I think that the CALMAN software is more accurate with the Spyder2 probe. I know that the CALMAN writers have worked with Colorvision about the cvspyder.dll.

Laric is the spyder2 dll a part of 1.11 or part of the spyder2pro driver pack. I'm running 1.11 and can't get a spyder2pro to run.

If its part of the spyder2 driver pack, can someone with a spyder2 zip up and post here their cvspyder.dll, and maybe the associated drivers. I'm trying to do a side by side with a DIY sensor and so far I can't locate this dll. I'm hoping the different driver and dll will work ok.

cheers

Would be nice to see a direct comparison between CalMAN & HCFR. I'd love to see which is truly closer in accuracy utilizing the Spyder colorimeter. As everyone else will most definately agree with me here, HCFR does have more of a professional look & feel to it, but how does it really compare in accuracy with CalMAN is the real question.

I think that the CALMAN software is more accurate with the Spyder2 probe. I know that the CALMAN writers have worked with Colorvision about the cvspyder.dll.

First let me say great looking app HCFR guys, it just gives us at CalMAN a much higher bar to hit with our next versions, which by the way will not need Excel.

Yes, in fact we have a licensed SDK from Colorvision for the Spyder2, an SDK from Gretag Macbeth for the EyeOne series including the Display2 and EyeOne Pro. We are also working with other manufactures in many areas.

As far as who is more accurate in using the Spyder2. Well the data from the Spyder2 is just that data. By reverse engineering the Spyder2 interface dll which was done by a 3rd party and given to the HCFR guys, getting the XYZ data is easy it's only a single call to the S2 dll. However setting up the Spyder2 before you get the data is very important but difficult step and can be a difference by as much as 10% in error if done wrong. The Spyder2 meter can be made to be accurate if you know how to set it up and know what all of the environmental factors that can effect it's accuracy and some environments it's just not well suited for. We have done extensive testing to make sure the way we setup the S2 up is the most accurate for each environment. By just reverse engineering the Spyder2 interface dll you have to make some assumptions about how to setup the S2 and not knowing what all of the factors are. I know this because that's what I did just about 1 year ago for the S2xyY app I released. When I joined Bill on the CalMAN project we got the SDK from CV to make sure the product we provided was accurate. Now knowing what I did I pulled the S2xyY because it could have accuracy issues and our License from CV was for CalMAN and not S2xyY.

I tried this out today on my Hitachi CRT RTPV TV. With the Spyder filter on, and the red tracks low. Without it, it tracks much better, but still tracks lower than my CALMAN run. The top is without the filter, the bottom with the filter.

HCFR Spyder runs (http://home.comcast.net/~leebailey00/HCFR.JPG)


thought that was suppose to be true for CRT=Filter Off and filter on for LCD/DLP..or am I missing something.

Laric is the spyder2 dll a part of 1.11 or part of the spyder2pro driver pack. I'm running 1.11 and can't get a spyder2pro to run.

If its part of the spyder2 driver pack, can someone with a spyder2 zip up and post here their cvspyder.dll, and maybe the associated drivers. I'm trying to do a side by side with a DIY sensor and so far I can't locate this dll. I'm hoping the different driver and dll will work ok.

cheers


ditto..same problem here..

Never mind..I copied from the Spyder2express file the DLL file to the HCMR file where the exe. file is at..and that took care of it..I HOPE..

thought that was suppose to be true for CRT=Filter Off and filter on for LCD/DLP..or am I missing something.

When using Spyder2Pro or Spyder2Express software, you'll be directed to remove the filter on a Direct View CRT. If you're using SpyderTV software, you never are asked to remove the filter. I'm not using a Direct View CRT, maybe I will try it set up for PROJ mode instead.

Meanwhile, very nice interface to run and use.

Here's what my CALMAN RGB tracking looked like during the same session:
(yes, it's time to check my calibration!)

CALMAN.PDF (http://home.comcast.net/~leebailey00/CalMAN.pdf)

I would highly recommend seeing about gettig the official SDKs both for the Spyder and the MUCH more accurate Eye-one line (both the Display 2 and Pro). These are excellent pieces and are widely used.

So - CalMan - you do have a major competitor that costs .... let's see here ....NOTHING..... so I guess you better get going on those enhancements. How about a continuous plot capability?


Agreed, this and many other features that don't even exist in any other products free or $2500. I would love to take about them but this forum has ears, so not until we can release them into beta :)

....setting up the Spyder2 before you get the data is very important but difficult step and can be a difference by as much as 10% in error if done wrong. The Spyder2 meter can be made to be accurate if you know how to set it up and know what all of the environmental factors that can effect it's accuracy and some environments it's just not well suited for. We have done extensive testing to make sure the way we setup the S2 up is the most accurate for each environment.Are you referring to the screen offset here or something else that the CalMAN does that other software does not with the Spyder2 I'm not aware of?

I'm curious about this reported difference and will do a runs with my Spyder2 to compare what CalMAN and HCFR show.

I understand the need to not market CalMAN here, but appreciate the inferences. I'll be following closely.

Dan

I understand the need to not market CalMAN here, but appreciate the inferences. I'll be following closely.

Dan

Agreed, we can discuss this in another thread or over on the CalMAN forums at length. However I'm not going to be giving away any trade secrets we learned over the last year about the S2 or the SDK from CV.

After comparing Lee Bailey's posted results between Calman and HCFR using Spyder2 probe, differences in tracking Blue and Green are minimal at worst. However, Red indeed tracks lower. Could this throw off an accurate grayscale calibration? How could this be fixed?

Are you referring to the screen offset here or something else that the CalMAN does that other software does not with the Spyder2 I'm not aware of?

I'm curious about this reported difference and will do a runs with my Spyder2 to compare what CalMAN and HCFR show.

I understand the need to not market CalMAN here, but appreciate the inferences. I'll be following closely.

Dan

Dan - Let's definitely take this offline, or over to our place. You know where to find us. I'm making it a personal mission to get all of the folks that are CalMAN users using HCFR back into the fold.

Bill

Is CalMan that threatened by HCFR?

it shure looks that way :D
and what's worst, threatend by a FREE tool :cool:

The calman site is here :
http://www.calman.tv/

Click the "Forums" link to see what's being discussed ;-)

jeff

btw. for those with upconverting players - do you use NTSC or HDTV on the Pref ->Ref-> tab

I have a 720 Mits 3000, upconverting 720P through an Oppo

Being like most people I am willing to accept limitations of DIY equipment, what ever it may be. On the other hand alot of the real discovery's of this world are made by the people who do it themselves.

In this case, here you have DIY hardware that with average skill one can create a tool that can hold it's own. Then there is the software, here again it can hold it's own. All this being created because there was an obvious need that wasn't being filled by anything else available. There is many reasons for that isn't there.

As far as pay for software, personally no matter how much it cost's it's value is arbitury as the moment one place's a value on it it must perform perfectly, if it doesn't you will surely hear about it.....don't you think.

In my case, I live in a part of the world where professional calibrators have not been invented yet, so DIY is where it is at as far as I am concerned.

I give thanks to the group from HCFR for all their efforts especially because it is not fueled by economics.

Hello,

You must keep in mind that Spyder and DTP support were added in about a week because we were asked for...

So far we haven't chosen to reverse engineer anything, we simply use respective probes drivers (and may be later other ways if we think it better suits). It's possible there will be improvement (if any are really needed).

BTW, the software was created and tunned for our probe... Although third party support was panned, it wasn't the initial goal... We think we have a very good probe (and even fantastic in regard to price :D) and it is offered to anyone that either like DIY or can't afford EyeOne ;)

Last, we trust in open source, but I assume you allready get that...


New version 1.12 is available here : http://www.homecinema-fr.com/colorimetre/release/Setup_v1_1_2.exe

It includes German, English and French language (Help are still in French Only), as well as a few improvements (nothing new on probe side).

--Patrice

damn - and just like that..there is a new version...

btw..I love the software, for the novice, this is the way to go...its pretty straightforward in alot of ways..Thanks so much..

Just curious, what are the changes implemented in the new point release 1.12?

Thanks guys.
Carmine.

Any comments on post #275?

Also, when measuring ANSI contrast, aren't we suppose to measure all the white squares and then the blacks? The programs keeps the pattern for about a second, doesn't ask to measure them all as if it were measure full ON/OFF contrast. I'm using "view images".

The software itself is not the most important component in the process. A quality instrument is at the top of the list followed by the skill of the user and then the software must be useful. The following is a calibration example from a client using one of the Spyder products versus a GMB Eye-One. The pre calibration results are with the Eye-One after the Spyder said all was good.

I was called in on this case because the owner is sensitive to color accuracy and knew the Spyder was wrong. Most people have never seen right and have nothing to go by.

Lamp based products like this SXRD display are difficult to read accurately and the new LED based DLP's are even more of a challenge.

jeff, what software was used with the spyder and how was it setup
this says NOTHING as long as one doesn't know ALL facts

every now and then someone does a reply in one or another topic trying to compare spyder vs. X

first of all, the spyder's are contact probes, so treat them as such (don't compare them in LCD/DLP projector situations)
second, they're more sensitive than most people realize (measure a tv with normal lighting, then re-measure in total darkness (the room, not the tv) you'll be surprised how much 'noise' it picks up)
third, state you software (the standard colorvision software sucks big time, i remeasured a profile colorvision made with hcfr and rader's ... boy, colorvisions profiling software sure is crap

the above 3 still don't make the spyder a bad colorimeter

fourth: and i find this one quite importent
if you wanna know how accurate the spyder really is, dont quit after ONE probe, test several, THEN you can give an estimated level of error

I'm making it a personal mission to get all of the folks that are CalMAN users using HCFR back into the fold.

