Is there any benefit of using CIE2012-2 over CIE1932-2?

Home Forums General Discussion Is there any benefit of using CIE2012-2 over CIE1932-2?

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 89 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #138561

    Kuba Trybowski
    Participant
    • Offline

    Try the RGB OLED Family correction.

    What colorimeter do you have?

    #138566

    Veridot
    Participant
    • Offline

    I1 display pro

    I’m looking for an appropriate ccss, but could only find one for the  samsung atna56ac01-0, not my atna56yx03-0 amoled display.

    Isn’t the oled rgb family profile too generic here, afaik created with a sony rgb oled ?

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

    #138567

    Kuba Trybowski
    Participant
    • Offline

    Your colorimeter is OK.

    Could you please post screenshots of your calibration and profiling settings?

    #138619

    Veridot
    Participant
    • Offline

    I’m referring to the greener white with cie 2012-2 compared to the  d65 white of my ips white led display.

    I’m not saying the whole picture would look too greenish, just the white in comparison.

    I have only checked that with hcfr (liberman fork with cie 2012 available), does the effect of  displaycal’s cie 2012  differ?

    I could also try displaycal, but it gave me severe problems in the past.

    Btw, why does the title say cie 1932-2,  1931-2 is meant?

    #138625

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    1

    I’m referring to the greener white with cie 2012-2 compared to the  d65 white of my ips white led display.

    I’m not saying the whole picture would look too greenish, just the white in comparison.

    I have only checked that with hcfr (liberman fork with cie 2012 available), does the effect of  displaycal’s cie 2012  differ?

    should  behave the same way

    I could also try displaycal, but it gave me severe problems in the past.

    try command line argyllcms to measure white, several ways: dispcal -r or -R, spotread…

    Btw, why does the title say cie 1932-2,  1931-2 is meant?

    It looks like a typo. CIE 1931, 2 degree observer.

    #138771

    EP98
    Participant
    • Offline

    @Veridot

    CIE 2012, 2 degree, needs an different WP then 1931 to get D65 for this color matching function.

    The D65 xy cordinates for CIE 2012 is

    x: 0.3135

    y: 0.3308

    • This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by EP98.
    • This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by EP98.
    • This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by EP98.
    #138775

    EP98
    Participant
    • Offline

    I uploaded a picture. CIE 2012, 2° and CIE 170, 2° are the exact same thing when I verified them with a Jeti 1501 probe using two different softwares.

    This picture is from Jeti’s cmf paper.

    • This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by EP98.
    • This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by EP98.
    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #138862

    naanmana
    Participant
    • Offline

    Should 2012-2 have significantly increased error in blue primary in verification? I understand the 2012 whitepoint is approximately 6800K relative to 1931, and verification is hard coded to 1931. I previously assumed observer shouldn’t change the primary.

    I tried 2012 on 3 different displays, (PVA with specific ccss, WLED with specific ccss, LCD PFS Phosphor IPS generic) and they all result in ~2.5 dE blue in srgb sim. All others are <=1 in default verification chart. Self check reports also have blue primary around dE 2.5. Interestingly, the display I normally use PFS Phosphor had slightly increased gamut coverage but slightly higher error when switching to W-LED generic (~1%) Still ~2.5 dE blue.

    Possibly could be my Colormunki Display. However, 2 months ago when I updated routine calibrations with 1931, the blue error was not as significant as this. I don’t expect my colorimeter going that bad so quickly. Only other significant change was changing to Windows 11.

    #138863

    EP98
    Participant
    • Offline

    Colormunki Display doesn’t have filters for other CMF’s. You need a colorimeter that is compliant for CIE2012.

    You need a spectro if you want to calibrate in other CMF’s.

    • This reply was modified 7 months, 1 week ago by EP98.
    • This reply was modified 7 months, 1 week ago by EP98.
    #138864

    EP98
    Participant
    • Offline

    https://www.konicaminolta.com/instruments/download/catalog/display/pdf/cap427_410c_catalog_eng.pdf

    #138867

    naanmana
    Participant
    • Offline

    Colormunki Display doesn’t have filters for other CMF’s. You need a colorimeter that is compliant for CIE2012.

    You need a spectro if you want to calibrate in other CMF’s.

    I did consider that, though from my understanding of this comment in my older thread with a similar issue, changing observer shouldn’t affect out of gamut, which is apparently blue primary on all of these tests.

    But shouldn’t a matching ccss allow consumer colorimeters to use other CMFs? The results are good, with most dE <0.5 aside from the blue primary.

    And this earlier comment says the i1Display Pro is okay, which should pretty identical to OP’s Colormunki Display*.

    However, I just ran a new calibration at 1931. Self check has a blue dE of 3.8, and srgb sim blue dE of 3.3. Guess I need a new colorimeter or need to reinstall something.

    • This reply was modified 7 months, 1 week ago by naanmana.
    #138869

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    You can verify whitepoint in commandline:
    -Q 2012_2
    at some apps like spotread (-x for Yxy), dispcal (-r or -R, with or without VCGT), that will report CCT and CDT, take the 2nd of the 4.
    Example (only 1 moniytor and only 1 measurement device plugged to computer):

    dispcal -r -Q 2012_2

    or for an i1d3 with custom CCSS

    dispcal -r -Q 2012_2 -X mypath_to_csss
    (if CCSS is imported it will list in -y param)

    Regarding blue verification, it validates measurement vs profile prediction. With matrix profiles made of several patches like combinations of CMYRGB 255 and 128, it computes the best fix description of all the data in  XYZ x 3 primaries.
    Self check report is showing measured blue 255 in profile creation vs computed “best fit” of all patches data.
    For fine grain fit use a 3D mesh, an XYZLUT profile.

    #138870

    EP98
    Participant
    • Offline

    I get the exact same high blue error you get when I use CIE 2012 with the i1 Display Colorimeter.

    #138871

    EP98
    Participant
    • Offline

    Visually I get purplish looking blues when I calibrate with 2012 and i1 Pro colorimeter.

    This is with a colorimeter profiled against a Jeti 1501 2nm hi res.

    Colorimeter is useless since it has CIE 1931 filters. Entire calibration needs to be done with spectro alone if you want to target alternate CMF’s.

    • This reply was modified 7 months, 1 week ago by EP98.
    • This reply was modified 7 months, 1 week ago by EP98.
    #138874

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    I get the exact same high blue error you get when I use CIE 2012 with the i1 Display Colorimeter.

    Regarding blue verification, it validates measurement vs profile prediction. With matrix profiles made of several patches like combinations of CMYRGB 255 and 128, it computes the best fix description of all the data in  XYZ x 3 primaries.
    Self check report is showing measured blue 255 in profile creation vs computed “best fit” of all patches data.
    For fine grain fit use a 3D mesh, an XYZLUT profile.

    And it’s expected if monitor behavior cannot be described by an idealized matrix. It is not related to observer, but to “fit” a cloud of points in a 2D graph with something like a “single straight line”.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 89 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Log in or Register

Display Calibration and Characterization powered by ArgyllCMS