- This topic has 36 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Happened to see this discussion, very useful info about Mac compatibility – so Windows has the edge by supporting XYZ throughout? Or it’s still only the pro apps that will support it?
I happened to get my xRite i1DisplayPro today. I did test it with both, my results between xRite’s Profiling software and DisplayCal were very similar. Would be hard to tell the difference. Whereas, compared to my last calibration with DisplayCal using the Spyder, quite a bit different.
Now that I’ve tested both xRite’s and Spyder’s colorimeters, I don’t really get how anyone can go for Spyder unless they get a very good deal on the lowest software package. The Spyder is consistently very reddish on the whites, no matter which whitepoint I choose. Not to mention speed – I know it’s been said somewhere on this forum that the i1DisplayPro is only about 40% faster, but I swear, it seemed to me to be 2-3x faster! The same speed/number of patches test that took 1 hour+ (more like an hour 15 minutes) took less than 30 minutes, maybe only 20 minutes, using the i1. It also looks professional, with its large glass lens. Not sure what the Spyder is going for but that grid of holes it has for the measurement surface looks more like a gas detector or a microphone than something that would be measuring light or color accurately. I would never believe the difference without trying both myself.
Calibrite Display Pro HL on Amazon
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.Happened to see this discussion, very useful info about Mac compatibility – so Windows has the edge by supporting XYZ throughout? Or it’s still only the pro apps that will support it?
In Windows the desktop and most apps are not color managed (apps could be explicitly color managed of course like Firefox or Photoshop). This could be good or bad depending on what you do and what monitor do you have.
That means that desktop and non color managed apps will ignore profile, be it matrix, LUT, single TRC or with 3 TRC. It wll only use calibration (1DLUT stored in profile’s VCGT tag loaded into GPU).Current (and some past) versions of macOS are not able to deal with 3 (different) xTRC curves stored in some matrix or table profiles , AFAIK caused by low precision rounding errors. So all 3 TRC curves must be equal in order to avoid this bug that causes coloration in grey components of UI/dekstop. Single curve +matrix profiles work in this way.
Switching back and forth from the sRGB profile in system settings with my created 3D Lut with VCTG enabled.
No, do not switch the display profile, leave it at the correct one, not sRGB.
Toggle the 3D LUT in Kodi – you should only observe a tone curve change (lightness).
I decided to use HCFR to measure AVS 709 patches in Kodi after applying the 3dLut and It’s all showing good results. I did saturation sweeps and color checker and it’s all looking good. So now I know it’s being applied correctly. At least with sRGB profile checked and VCTG Enabled.
I decided to connect to an external TV through thunderbolt using HDMI and by default Mac uses YCbCr and no way to switch in Settings. And it gave me bad results using Single Curve +Martix. No matter how many times I tried, still bad results. I’ll upload the verification report. sRGB Gamut coverage is only around I think it was 91%.
This might be something to look into when using DisplayCal connecting to an external TV. It might be an error in measurements.
I had to use this guide “here” to force RGB and set my TV to Full Range RGB. I got deeper Blacks and contrast ratio improved by 1,000 more. And better results with more 98% sRGB coverage.
First 2 Attachment comparing Single Curve+Matrix with YCbCr and Forced RGB. Last 2 attachments its comparing 3D Luts. Notice the increased contrast ratio.
This might be something to look into when using DisplayCal connecting to an external TV. It might be an error in measurements.
No, when you are driving a TV or other display in YCbCr, the TV does its own YCbCr to RGB conversion, so there is no way to profile the native response of the TV. This situation requires a cLUT-based profile.
I had to use this guide “here” to force RGB and set my TV to Full Range RGB. I got deeper Blacks and contrast ratio improved by 1,000 more. And better results with more 98% sRGB coverage.
If you can force RGB and have to use a matrix profile, then that’s what you should do.
No, when you are driving a TV or other display in YCbCr, the TV does its own YCbCr to RGB conversion, so there is no way to profile the native response of the TV. This situation requires a cLUT-based profile.
If you can force RGB and have to use a matrix profile, then that’s what you should do.
I noticed better results with cLUT then with Matrix profiles. Is the reduced contrast ratio and Reduced Gamut Coverage a huge impact? I mostly want my TV as a video player for Kodi, and run 3D Luts.
