiles actually are for. They’re not inherently there to make your screen look better, in fact a properly calibrated monitor will typically look less appealing than a standard out of the box monitor.

The profiling is done to create a LUT that the computer uses to know the capabilities of the screen, from there you’ll then be able to accurately soft-proof for output profiles, printers, other monitors, etc. In short, profiling your monitor is the first step to making the proofing process more accurate. This typically involves additional hardware to do it correctly.

What you’re trying to accomplish is a screen that is more appealing to look at. And that will likely be a personal preference that will be influenced by your working environment’s lighting, viewing angle, etc. I wouldn’t expect a shared profile from an unrelated display to get you what you want.
My above post says it pretty well. You can't fix panel issues like poor viewing angles with a profile, but you can make the colors and saturation more appealing to look at and work with. People have been sharing these profiles for years. Almost a decade and a half on MacRumors. And to say "unrelated display" is nonsensical, the shared profiles were created using the same model of panel. There may be minor variations as no two screens are the same, but it will get you something close to what they created.



These are some threads I got profiles from in the late 2000s. I am to this day using a profile from the former link, and it looks way better than it did without.

Edited to request that nobody reply to either of these above threads, do not revive decade old threads.
 
My above post says it pretty well. You can't fix panel issues like poor viewing angles with a profile, but you can make the colors and saturation more appealing to look at and work with. People have been sharing these profiles for years. Almost a decade and a half on MacRumors. And to say "unrelated display" is nonsensical, the shared profiles were created using the same model of panel. There may be minor variations as no two screens are the same, but it will get you something close to what they created.



These are some threads I got profiles from in the late 2000s. I am to this day using a profile from the former link, and it looks way better than it did without.

Edited to request that nobody reply to either of these above threads, do not revive decade old threads.

You are misunderstanding what color profiles are for. Although you can fidget with the sliders and crank things around to make it look “good” to your eyes, that’s not what they are for or how they are intended to be used. To reveal that you’re using a decade old display profile says it all, you should be re-profiling your display at least every 6 months to compensate for the aging panel. And yes, the various panels in the old PowerBooks that are the exact same make and model are unrelated, they’ve been used in totally different situations and have different wear leveling after all these years. They are absolutely different.

I totally understand wanting to get more appealing color from your old PowerBook. My point is that you shouldn’t be leaning on random or outdated profiles on the internet. If accuracy is not your goal then just go in and adjust the display using the built-in profile tool, get it to where it looks good to you and call it a day. But if you’d rather argue over color profiles, color theory, color workflow, soft-proofing, profile conversions and studio matching displays I’m your huckleberry.
 
You are misunderstanding what color profiles are for. Although you can fidget with the sliders and crank things around to make it look “good” to your eyes, that’s not what they are for or how they are intended to be used. To reveal that you’re using a decade old display profile says it all, you should be re-profiling your display at least every 6 months to compensate for the aging panel. And yes, the various panels in the old PowerBooks that are the exact same make and model are unrelated, they’ve been used in totally different situations and have different wear leveling after all these years. They are absolutely different.

I totally understand wanting to get more appealing color from your old PowerBook. My point is that you shouldn’t be leaning on random or outdated profiles on the internet. If accuracy is not your goal then just go in and adjust the display using the built-in profile tool, get it to where it looks good to you and call it a day. But if you’d rather argue over color profiles, color theory, color workflow, soft-proofing, profile conversions and studio matching displays I’m your huckleberry.
In that case then all color profiles are made irrelevant within 6 months. Apple's standards included. I didn't come here to argue about definitions, it's a rather simple question for MacRumors users. These people know what I mean in my original post, doesn't matter if I'm not using the correct lingo for it.

In more recent times people have recommended replaced CCFL tubes in the panel, which I could do to improve the brightness. They then followed by recommend me to use a program to create a better profile to my liking. Most have argued that at least in the late 2000s, Apple's default calibrations were not taking full advantage of what the display could offer.

And if "calibration" isn't correct speak, then tell me where I have fallen. I know software, not display and color technologies.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.