BillNow this is what I call an appropriate, constructive response to competition. I won't be leaving the CalMAN fold, but do expect the new user interface to be better than that offered by the HCFR software. How it could be better I don't know and look forward to finding out. The EyeOnePro offer is one thing I look forward to as well. This whole question of whether that probe is meaningfully more accurate than the Spyder2 has been gnawing at me for about a year or so - at least enough that I am prepared to fork over a few hundred dollars to find the answer. I don't consider myself color-perception challenged and calibrating using the Spyder2 has resulted in an image that looks great to me. Perhaps I have just been lucky, and I hold out the enticing possibility that I have yet to see what "accurate" is after 16 years of viewing front projection images.

So, Jeff, if I get that probe and there's no change from results I obtain from the Spyder2, you'll be hearing from me. ;) OTOH, if I see "accurate" for the first time after calibrating with the EyeOnePro, I will duly declare to you that I am not worthy.

Dan

Any comments on post #275?

Also, when measuring ANSI contrast, aren't we suppose to measure all the white squares and then the blacks? The programs keeps the pattern for about a second, doesn't ask to measure them all as if it were measure full ON/OFF contrast. I'm using "view images".
Can anyone clarify this?

The software itself is not the most important component in the process. A quality instrument is at the top of the list followed by the skill of the user and then the software must be useful. The following is a calibration example from a client using one of the Spyder products versus a GMB Eye-One. The pre calibration results are with the Eye-One after the Spyder said all was good.

I was called in on this case because the owner is sensitive to color accuracy and knew the Spyder was wrong. Most people have never seen right and have nothing to go by.

Lamp based products like this SXRD display are difficult to read accurately and the new LED based DLP's are even more of a challenge.The errors of the spyder calibration in the pdf is not due to bad hardware, it is due to bad software or errornous use of the sensor (baffle on/off, wrong mode, something).

Spyder TV / Spyder TV pro is way off in most aspects. Never trust it. Use the sensor to get XYZ-data and use the data in a better software.

btw, Y is cd/m2 not fL... You might wanna change that in accucal.. :)
(1fL = 3.4262591 candela/m2.)

// Lyckman

Laric,

I admire your project ... and now in german too :eek:

Please allow me 2 informations for the spyder2:

a) for LCD Projectors, in v1.11 I had to select "LCD" instead of "Proj" because measured values with "LCD" are closer to SpyderTVPro results - will see what's happen with v1.12 :o :o :o

b) Read time: I guess, there's one decade too less. If I select 500ms, the Spyder reads nearly 5s. If I choose 1000ms, my Spyder2 reads nearly 10s.
Btw: In SpyderTV.exe /support the range for allowed read times are 2s ... 12s.

Regards,
Harry
Btw: Please take a look at my PN regarding your probe - lot of thanx

Just curious, what are the changes implemented in the new point release 1.12?

Thanks guys.
Carmine.

Im not sure myself but one thing I did notice that I am not sure I noticed before was that the greyscale readings topic line where it actually says GREYSCALE also has the Average gamma setting, not sure if that was there but I noticed it today...YIKES, mine is averaging 1.92...Still trying to figure out how to calibrate gamma in general..

btw HCFR - how about adding an ENGLISH forum on your end..

ALSO - how do I link a file for my results..I tried earlier but it doesnt support this ext. obviously..

Lyckman,

Your drive by shooting of SpyderTV/Pro software doesn't jive with my experiences. I've never had such good results with SpyderTVPRO from any display device I've ever owned and that includes self calibrating efforts with AVIA, DVE, Monster/ISF, Sound and Vision's Home Theater Tune-Up, Calman, and two professional ISF calibrations by local technicians.

Perhaps when you choose to dismiss a product in such a wide sweeping manner you might wish to offer your reasons why you hold such an opinion. And I gather it is just that: an opinion which of course you are welcome to and free to offer. However, you would seem to be speaking from a position of authority on the subject given what you wrote after what you said about the Colorvision software which might cause some readers to unnecessarily decide to stay away from these products.

Although Colorvision's software is not the subject of this thread, I cannot let your remarks pass without comment. Please respond publicly to this matter since you have publicly attacked Colorvision's credibility.

Wayne

Hello everybody

HDHolic, for ANSI contrast, we just measure a white and a black... it isn't the real procedure, with manu measures and averaging. Actually, our probe is not reliable when measuring contrast. We are working on that problem. So, our priority is to research ways of computing a true contrast value with our probe, and then we could make the procedure inside the software in sync with ANSI recommendations.

Richlo, you are right, I added the gamma average in the main view, just because many people asked it on this forum. The other mods in 1.12 are the view closing bug in full screen mode, a third Delta E curve in RGB histogram when a reference document is defined (the Delta E between measure and reference), and improvement on CIE chart (zoom mode, delta E displayed in tooltips, and optional drawing of Delta E 3 and 10 around white reference). And of course German language support, thanks to Schrauber ;)

Regards
Georges

Hi Derek
First let me say great looking app HCFR guys, it just gives us at CalMAN a much higher bar to hit with our next versions, which by the way will not need Excel.

Thanks for your compliments, you are really fair play ;)
And we are proud to challenge commercial products like yours... we are just "amateurs" ;)

Yes, in fact we have a licensed SDK from Colorvision for the Spyder2, an SDK from Gretag Macbeth for the EyeOne series including the Display2 and EyeOne Pro. We are also working with other manufactures in many areas.

We do not have those SDK. Maybe we will ask them one day, but it isn't a priority for us. We have other wishes for our software in the future ;)

As far as who is more accurate in using the Spyder2. Well the data from the Spyder2 is just that data. By reverse engineering the Spyder2 interface dll which was done by a 3rd party and given to the HCFR guys, getting the XYZ data is easy it's only a single call to the S2 dll. However setting up the Spyder2 before you get the data is very important but difficult step and can be a difference by as much as 10% in error if done wrong. The Spyder2 meter can be made to be accurate if you know how to set it up and know what all of the environmental factors that can effect it's accuracy and some environments it's just not well suited for. We have done extensive testing to make sure the way we setup the S2 up is the most accurate for each environment. By just reverse engineering the Spyder2 interface dll you have to make some assumptions about how to setup the S2 and not knowing what all of the factors are. I know this because that's what I did just about 1 year ago for the S2xyY app I released. When I joined Bill on the CalMAN project we got the SDK from CV to make sure the product we provided was accurate. Now knowing what I did I pulled the S2xyY because it could have accuracy issues and our License from CV was for CalMAN and not S2xyY.
In fact, our tests showed S2 is not perfectly reliable with HCFR software. That's certainly the reason why. But we are reliable with DTP-94, for which we have all necessary information to exploit perfectly its results. For us, that's enough: we support our DIY probe, and a commercial probe for those who can't make the DIY probe by themselves, but want to use our software.

Anyway, do not feel so quiet: even if it isn't a priority, we don't like having something not perfect in our software, so we will work on Spyder support one day :D

Regards
Georges

Is CalMan that threatened by HCFR?


Where is that at? I wouldn't mind learning a bit about the differences on drapp1952's comment.

drapp1952- I'd like to see your runs on both programs.
Here are two runs following a calibration first with HCFR, then with CalMAN, with the Spyder2 untouched in placement between runs and no adjustments made before CalMAN was used for the comparison run. Sorry but < 10 is cut off in the CalMAN RGB tracking graph and I want to go back and check how that tracks compared with HCFR. The readings are taken off the screen which helps explain the low IREs being off; I'll get around to taking direct projector readings at some point but have traditionally gone by eye at 10-20%. Subjectively the CalMAN tracking looks closer to what I see at <20%.

I'll do a few more to see if I can pick up more differences between the two softwares and include gamuts. I'll also use the latest HCFR though I wouldn't expect to see fundamental changes in readings from what I understand of the updates.

Dan

Hi Dan -

They look awefully similar with the exception the obvious 20-30ire..which is typically the hardest area to hit right...

Anyone know where to purchase the DTP-94

Hi Dan -

They look awefully similar with the exception the obvious 20-30ire..which is typically the hardest area to hit right...

Anyone know where to purchase the DTP-94
It's the same as the Monaco Optix XR.

re: dtp-94 (aka monaco optix xr) and spyder2 low light sensitivity...

If anyone has both a comparison at low light levels might be in order. my dtp-94 produces very reliable readings down to 0.1-0.2 cd/m^2 Y levels.

I'm speculating that it's not just getting the software to properly configure the hardware. The hardware are different and my opinion is that the dtp-94 does better when light challenged.

Are there any CalMAN owners that have both probes and have done the comparison?

Best,
jeff

P.S. As an aside, the DIY probe is a fantastic idea. I just knew that they (probes) shouldn't be that expensive and that the cost for commercial models had to be due to software costs. We all know developing software is expensive ;-)

Hi Dan -

They look awefully similar with the exception the obvious 20-30ire..which is typically the hardest area to hit right...

Anyone know where to purchase the DTP-94
The Gamma reading is not close though, which is very important when calibrating. I'd also like to see some DTP-94 vs Spyder2 readings.

I'm speculating that it's not just getting the software to properly configure the hardware. The hardware are different and my opinion is that the dtp-94 does better when light challenged.
You are absolutely right, the chalenging area are sub 30IRE... That's were all differences are made... It is also that very area that is (IMHO) very good on our probe ;)

As an aside, the DIY probe is a fantastic idea. I just knew that they (probes) shouldn't be that expensive and that the cost for commercial models had to be due to software costs. We all know developing software is expensive ;-)
Yes, and now you have the software ;) :D

Our probe has many cons (IR sensitivity so may require an IR filter as well as the "profile" thing) but beside that (and we have solutions to those problems), it cost around $50 to build... That was (is) one of our goal... Allow many people to have their own system so they can tune as many time as they want, each time they change sources, room details, screen... etc...


Last, 1.12 add nothing on the probe reading side...

--Patrice

The Gamma reading is not close though, which is very important when calibrating. I'd also like to see some DTP-94 vs Spyder2 readings.
I think the general shape of the curves is about the same although the CalMAN indicates the gamma as 2.85, off the 2.2 target, that is probably related to the autoiris1 setting on my Pearl; gamma was at default setting otherwise. I'll do runs with the autoiris off and see what happens.

