- This topic has 22 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
SpyderX is an inaccurate device that cannot be corrected “in a portable way”. Hence if it doe snot measure well you’ll have to correct it FOR YOU with an spectrophotometer measuring YOUR CS2420. It’s a waste of money & time buying one of these. Get an i1DisplayPro if you need to upgrade.
CG2420 <- CS2420
1500:1 panel
same lut matrix gamut emulation
integrated probe not so accurate and that cannot be used to validateFS2331
As explained before, just make calibration slower to imporve grey. If you see banding in non color managed gradients try to get an AMD GPU, or try to use nvidia dithering hack for windows or (whatevr vendor) use DMWLUT (source = a single curve matrix description of your calibrated display, destination = a simple or complex prpofile with grey calibration, embed VCGT in LUT3D).
This way you spend 0 pounds.Calibrite Display Pro HL on Amazon SpyderX Pro on Amazon
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.godammit, I wish I bought the display pro and not the studio.
I got the spyderX on offer plus used some other vouchers so £67 total, but surely can’t be a total dud and same accuracy as built-in probes.
Why do Eizo accept it for CN7 if it’s no good, would the EX4 be exactly the same as SpyderX Pro (just a different colour body/log) or has it been somehow precalibrated or corrected by Eizo for thier Displays?
So, an individual unit accuracy gamble with the spyderx? But could I use my iDisplay Studio to verify if I have a good or bad one?
I have AMD and no colour banding issues.
BUt its getting too complex for me:In Profiling Tab do I select Single curve + MAtrix for profile type and black point compensation?
Then, In 3D LUT Tab, do I select Create 3D LUT after profiling with ‘Apply Calibration (vcgt)’ checkbox ticked.
Then action the Calibrate & Profile form the 3D LUT TAB.If so, which source colourspace, tone curve and gamma on the 3D LUT tab.
Sorry, I’m just a bit lost.
CCSS made by another for your display model vs CCMX mabye by another to his colorimeter and his/your display model.
That is the difference, portable upgradeable corrections vs built in corrections. Using built-ins in an “all purpose device” is a go no zone since Xrite make/patented ths EDR/CCSS stuff.I wrote several options. Since you have an amd card the others are not needed, just lower calibration speed to imporve grey and that’s all. Easier to avoid color managed rounding erros with a matrix single curve bpc, but C1 does dither so it is not limited by that stuff.
TL;DR: return spyder, keep your i1display studio. On your Eizo Foris FS: DisplayCAL calibration speed madium or slow, single curve + matrix +bpc. If it valudates using sRGB simulation profile (do not set/check simulation as display profile) it’s done. If it fails try XYZLUT with same settings, it should be OK now.
This test tries to find how good is a display in Photoshop or C1 or other color managed app showing sRGB content and assuming no rounding errors caused by app/engine due to limited precisionDid what you said. It passes and has no grayscale banding. Many thanks.
Out of curiosity used both i1display and spyder – they vary in measured white point by approx 500-600K!!
i1display => hint/essence of matrix style colour balance (feels a bit green)
spyder => hint/essence of salmon pink colour balance (feels a bit pink)Comparing a spectrally neutral grey card (lit by daylight) to each RGB user presets the i1display greys seem right/more neutral.
If anyone is interested, or it helps, to show the differences between x-rite i1display and datacolor SpyderX, I verified each instruments calibrations with both:
1. calibration from x-rite verified using x-rite MWP=6496K, then verified using spyder MWP=7178K
2. calibration from spyder verified using spyder MWP=6523K, then verified using x-rite MWP=5949K
I think I got a duff datacolor spyder? It doesn’t seem to measure blacks properly, gives the wrong contrast for the VA panel, and also gives a pink cast.
As all the repeated advice, I need to return and future budget for an i1Display Pro. This puts back any hope of a new monitor for now 🙁
CCT is not a valid way to address color differences, it’s meaningless. Also all your spyderX settings are wrong, you need to setup measurement mode.
Regarding white point with i1d3 try to find a CCSS for that model, since it can be used in a distributed way. It that foris is actually a CCFL, make sure 3nm or better.
The Foris is CCFL, I am certain. One reason I choose it(over LED) back in 2011. I don’t know if it’s 3nm or better or how to find out.
There is a spectral correction for the FS2331 but as White LED IPS, not the correct CCFL and VA panel. Nevertheless, I used them in the past but found the generic CCFL gave more reliable results.
I installed the argyIICMS drivers for the Spyder and intentionally selected generic mode as datacolor say to use for older standard gamut displays with CCFL. From the 4 choices in the firmware, its not standard white LED, or either of the two wide gamut modes.
I’m sorry but I don’t know what else I need to do to setup measurement mode to get the correct settings for the spyderX, I can’t find any other options.
I measured X and Y using the visual white editor on a 2nd monitor and got approx 6350K from the iDisplay and approx. 6650K from the spyder, does that prove anything?
Then spyder has no correction at all and all its measuremenst should be discarded.
I’d checked custom CCSS and due to poor spectral resolution it looks no better than defaul CCFL but you can try, no WLED for sure.
As I said previously CCT is meaningless, you cannot use kevin value to compare, it cannot store the information you describe as “color tint”, it lacks 1 dimension.
