- This topic has 7 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I’m using an old Datacolor Spyder2 express for calibration, and while it seems better than before I’m still not entirely happy. Spyder5’s are on sale right now so I’m wondering, could my Spyder2 no longer be accurate, or is there a compelling reason to upgrade to the 5?
For context I am using three different monitors from different manufacturers, one is quite old, so I know its not an ideal situation to begin with…
I just replaced my aging Spyder 3 for a i1Display Pro. Profiling yields much more realistic colors to my eyes, very happy with the upgrade. Whether this is due to aging or not it’s in line what I’ve read about X-rite units being made to a higher standard than Datacolor. For a power user like you sound like I would consider upgrading a no brainer.
Calibrite Display Pro HL on Amazon
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.Yes meters age and their results get worse with time. Generaly a meter should be calibrated once a year or before every calibration to the display it’s calibrating. That is done with a Spectrophotometer, but those cost upwards of a 1000 dollars….
Hello, guys.
About that “meters aging” topic… I’ve just bought a Colormunki Display Pink Special Edition (they’re cheaper than the normal edition ones). XRite is not selling those anymore and it seems that they’re released in 2016.
That means I probably bought a meter that was sitting in the shelf for two or more years (sealed package though). I’ve never thought about that… Should I be concerned about possible inaccurate results because of that age even if the unit was never used?
Yes meters age and their results get worse with time. Generaly a meter should be calibrated once a year or before every calibration to the display it’s calibrating. That is done with a Spectrophotometer, but those cost upwards of a 1000 dollars….
Not all spectrometers are that expensive, the X-Rite i1Studio is a spectrometer and it cost US$390 .
Yes meters age and their results get worse with time. Generaly a meter should be calibrated once a year or before every calibration to the display it’s calibrating. That is done with a Spectrophotometer, but those cost upwards of a 1000 dollars….
Not all spectrometers are that expensive, the X-Rite i1Studio is a spectrometer and it cost US$390 .
No UV (print), no re-certification services (AFAIK), no self-diagnosis of grating in respect to sensors (AFAIK)… I think that patch size reading is not the same and munki/i1studio needs bigger patches (print)
It is not the kind of device I would invest 400+ euro.
IMHO is cheaper and more accurate:
-an i1d3 with community or vendor or synthetic CCSS (but it may be not so easy to all users to get/generate them)
-an i1d3 as explained above and custom M0/M1/M2 profiles for your printer made by a respectable lab (you print patches, send them my “physical” mail, <40 euro 1st set for 1 paper type, following papers may be cheaper in the same batch)or save money and jump to a i1d3 and a basic i1Pro2 (buy two devices) and do all this stuff by yourself with your own quality criteria: CCSS in 10 or 3nm, printer profilling with/without UV with whatever nº of patches and patch-size/number of sheet optimization…
