![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Best Color Calibration Hardware?
- Thread starter zod96
- Start date
AsAnAtheist
n00b
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2010
- Messages
- 24
Eye One Display 2 is currently the best one available. Uses the same sensor as the X-Rite Optix however lacks good implementation.
The best would be X-Rite Optix (not manufactured anymore) but if you can find one that's your best bet.
The best would be X-Rite Optix (not manufactured anymore) but if you can find one that's your best bet.
Luthorcrow
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2002
- Messages
- 1,241
If you are looking for a fast, easy and low price calibration unit that does a good job then I would recommend the Huey (NewEgg listing).
Eye one Display LT is your best bet at your price point.
Quality varies greatly by unit in regards of the Spyder 2 & 3.
What is the point of calibrating a monitor if the result is not accurate?
Please see this.
http://www.curtpalme.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11436
Quality varies greatly by unit in regards of the Spyder 2 & 3.
What is the point of calibrating a monitor if the result is not accurate?
Please see this.
http://www.curtpalme.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11436
The led apple cinema is still not wide gamut, so I think you can get by with the eye-one display lt. (I recommend argyll software with that; will do a lot more calibrating than the LT software).
If you were looking at a wide gamut display like the 30" dell/hp, then the higher end spectrometers are better for calibrating. The colormunki design at ~$350 seems to be the current cheapest choice in that area. I just upgraded to that myself.
I haven't. I have read that spectrometers (more $$$$) are better than colorimeters like the Eye1/Spyder 3 for multiple gamut usage. Spyder 3 still can have wide gamut issues:
HCFR has tested Spyder 3s and state that a Eye1 is still better, being all consistent and better at dark measurements. The found some average Spyder 3, some very good and some awful. They still recommend avoiding them.
If you go to X-Rite page and use their suggestions in solutions for monitor calibration they recommend Pantone Hueys for amateurs with normal gamut. But if you select wide gamut they will recommend a Eye 1 LT/2.
http://www.xritephoto.com/ph_solutions.aspx
NEC is still shipping Eye1s with wide gamut SV monitors.
Last edited:
Sailor_Moon
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 611
The problem is that the filter solutions of consumer colorimeters don't reach the CIE standard observer function. Therefore an initial correction has to be accomplished - normally to a CRT spectrum and a LCD CCFL spectrum (which internal matrix is used can be selected in the software then) without extended color space (72% NTSC). Deviations regarding the reference will lead to deviations in measurement. Other corrections can be carried out in software (in particular: Eizo Color Navigator, Quato iColor Display - its generic corrections allows for usable results with WCG-CCFL screens, especially when using the X-Rite DTP94) or you can use a different initial correction (HP and NEC provide their "own" EOD2 whose "special" correction can be accessed via their software). A colorimeter that matches the standard observer would be univeral, but even the Minolta CS 200 doesn't completely reach this aim. I know of one german solution (Color Mouse) that sounds good and the new Discus of BasICColor also promises flexible usage - but I haven't tested it yet.
Matching of two screens with different spectra is a problem even when using the right equipment. That's because normally the spectral curves of the 2 degree observer are used. For a wider field of view these curves differ slightly.
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1036129955&postcount=133
But it doesn't emit the same spectrum as a CCFL backlighted screen without extended color space. That's why Quato has also implemented corrections for a White-LED (72% NTSC) spectrum in their newest iColor version - although deviations are less dramatic compared to WCG-CCFL or RGB-LED spectra.
Best regards
Denis
Last edited:
Interesting, I've not seen any such adjustment or description of it for the other calibration software (eye-one match, colormunki, argyllcms, dispcalGUI). I assume this only applies to colorimeters? (there are only colorimeter corrections in iColorDisplay's DeviceCorrections.txt.)
Perhaps the other calibration software is able to handle LED simply by getting the white point set right?
If you download icolorDisplay it won't let you calibrate anything, as it's just a crippled demo, and there is seemingly no way to buy a license key in the US.
argyllcms/dispcalGUI will let you make calibration adjustments, and are free. However it's not clear to me whether you need an LED adjustment with that software.
Sailor_Moon
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 611
Yes a spectrophotometer works differently - although there are also limitations that are based on the sample intervall which is (consumer solutions like EyeOne Pro and ColorMunki) twice as coarse as the fogra recommendation of <= 5nm (the 3.3nm you can achieve with Argyll and the EOP is without oversampling) - but we achieved feasible results even with current RGB-LED backlight displays (108% NTSC).
Argyll now allows the usage of 3x3 correction matrices and it can calculate them self based on two measurements (colorimeter + reference device) but you need the reference.
Best regards
Denis
I know spectrometer > colorimeter, yet you lump the two together in your statement about consumer devices.
So still not clear whether you're claiming this adjustment only applies to colorimeters.
Yes, I showed in the other thread that argyll can do correction, in fact it seems to use the same format as iColor Display that you keep mentioning (that nobody has a license to use).
If this correction you're talking about involves a correction that isn't perceptible to the human eye than it's really not worth mentioning for users. So I'm wondering if you can quantify things?
