Inter instrument Comparison

[Roger Breton]

For my own curiosity, I took measurements off my Dell U4326Q with four different instruments. I measured White, Black, Gray, Red, Green and Blue. All with Linear CAL.

1) Minolta CS-200
2) Konica-Minolta MYIRO-1
3) X-Rite i1DisplayPro3
4) X-Rite i1Pro2

I’m surprised of the similarity between MYIRO-1 and i1DisplayProf3.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Vincent]

Did you apply White LED correction to i1d3 or are thay raw readings with default correction? (it assumes it is measuring a display with the same SPD as its RGB sensivity filters)

Calibrite Display Pro HL on Amazon  
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

[Roger Breton]

No CCMX to the i1DisplayPro.
These are as “RAW” as I can get them.
“Whatever is assumed”.

[Vincent]

Then any comparison made with i1displaypro in the way you did is useless and not valid.
i1d3 is not meant te be accurate without an EDR/CCS that at least resembles backlight technology, it was designed that way.
Accuracy test ( = if i1d3 firmware is an accurate description of device spectral sensivity curves, so it can use effectively CCSS/EDR) should be done with a reference CCSS

[Vincent]

I meant, using “no correction” on a White LED like yours is introducing deliberately an error bc as I explained above, with no correction assumes it is measuring a display with the same SPD as its RGB sensivity filters. It is applying a CCSS.
There is no “RAW” CIE XYZ measurements from i1d3 (although Calman may mislablel it this way). It always applies a correction bc raw values from device are RGB “counters”.

[Roger Breton]

Vincent,

Comments like this are useless :

i1d3 is not meant te be accurate without an EDR/CCS that at least resembles backlight technology, it was designed that way.

I provided data that demonstrate the comparative accuracy of the device while you provided only blanket statements. Please allow me to disregard your posts entirely.

[Vincent]

It is i1d3 device description, if this is beyond you can understand do not bame the messenger.

Any inter instrument comparison with i1d3 made with no correction IS USELESS because these devices can vary to high degree EVEN IF THEY ARE ACCURATE.
Accuracy comes from spectral sensivity curves stored in firmware, if they match actual filder+sensor response or now, or the value of that difference per wavelength.
Once you apply a CCSS taht at least resembles the spectral shape of the display to measure you can test if it is accurate or not.
You can see several i1d3 spectral sensivities dumped from each device’s firmware in AVSForum. THEY VARY! of course they did, and even they vay all of them are meant to be accurate within typical 3dE boundary to a true reference device.

Also this subject was discused many times with the usual Colorspace intoxiators in AVSForum.

Hence your test, regarding i1d3 and only about that as said in my previous message, SHOWS NOTHING, it is no accuracy test at all for an i1d3. It’s a coin flip, if you choose 2 units of i1d3 ramdomly, both tested accurate with a set of CCSS, and you do your useless test, one may aim closer to actual coordinates, or both… or none of them.

You saw data you seem to do not understand, so educate yourself in this subject before further sh*tposting. Hint: read ArgyllCMS code for i1d3, it’s free.

[Author]

Posts