Spyder4 vs i1Display vs Displaycal

Home Forums General Discussion Spyder4 vs i1Display vs Displaycal

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #30257

    Michael Metzger
    Participant
    • Offline

    Hi!

    i used a spyder4 for some years, first with its shit software, then with displaycal. I use a Fujitsu P27-7.

    I made some changes in displaycal i didn’t understand, so the grey was a little bit too green. In displaycal the manual adjustments told me to make it horrible green, and the result was that bad.

    II thought something is wrong with the spyder4 so i ordered a xRite i1Display for comparison. Then i got the same thing and i understood that i have to set the color adjustments of the display to “native” and set everything (white in displaycal to “as measured”. I hope these settings are okay?
    observer: CIE 1931 2
    Whitepoint and white + black level: as measured
    tone curve: gamma 2.2

    When i start the interactive adjustment it still is not in balance, but if i am balancing the 3 colored bars with screen adjustments, it looks really horrible…
    I expect, when i set whitepoint to “as measured” the interactive adjustment should be okay!?
    Nevertheless: the calibration and profiling is running with spyder4 and i1Display and the colors are looking good. also for photos of other photographers – not green like before._

    I made 2 calibrations. one with spyder4 and one with xrite. And i made a verification of each calibration with both hardware. I realized 2 things:

    1. When i calibrate with xrite and verificate with xrite the lower end, <10% is much too blue. So the ΔE*00 is over 10. But the rest seems to be okay. It is exactly the same when i calibrate and verificate with spyder. I think this is only in almost black areas and not that problem.?!
    You can see that in the 2 reports Xrite FInal … .pdf and Spyder Final … .pdf

    2. When i crosscheck, xrite calibration with spyder  verification and vice versa, it is really bad. You can see that in the 2 other reports.
    How can that happen and which hardware is allright?

    Can i work with one of these calibrations and profiles, or is there some bigger problem?

    thanks and best regards

    Michael

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #30267

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    Colorimeters need a correction. Google and try to find exact backlight type (“name + surname”, not just “it’s LED”)

    Common sRGB LED monitors use “WLED”/”White LED” backlights. It is bundled in displaycal for i1displaypros & cousins (http://http://displaycal.net/i1d3 ), use it, read displaycal doc. It is built in Spyders too (mode, upper right combo in displaycal).. although Spyder won’t be accurate.

    #30268

    Michael Metzger
    Participant
    • Offline

    Your link is not working.

    The monitor uses a LG Panel with WLED.

    I thought i set “mode” to LCD White LED all the time, but i think it is set to default when switching the colorimeter, so i will try it again today.
    “Correction” was set to auto.

    I will set mode to “lcd white”  for spyder and use correction “lcd white family” for both.

    Do you have an idea what is the reason for the out of balance of the bars in interactive adjustment? If i bring it to balance, it looks much greener, but the verification at the end is also good. This makes no sense to me..

    #30269

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    Your link is not working.

    The monitor uses a LG Panel with WLED.

    I thought i set “mode” to LCD White LED all the time, but i think it is set to default when switching the colorimeter, so i will try it again today.
    “Correction” was set to auto.

    It’s set to none on all

    I will set mode to “lcd white”  for spyder and use correction “lcd white family” for both.

    You can import the same corrections as in provided link by importing corrections in “auto” for i1d3.

    Do you have an idea what is the reason for the out of balance of the bars in interactive adjustment? If i bring it to balance, it looks much greener, but the verification at the end is also good. This makes no sense to me..

    Already explained, no correction was applied to colorimeter.
    Also your display backlight may not match some of the generic ones. Try to find a custom CCSS for i1d3 colorimeter in https://colorimetercorrections.displaycal.net/ or rent an spectophotometer to create one.

    • This reply was modified 1 month, 1 week ago by Vincent.
    #30271

    Michael Metzger
    Participant
    • Offline

    Okay i got a  ccmx file for the Xrite i1 and my monitor, but nothing for spyder.

    I will make a test with:

    Spyder with Mode=LCD White LED and Correction = none
    XRite with Mode=LCD (generic and Correction = downloaded file

    and compare the stuff again – with and without interactive adjustment.

