Quote:
Originally Posted by
sotti 
The proper thing to do is calibrate the display first and get it as close to rec.709 as possible, then tune the PC to match.
As a first principle that's okay however over the many years I've been doing this I've found its not always the best approach with many displays.
What I generally do is target a white point as high as the display will go without clipping any of the color channels.
Then I usually target a black point which display everything down to 1.
Color temp seems secondary to this process. What you are tryng to do is minimise the impact of the usually less than transparent color management controls on the display hardware whilst providing the maximal amount of precision and dynamic range on the display for the LUT to work with. If you don't do this you tend to find the end result on the screen impacts into the maximum potential precision that the system as a whole can provide.
In other words you are better off putting the bulk of the correctional work into the graphics card rather than the display itself whilst just maximising the available dynamic range and precision at the display side.
When you are applying luts it doesn't matter if you are applying a little correction or a lot just make sure the end result is optimised in terms of each component in the chain and that you are not exacerbating precision limitations at each stage.
For example , in film work we often have to target D.54 , this used to be applied in the display hardware , however this causes a lot of problems ; monitors cannot reach useful white ,luminance levels for very long when run in this mode even old stye CRTs. Targeting D.65 and doing the color temp correction in the lut breathed new life into displays that had previously been categorised as NG ( could no longer give useful luminance and reach the D.54 target).
Nowadays I don't even bother with display hardware calibration as long as the dynamic range and precision are maximised without any clipping.
