• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

TV Color Temp: What do Dev's say is the preferred Color Temp?

Usually, Game Mode has less lag, but depending on the screen, it fucks up all of your settings, increases sharpness, messes up colour temperate etc.

PC mode usually tries its best to give you the most accurate picture I find. No overscan, SRGB, 4:4:4 chroma etc. and this tends to have less lag (although sometimes game can have even less but personally I don't think it's worthwhile).

Sometimes, though, Game Mode COMPLETELY fucks with your picture. I see this shit on Gaming Monitors usually. Ugly as fuck.

just checked, input lag on my TV in PC mode is 34.9 ms; Game mode is 26.4 ms. is that difference even noticeable? lol

and yeah the difference in sharpness between the two modes is pretty shocking.
 
just checked, input lag on my TV in PC mode is 34.9 ms; Game mode is 26.4 ms. is that difference even noticeable? lol

and yeah the difference in sharpness between the two modes is pretty shocking.

I personally wouldn't say so, and it would be worthwhile for 4:4:4 anyway. If you're playing something that extremely competitive and requires low input lag, the big picture is to not play on a TV anyway haha
 
Standard all the way. None of that warm rubbish (which makes everything yellow) or cool (which makes everything blue). What on earth is wrong with colours being correct? People spend thousands on these TVs and all this tech and then wreck everything by mangling all the colours with one silly setting.
 
ITT: People have been brainwashed by laundry detergent commercials to think whites should be blue.

Obviously it depends on your set, but calibrators usually use Warm or Warm 2 as a starting point to achieve a proper calibration.

To be fair though setting your set to Warm 2 without making other adjustments usually results in whites that are a bit too red/yellow.

Default-colors.jpg


How GAF likes to view content

Yeah, going into TV threads in GAF is pretty eye-opening. I'd wager only a tiny % of people here have an accurate calibration on their TVs.
 
People complaining that whites look too yellow on Warm don't seem to realize that after a while your eyes are going to adjust to it. Then, once you do, if you go back to Cool you'll be amazed at how blue everything looks.
 
Excess blue light is bad for your eyes. Warm 2 ftw.
Proper computer monitors are all 6500K. Warm 2 is 6500K. All movies and videos are based on 6500K.
If you're surrounding your TV with sunlight or 9000K+ fluorescent lights, then of course Warm 2 is gonna look awful.
If you're in the dark or your lights are a more natural 5000K or 3000K, then Warm 2 is the best.

Once you get used to Warm, you'll realize that normal/cool color temperatures make grass look like seawater.
 
Warm makes my TV look like it has a piss yellow filter. Give me cool. Makes the whites vibrant and blues more crisp.
 
Apple devices tend to come fairly well calibrated by default ... I've always assumed that's a big reason why people like Apple products without them necessarily realising it.

Not only is the hardware carefully designed for accurate representation, but the entire software stack is color managed with every single color value and bitmap carrying color space information that is matched at output. Not a lot of people realize what a big difference this makes.

One of the most recent devices, the 9.7" iPad Pro goes a step further by monitoring ambient light and adjusting color temperature on the fly so that on-screen images will look as similar as possible to objects in the world around us.

Our visual apparatus is incredibly adaptable, as evidenced by the wide range of experiences in this thread, allowing us to see "white" in a wide range of color temperatures. What we can't do is see two different colors as white simultaneously. D65 is the white point used by anyone doing professional work viewed on screen (printed material is usually calibrated to the much warmer D50 to cope with the dreadfully warm light spectrum most indoor lighting puts out.) As virtually everyone else with some real experience in the field here relates, D65 is generally closest to what you get with Warm2 settings. Your eyes can adjust to much warmer or cooler light, but it skews toward the edges of the accurately representable color gamut and is not a match for authorial intent.

I play Cool. Hate whites looking yellowed. I want them pure or bleached

You've been deceived by decades of advertisers telling you to get your clothes or teeth their whitest and showing you an overtly blue image as "white." It's a trick of perception that it takes a little bit to unlearn, but it's totally worth rediscovering true daylight white.
 
Warm 2 4 lyfe!!!

Took me a while to get used to it, but it looks so much more natural now then cool, which is way too blue and unnatural.
 
Like some others have said giving Warm/Warm 2 for a bit and you do get use to it. About 5 years ago I had my first professional calibration. At that time, I would always use Neutral/Cool, but my calibrator told me to give it a good effort to get use to it and I have not used anything other than Warm 2 or at times Warm 1. This calibrator also did calibrations for major movie and T.V. Studio's and he basically had them all at Warm 2 or whatever the set they had where it dialed it in to 6500k which is the reference level. Many studios have reference monitors that are calibrated to 6500k.

However, we don't know if game developers also use 6500k, which I assume they do, but not sure hence the reason for starting the thread. I do know that Cool introduces way too much blue and is not realistic, even for gaming. But it is a preference, just like people that use "Vivid" which many refer to as Torch Mode.
 
