DisplayCAL appeared on DPReview %)

Home Forums General Discussion DisplayCAL appeared on DPReview %)

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #31429

    Алексей Коробов
    Participant
    • Offline

    Found here today. I don’t believe in sponsorship of this event. Are they capitulated?

    The article seems to be typical product advertisement. Mac users won’t buy Asus, PC users don’t have need in DCI-P3 color space, but the drawback of Apple display on PC book is exsessive resolution for Windows icons. My experience also tell me to avoid discrete graphics on PC for graphics, this gaming feature usually has buggy integration with ICM/vcgt workout. I also highly recommend to delete Asus and MSI color management software on notebooks, though I hope they will do something workable.

    I know the only laptop panel (or panel family) with over-sRGB coverage and “color-stable” three-peaks lighting: the one of Honor Magick Book Pro 16.1 (2020-2021, all submodels?). It has Full HD only resolution, anoying separately seen pixels and unpleasant crystal effect. Some HP submodels seems to use it too. I rarely meet here 12-14″ models. There’s some 15,6″ panel with sRGB coverage, but it is with WLED lighting and… memory effect or something like this. I always get 200+ more Kelvins after calibration of these panels. Twice I’ve met AdobeRGB+ coverage on 15,6″ 4K panels (Dell XPS 15 and some MSI model), both panels had terrible linear defects and non-acceptable uniformity.

    #31437

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    DisplayCAL has been used on several review site, although on some reviews it is configured wrong  or in a tricky way:

    -No colorimeter correction
    No issues here in DPreview although they have hidden one use they used, so review is even more useless to unexperienced reader who would come there by google… so chances are hight to ask here where we do not know which LED P3-widegamut  it is using (WLED PFS? some QD LED?)

    -XYZLUT profile as a way to lower dE errors in display profile vs actual profile, so review says display is better than it actually is because measurement report validates measurement against profile expected values (best to calibrate with a 1curve + TRC + BPC to spot any non ideal behavior)
    That DPreview review fails here

    -No factory whitepoint validation (how bad is it out of the box) / no post calibration whitepoint validation (how much contrast would i loose to correct white)
    That DPreview review fails here

    -No calibration curves in custom profile (how bad was grey, if gamma was OK, a white point only correction will show divergent but straight lines)
    That DPreview review fails here

    -Grey range (how bad is post calibration grey if we exclude GPU induced banding)
    That DPreview review fails here

    • This reply was modified 2 weeks, 3 days ago by Vincent.
    #31440

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    Funny jokes in DPreview:

    In my testing, it didn’t quite live up to that claim, managing only 95.3% coverage of DCI-P3 and 80.0% of AdobeRGB, but it did so at a respectable Delta E 2000 of less than 2.

    No, it didnt! (we do not know). You choose a XYZLUT profile to get a good result (or by ignorance).

    Other reviewers have profiled this display at up to 98% DCI-P3, but to my knowledge, nobody has seen it hit the advertised 100%.

    That other review used an Spyder (which model, although using an spyder its actually a joke) and an unspecified correction (maybe none, maybe a wrong one, maybe it lacks of a correction for that in 4 or 5 model)

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Log in or Register

Display Calibration and Characterization powered by ArgyllCMS