Dan

Are there any CalMAN owners that have both probes and have done the comparison?I'll compare with the Spyder2 by late next week after the Optix XR package arrives.

Dan

Dan-


On page 8 there is a comparo of the spyder and DTP-94 ..with HCFR software

Hi Derek

We do not have those SDK. Maybe we will ask them one day, but it isn't a priority for us. We have other wishes for our software in the future ;)

In fact, our tests showed S2 is not perfectly reliable with HCFR software. That's certainly the reason why. But we are reliable with DTP-94, for which we have all necessary information to exploit perfectly its results. For us, that's enough: we support our DIY probe, and a commercial probe for those who can't make the DIY probe by themselves, but want to use our software.

Regards
Georges

Georges that is why I pulled the program I wrote a year ago S2xyY, because of the reliable/accuracy issues. Once I had access to the SDK for the S2 I was not privileged to use it for S2xyY so it got pulled.

BTW, I do belive in DIY I do a bunch of it myself, hardware and software. In fact not to help out our competition but here is a good service in the US for short run PCB's that I use. http://www.pcbexpress.com/

I also believe the market has more than enough room for a free and affordable commercial calibration system. In fact the market is outgrowing both of us by a huge margin.

Dan-


On page 8 there is a comparo of the spyder and DTP-94 ..with HCFR softwareThanks for the reminder. I'd seen that post and knew there was another reason to order this sensor. It looks like it works very well with HCFR for the lower IREs especially.

Dan

Lyckman,

Your drive by shooting of SpyderTV/Pro software doesn't jive with my experiences. I've never had such good results with SpyderTVPRO from any display device I've ever owned and that includes self calibrating efforts with AVIA, DVE, Monster/ISF, Sound and Vision's Home Theater Tune-Up, Calman, and two professional ISF calibrations by local technicians.

As you can imagine my experience differ from yours. I have not tried TV / TV Pro on my own display but we have tried it at a friends several times, and the result was always way of. Both grayscale and contrast/brightness. Nothing wrong with the Spyder II sensor though.

I'm having a hard time to believe that the TV Pro gave you a better result than a professional calibration. Do you have any numbers to back this up?

Imho, TV Pro is a good tool if you're not able/capable/interested to do the calibration based on the raw data returned from the sensor. But the result will never be as good as if you did. TV / TV Pro is a shortcut. But not an accurate one. I will try to get some measurement posted to back this up.Perhaps when you choose to dismiss a product in such a wide sweeping manner you might wish to offer your reasons why you hold such an opinion. And I gather it is just that: an opinion which of course you are welcome to and free to offer. However, you would seem to be speaking from a position of authority on the subject given what you wrote after what you said about the Colorvision software which might cause some readers to unnecessarily decide to stay away from these products.I'm not sure what you mean but,

I have nothing against colorvision or their products. Far from. But if you have interest enough for calibration to read through this whole thread, which is about a software that is far superior to all "light" colorvision products, you should not consider buing one of them (imho). :)

Color HCFR, CalMan, Accucal. All is better. But only if you understand how to use them. How to interpret the colometry data. How to adjust your device accordingly.Although Colorvision's software is not the subject of this thread, I cannot let your remarks pass without comment. Please respond publicly to this matter since you have publicly attacked Colorvision's credibility.

WayneNo problem ;)

I'm very interested to have before/after reading of your device. The ISF-guys must have left you with some documentation. Maybe you could post it.

// Lyckman

So...

Who does correct calculation for the gamma...

Color HCFR or CalMAN

It looks like CalMAN reports a higher gamma than Color HCFR. It's the same with the predecessor excelsheet (Colorimeter007)..

// Lyckman

I was trying to get a comparison between the spyder2pro and HCFR DIY probes over the weekend, but the spyder lacked a dll file to run with HCFR so I had to give up.

But I have managed to get my DIY working. I managed to address some of the addivity issues, that is lower them to 15% from 30% on my PC LCD screen by postioning the probe closer as suggested by Laric.

Now I have got onto some actual readings I'm in a learning curve as what does what.

My first question is, is it possible to set the basics of brightness and contrast via the HCFR software and DIY probe?

I had to revert to my DVE disc to set brightness, black level first.

Next question is about color and tint; what can you do if the CIE triangle is way off with one color, in my case green on my projector. It seems that color and tint only adjust balance between the primaries not individual saturation.

I've attached 3 zips with HCFR runs with my DIY probe.
I have alot to learn to get these right, so far I am a bit off base.
The phillips one I got the RGB tracking together nicely, delta e looked good, but dispite the RGB fitting nice the gamma went awol and the picture look awful dispite the grey scale right on the money.

The next 2 is my AE900 runs, here I am trying to get the basic CIE triangle on track.
Thes were done in Cinema1 with no filters and my screen is just a painted surface(firehawk shade of grey)
Run 001 I tried to do color and tint via the HCFR software, but I am fighting green.
I had a small tweak of individual RGB and got some tracking.
Run 002 I did color and tint via DVE. Green is an issue again, I could see errors whilst tweaking the levels in DVE, but couldn't seem to do anything about them.

I see inaccuracies with my results through 2 pieces of software, and it is this issue which led me to build a DIY probe, to confirm what I was seeing in DVE and visually when watching movies.

anyone got any ideas on how to tackle the green saturation issue.

I was trying to get a comparison between the spyder2pro and HCFR DIY probes over the weekend, but the spyder lacked a dll file to run with HCFR so I had to give up.Make sure the CV_Spyder.dll file is copied to the Color_HCFR directory.

// Lyckman

SmokeyJoe,
I've also spend a lot of time with HCFR learning by doing ... ;)
The dll was no problem. Just have to copy cvspyder.dll from folder SpyderTV into the HCFR folder. So my Spyder works fine (except below of IRE 40).
I agree with you, my Green color from 0% Sat to 90% Sat is also way off.

But I've an other question to Laric or Georges:
I'd like to manual adjust the black level because of Spyders low brightness reading problem.

So I used your DVD-Pattern "Luminosité". With this, a white square appears on the right side below of the Patternline, if I rise the black level.
Question: For the correct adjustment - should this square be visible or not?

Regards
Harry

Who does correct calculation for the gamma...

Color HCFR or CalMAN

It looks like CalMAN reports a higher gamma than Color HCFR. It's the same with the predecessor excelsheet (Colorimeter007)..

So that people are not confused, Colorimeter 007 is NOT a predecessor of CalMAN. Version 1 of CalMAN was being used be several people participating in this thread before Shawn ever started modifying Gary Fritz's old spreadsheet. If you check the SpyderTV review, you will find ample documentation on such. Just under a slightly different user name. ;)

As for who is correct, our method of handling gamma is better than most of what I have seen on the market. It is also one area where we have put effort into differentiating CalMAN. If you have questions regarding how HCFR handles gamma, then they should feel free to post. As for CalMAN, I would respectfully point people to our forum where such questions are more appropriately handled there. (And have been)

Bill

Okay...now that I have a decent tracking and the primary and secondaries are not so bad actually - with my Mits 3000U...my only problem is GAMMA where it stating an avg of a measely 1.38, which is rediculous...I know I need to be shooting for 2.2 - 2.5..

There is a huge PEAK between 20-60 (yellow line). My mits allows me to adjust HIGH, MED, LOW in a gamma setting, but Im am not sure if I should be lowering Medium, Med and Low, and how do I adjust, right now my settings are zero across the board, do I decrease those or do I need to me making some other adjustment..

Richo I think I would redo those readings. Something went wrong looking at the luminance figures. You need to check if it was just a poor reading or something real. If it was just a poor reading it may pull the gamma into line for you.



I have a question for anyone that knows about the CIE chart.

How far away from the triangle does any one need to be before you notice that a color is over or undersaturated. More importantly off axis.

I only ran the greyscale steps, the primary and secondary. I see there is a ANSI step - do I need to run that for GAMMA actually...since i do not remember running Luminance figures at all..

Thanks also from me richlo for reminding about that post. the dtp-94 compares well and confirms my results using that probe. If I get board this winter. I might try and build the probe for fun ;-).

Best,
jeff
Thanks for the reminder. I'd seen that post and knew there was another reason to order this sensor. It looks like it works very well with HCFR for the lower IREs especially.

Dan

the dtp-94 compares well and confirms my results using that probe.
Best,
jeff
what did you compare the dtp-94 against?

Sorry for the confusion in my poorly worded post... I was refering to what I wrote just above. The meter gives very reliable results down to 10% stim. Really down to .1 or .2 cd/m^2 values of Y. Measurement variations from day to day and from session to session are within the stated error ranges given by the manufacturer. I haven't had the issues other using the s2 probes report at low light levels.

Best,
jeff

As for who is correct, our method of handling gamma is better than most of what I have seen on the market. It is also one area where we have put effort into differentiating CalMAN. If you have questions regarding how HCFR handles gamma, then they should feel free to post. As for CalMAN, I would respectfully point people to our forum where such questions are more appropriately handled there. (And have been)

BillI was under the impression that there was a standard for gamma calculation. You hint that CalMAN has a different (better?) implementation of gamma calculation than most software. How can one improve a standard without breaking it?

And I do think it is appropriate to ask in this thread. :)
Since people here have begun comparing results between Color HCFR and CalMAN, we need to have a reference for what is correct. Correct according to a standard. A standard can of course be questionable, but that does not mean one can ignore it. At least not without giving reasons.

And this is no trap. I have no idea of which software is according to standard. ;)
So please enlighten me!

Question remains..
At least one of Color HCFR and CalMAN is wrong. Which one? (Or both?)