Natural or Warm, the rest mess with colours regardless of what experts say.
 
Maybe I'm dense, but I don't follow this at all. My TV (Panasonic Viera) has 3 colour temp settings; Cool, Normal and Warm. I just assumed Normal is the most balanced setting, and Cool or Warm are more extreme either way. Looks that way when I switch between them.

Warm is actually the best colour balance?
 
Warm 2 is what I use on my TV, with some white balance tweaking. I just look up the ideal calibrations then tweak it a bit to my liking.

Cool always makes everything washed out to my eyes. I prefer the more saturated colors look.
 
Not only is the hardware carefully designed for accurate representation, but the entire software stack is color managed with every single color value and bitmap carrying color space information that is matched at output. Not a lot of people realize what a big difference this makes.

One of the most recent devices, the 9.7" iPad Pro goes a step further by monitoring ambient light and adjusting color temperature on the fly so that on-screen images will look as similar as possible to objects in the world around us.

Our visual apparatus is incredibly adaptable, as evidenced by the wide range of experiences in this thread, allowing us to see "white" in a wide range of color temperatures. What we can't do is see two different colors as white simultaneously. D65 is the white point used by anyone doing professional work viewed on screen (printed material is usually calibrated to the much warmer D50 to cope with the dreadfully warm light spectrum most indoor lighting puts out.) As virtually everyone else with some real experience in the field here relates, D65 is generally closest to what you get with Warm2 settings. Your eyes can adjust to much warmer or cooler light, but it skews toward the edges of the accurately representable color gamut and is not a match for authorial intent.



You've been deceived by decades of advertisers telling you to get your clothes or teeth their whitest and showing you an overtly blue image as "white." It's a trick of perception that it takes a little bit to unlearn, but it's totally worth rediscovering true daylight white.
Fascinating. This makes me wish Apple made TVs, because at least then there'd be a popular, properly calibrated standard for people to compare against.

This thread has made me very angry with TV manufacturers. Why not just make the standard setting have the correct colour temperature and gamma? Why use confusing labels like cool, neutral and warm? Why even have any other setting but the one content is made for?
 
Fascinating. This makes me wish Apple made TVs, because at least then there'd be a popular, properly calibrated standard for people to compare against.

This thread has made me very angry with TV manufacturers. Why not just make the standard setting have the correct colour temperature and gamma? Why use confusing labels like cool, neutral and warm? Why even have any other setting but the one content is made for?

Because accurate settings don't look good in brightly-lit Best Buys. This is a big reason why plasmas died off despite being the objectively best TVs of their time. The world would be a better place if Pioneer was still making TVs.
 
Fascinating. This makes me wish Apple made TVs, because at least then there'd be a popular, properly calibrated standard for people to compare against.

This thread has made me very angry with TV manufacturers. Why not just make the standard setting have the correct colour temperature and gamma? Why use confusing labels like cool, neutral and warm? Why even have any other setting but the one content is made for?

Personal preference is why. Not everyone likes Warm/Warm 2. Even though it is the closest to reference and taking into account other settings on the TV.

There are people and I have been to friends places where they have the set on Vivid (Torch) mode and they love it that way. I could never watch TV in Vivid let alone gaming on a set in Vivid mode. Same with Cool, it just looks horrible to me and makes things look really off.

I would rather have the ability to change settings rather than have a TV that is set one way and no way to change it.

Really wish a dev or two would come in and let us know when they are creating the game what temp they make the game in.
 
I use 6500k calibrated mode on my IPS laptop, Warm 1 on my 2009 Panasonic plasma (Warm 2 is too greenish/yellow, common issue with the set) and *Computer for my Vizio 2015 E Series 32" which edges out the Warm setting, use it solely for a secondary screen on the PC. The Vizio is definitely the worst looking of the bunch if you have all 3 together. Laptop screen and the Panny trade blows with varying content.

Noone should be using Cool 2 or 1 or Normal/Neutral. Even if warm looks too yellow, try it for a week and it will be hard to go back unless your TV is absolutely fucked in the calibration department, then I don't know. That would suck.
 
Personal preference is why. Not everyone likes Warm/Warm 2. Even though it is the closest to reference and taking into account other settings on the TV.

There are people and I have been to friends places where they have the set on Vivid (Torch) mode and they love it that way. I could never watch TV in Vivid let alone gaming on a set in Vivid mode. Same with Cool, it just looks horrible to me and makes things look really off.

I would rather have the ability to change settings rather than have a TV that is set one way and no way to change it.

Really wish a dev or two would come in and let us know when they are creating the game what temp they make the game in.
A few have, and the consensus is 6500k, which is typically Warm/Warm 2 on TVs. My girlfriend is a 3D artist at a game studio and they take display calibration very seriously.
 
I use 6500k calibrated mode on my IPS laptop, Warm 1 on my 2009 Panasonic plasma (Warm 2 is too greenish/yellow, common issue with the set) and *Computer for my Vizio 2015 E Series 32" which edges out the Warm setting, use it solely for a secondary screen on the PC. The Vizio is definitely the worst looking of the bunch if you have all 3 together. Laptop screen and the Panny trade blows with varying content.

Noone should be using Cool 2 or 1 or Normal/Neutral. Even if warm looks too yellow, try it for a week and it will be hard to go back unless your TV is absolutely fucked in the calibration department, then I don't know. That would suck.

This so much. If you are using cool at minimum try moving to Warm and give it some time. You will see that it is more natural looking, unless other settings are jacked up like Neo mentions above. If you use cool and you had a calibrator come to your home, he or she would bitch slap you for using cool. The best calibrators charge $350+ and can spend 2+ hours dialing in a set and universally they use the highest available temp setting a TV offers to get to the 6500k reference.
 
Maybe I'm dense, but I don't follow this at all. My TV (Panasonic Viera) has 3 colour temp settings; Cool, Normal and Warm. I just assumed Normal is the most balanced setting, and Cool or Warm are more extreme either way. Looks that way when I switch between them.

Warm is actually the best colour balance?

Look up your sets model number on a reputable TV review site, I prefer Cnet myself, and see which setting they determined is the most accurate if they did a review of it. This is the easiest way aside from getting your own readings via calibration hardware and software and/or obtaining the appropriate pattern and a reference screen to compare it to. While it is likely "Warm" is the most accurate, that may not be the case.
 
You will also notice virtually all calibrations, if you see them listed in a row for instance, are all universally using the same color temperature and will all be Warm or Warm 2. Some user calibrations can be thrown in that will throw a "Normal" curveball, but there is a very good reason you never see "Cool" in any calibration listing...Unless it's April 1 or it is some sick joke.
 
What? 6500k rec709 is the standard.
As in, there would be a popular TV available (assuming popular because Apple) that would be properly calibrated, so people would have a point of comparison and look at their TVs at home and be like, "What have I been doing with my life, I feel infinite shame."
 
I like whites to be actual white and not a "warm" white that is yellowed and looks like my tv/monitor has aged, or "cool" that is white with a tint of blue. As a developer I have better range of colours and tints I can use in my games the closer white is actually white.
 
I wonder why Cool 1 and 2 settings exist, if (according to this thread) they provide the most inaccurate results when trying to properly display natural looking colors. It's like TV manufacturers decided to have a "fuck up my whole shit, fam" setting.

Warm 2 for life
 
Before I was a firm believer in Neutral. After reading this thread and playing around with my tv settings, I'm #teamwarm.
 
I wonder why Cool 1 and 2 settings exist, if (according to this thread) they provide the most inaccurate results when trying to properly display natural looking colors. It's like TV manufacturers decided to have a "fuck up my whole shit, fam" setting.

Warm 2 for life

Because they have nothing better to do than to include a ton of shitty features on their sets.
 
With all the talk of 4k, HDR etc. with the release of Xbox One S & PS4 Pro/PS4 HDR update, I was wondering what developers suggest to consumers the proper color temperature for our sets? I know that movie studios author their movies in the Warm/Warm 2 setting or Expert/Expert 1 (different TV's call it different things). But I never heard from a developer when they make a game what color temp. do they create the game in.

Can any devs offer input on what is the preferred color temperature we should have our sets in? I know the majority of retailers have TV's displayed using "torch" mode where everything is blown out and the color temp is set to Cool, but this adds a blue hue to everything and does not look natural and taking personal preferences to color temperature as each person may like different things aside, what do dev's recommend as the best color temp so the game looks like the artist/dev's intended them to look?

Not a dev, but i am a professional colorist. Ideally you would want to calibrate your tv to be consistent with the ambient lighting in the room. for best practices that means being in an isolated room free from outdoor lighting and using specific color temp ambient lights with say 40% gray walls.

one scenario: i calibrated my tv one night, the next morning it looked horrible in the daylight.

What i really want is to use one of Dolby's professional HDR monitors, or if because i probably couldn't afford one even in a dream, i would use a calibrated Flanders monitor. Need to look into HDMI to HD-SDI converters and see if i have to disable HDCP or not in order to get it to work.
 
Fascinating. This makes me wish Apple made TVs, because at least then there'd be a popular, properly calibrated standard for people to compare against.

This thread has made me very angry with TV manufacturers. Why not just make the standard setting have the correct colour temperature and gamma? Why use confusing labels like cool, neutral and warm? Why even have any other setting but the one content is made for?

All i can say is that Apple displays, at least for computers and laptops are horribly inaccurate.
 
Top Bottom