Totally new to screen calbration. Can’t decide which calibrator to buy ??

Home Forums Help and Support Totally new to screen calbration. Can’t decide which calibrator to buy ??

Viewing 10 posts - 16 through 25 (of 25 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #31678

    Алексей Коробов
    Participant
    • Offline

    We know, Kuba, that you’re Calibrite (i.e. stupid rebranding of X-Rite calibration products with no difference to original products in package set or price) advertising agent on free and powerful DisplayCAL forum. I have all X-rite “computer calibration” devices: i1Display Pro, ColorMunki Design and i1Pro 2 Photo, moreover I have little experience with i1Pro Rev.B and Rev.D, i1Profiler CMYK mode and Xerox PhaserMatch ColorMunki edition. Though, I use ColorGATE PS21, that is based on ColorLogic engine, for printing and used it for profiling. My experience shows that i1Display Pro and ColorMunki are not precise devices. i1DisplayPro may need  personal correction made by i1Pro or similar device (I haven’t tested many devices, but two devices at least show significantly different results that are out of acceptable precision, while i1Display Pro is the most desirable consumer-class colorimeter), and ColorMunki (bought new) shows little, but sensitive spectrum shift and compression in comparing to industry acceptable i1Pro 2, display calibration with ColorMunki shows corresponding color cast. The only good thing you can do is to tell your bosses that X-Rite should keep and publish quality criteria even for consumer-graded devices. Time is running, X-Rite crown may be carried away by growing competitors. Don’t believe that speculation can save it.

    i1Display Pro on Amazon   i1Basic Pro 2 on Amazon  
    Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

    #31683

    Kuba Trybowski
    Participant
    • Offline

    I have nothing to do with X-Rite/Colorite other than using their device (an i1 Display Pro Plus) to calibrate my screen.

    I make my living by designing logos:

    https://www.upwork.com/freelancers/jakubtrybowski

    https://www.behance.net/jakubtrybo387d

    Since logos are printed, I need a calibrated, color-accurate display.

    I chose an i1 Display and not a Spyder – or any other device – spimply becase I needed a colorimeter that was guaranteed to work with an OLED display (you could call me an early adopter):

    And I chose an OLED laptop simply because I didn’t want to be tied to my desk.

    That’s it.

    i1Display Pro Plus on Amazon  
    Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

    #31688

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    My experience shows that i1Display Pro and ColorMunki are not precise devices. i1DisplayPro may need  personal correction made by i1Pro or similar device (I haven’t tested many devices, but two devices at least show significantly different results that are out of acceptable precision, while i1Display Pro is the most desirable consumer-class colorimeter), and ColorMunki (bought new) shows little, but sensitive spectrum shift and compression in comparing to industry acceptable i1Pro 2, display calibration with ColorMunki shows corresponding color cast.

    And who cares about that?
    Inter instrument variation or raw RGB accuracy does not matter for i1d3 as long as spectral sensivity data stored on each device matches its device. It’s the basis of all CCSS/EDR “distributed” corrections.

    i1d3 devices are accurate as long as vendor (or community) keep supplying EDR/CCSS for new models.

    Using raw RGB data from i1d3 corrected to CIE XYZ using no correction is using them supposing thant measured display emits an spectral power distribution equal to i1d3 filter response… thus… it is inaccurabe BY USER’S FAULT, not device.
    If I use a washing machine without soap and clothes remain dirty… it is not device’s fault, it’s user’s fault.

    Generic GB-LED EDR + i1d3 matches very closely actual color coordinates of a GB-LED while i1Pro2 (xrite 10nm) does not (under measures Z but still in daylight locus, just different temp). Rising resolution with argyll makes i1Pro2 match closely the color coordinates measrued by i1d3 + generic GB-LED. It is a good design, relying on portable distributable corrections.

    #31689

    Алексей Коробов
    Participant
    • Offline

    Inter instrument variation or raw RGB accuracy does not matter for i1d3 as long as spectral sensivity data stored on each device matches its device. It’s the basis of all CCSS/EDR “distributed” corrections.

