Is it possible to recalibrate LCD of Phase One IQ back?

[dougpeterson]

Hi Steve, while we have your attention, could you pls weigh in on the LCD issue? Have you ever come across any backs had this problem? And how would you solve it? (It could be just my unreasonable expectation). I dont have a dealer locally, but will travel to one at the weekend.

This is not a grumble, simply an effort at problem solving. I love Phase One sensor.

With your dealer you can compare your back with other similar Phase One backs.

If it's the same, then your back is normal and there is nothing to be done.

If it's different then your back is not performing correctly and should be repaired/replaced/rectified.

Over the internet none of us can see what you're seeing. So it's hard for us to tell if what you are seeing is normal.

 

[yashima]

Hi Doug, I'm not asking what's wrong with my back. I'm trying to ask if anyone has similar experience and has had the back service based on that. As someone who has handled thousands of repairs/service, I'm sure you/Steve would know better than anyone.

 

[dougpeterson]

Hi Doug, I'm not asking what's wrong with my back. I'm trying to ask if anyone has similar experience and has had the back service based on that. As someone who has handled thousands of repairs/service, I'm sure you/Steve would know better than anyone.

I cannot recall overseeing any repairs where the description was similar to "a little bit washed out with some color cast".

- There's a first time for everything
- I can't see what you're seeing, so my understanding of what you're writing may be incorrect

Your dealer can take one look at the system and tell you whether the LCD is functioning normally.

 

[Steve Hendrix]

Hi Steve, while we have your attention, could you pls weigh in on the LCD issue? Have you ever come across any backs had this problem? And how would you solve it? (It could be just my unreasonable expectation). I dont have a dealer locally, but will travel to one at the weekend.

This is not a grumble, simply an effort at problem solving. I love Phase One sensor.

Hi Yashima -

You don't have to worry about grumbling. You brought a legitimate problem to the front. Grumbling only elevates to a topic in its own right when grumblers are taken to task or other grumblers take to task grumblers for grumbling about grumblers. Yada, yada, yada.

So back to your original concern - which is not a grumble, it's a voiced legitimate concern. Your LCD might have some issue if it is showing some cast of some sort, possibly. Let us know what the dealer concludes this weekend. As to the LCD itself, yes, it is naturally a bit under-saturated. I myself kind of like this, though I can understand how it could take getting used to. But with regard to color, assuming a healthy IQ or Credo LCD, if you find the colors are not that similar to the color you see on your computer display on initial import with no adjustments, then there's not a lot I can recommend at this stage. If the color is different after making white balance adjustments in Capture One, then you could potentially upload those custom white balances that were set in Capture One to the IQ and perhaps they'd be closer if you shot to those.

There's a potential for custom calibrating camera LCD screens, but it remains to be seen whether that will ever develop.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

 

[yashima]

Clear, to the point, helpful answer. Thank you Steve.

Yes, I meant the colors are not that similar on initial import with no adjustment. I really think its because the embedded ICC profile of the back is not the same as the default ICC profile for the back in Capture One.

But at the same time, I can see the difference with some predictability so its something that can be adapted to. I will report after the weekend.

 

[f8orbust]

And then there's the grumbling about the grumblers who are grumbling about the Phase One grumblers.

So, just to clear this all up - that’s a grumble about a grumble at the grumblers who are grumbling about the Phase One grumblers? Sounds about right - or have I missed a grumble out somewhere ? If I have, please don’t grumble about it.

In all seriousness, this shouldn’t be difficult to resolve. A bit like the issue of 5 yr warranties as standard when someone drops $40k on a piece of gear. Oh, yes - P1 now do that at long last. Shows you what a good grumble will do (was one of my personal favorites) in a market pretty much free of competition, and the excellence that it naturally brings.

So here’s a radical idea - P1 shoot a standard image (for each series of DB) of a test target (Kodak, X-Rite or whatever). The relevant image can then be copied to the user’s CF card for display on their back (with the back’s settings reset to the factory defaults).

They also create an ICC profile for the LCD’s color space and supply that to the user, so they can load the reference image into C1 (with appropriate C1 settings supplied by P1) and see a good approximation (on a properly calibrated monitor) of how it should be displaying on the back’s LCD.

Anyway, just an idea.

