I’ve always assumed my calibration was correct. I use an Optix XR (purchased @ chromix) with the Pro software, calibrate to D50, gamma 2.2 and a white point around 125cd/m2 (black at 0.25). I set the monitor white point using the RGB controls in the OSD. I get an average delta-e of 1.2 when evaluating the generated profile in the Optix software.
What makes me question it now is I’ve always had problems with flesh tones – too saturated, strange color, etc. I traced some of this problem to my camera and corrected it with the Adobe DNG Profile editor. But recently I received a test print from ACI Lab and compared it to the digital image and the digital image looks nearly identical except for the skintone – the lady’s face is saturated to the point of looking orange. The print shows fairly neutral skintone (perhaps just a less saturated version of my monitor’s interpretation).
Can someone explain what may be going on and how to fix it if necessary?
Your settings seem to be good, although I do have a small question about your monitor’s color set to Custom. That usually means that it is set to something - but it’s something other than 9300, 6500, etc. It would be nice to find out what that something is.
A bigger question is your setting the Optix to calibrate to D50. For most professional photographer’s purposes, that would make your display rather warm. Most people would start at somewhere around D65 (6500 K). So is it possible that what you perceive as too saturated is actually generally too red / yellow?
Are you saying that the ACI test print is identical to the same image on your monitor except that the skin tones are too saturated on your monitor? Or is everything on your monitor too saturated, but especially the skin tones?
