| ▲ | cdev_gl 12 hours ago | |||||||
I can't speak to the rest of the text or the laptops themselves, but as someone who works with color reproducibility in video and print, those photos comparing colors of two different screens are worse than useless. Uncalibrated screens photographed at different angles in different lighting conditions are not a valid basis for comparison. If you want properly calibrated displays, you need to purchase hardware (datacolor makes one such device) and calibrate them. Even "factory-calibrated" monitors will benefit from this, because the quality of that calibration varies widely and your color reproduction is going to vary based on ambient lighting conditions etc. | ||||||||
| ▲ | YorickPeterse 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
The photos are just meant to illustrate the difference to the reader, not to be anything scientific. Of course manual calibration is ideal, but having a somewhat sensible default calibration isn't much to ask for and is in fact something many other laptops do just fine. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | Groxx 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
I can add anecdata for the factory profile being very over-red - it's quite obvious out of the box. Not as bad as many Samsung OLED phones you see in stores (typically set to some crazy "enhanced" mode), but it's certainly closer to them than a calibrated screen. One thing that has bugged me for a while though: why isn't it possible to make my own color profile by hand? Everything seems to imply that you can only get a profile definition file from a calibration device, and I don't have one... but I can eyeball it significantly better than the default profile. Is there something software out there that will let me adjust my curves, like the OS already does with night-mode color balance changes? | ||||||||
| ||||||||