    #30272

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    Don’t use ccmx, i’ve said ccss. Otherwise bundled ones.

    #30273

    Michael Metzger
    Participant
    • Offline

    so i use for both colorimeter the bundled one = the WLEDFamily_07Feb11.ccss file that is included in displaycal?

    I think the ccmx files are only for one colorimeter, the ccss is for all colorimeter.

    If there is a ccmx for my xrite colorimeter and monitor, isn’t this a better option then the standard ccss?
    For spyder i have to use the standard ccss cause there is no special version for in the database.

    #30274

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    It is not for you, unless you made that CCMX

    #30275

    Michael Metzger
    Participant
    • Offline

    I use now these settings in the screenshot. There is no ccss, so i use the mode  LCD White LED.
    If i use the correction the mode is set to none, so it is either or.

    The monitor has 2 modes that are very good calibrated by default (tests told that). “Office” and “SRGB”. In SRGB i cannot change colors at all, but the bars look the same at the beginning. In “Office” i can adjust them. When i set it the colors in monitor settings to 6500k it looks good and almost the same then in “native” mode. I use “native” now.
    In the second screenshot you see the interactive adjustment at the beginning (left) and after i balanced the bars with monitor settings.
    The monitor should be not that bad in “native” mode… If i bring the bars into balance, it looks really horrible.

    Image 3 is a photo of the screen after balancing, where you see the on display menu of the monitor which is not influenced by color settings. the grey of the menu area looks like the grey BEFORE i made the balancing. After it looks like the background.

    I cannot imagine that this is better then before manual adjustment…

    Thats why i skiped the manual interactive adjustment and got the reports i posted yesterday.
    Why shall i do the interactive adjustment, if the report at the end shows “good” results with any manual adjustment? And why is displaycal interactive adjustment is forcing me to adjust the colors to this horror when i set whitepoint to “as measured”? I expected as measured means it is good as it is measured….

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #30279

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    As explanied many times here or in other threads spyder is not accurate even using built in modes. i1d3 using a CCSS close to actual backlight (whatever it is) should be accurate.
    You can rent an spectrophotometer to make a 3nm ccss (ccmx for spyder4) or  choose a visual approach to fix white until it looks white.

    As measured = “displaycal does not care”,

    When you validate it tests if white is close to daylight or blackbody locus. Since Spyder4 is innacurate it may ( it is expected to) complain that your chosen white is not close to the white it believes to be in one of those curves.

    #30280

    Michael Metzger
    Participant
    • Offline

    okay. i will try not spyder4 with mode and xrite with ccss correction.

    In both cases, i will start the interactive measurement, but i keep it as it is cause it seems to be white.

    I hope i will get same results and i can send back the xrite…

    #30281

    Michael Metzger
    Participant
    • Offline

    Still the same…

    I used the white LED Mode for spyder and white led correction for xrite. Afterwards i made a verification with same colorimeter and also with the other one.

    1. Under 10% white the verification is not ok. It is the same with xrite and spyder. Above it is good.
    2. If i crosscheck with the other colorimeter, the verification fails also for more bright colors.

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #30286

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    Spyder is wrong so any crosscheck is useless.

    #30287

    Michael Metzger
    Participant
    • Offline

    But even with the xrite colorimeter, the color balance is not calibrated.

    If i set it to “6500k” in displaycal, the interactive adjustment tells me to make it horrible, but the verification tells me everything is allright. If i set it to “as measured” and don’t use the adjustment, its also allright.

    #30288

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    Because:

    -you are not using the proper correction for that Fujistsu (IDNK which one it is using), unless other user provides CCSS you’ll have to rent an spectrophotometer to complement that i1d3 for that backlight. Visual whitepoint editor may fix white but dE is too high so some primary coordinate may be wrong too.

    or

    -because you have some OS/3rd party utility modifiying white point on shaders or other trick. Disable it: driver GPU, OS night modes, etc

    or

    -because you suffer an observer metameric failure, yourself and CIE 1931 2degree observer do not match by some significative amount with taht backlight. That is not solvable. Using your visual WP won’t match what others see as “D65 white”.

    or a mix or the above.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Log in or Register

Display Calibration and Characterization powered by ArgyllCMS