// Lyckman

Hi all

About gamma. There is really much to say, because the standard is not defined enough. 2.22, ok, but how to calculate it ? That's a big question. First of all, you have one gamma value per measured IRE. So, there is not ONE gamma, but MANY gammas. When talking about THE gamma, it's always an average. Now, it's still simple... But what about black compensation ? In HCFR software, on luminance histogram in log mode, you can see individual gamma values, and average gamma (the horizontal cyan line). And if you check and uncheck "black compensation", you can see it varies... Very few on projectors having really dark blacks, quite much on old LCD models having high black levels.

Principle of black compensation is simple: 0 IRE luma value is substracted for all other luma values. And gamma is calculated from those "black compensated" values. And it gives higher gammas, which match much better what you can feel with your eyes. But the standard does not force to use (or not to use) black compensation. In the main window, the gamma displayed in gray scale group title is an average gamma computed using black compensation (it's easy to check the values by comparing it with the values in the luma histogram in log mode).

Regards
Georges

Thanks Georges,

So for my crt pj with total ftb, black compensation should always be off.
But I wonder if it will make any difference.. 0 IRE is never readable, so there is nothing to substract, right?

// Lyckman

Hi Lyckman

Even with absolutely infinite contrast, with IRE 0 = absolute zero, you will have something to substract, the noise returned by probe ;)

Anyway, this is visible usually on second decimal, which is useless. For instance, everybody talks about a standards of 2.2. Actually, the "true" standard is 1/0.45, which is 2.2222222. But in no way your eyes can see the difference between 2.2 and 2.222... ;)

So, if black compensation turns your gamma average from 2.21 to 2.22, you can forget it ;)

Regards
Georges

George -

When I run the Luminance/Ansi it ask for 0 IRE then 100 IRE, then ANSI1 and ANSI -2. Is this what is used for GAMMA??

I cant wait to see the English HELP..I need it..;0)

Hi richlo

Contrast measures are used only for on/off and ansi contrast values in the contrast group. No more. Gamma cannot be computed with only IRE 0 and 100, it needs all intermediate IRE ;)

Actually, contrast measuring is not reliable with HCFR probe, and not so much with other commercial devices. To have a true, really reliable contrast value, you need a luxmeter. Being conscious of that, we didn't work much on that feature, it's really simple.

Regards
Georges

FWIW, I think the baffle ON/ baffle OFF question maybe lies in which .dll you are using (I don't know nottin' about no .dlls, but...) SpyderTV keeps the baffle ON all the time. If I copy the .dll from this program's directory, and then read my D65 reference CRT monitor with Spyder2 + baffle, HCFR reads the greyscale accurately. If I remove the baffle, readings are way off. If I use the NEW version of HCFR, which supplies the .dll (and I think it comes from Spyder2PRO), the baffle needs to be OFF to get accurate greyscale readings. AND the Spyder2PRO software directs you to remove the baffle before reading CRT displays...

Dan

A question for the develpers. The HCFR website states the software only works with Windows 2000 & XP. I've got two older PCs -- one with 98SE, and the other with ME. I installed 1.12 on both, and it seems OK so far. My Spyder won't arrive for a couple days so I haven't been able to take any measurements.

Am I going to need to upgrade to XP? Thanks for any help you can provide, and what appears to be a great calibration tool!

Hi Steve

Too things: HCFR probe driver works only on W2000 and XP. When using other probes (Spyder II and DTP-94), the software may work with other versions... For some features it needs multithreading capabilities, but most of the software should work with other Windows versions.

Anyway nobody never tested it... so nobody knows ;)

Regards
Georges

Thanks Georges. Looks like I'll be the offical tester!

So - does anyone have a suggestion on how to correct the gamma I am showing..I have viewed several movies and I have been outstanded by the results...but the low gamma reading I am showing - is bothering me a bit. I have redone the test several times but still results are the same...

I have the probe pointing from 0-40IRE towards the FP - Mits3000U, then from 50IRE and up I have it facing my screen, I have the probe in the same place - I just swing the tripod where mounting to face either the screen or the projector..

As indicated the mits has Gamma control for High, Mid, and Low, but I am not sure how to adjust these to correct them, by default they are at ZERO.

So - does anyone have a suggestion on how to correct the gamma I am showing..I have viewed several movies and I have been outstanded by the results...but the low gamma reading I am showing - is bothering me a bit. I have redone the test several times but still results are the same...

I have the probe pointing from 0-40IRE towards the FP - Mits3000U, then from 50IRE and up I have it facing my screen, I have the probe in the same place - I just swing the tripod where mounting to face either the screen or the projector..

As indicated the mits has Gamma control for High, Mid, and Low, but I am not sure how to adjust these to correct them, by default they are at ZERO.If you are to mix readings facing screen with readings facing the pj, you have to substract the offset from the "pj readings"... Your gamma is probably fine.

// Lyckman

Thats what I was thinking..the pix is incredible and if I had a gamma error as such, it will be seriously obvious..

Laric, was pondering the low end DIY sensor sensitivity, as it seems all the probes suffer below the 20 IRE levels to obtain enough data to return a decent response. That is, an adjustment to any control needs to be larger at low IRE levels to see a change than high IRE levels where small movements see a response.

So to increase sensitivity you need more data, in this case more light, so to get more light you need optics. I was considering fitting the DIY sensors inside an old anolog camera housing to provide an optical zoom for this purpose of gathering more light, and with more light from low levels means greater sensitvity.

Also would have 2 extra advantages, 1 a place to fit a CM500 filter to get around the IR interference and 2, can place the sensors in a place as not to shadow the screen.

Has anyone from HCFR tried this?

Regards
Nigel

Sowhat irritating, but you will need wide angel, not zoom, to get more light.
Zooming in will give you less light. Zooming out (wide angle) will give you more light.

The idea is worth to try.

But I dont think that an camera optic will do. It needs to be focused correcly. So it is somewhat complicated. Additional, the optic itself cuts off light. But maybe a fresnel lense will do.

So to increase sensitivity you need more data, in this case more light, so to get more light you need optics. I was considering fitting the DIY sensors inside an old anolog camera housing to provide an optical zoom for this purpose of gathering more light, and with more light from low levels means greater sensitvity.


I don't know that a lens will help. You really need to increase exposure time. Ideally the sensors will have variable exposure times otherwise they would be oversaturated for bright patterns.

Looking at the datasheet for the sensor used in the DIY probe it doesn't have any kind of shutter/exposure mechanism so you'd need to use a camera type sensor to get that level of control.

the dtp-94 autoranges, i.e. uses a progressively longer exposure until the errors are acceptable, or if errors at the end of the maximum exposure time are unacceptable, it returns 0's.

A lens might gather more light, but more time is probably a better bet for getting a better reading at low light.

Best,
jeff

Sorry for the confusion in my poorly worded post... I was refering to what I wrote just above. The meter gives very reliable results down to 10% stim. Really down to .1 or .2 cd/m^2 values of Y. Measurement variations from day to day and from session to session are within the stated error ranges given by the manufacturer. I haven't had the issues other using the s2 probes report at low light levels.

Best,
jeff

Greeno:

What kind of displays have you used the DTP-94 on? Any projectors? I currently have a PLV-Z4 and I am planning to purchase an LCD flat panel TV.

-George

I've used it on direct view and rp crt's, dlp, lcd and plasma. I've not tested it on any front projectors of any type, but I have used it on most types of technologies accept led.

Generally, I think that the dtp-94 can do whatever the s2 can do plus handle low light better. The post pointed out on page 5, was it?, bears that out.

Sorry I can't give you direct first-hand data. You will have to fabricate some sort of tripod mount as the dtp-94 is really setup for tripod mounting or accepting an adapter. That shouldn't be too hard to do though.

best,
jeff

I was under the impression that there was a standard for gamma calculation. You hint that CalMAN has a different (better?) implementation of gamma calculation than most software. How can one improve a standard without breaking it?
By not breaking it? ;) Seriously, my background is in marketing statistics, so I take a bit of pride in some of the stuff we do right. I am also a little surprised by what I have seen others implement. How's that for a non-answer?

And I do think it is appropriate to ask in this thread. :)
Feel free to ask, but that's about as far as my answer goes. Or at least here. ;)

Since people here have begun comparing results between Color HCFR and CalMAN, we need to have a reference for what is correct. Correct according to a standard. A standard can of course be questionable, but that does not mean one can ignore it. At least not without giving reasons.
Ask my customers whether they are unhappy with how we do things. :) Then ask yourself how the fact that people are comparing a free product to our product puts an obligation on us to disclose what is a blatantly obvious error that more than one package is making? ;) We owe our customers enough of an explanation that they are confident in our product. While that is a large obligation, that's as far as it extends. And I'm telling you, just a bit of effort on your part will be rewarded with some answers over in our forum.

And this is no trap. I have no idea of which software is according to standard. ;)
So please enlighten me!

Question remains..
At least one of Color HCFR and CalMAN is wrong. Which one? (Or both?)

// Lyckman
One of life's mysteries. Perhaps answered a few months ago. In our forum. Sense a theme? ;)

Sowhat irritating, but you will need wide angel, not zoom, to get more light.
Zooming in will give you less light. Zooming out (wide angle) will give you more light.

The idea is worth to try.

But I dont think that an camera optic will do. It needs to be focused correcly. So it is somewhat complicated. Additional, the optic itself cuts off light. But maybe a fresnel lense will do.

True, Thinking fresnel, I had a look around for old crap around the campus. Found myself an old slide projector with 2 square lens inside. Will have a play to see if I can increase intensity with them.

I don't know that a lens will help. You really need to increase exposure time. Ideally the sensors will have variable exposure times otherwise they would be oversaturated for bright patterns.

Looking at the datasheet for the sensor used in the DIY probe it doesn't have any kind of shutter/exposure mechanism so you'd need to use a camera type sensor to get that level of control.

It self regulates the time by a series of measurse and averages. You can set an actual time in ms for total exposure.

So when it is bright it will get what it needs very quickly.

