Best display profile for Macbook Pro?

By Cloud Constructors
in Apple (macOS)

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

Chad

Posted
Posted

A gamma of 2.2 produces better results for soft-proofing (web publishing), as it has become more of the standard. If you are in the print industry, you'll never use 2.2. Each display needs to be calibrated separately, so the gamma will vary depending upon the Mac's surroundings. You will always use a gamma closer to 1.8 if you are preparing images for print (hard-proofing). A gamma of 1.8 roughly equals the inverse of the human visual response in average lighting (not my words, but proven to be true).

Apple used 1.8, as it more closely matched the output of Apple Laser Writers as well as Quickdraw (deprecated as of 10.5). They still recommend using 1.8, all things being equal, as that is what the OS ui is designed around. However it comes down to personal preference. If you prefer a lighter output, 1.8. If you prefer something darker, 2.2.

I'd recommend running the Expert Calibration and setting the display to your preference.

Grand Master

Fusion

Posted
Posted
if this 2.2 setting is so awesome .. why dont apple just make that the generic :blink:

Chad's response is most definitely the most comprehensive and correct response you'll get. I first started using it for web work because it closer matched what Windows users will see but stayed with it because after I got used to it I just prefer the way it looks. It adds a bit more contrast which I think looks really great with the UI. But as to why its not the default is for the historical reasons Chad mentions.

A gamma of 2.2 produces better results for soft-proofing (web publishing), as it has become more of the standard. If you are in the print industry, you'll never use 2.2. Each display needs to be calibrated separately, so the gamma will vary depending upon the Mac's surroundings. You will always use a gamma closer to 1.8 if you are preparing images for print (hard-proofing). A gamma of 1.8 roughly equals the inverse of the human visual response in average lighting (not my words, but proven to be true).

Apple used 1.8, as it more closely matched the output of Apple Laser Writers as well as Quickdraw (deprecated as of 10.5). They still recommend using 1.8, all things being equal, as that is what the OS ui is designed around. However it comes down to personal preference. If you prefer a lighter output, 1.8. If you prefer something darker, 2.2.

I'd recommend running the Expert Calibration and setting the display to your preference.

Good to see you still around and kickin' arse around the Mac section!

Grand Master

Chad

Posted
Posted
Chad's response is most definitely the most comprehensive and correct response you'll get. I first started using it for web work because it closer matched what Windows users will see but stayed with it because after I got used to it I just prefer the way it looks. It adds a bit more contrast which I think looks really great with the UI. But as to why its not the default is for the historical reasons Chad mentions.

Yeah I rather like 2.2 better as well. I've never been fond of the washed out look 1.8 gives.

Good to see you still around and kickin' arse around the Mac section!

You too Josh! Nice to have someone else from the 'old guard' around.

Enthusiast

mbtx__

Posted
Posted

So no one here uses the sRGB IEC61966-2.1 colour profile for their MBPs?

The colours just seem so much more vibrant, and it doesn't have this weird tinge that seems like a coffee filter has been put in front of the screen or something that you get with Colour LCD.

Grand Master

giga Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
So no one here uses the sRGB IEC61966-2.1 colour profile for their MBPs?

The colours just seem so much more vibrant, and it doesn't have this weird tinge that seems like a coffee filter has been put in front of the screen or something that you get with Colour LCD.

Never use generic ones like that. Use the calibration tool.

Grand Master

giga Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
There is no need to use a calibration tool if he doesnt plan to create printable material.

It'll still affect the colors he's seeing through his display. You can be sure that the color won't be right if your display is using a color space that it's not fitted for.

Grand Master

sanctified Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted (edited)
It'll still affect the colors he's seeing through his display. You can be sure that the color won't be right if your display is using a color space that it's not fitted for.

Fair enough, its just that by experience I always discourage non experienced users to mess with calibrations tools. Im not saying that matty2312 its inexperienced, just that if he doesnt have an specific need for calibration sometimes its better to leave it as that.

Edited by sanctified
Grand Master

Fusion

Posted
Posted
So no one here uses the sRGB IEC61966-2.1 colour profile for their MBPs?

The colours just seem so much more vibrant, and it doesn't have this weird tinge that seems like a coffee filter has been put in front of the screen or something that you get with Colour LCD.

The issue is once you get used to a certain profile everything else looks crazy. On any display I've ever tried for instance, the sRGB profile brings an incredibly weird blue cast over everything and is impossible for me to look at more than 30 seconds. But I do know people who use it full time and they're so used to it they can't stand the default profiles.

If you're doing work for the web, I always encourage people to stay as close to the default profile as possible simply because 99% of the people out there viewing your work (especially on a Mac) will be viewing it through the default profile. Setting gamma to 2.2 on the default profile allows you to see the same color tones but with a better contrast closer to what Windows users are seeing making it a great choice.

Grand Master

sanctified Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
The issue is once you get used to a certain profile everything else looks crazy. On any display I've ever tried for instance, the sRGB profile brings an incredibly weird blue cast over everything and is impossible for me to look at more than 30 seconds. But I do know people who use it full time and they're so used to it they can't stand the default profiles.

If you're doing work for the web, I always encourage people to stay as close to the default profile as possible simply because 99% of the people out there viewing your work (especially on a Mac) will be viewing it through the default profile. Setting gamma to 2.2 on the default profile allows you to see the same color tones but with a better contrast closer to what Windows users are seeing making it a great choice.

Tell me about it. I hate to see my photography work in other monitors than my own. Its heart breaking :cry:

Enthusiast

mbtx__

Posted
Posted
Fair enough, its just that by experience I always discourage non experienced users to mess with calibrations tools. Im not saying that matty2312 its inexperienced, just that if he doesnt have an specific need for calibration sometimes its better to leave it as that.

Haha I am inexperienced when it comes to all this colour business.

So, I need to switch it back to Colour LCD and then configure it how?

Even if I just change that gamma thing you guys were talking about, the sRGB blah blah blah -2.1 thing looks SO much better. Photos look better, colours look great and websites I've been looking at keep telling people to configure their photo programs for images @ the sRGB thing.

Grand Master

Fusion

Posted
Posted
Haha I am inexperienced when it comes to all this colour business.

So, I need to switch it back to Colour LCD and then configure it how?

Even if I just change that gamma thing you guys were talking about, the sRGB blah blah blah -2.1 thing looks SO much better. Photos look better, colours look great and websites I've been looking at keep telling people to configure their photo programs for images @ the sRGB thing.

First, you don't need to switch back to Color LCD, you can leave it at whatever you want.

Second, about configuring your photo editing software to use sRGB, that's fairly good advice but only because of the way browsers handle color profiles. It has NOTHING to do with your monitor space ...

Third, when you say it looks "SO" much better, as I already mentioned, this is entirely subjective and your eye tends to just get used to something and feel its better. Believe me, people like myself who have been using a variation of Apple's default profiles for 8 years on OS X can't stand to look at a screen configured in sRGB.

Enthusiast

mbtx__

Posted
Posted
First, you don't need to switch back to Color LCD, you can leave it at whatever you want.

Second, about configuring your photo editing software to use sRGB, that's fairly good advice but only because of the way browsers handle color profiles. It has NOTHING to do with your monitor space ...

Third, when you say it looks "SO" much better, as I already mentioned, this is entirely subjective and your eye tends to just get used to something and feel its better. Believe me, people like myself who have been using a variation of Apple's default profiles for 8 years on OS X can't stand to look at a screen configured in sRGB.

Ahh okay. Thanks very much dude. I'm going to play around with them all and see what I like, no harm in experimenting for a little bit to find what I really like.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.