    Using raw RGB data from i1d3 corrected to CIE XYZ using no correction is using them supposing thant measured display emits an spectral power distribution equal to i1d3 filter response…

    Vincent, you can’t exclude technical quality issue by math, this issue is inaccurate measurement by i1Display Pro, either filters or photodiods problem. Yes, when I build personal CMX correction, I realy use SPD data got by i1Pro 2. But DisplayCAL can’t build personal correction from CCSS file, it needs .ti3 data to do it. CCSS correction seems to be based on normative XYZ (=LMS here) response, not actual filter spectral pass data. And i1d3 filters seems not to be of very high quality. I disassembled my i1d3 some moths ago, it has LMS (I suppose) gel filters (or very thin glass). Do you believe that those filters have precise spectral pass curves? I think, it is difficult to achieve it.

    2Kuba: So, why do you still post previews with Calibrite logos? It’s not the matter of this topic. We can discuss on official X-Rite software and even “solutions”, but here, on a freeware forum, better to talk on all abilities and comparre them with DisplayCAL.

    #31691

    Kuba Trybowski
    Participant
    • Offline

    Simply because there’s no real alternative.

    There’s no other place where you can find comparable, user-friendly and easy-to-understand calibration/color management guides and tutorials.

    That channel is a really great place if you want to learn about display calibration from scratch.

    #31692

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    Inter instrument variation or raw RGB accuracy does not matter for i1d3 as long as spectral sensivity data stored on each device matches its device. It’s the basis of all CCSS/EDR “distributed” corrections.

    Using raw RGB data from i1d3 corrected to CIE XYZ using no correction is using them supposing thant measured display emits an spectral power distribution equal to i1d3 filter response…

    Vincent, you can’t exclude technical quality issue by math, this issue is inaccurate measurement by i1Display Pro, either filters or photodiods problem. Yes, when I build personal CMX correction, I realy use SPD data got by i1Pro 2. But DisplayCAL can’t build personal correction from CCSS file, it needs .ti3 data to do it. CCSS correction seems to be based on normative XYZ (=LMS here) response, not actual filter spectral pass data. And i1d3 filters seems not to be of very high quality. I disassembled my i1d3 some moths ago, it has LMS (I suppose) gel filters (or very thin glass). Do you believe that those filters have precise spectral pass curves? I think, it is difficult to achieve it.

    2Kuba: So, why do you still post previews with Calibrite logos? It’s not the matter of this topic. We can discuss on official X-Rite software and even “solutions”, but here, on a freeware forum, better to talk on all abilities and comparre them with DisplayCAL.

    No, you are wrong about that.

    Read ArgyllCMS code. CCSS corrections create a custom taylor made matrix correction from YOUR colorimeter based on firmware data (custom spectral sensivities). Even if you do not use a CCSS at all (it assumes that display behaves like filters).
    They do not need to be a perfect match fro CIE 1931 2 degree, they just need to be close and let device know actual error/difference.

    #31701

    Алексей Коробов
    Participant
    • Offline

    OK, why do I get significant and visible error when I use CCSS (either built with i1p2&3nm, or JETTI-built) and almost equal to i1p2 result using personal CMX? May be firmware data does not represent actual device response?

    #31705

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    If you opened it… maybe they do not match now. Also visible errors but numeric match can be caused by observer metameric failure,  RGBLED, QLED and WLED PFS more prone to it than WLED or GB-LED, or even sensivity variations on shorter wvlengths in z-bar across humans against CIE 1931 2 degree may cause this visual shift in RGB OLED wp.

    Anyway, the key point is that a CCSS leads to a custom matrix RGB to XYZ tailor made for each i1d3 (or for i1d3 batch) and sample spectral power distribution. Otherwise distributed corrections cannot be used. That is 100% sure, argylls code, take a look at it.
    That is different from QC in a batch or user damage to unit by modifying/opening it.

    #31723

    Алексей Коробов
    Participant
    • Offline

    Vincent, Mindas test of Eizo CS2731 using my .ti3 data from i1p2 showed the same problem with his i1d3. I did not damage filters (there’s nothing to break, except of optical surfaces), the problem had persisted before repair. The strange thing is that SPD panel data allow to build personal device correction before each calibration/profiling, thus avoiding  manufacturing quality issues, but factory filters data are used intead of direct colorimeter response measurement.

    #31739

    Vincent
    Participant
    • Offline

    Mindas’ CS2731 is a WLED PFS and works like a charm with 1nm correction. Also WLED PFS is more prone to observer metameric failure.
    It’s Eizo’s CN fault that i1d3 is corrected by a generic matrix (not customized for “his” i1d3) or a GB-LED EDR.

Viewing 10 posts - 16 through 25 (of 25 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Log in or Register

Display Calibration and Characterization powered by ArgyllCMS