I don't mean to poo poo any of these sensors, but I deal with Gas Cromatography and these are very expensive and deal with very low level measurements. The issue with all measurement systems is the noise at the limit of the detectors. The percentage error of the sample has to increase as you get close to the limit, so with that in mind when measuring the grey scale at 00 IRE the mv level will be nearly indetectable within the noise of the probe. Hence why you see wide tracking results with all the probes at low IRE grey scales.

So increasing the exposure time may help it doesn't increase the intensity of what you are measuring. When I was thinking optics I was thinking along the lines of astronomy to try and increase low light to measurable levels. That is to push the values up above the noise floor.

So we do have several choices, an optics lens approach that bends the light source to a point or parabola deflector.

My aim of this thinking is to accurately detect the 0 point black level for brightness.

So to increase sensitivity you need more data, in this case more light, so to get more light you need optics.

It is funny you mentioned this issue as I tried this 2 days ago. I bought a cheap loupe around 3" in diameter for 3$. Placed it 2" in front of My spyderpro. Aligned in order to get right in the center middle between the sensor and the PJ Lense. Result: 3 times more lights coming in :) That is I manged to increase my POD sensitivity by three times and was able to get correct color reading 20IRE lower. Note some slight offset should be used.

In my case, I don't have control over pod reading time as I use SpyderPro automatic profiler. This is mandatory to get proper blue tracking with CRT PJ. Also I don't have the option to move the pod closer to the PJ as there are 3 physically distant guns. Having a magnifying glass was the only option and it worked great.
Sam.

Then ask yourself how the fact that people are comparing a free product to our product puts an obligation on us to disclose what is a blatantly obvious error that more than one package is making?Ok.. So if I understand you correctly.... If Color HCFR was a commercial product.. You would provide an answer? :rolleyes:

Perhaps answered a few months ago. In our forum.Or not? If it is, it is very well hidden... ;) Please send me the URL by PM.

// Lyckman

You really need to increase exposure time. Ideally the sensors will have variable exposure times otherwise they would be oversaturated for bright patterns.
That is exactely what we do, no mistery, no secret...

Joe, lenses won't help unless your really fine tune when adapting it.
BTW, IR filter is a good thing ;)

--Patrice

That is exactely what we do, no mistery, no secret...

Joe, lenses won't help unless your really fine tune when adapting it.
BTW, IR filter is a good thing ;)

--Patrice

Actually, Joe has a really good idea with using a magnifying glass on a CRT front projector. His analysis of the signal to noise ratio effecting accuracy is a very valid problem. Addressing this along with f1' errors will improve an instruments accuracy.

Sure it is valid, my point was that it is not practical...

Also thousands of measure and users feedback highlight this is not problem in real life... At least we have other areas to work on first.

--Patrice

Sure it is valid, my point was that it is not practical...

Also thousands of measure and users feedback highlight this is not problem in real life... At least we have other areas to work on first.

--Patrice

Most other users are not using it for CRT front projectors. These are a special category because of the three guns and low light output. It is also very simple to hold a magnifying glass in front of the sensor while sampling the light. This will not yield accurate light level readings, but that is not an issue since reading lux is not the key factor.

There is nothing for you to work on. This idea can be used by anyone who faces this problem and uses a sensor with a diffuser.

I agree and sorry, I wasn't clear.
What we work on is some improvements to our probe... ;)

--Patrice

I agree and sorry, I wasn't clear.
What we work on is some improvements to our probe... ;)

--Patrice

No problem.

Remember that 0% stimulus is not really 0 light output, or at least it doesn't have to be. this might be wrong, but what I did/do in my calibrations is to set 0% to 0.1 - 0.2 cd/m^2. that's the limit of the instrument and at least for crt's seems to provide a good black point.

As to gamma, I made a post awhile back (you can search for my user name to find it. I'm too lazy to do that right now... but I included a link to a good reference) in the free rader spreadsheet thread regarding this issue, based on a couple of technical articles I found written by a group of international tv guru's. Recall that you're trying to fit a slope with a power law. If one ignores constant offsets, you'll get flakey results. I'm not privy to the details of CalMAN (and if I did it's not my place to share them ;-), but what made sense to me was to numerically differentiate the Y versus %stimulus data, then fit that using the ansatz Y = a I^gamma, for gamma the coefficient of interest and a is a constant of proportionality that we don't care about. I tested this approach and it agrees pretty well with CalMAN and disagrees with the free sheet. From a set of measurements from 0 - 100%, you get a set of gamma which can be plotted, averaged, least squares fit, etc.

the CalMAN site is found here: http://www.calman.tv/
click the Forums link to go to the CalMAN forums.

I believe that CalMAN is accurate when using the dtp-94 sensor. This is the sensor I have. They (Derek and Bill) worked *very* hard making sure it was accurate.

Related to noise in the sensor, the dtp-94 has a command that computes amplifier offsets. this step is crucial to being able to compensate for sensor noise at low light levels. If you don't do that, then you get flakey low light measurements.

As to a winter project (building the DIY sensor), an english version of the single player plans would be very helpful. i've been through the exercise of using a foreign language technical webpage to do technical work and it can be problematic. Maybe Joe can help since he's been through the build process. I'm especially interested in the programming of the processor chip...

Best and sorry for the long post,
jeff

HCFR is a calibration software originally created to be used with the specially designed HCFR colorimeter (DIY (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8716283&&#post8716283)), by the homecinema-fr team.
The software looks very professional and it is totally free.

Now direct Spyder2 readings and English support!

http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/1219/softgz9.jpg
This software is distributed under the GNU GPL license (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html).
______________________________________

- Download HCFR (http://www.homecinema-fr.com/colorimetre/release/Setup_v1_1_1.exe) calibration software.
(3.8MB - Ver. 1.11)

- Download the HCFR DVD (http://www.homecinema-fr.com/colorimetre/release/DVD_V1.1.5.ISO) with patterns.
(42MB - PAL multiregion)

Or patterns to author (? (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=705146)) HDDVD here (http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.homecinema-fr.com%2Fforum%2Fviewtopic.php%3Fp%3D169903772&langpair=fr%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools).

-------------------------------------------|
For more information, visit the following webpage: www.homecinema-fr.com/colorimetre/index_en.php
______________________________________

This will work with the Spyder2 Pro?

Yes, it is the same probe. You'll need to copy your cvspyder.dll file to the HCFR directory though.

matt -

page 10 has the lastest firmware for download, the above link you have is the original release

As to a winter project (building the DIY sensor), an english version of the single player plans would be very helpful. i've been through the exercise of using a foreign language technical webpage to do technical work and it can be problematic. Maybe Joe can help since he's been through the build process. I'm especially interested in the programming of the processor chip...

jeff

Jeff, here is a good source for electronic components I use for my DIY projects Digi Key (www.digikey.com)

I may just build one as a learning experience in filtered based meters. I could add it to my growing collection of hardware, which also now includes a DTP94 :)

Thanks for the link Derek ;-)

Do you also have a spyder probe? Done any comparisons with the dtp-94 or others that you care to share?

Best,
jeff

I would like to see more comparisons as well. I am trying to decide if I should purchase C----n for my Spydertv probe.

Rick

Greeno, building the probe looks more daunting than it actually is. Although I did(as we do) make life harder with respect to which design to start with.

Key points if building a HCFR designed probe.

The 2 major hurdles.

1. the pcb, there is 2 choices, a single sided and double sided pcb layout. They produce the same result, but the double sided uses less space.
The main issue with using the double sided version is that you really need solder down the holes for components make curcuit contact under the component.
Alas I didn't have solder down the holes so I had to raise some parts to create the curcuit.
So in hindsight the single sided version would be a better choice for the average joe.

The pcb's themselves, the website downloads have all the schematics that you need. I looked in the phone book for curcuit board makers, then emailed them the gerbal files from the website. I asked for 2 pcb prototypes, and ended up with 3. They made a spare in case and the total cost was about $25US. Having spares is very useful btw.

2. Next hurdle the microchip. Basically I ended up buying a PICKit2 microchip programmer(which is produced by the same Co as the microchip, must also be updated to the latest software) and made a small adaptor to connect to the correct pins for programming.
You don't have to programme per say, just load the Hex file already provided by the HCFR team.

You can make a interface that connects to your pc and use free software, which I looked at, but since I am very amature at electronics I decided to go the the slight more expensive sure thing route.

The key problem is that I found is that most of the electronic Co's in my city didn't actually have an interface programmer tool for this particular microchip and for such a 1 off situation couldn't be bothered making or purchasing anything.

I actually left chips with 2 different Co's and both failed once they realized what type of chip it is. I spent more on petrol and got pissed off with the running around that proved to be fruitless.

So if you can find someone who can programme the microchip great!, PIC18f2550 , which is a 28pin chip.

Most ppl have gear for 16pin and 20pin chips. The 28pin have different pin arrangements(so I found).

So once I bought my programmer kit and built an adaptor the actual programming took 3 minutes from the time I fired up the programme I had never used before. I had to confirm the programme serveral times because I couldn't believe it was so easy after all the running around I did. sigh.

The major tricky bit when making the probe is the sensors themselves which are very small surface mounted RBG sensors. DO NOT get them too hot.

You need a fine point soldering tip for this job, anything large will be like trying to pick a eyelash out of ya eye with a lamppost.

I mounted one of my probes in a metal case rather than the plastic one on the website. I used PEM standoffs too mount the pcb and the metal case allowed me to fit PEMS to mount the probe on a stand, like a camera tripod(usually 1/4 fittings).

Other advice.
Get enough parts to make atleast 2 probes. They are mostly very cheap and the freight costs are just as much.

I am going to get some more bits myslef to build another, but this time I am going to mount the sensors on pointers so I can get the sensors closer to the screen without causing too much shadow, a problem with any probe and postioning. In fact I'm going to get a number of the sensors so I can experiment with optical and parabola collectors.

With that in mind, a Question to Laric. I plan to use ethernet cabling and plugs and fit the sensors on leads( because there is 8 wires and is shielded and twisted pairs). Will there be a limit of length of wire I can use that the sensors be away from the microchip. With respect to signal loss. I was thinking around 1~1.5 metres.