The caveat about needing the right reference would apply to iColor Display too.
Sailor_Moon
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 611
I wouldn't call them better in all regards - at least when we are talking about the consumer devices which have disadvantages with low luminance measurement and a coarse sample intervall. But yes, they need no correction.
No because you have precalculateted matrices (the generic corrections). They were averaged over screens with slightly different spectra (92-102% NTSC - they have individual corrections for their own screens too) and many colorimeter of one type to compensate for inter instrument deviations. Because EOD2 and SpyderIII have quite high deviations among individual samples (if not handpicked) these precalculated corrections are not as effective as when using it with the "stable" DTP94. This device is quite far away from the standard observer (through its anorganic, very age resistant filter solution) but they deviate much less among each other. Argyll builds the matrix from your own measurements or you can of course use your own one.
It's very perceptible (and as I said: Not only Quato considers that). Here an example for a screen with WCG-CCFL backlight (102% NTSC) with/ without usage of the generic correction (individual correction with EOP as reference is listed beneath):
http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/review/2010/review-dell-u2410-part15.html#Correction
Although only possible on a CCT base (which says little but is at least a hint) you can also compare measurements of for example tftcentral who are using the Lacie BlueEye Pro.
NEC PA241W factory setting (native color temp):
Our EOP measurement: 6435K (quite far away from blackbody curve)
Lacie BlueEye Pro: 5392K (no additional colorimetric information)
Best regards
Denis
Last edited:
The original question was whether consumer colorimeters were suitable for the apple cinema display. You claim they aren't, but I haven't seen where you show that the results are not suitable. Other reviewers such as Anandtech found no problems with apple cinema calibrated with a colorimeter.
You quote a review for a wide-gamut monitor as justification, but the monitor in question is not wide-gamut.
You keep recommending iColor Display for calibration correction, but never address the issue that the only version available is a demo that doens't allow any calibration.
You suggest that iColor Display can do better calibration adjustments, but these are just fixed 3x3 matrices that can be applied to free software such as argyll as well.
Sailor_Moon
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 611
It's only indirectly a gamut question. Important is the emitted spectrum. I have recently tested a screen with White-LED Backlight while using the DTP94. Deviations were not as bad as with a WCG-CCFL or RGB-LED backlight screen but usage of a correction matrix helped (=> an EOP is no ideal reference but I have no quick access to something like a Minolta CS 2000) to achieve a more correct result. Btw: The DTP94 has the characteristic to deliver consistent results relative to the wrong whitepoint when compared to measurements of the EOP => After chromatic adaptation to a common base (for example D50 in the ICC workflow) the readings are comparable. Doesn't help much during calibration but leads to very similar ICC profiles. In contrast to that we got absolute wrong gamut measurement when using a Spyder3 with a RGB-LED backlight screen.
White-LED backlight (72% NTSC):
CCFL backlight (72% NTSC):
Which reference was used - apart from a profile validation with the same probe (which will of course show no problems)? Saying that I must point out that most (doesn't mean all - haven't read Anandtechs tests yet) colorimetrical tests of consumer magazines are based on a wrong workflow in which especially the expressiveness of a simple profile validation is misunderstood (and such a function is also often misused).
iColor Display is widely available in Europe (separately or bundled with the DTP94) but I've already heard that it is problematic to get overseas. Sry for the European perspective - there should be ways to import it (?). But I think that we will see other suitable consumer colorimeter solutions in the near future. Already mentioned the Discus of BasICColor.
Never said anything else. I only wanted to say that they provide precalculated matrices which can be "extracted" of course (an undocumented "feature" through the "open storage" in a txt-file). At least at the moment.But when you are using Argyll and don't have access to correction matrices you must have your own reference device as there are no generic ones bundled with it.
Best regards
Denis
Last edited:
Perhaps but you haven't quantified how much any of your information matters to the subject at hand - that being whether consumer colorimeters are suitable for the apple cinema display.
Now you added a graph, which seems to show delta E<3, thus no problem for the user who isn't trying to be a calibration engineer.
Sailor_Moon
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 611
The graph shows the emitted spectrum no color difference. Just wanted to show the differences regarding the spectrum. Nevertheless: DeltaE when using the DTP94 actually wasn't much higher than ~4 regarding measured whitepoint of the EOP (CCT was the same). But there was a difference in measured brightness which I haven't experienced when comparing CCFL, WCG-CCFL and RGB-LED measurements with the same instrument configuration.
Without a really good reference like the high end Minolta devices (with fine sample intervall) and considering the low inter instrument agreement of most consumer devices it's quite difficult to make a general assertion in this case. Maybe that's our misunderstanding.
The results will be less incorrect (regarding color difference without consideration of luminance differences) than with WCG-CCFL or RGB-LED backlight. If you have a suitable correction matrix on hand (such as in iColor Display > 3.6 for 72% NTSC White-LED screens) you should use it - otherwise you may can live without it. Things can turn when measuring other White-LED displays with again different spectral characteristic (I'm thinking of notebooks for example).
Best regards
Denis
Last edited: