- This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I guess this is an OS/API limitation, but overnight I did a long (slow+11140 patches) run with a long name:
i1pro i1d3 Matrix LG 27UD68P-B B34-130nit RGB-51-43-40 Ultra HD #1 2017-11-17 05-21 0.3127x 0.329y sRGB S XYZLUT+MTX
so the output path is e.g.
D:\DisplayCal Profiles\i1pro i1d3 Matrix LG 27UD68P-B B34-130nit RGB-51-43-40 Ultra HD #1 2017-11-17 05-21 0.3127x 0.329y sRGB S XYZLUT+MTX\i1pro i1d3 Matrix LG 27UD68P-B B34-130nit RGB-51-43-40 Ultra HD #1 2017-11-17 05-21 0.3127x 0.329y sRGB S XYZLUT+MTX.icm
which is above the 255 chars limit. This caused no apparent problem in the log (except for not being able to access the icm), but I could not install the profile and cannot open it because the total path name is too long.
It would be great if DisplayCAL would warn in advance (!) that a filename total length would exceed 255 chars.
However, the coverage result was a bit too good to be true (96% DCI and like 200% volume etc.) and the coverage graph looks physically impossible (to my knowledge). Earlier cal runs (same long duration settings, shorter name) produced worse, but realistic coverage and no broken coverage graph.
Can I confidently salvage the cal run (maybe the the measurements are all right) or is everything lost?
Thanks!
Calibrite Display Pro HL on Amazon
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.Here’s what it looked like the last time with the same settings (slow+11140 patches).
Only other difference besides long name to before is I now use a manually created matrix correction which I verified twice and works fine otherwise.
OT: what does “minimize XZ chroma diff” do for matrix correction? Found no docs. Does it improve quality? I did two correction runs with/without, see attached.
It would be great if DisplayCAL would warn in advance (!) that a filename total length would exceed 255 chars.
A check like that is already in place, I’ll have to do some tests and see why it is (apparently) not working as intended.
However, the coverage result was a bit too good to be true (96% DCI and like 200% volume etc.) and the coverage graph looks physically impossible (to my knowledge).
This looks like something interfered with the measurements.
Can I confidently salvage the cal run (maybe the the measurements are all right) or is everything lost?
The files are usually either in the “storage” or “incomplete” (if the run was aborted due to error) directories, see the documentation on file locations.
what does “minimize XZ chroma diff” do for matrix correction?
Instead of using deltaE 94 squared to minimize overall color difference (which is the ArgyllCMS default), “minimize xy chromaticity difference” implements the four-color matrix method published during the CIC (Color Imaging Conference) in 1998. It’s mainly there to make comparisons with other calibration/profiling solutions easier which usually only implement this method. Outside of that, there should be little difference to which method you use.