Regards
Nigel

ps, to those with spyder2 Pro, I have borrowed one and for the life of me can't get it working with HFCR. It doesn't use the same dll files, that I can find on my pc.
I am not to bothered, on the HCFR website forum there was some tests done on various probes. They all have pros and cons, but I feel the trick is to get used to what ever you are using as it is more the skill of the user than the quality of the equipment. In fact I would hazard a guess that any novice at calibration(me being one) getting within 10% accuracy with any of the probes and software is doing well.
The inaccuracies of the software or probes will be far less than the average ability of the novice.
Anything is better than nothing though and for me the idea of building probes and doing this myself helps me learn and is a great hobby aswell.

I can feel the wife frowning.....

matt -

page 10 has the lastest firmware for download, the above link you have is the original release

That's nifty. What will this software do? Is it a more powerful tool than the software that comes from the factory? User friendly?

Dererk, I'd also be interested in your thoughts on DTP-94 vs. Spyder2, as relates to low stimulus accuracy and also suitability for various display technologies, since we know the Spyder2 is not well suited for DLP's and such....

:cool:

That's nifty. What will this software do? Is it a more powerful tool than the software that comes from the factory? User friendly?

Matt -

Its super easy..Just make sure you take the .DLL file from the Spyder folder, copy it over to the HCFR folder where the .exe file is..Open the program up..click on the NEW icon, select if you are going to use your DVD or other (I use AVIA so I select DVD Manual), then select your probe.

Connect your probe, if it hasnt been connected and set it up, selected how many IRE you are going to measure, by default you should see 10, which will start you a 0IRE and 10IRE increments until you hit 100IRE..you can changed that, then I select xyz, to see my coordinates, in the table where the IRE is at, click on the camera to start your reading, it will start as mentioned at 0IRE, then it will tell you to go to 10IRE, etc...when done, your figures will pop up, then you can use the see your greyscale, your RGB, gamma etc..

Ok.. So if I understand you correctly.... If Color HCFR was a commercial product.. You would provide an answer? :rolleyes:
You misread my point. If I help a competitor get better, then I am most likely making a mistake. If I help a competitor with no profit motive get better, then I'm just being silly. :) HCFR is a "for profit" home cinema site. This software would be, in marketing terms, a "value added service" something is an addition to the value they offer people (and pretty good advertising given the splashes on the graphics). If they drive more traffic to their site, then their revenues go up and their support costs do not since no support is implied.

For us, our model is the inverse. People getting the software increases our revenues, and if the ask questions in our forum, then our support costs increase. Because we offer support, you see. In other words, this really isn't higher math, and it's the last I'll say on the matter. We are looking into getting our app certified, though. Which costs money... ;)

Or not? If it is, it is very well hidden... ;) Please send me the URL by PM.
Search is your friend. :) You have 4 links in your inbox at our site, and you are free to post a thread on our site asking for clarification on anything not covered to your satisfaction. :)

Bill

Thanks for the link Derek ;-)

Do you also have a spyder probe? Done any comparisons with the dtp-94 or others that you care to share?

Best,
jeff

Yes I do have several S2's, along with many other meters and types of meters.

I will on the CalMAN forums once I get all the hardware needed to perform a accurate comparison. Those include a light and temperature controlled environment and the ability to accurately measure those.

HCFR is a "for profit" home cinema site. This software would be, in marketing terms, a "value added service" something is an addition to the value they offer people (and pretty good advertising given the splashes on the graphics). If they drive more traffic to their site, then their revenues go up and their support costs do not since no support is implied.
I'm sorry but this is totaly wrong !!

HCFR web site is totally non profit ! Self financed by donation.
There is no adverts on site and no advert revenu at all !
(Although there was some adverts testing earlier this year, they were finally not in sync with our spirit and removed, BTW, that was way before software goes out, last it was only visible to un-registered users, registered never seen it).

HCFR organisation is a non profit one, registered and validated as so per France gov. agency.

If you can read french, look at our "change" file and you'll see the reasons to put the splashes on the graphics, it is not to promote site, but to avoid profit usage ;)

We do this on a total non profit basis, and given the thousands hours we spend on this, I take this as an offence if you think there is !

Neither Georges nor I did tell anybody to post on the HCFR Forum, we answer here and will continue to do so, here and elsewhere... You don't have to go to "our" forums...

Last, another revision will be available soon, lots of improvements on GUI and some new probe support. (Isn't that promotional ? :D :D :D)

--Patrice ;)

There seems to be some jealousy here..and I hope this does not get out of control. It seems like HCFR has to defending itself but maybe that is a good thing..its like they say BAD PUBLICITY IS GOOD PUBLICITY...well at least in Hollywood :0)

I personally think HCFR has something going for itself..and for the very least on my end, have not profited from anything from me . If anything, many of us in some way can profit from using HCFR..but that is my opinion..

thanks HCFR for such a wonderful and simple to understand software

btw..I downloaded your DVD patterns, and it seems in line with AVIA (by comparison), and so much easier to use since it is directly patterned to your software...I am assuming correctly that we can use this also and although its PAL, the patterns are the same as NTSC???

Self financed by donation.
Patrice - No offense intended! I have to admit that my French is very rusty, so it seems I mistook your 15 Euro requested donation as a mandatory one. I expect that you guys have spent as much time and money on your site and application, if not more, as we have on CalMAN. Neither of us is likely to get rich making tools for other DIYers to use. :)

Lest I stick my foot further up my mouth and offend a good group of folks who have put out a nice app and what seems like a decent DIY meter, I'll bow out completely now. If you have any additional questions on CalMAN, you know where to find us! :)

Bill

That's fine Bill, no offence taken.

richlo, yes patterns will be the same, an NTSC version should be available soon, we wait to have DVD v1.15 validated then will do NTSC version.

--Patrice

Back to topic.

I did some small experiments to try and boost light input from afar too do 2 things, so as to raise the low end light levels above noise and so I can move the sensors further away so I can avoid the sensor case casting a shadow on the screen. With a slightly boosted signal overall possibly will help readings in general.

I tried using some small toy binoculars. These as predicted by some reduced the signal.

Next I tried a lens from an old slide projector. This had potential, but has the issue of being sensitive to tuning to a focal length. Too hard for us in the long run.

Next a neat bit of DIY. Cheap and effective. A light funnel.

Working on the principal that light bounces off surfaces at acute angles, ie greater than 15deg I found a piece of 45mm round clear plastic bar 90mm long. I then lathed it into a cone shape with an angle of 15deg down to 8mm at one end. The final shape looks like an icecream cone. I polished the whole finnished piece as to aid reflectiveness internally.

How it works. The large end area is the collector and the small end is the funnel which is placed in front of the sensor. Basically its about ratio, the collector has a 31:1 ratio in surface area. This is about light traveling in straight lines off a surface, the most powerful for us here. This collected light is funneled to the small end area increasing the light intensity.
The funnel doesn't need focal tunning at all, only direction, but we have to do that anyway.

I ran a proof test on my PC screen with the sensor placed 300mm from the screen.
All lights were off in the dark.
Interestingly I used the device to try a calibration and found it easier to get results, dispite the extra range of 300mm from screen, whereas a sensor on the screen left me off target at the bottom end.

Anyway the proof of the exercise.
In the attached file check the "measures" run I did.
The first half of measurements is without the funnel, then it spiked as I placed it upon the unit, then notice the luminance values go from 0.47 to 0.65 and since this value is not linear the result has potential of my aim of raising the low end response above noise so one can set black point brightness and get low end balance figures.

I was pleased to see the other figures, delta E, temp not change although there was a slight change in red. Maybe responding better.

I suspect by using larger round material and making a larger collector you could gather more light. Dishing the collector end may help collect wide angle light coming from wider afield, without the need to go wider material.

All in all a cheap and effective result and worthy of further tuning. The only thing I don't want to do is get to sensor saturation and haven't really looked into that as of yet.


btw Laric, With the V1.1.5 DVD I did find a small error in the 00IRE part of the "contraste". It strangely worked in v1.1.4 now doesn't in v1.1.5.
I just used the grey scale 00IRE instead.

If it was on auto from probe it would crash.

don't forget that any material you use between the sensor and the source will, in addition to aiding as a "collector" here, also affect the color balance to some extent depending on the index at different wavelengths (colors)....

:cool:

To the designers of the DIY sensor:
What about including an "amplifier offset" calculation much like the dtp-94 has to account for amplifier noise?

to those in the know of the internals of the spyder2 SDK (and hopefully you can answer without violating a NDA):
Does the SDK allow for a similar calculation of amplifier offset?

If not, then this might be a key to improving low light level performance, no?

Best,
jeff

What sensors are now supported, DIY, Spyder 2, and DTP-94? Is that correct? If so any chance the Display 2 will be added anytime soon?

Thanks!!

Youa re correct on the 3 sensors..I have not heard anyothers they will suport

Hello,

To the designers of the DIY sensor:
What about including an "amplifier offset" calculation much like the dtp-94 has to account for amplifier noise?
Of course it is possible, but as I said earlier we are working on some improvements and then it is likely you'll stuff like this one...

btw Laric, With the V1.1.5 DVD I did find a small error in the 00IRE part of the "contraste". It strangely worked in v1.1.4 now doesn't in v1.1.5.
I just used the grey scale 00IRE instead.

If it was on auto from probe it would crash.
I pass it to the person (David) doing the DVD, he says nothing change in that area and did not fully understand the point, would you mind given more details ?

--Patrice

when i'm measuring gray scale with "DVD manual" as generator, the popup window tells me exactly what DVD chapter i have to use.
unfortunately this is not true for any other color measurement like saturation, primaries or secondaries.

is it possible to enhance this in the next version?