 

[Steve Hendrix]

So, just to clear this all up - that’s a grumble about a grumble at the grumblers who are grumbling about the Phase One grumblers? Sounds about right - or have I missed a grumble out somewhere ? If I have, please don’t grumble about it.

In all seriousness, this shouldn’t be difficult to resolve. A bit like the issue of 5 yr warranties as standard when someone drops $40k on a piece of gear. Oh, yes - P1 now do that at long last. Shows you what a good grumble will do (was one of my personal favorites) in a market pretty much free of competition, and the excellence that it naturally brings.

So here’s a radical idea - P1 shoot a standard image (for each series of DB) of a test target (Kodak, X-Rite or whatever). The relevant image can then be copied to the user’s CF card for display on their back (with the back’s settings reset to the factory defaults).

They also create an ICC profile for the LCD’s color space and supply that to the user, so they can load the reference image into C1 (with appropriate C1 settings supplied by P1) and see a good approximation (on a properly calibrated monitor) of how it should be displaying on the back’s LCD.

Anyway, just an idea.

More ideas are good! And grumbles can lead to improvements. However, I don't know that grumbling had much to do with the 5 year warranty being standard on IQ2/3. This was more likely (IMO) an internal decision as a way to increase value without reducing price. Phase One prefers to maintain, rather than erode their price point structure as much as possible. There is more value for them to make a product more attractive at the same price point than make a price point more attractive for the same product. Just my theory though, you could have been behind this after all, and then everyone owes you a nice pat on the back.

Back to the LCD ICC/Calibration issue - is there any digital camera (that is not a smartphone or tablet) that allows this?


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

 

[yaya]

Clear, to the point, helpful answer. Thank you Steve.

Yes, I meant the colors are not that similar on initial import with no adjustment. I really think its because the embedded ICC profile of the back is not the same as the default ICC profile for the back in Capture One.

But at the same time, I can see the difference with some predictability so its something that can be adapted to. I will report after the weekend.

Apologies if this was already suggested and I missed it, but have you tried shooting a Grey card and creating a custom WB for your specific lighting conditions?

 

[Wayne Fox]

I tend to agree with Ken on his overall statement, but I still feel that I can get a lot more "perceived" color from a Sony, Fuji, or Nikon LCD, may just be my eyes.

Unlike Don, I never use Auto WB, as I feel it really creates the worst image on the LCD, but we each have 2 eyes and it's all seen differently for sure.

Paul

I don’t believe the problem is with the LCD and while Phase probably describes what the LCD is “capable" of, the firmware of the camera is where the limitation lies.

Unlike most digital cameras with firmware which attempts to render out a “finished” file and by default only stores that finished jpeg (and shows the results of that on the LCD), a Phase back doesn’t come with built in firmware for finished processing/rendering. As such it only presents a rudimentary processed file for evaluation. I”m sure there are a few adjustments made when it is processed, but the back itself doesn’t have a way to modify those, and non of those adjustments are an attempt to arrive at “finished” quality.

One challenge I have with other cameras is I can’t get the display to really “show” me what I have in the raw file ... what I will have to work with once I get the file into my computer.

Since I use ETTR frequently, the image on the back looks pretty weak most of the time. It’s amusing to see other photographers look at the back of my camera when shooting at a workshop. But the image has the information I need to know. Cropping, exposure, and focus.

I used to use AWB, but in the last couple of years I have migrated to daylight as well. I find that in unusual lit circumstances (sunsets) the initial rendering of the color seems closer to what I’m after, and if in AWB I end up trying having to adjust the color more often. But I’m not sure it’s any better, as it seems nearly every image needs tweaked no matter which method I use.

 

[Don Libby]

Okay maybe a screwy thought however if a computer screen can drop pixels or develop hot ones why can't the LCD of any digital back do the same?

Also re AWB - I do that when shooting off the DF but always shoot an LCC when on the Cambo which in turns helps the process.

No longer in a cranky mood - sorry for pissing people off yesterday.

Don

 

[jlm]

cranky can be good...gives you an edge

 

[Don Libby]

cranky can be good...gives you an edge

Sandy has begun to keep sharp object away from me

 

[yashima]

I don’t believe the problem is with the LCD and while Phase probably describes what the LCD is “capable" of, the firmware of the camera is where the limitation lies.

Unlike most digital cameras with firmware which attempts to render out a “finished” file and by default only stores that finished jpeg (and shows the results of that on the LCD), a Phase back doesn’t come with built in firmware for finished processing/rendering. As such it only presents a rudimentary processed file for evaluation. I”m sure there are a few adjustments made when it is processed, but the back itself doesn’t have a way to modify those, and non of those adjustments are an attempt to arrive at “finished” quality.

One challenge I have with other cameras is I can’t get the display to really “show” me what I have in the raw file ... what I will have to work with once I get the file into my computer.

Since I use ETTR frequently, the image on the back looks pretty weak most of the time. It’s amusing to see other photographers look at the back of my camera when shooting at a workshop. But the image has the information I need to know. Cropping, exposure, and focus.

I used to use AWB, but in the last couple of years I have migrated to daylight as well. I find that in unusual lit circumstances (sunsets) the initial rendering of the color seems closer to what I’m after, and if in AWB I end up trying having to adjust the color more often. But I’m not sure it’s any better, as it seems nearly every image needs tweaked no matter which method I use.

I think Wayne nailed it.

The reason is phase backs lacks a proper processing engine. It looks like it applies an almost linear curve to raw data. (choose IQ 160 Achromatic ICC profile in Capture One gives the closest look to the LCD).

In manual/document, Phase One does describe there is an "embedded ICC profile" to the LCD. If there's a chance to get hold a copy of that profile, then we'll know for sure ...

 

[ChrisLivsey]

Would that embedded ICC profile actually be applied to the jpeg, by the back processing engine, that is then displayed and not to the actual LCD screen though?
I am correct am I not that what we see on the display is a jpeg rendering of the RAW? So on a "standard" DSLR changing the jpeg in camera settings changes the preview, AFAIK the Phase One "jpeg" is fixed and not user changeable. As was mentioned above in my mind the greatest potential for the LCD to show a "poor" image colour wise is if the WB is "off" for the scene but that would also show on import and the OP says it does not.
Could the firmware generating the jpeg be corrupted and it be worthwhile re-loading the current version, or is that not allowed by the process control?

 

[yashima]

Would that embedded ICC profile actually be applied to the jpeg, by the back processing engine, that is then displayed and not to the actual LCD screen though?
I am correct am I not that what we see on the display is a jpeg rendering of the RAW? So on a "standard" DSLR changing the jpeg in camera settings changes the preview, AFAIK the Phase One "jpeg" is fixed and not user changeable. As was mentioned above in my mind the greatest potential for the LCD to show a "poor" image colour wise is if the WB is "off" for the scene but that would also show on import and the OP says it does not.
Could the firmware generating the jpeg be corrupted and it be worthwhile re-loading the current version, or is that not allowed by the process control?

Hi Chris, me and a few other users think the LCD preview is not a good representation of the image upon import on Capture One. So its not a WB issue. There are two possibilities here:

1. LCD screen is out of calibration

2. The ICC profile the back use and the default profile Capture One use is not the same, OR, the processing engine in the back renders the colour (using the ICC profile) poorly in comparison with Capture One processing engine.

On certain DSLR we can load custom tone curve on it, so the processing engine can renders accordingly. My experience with DSLR is they renders pretty closely to the image upon import using the camera manufacturers' own RAW converter. Hence the initial questions. I guess I will learn to live with it.

 

[Steve C]

The display on the back of my IQ180 and many others I have used or seen shows the same weaknesses Yashima describes. The color gamut / saturation is much reduced compared to what is seen on a laptop with C1 and the sharpness is not adequate to truly evaluate focus in my opinion. Remember though, the laptop is fully processing the raw image with sharpening, while the back is only showing an image that is not fully de-bayered or adequately sharpened. It seems that Phase One should be able to do better if the display is truly "Retina" quality though. My Canon 5d and iPhone both certainly show better image color, saturation and sharpness than my 80 mpix back! Come on Phase One, give us something better. I need to see if the shot is truly sharp!

 

[Wayne Fox]

Okay maybe a screwy thought however if a computer screen can drop pixels or develop hot ones why can't the LCD of any digital back do the same?

Don

The pixels on the computer screen (until recently) are much larger. I’m not sure if you can see a dropped pixel on a retina density screen without some magnification ... so maybe they are there?

(heading to closet now to get loupe ... )