Hi Waho

Works perfect for me..never had a problem with that. It doesnt matter what generator you have, just make sure to hit the camera in the areas for greyscale, primary, secondary, and I get the popup screen for the pattern they request

Laric, when manually selecting the "contraste" black 00IRE value the DVD would freeze and stop.

Starting from the "contraste" white 100IRE allowed forwarding through the series.

I got around the issue by running the 00IRE from the grey scale series then returning to contraste from white.

DVD player is a Panasonic HT520
DVD created on a LG burner using imgburn software.

Relatively minor issue, I would only attend too if/when making other changes.

Regards
Nigel

Hi Waho

Works perfect for me..never had a problem with that. It doesnt matter what generator you have, just make sure to hit the camera in the areas for greyscale, primary, secondary, and I get the popup screen for the pattern they request

there is a popup screen - but always with the same message:
"display the color to measure then click ok."

so if doing for instance a green saturation scale, i got always this same message.
it's not a big problem - it would be just more convenient to get a message like during gray scale...

weird..I dont get that and I have the latest which I think is on page 10

Mine says..Red, then Green, Blue..for Primary
for Secondary, yellow, cyan, majenta..

here is my latest and greatest results..whatcha think..btw..as mentioned at 30IRE I had to point my sensor to the projector..

Richlo, I notice a few things.

If you click on the probe info, you have LCD selected. Below that is "Proj".
Maybe try "Proj" as source rather than LCD.

Try adding more sampling time, it is on default read time of 300 ms, The near black readings do take a long time, If too short they may be getting discarded, hence the need to to turn the probe around.

The values themselves seem very low aswell. My DIY sensor has values of about 60 at 20IRE where you have 1, reversed. My probe was about 1metre away from the screen.
Just try setting the probe distance from the screen quite close but looking at a non probe shaded area, it will be off axis at close range but you need to get values first to work with. By turning or moving the probe you are wasting your time, any values need to be redone if the probe moves.

I heard that using LCD is the way to go because both use BULBS but nevertheless I will try that..

I was a little confused about what you meant about sensor values, so I went back and changed the display to sensor..I see what you mean..but are you also calibrating a DLP FP off a screen, or is it a rear projector type of tv, those will I assume be highersensor values because your basically putting it right on the strength of the light..

My probe is angled up and very very close to the screen and away from the shaded area (definitely off axis).

I will try a higher sampling time..that makes alot of sense, I thought selecting EXTEND READ TIME ON DARK MEASUREMENT will handle that already..I will keep that selected and extend the read time..

Right now..I am actually very content for a novice to get where I am..the picture is spectacular..and Im off the next 5 days..so I will play some more..

Thanks Smokey..

I've been playing around with the HCFR software. I'ts not obvious to me where the gamma for my greyscale is indicated - any suggestions? Also, I've run the software on a B&W CRT reference monitor. The Spyder2 is a bit off for the entire GS. Is there a "meter offset/correction" anywhere?
Thanks!
Dan

Hi Dan

after your greyscale test results you should be able to look above where the readings are for the AVERAGE, just above your results for 0IRE-20IRE..make sure you have downloaded the latest firmware which i think is on page 10 here, it was not there on the original release.

Also, you need to click on the icon called: luminance histogram - this is your gamma tracking, then you can right click your mouse and change the patterns or add to it for more info..

Hi Joe

The values themselves seem very low aswell. My DIY sensor has values of about 60 at 20IRE where you have 1, reversed. My probe was about 1metre away from the screen.

Do not worry about Sensor values when using Spyder II or DTP-94. Sensor values, with those two probes, are directly XYZ values. In "sensor value" mode, they appear rounded to integers, so it has no meaning (only zeros and ones ;) ). Sensor values are only useful with HCFR probe, which returns integer values which are turned into XYZ values through a conversion matrix.

Regards
Georges

Thanks George...

I'm a little worried that the HCFR boys have been working a little too hard :rolleyes: For those who haven't tried the French Help file on their site , check out this area where it says "page en construction"...

http://www.homecinema-fr.com/Colorimetre/WebHelp/

...and click on "Installation"...

That's the saddest gif I've ever seen :D

On another note , do we have to perform any "Calibration" of the Spyder2 before we start taking measurements ?

Thanks in advance ,

Scott.......................

hehe, that gif is a classic! :D

Regarding calibration of the spyder2. If you have the possibility to measure it against a sensor that you know it is correct it is of course a big plus. Note that this is not specific to Color HCFR. It's regardless of software used.

// Lyckman

Hello,
Question regarding the Spyder...are you using the spyder2 colorimeter that is used for computer monitor calibrations, or, the spyder TV colorimeter that comes with the TV calibration products?

TIA
bnw

actually both are the same colorimeter, its the software that is different

hehe, that gif is a classic! :D

Regarding calibration of the spyder2. If you have the possibility to measure it against a sensor that you know it is correct it is of course a big plus. Note that this is not specific to Color HCFR. It's regardless of software used.

// Lyckman

If we could measure it against another sensor , that was known to be accurate or traceable , how and where could we adjust or tweak the sensor file for HCFR ?

Scott....................... :confused:

good question..



I just used the calibration wizard with my Spyder 2express to calibrate my computer monitor, then when it was complete, I decided to run HCFR to see how ACCURATE that was (used VIEW IMAGES)..Id say its pretty darn accurate my spyder after the HCFR results came back

Not sure if this is a good way to tell or not..but I was pretty impress by it..

I have read a few post that the spyder2 sensor is not well suited for DLP displays.
Has anyone performed calibration on DLP using HCFR and spyder2?

Bruce

Look at my post of my Mits3000U just above..that is a FP DLP..seems to me it works and the results look fantastic..top of this page

where the issue is at the very low end of the IRE that it may struggle

BTW.>

for the HCFR folks -

For some reason the latest firmware, I keep having issue with 30IRE when reading, it reads 0,10,20 at a slower read, then when 30IRE request comes up I put my pattern, and within 2 seconds it ask for 40IRE, then it slows down from 40IRE and up..only with 30IRE its almost instantaneous right to 40IRE..Im still getting a read on it but that seems a bit odd. I tried it using my FProjector DLP setup and then I did it on a Rear Projector CRT, same deal..

I can't read the dvd in my dvd player. i tried to convert it but now i have 3 dvds in pal format. anyone know how to convert it so i can read it in my old toshiba?

I am not sure about converting the dvd itself, but some dvd players have known hacks to accept ALL REGIONS.

You should probably purchase either AVIA, DVE, Getgrey, sounds and vision, Monster/ISF calibration disk, - one of these will solve your problem.

Getgrey you can purchase for I think $25.00 and download it, burn it then...they will give you all the info you need to burn it.

Actually, I just got GetGrey but it doesn't use IRE values, instead it uses the more standard % values, which most calibration discs and calibration software use. Avia has IRE values but it contains slight errors in its RGB values, which has been discussed on other threads.

With that being said, I wanted to know if the HCFR team plans to support % grayscale values at some point.

Hi,

Apologies for what is probably a very silly question to many here, but is it possible to use the free HD-DVD test patterns available on the other thread to calibrate my projector using a Spyder2 along with my Toshiba HD-A1, or do I need to use one of the SD pattern discs ? - I am keen to calibrate with an actual HD pattern source...

Thanks,
-rf

Actually, I just got GetGrey but it doesn't use IRE values, instead it uses the more standard % values, which most calibration discs and calibration software use. Avia has IRE values but it contains slight errors in its RGB values, which has been discussed on other threads.

With that being said, I wanted to know if the HCFR team plans to support % grayscale values at some point.

Glad I never got the DVD then ;) ..I guess I just figured it did..

One question I do have

When selecting under Preferences for RGB levels for NTSC

Do I select for RGB levels:
0-255
or
16-235

Right now by default, I have 0-255

I've been told (by several pro calibrators) that the use of the SPyder2 on DLP displays is a highly qualified "possibly". For most older DLPs, the Spyder2 should be OK. For NEW LED-based DLPs (ie., Sammy 5679), most of the filter-based probes are possibly inaccurate for color adjustment. Grey-scale MAY be OK - adjusting primaries and secondaries with Spyder2 is NOT recommended. That being said, I've not seen anybody who has done the correct test - calibrate the LED DLP with a spectrophotometer, then re-read greyscale and color(s) with the Spyder and document differences.

There have been a couple of threads concerning accuracy of the Spyder. I know my Spyder has slight inaccuracies (but significant enough to alter calibration settings) based on my readings of a B&W D65 Sony CRT reference monitor. I'd like to be able to correct my readings in the HCFR software to adjust for the inacuracy (meter offset) but I don't see this option. Is there a spot for this? It would REALLY be nice to be able to have a "correction" cell for EACH measured IRE...

Dan

Hi richlo

Unfortunately, I can't answer. Those RGB levels are totally independent from NTSC standard. They deal only with "Display images" generator. Usually, you should stay in 0-255 scale, except if you use your PC to calibrate an input normally used by a DVD player.

Regards
Georges

One question I do have

When selecting under Preferences for RGB levels for NTSC

Do I select for RGB levels:
0-255
or
16-235


If you select 0-255 you are calibrating for PC levels, i.e. what is used for working on digital pictures, etc.

If you select 16-235 you are using video levels, i.e. the range that is used for DVD playback.

Actually, I just got GetGrey but it doesn't use IRE values, instead it uses the more standard % values, which most calibration discs and calibration software use. Avia has IRE values but it contains slight errors in its RGB values, which has been discussed on other threads.

With that being said, I wanted to know if the HCFR team plans to support % grayscale values at some point.

Using % stimulus shouldn't matter for setting the greyscale correctly. All it means is that the points on the graph will be shifted horizontally since the % stimulus to IRE mapping is not exact.

It will probably make a difference in the gamma calculation that the tool generates though.

If you select 0-255 you are calibrating for PC levels, i.e. what is used for working on digital pictures, etc.

If you select 16-235 you are using video levels, i.e. the range that is used for DVD playback.


so in effect, this will mean that right now leaving at 0-255 will give me incorrect readings?? man, here we go again, time to go over my calibration..

oop..never mind..this would be for DISPLAY IMAGES only..correct??

so in effect, this will mean that right now leaving at 0-255 will give me incorrect readings?? man, here we go again, time to go over my calibration..

Not so much a matter of incorrect readings, but incorrect settings.

For video playback anything below digital 16 = reference black = 0% stimulus should be off. By setting your range to 0-255, digital 16 isn't black it's very dark grey which means your overall image will be too bright for movies. However it will be fine for pictures, etc.

Don't forget that calibration is an N-step, iterative process. You need to set brightness/contrast first, measure greyscale and colour and make adjustments, then re-check and perhaps adjust brightness and contrast, etc.

It's possible to have perfect greyscale, but with incorrect levels.

okay..that was clear enough..

thanks..

I tried last night recalibrating my crtRP Mits 55807 that was professionally done back in 2002, its been a while, I removed the baffle on the Syder 2 for initial readings, and with the baffle for initial readings..seems that without the baffle, it works..with it, my readings where all over the place. After tweaking the greyscale though, I got a pretty decent greyscale, but my picture looked a bit redish to purple looking (I have an accurate color decoder), so I refered back to original settings.I am surprised by this since the sensor is right on the screen at center and I thought if anything this setup will be easier than a FP but the pix did not look right..yet with the DLP-FP, the pix looks outstanding..

IIRC, 16-235 is the range of digital information for encoding a dvd, but values above 235 (WTW) and values below 16 (BTB) exist on the disc and provide head and foot room, respectively. You want the black point to be set to 16 which can be done precisely on digital displays and less so on analog ones, and set white point to 235.

What you don't want is to have the source device clip below black and above white. If it does then it's using the wrong level, pc instead of video.

There was a really nice set of posts on this a long time ago by Stacey Spears and others, but I couldn't find it in the archives. Anyone have a link handy? This sorts of things should make it into a sticky/faq, as they come up alot.

Best,
jeff

So, when will the Mac OSX version of HCFR be ready :D

To HCFR team:
I want to know if I could use Getgrey's % greyscale with HCFR. What's HCFR 0IRE black reference value?

So, when will the Mac OSX version of HCFR be ready :D
When someone will port it ;)

To HCFR team:
I want to know if I could use Getgrey's % greyscale with HCFR. What's HCFR 0IRE black reference value?
I dunno Getgrey's greyscale but I assume you can...

The software support both 16-235 and 0-255 scale, you just have to chose the according to Getgrey's (I assume it is video 16-235)

--Patrice ;)

Patrice,

I attached Getgrey's table where it compares its % Amplitude vs IRE. Could you take a look at that and determine if Getgrey can be used with HCFR?

BTW.>

for the HCFR folks -

For some reason the latest firmware, I keep having issue with 30IRE when reading, it reads 0,10,20 at a slower read, then when 30IRE request comes up I put my pattern, and within 2 seconds it ask for 40IRE, then it slows down from 40IRE and up..only with 30IRE its almost instantaneous right to 40IRE..Im still getting a read on it but that seems a bit odd. I tried it using my FProjector DLP setup and then I did it on a Rear Projector CRT, same deal..

I see the same behaviour. What I do after finishing the run, go into the measures
area with an IRE30 window pattern displayed, take a few measurements (3-4)
and then manually edit (Editable data) the IRE30 area.

Just a little glitch but easy to get around.

I see the same behaviour. What I do after finishing the run, go into the measures
area with an IRE30 window pattern displayed, take a few measurements (3-4)
and then manually edit (Editable data) the IRE30 area.

Just a little glitch but easy to get around.


As I am getting more familiar with this program..how do I get to make a few measurements of the same IRE without going through the others..I know I can change the field to the number of IRE to be displayed but how does one get a read of the same IRE.

Today - I was redoing my my CRT again..Im just not happy with the sypder when it comes to calibrating a CRT Rear Projector, for some reason it seems alot harder to read the lower IRES compared to my DLP front projector.

im seriously considering getting the DTP-94 (Optix-xr)

richlo,
Here's where I bought mine:
http://www.normancamera.com/product-exec/product_id/12742/nm/MONACO_OPTIX_XR

No interest in the company, just good prices and no hassles.
Froogling shows no better price.

Best,
jeff

im seriously considering getting the DTP-94 (Optix-xr)

The DTP-94 works well for CRT RPTVs ...

thanks Jeff, I can get it 5 minutes or so from my work for the same price - where I bought the spyder..

I've also used it on a fujitsu plasma, an lcd and a dlp. Good results each time, apparently.

jeff

I can't help thinking that the Spyder's may be suffering from a lack of known offsets. Each sensor will perform a little bit differently from another and differently from a known reference device . Without being able to compensate for this difference by applying this offset , all software platforms will produce results based on an uncalibrated or referenced sensor .

Even the lowly Smart-III system I bought a few years back came with a set of RGB offset values that were required to be entered into the Spreadsheet to compensate for my particular meter . If I calibrate with and without the offsets being entered there are significant differences in the calculations . This of course was also a tedious calibration system but did work .

I wonder if the top of the line Spyder package , used for HT-type Display Calibrations, has offsets included with the software that accompanies the sensor . Each have their own serial number and could be referenced . Colorvison may go to this extra effort on the more pricey packages .

Does anyone see a way of applying anything like this to the HCFR system ? I don't know if the CalMan package takes this into account or not . It might as they do require the sensor s/n to "unlock" their software . This may enable a set of global offsets for each type of sensor .

Time to swing over and ask Bill :D

Scott..........

This is when Calman becomes the software of choice for the Spyder...

To my knowledge of the dtp-94 (many conversations with the technical guys at x-rite and monaco), each meter is calibrated to a known reference at the factory. That offset is stored and all measurements take that offset into account. That is one source of offset.

Another is an offset due to amplifier noise. The dtp-94 has an instruction that allows one to compute this offset and those are used to effectively offset the amplifier noise.

A third offset might be that due to the spectrum of light being measured. This one, IMO, is a bit subtle. If a sensor is designed to be "tuned" to particular bandwidths of spectra, then shifting the source specta will cause the sensor to "miss" present spectral content. Fixing the internal sensor hardware, the only hope here is to adjust the filters on the sensor thereby adjusting what/how the sensor sees source signal.

I think the one you mention, Scott, is the first type of offset. Bill can speak definitively for CalMAN, but IIRC, the offset feature allows for a shift in the measured results based on a separate measurement, ie. to compensate for a "systematic" type error. I'm not sure which of the 3 types I list above this one falls into (1 is a reference, 2 is internal electronic noise that will have a nonlinear effect, 3 relies on a sort of constant spectral shift as a function of %stimulus).

Best,
jeff

richlo,
Here's where I bought mine:
http://www.normancamera.com/product-exec/product_id/12742/nm/MONACO_OPTIX_XR

No interest in the company, just good prices and no hassles.
Froogling shows no better price.

Best,
jeff
greeno, richlo:

I've been contemplating getting the Monaco Optix XR from Adorama (found it using Nextag) for about 108 shipped.

Anyone dealt with Adorama before?

-George

Wow. I've just started playing with this software with a SpyderTV, and it's excellent. I'm still learning what all the charts mean.

As a test I checked my laptop display - a Dell D600. The CIE Diagram seems too far off. I thought LCD screens were inherently more accurate before adjustment.

From looking at my results can anyone tell if I'm doing something obviously wrong?

Thanks!

Indi-george,
No I've not. Just do the regular due-diligence before ordering. Expect the item to have a weak return policy, i.e. some restock fee for non-defective, etc.

Just make sure it's the XR. That's the latest product/hardware.

Best,
jeff

this is the second file of this type that my new winxp box doesn't know what to do with after unzipping. what's the file type of the zipped file HappyFunBoater? what's a *.chc file?

jeff

this is the second file of this type that my new winxp box doesn't know what to do with after unzipping. what's the file type of the zipped file HappyFunBoater? what's a *.chc file?

jeff

*.chc is the native file format for the HCFR software.

If you want non-HCFR'ers to look at the files, you probably should export to a more widely known format.

About your lcd question, you probalby need to select a "profile". on my apple g4 powerbook lcd, I can select a "standard". Choosing D65k and then measuring shows the sensor (dtp-94) is reading correctly and that this setting really is close to D65k. YMMV.

jeff

greeno:

Have you compared HCFR w/DTP-94 versus toolcrib w/DTP-94, similar to what you did over on the calman forum with calman versus toolcrib?

-George

A follow up to a previous post wherein I asked if the HCFR software would work with Windows 98SE. My SpderExpress arrived a few days ago and everything works great. I now have a much better image from both my CRT HD RPTV, and LCD HD Projector. Thanks!

Hello,

Just a word to let you know we are aware of the 30IRE bug using Spyder II... A new version should be available soon...

ssj2, the software should work on 98SE, our probe did not, but if Spyder srivers have same behavior than on XP/2000, it should be ok.

Last, you should keep in mind our initial goal was (is) to fully support our probe, Spyder and DTP94 come up as it was quite easy, support will certainly improve in futur versions...
(Also other probes should appear ;))

--Patrice

If you want non-HCFR'ers to look at the files, you probably should export to a more widely known format.

About your lcd question, you probalby need to select a "profile". on my apple g4 powerbook lcd, I can select a "standard". Choosing D65k and then measuring shows the sensor (dtp-94) is reading correctly and that this setting really is close to D65k. YMMV.

jeff

Sorry, I had assumed that this forum was specifically for the HCFR software, and I had also assumed that my problem was related to how I was using the software.

Here are some jpgs zipped into one file. I think they show industry standard measurements and formatting.

Thanks for your help.

Hi HDholic

I attached Getgrey's table where it compares its % Amplitude vs IRE. Could you take a look at that and determine if Getgrey can be used with HCFR?

[EDIT: text removed because it was completely wrong]

Regards
Georges

greeno:

Have you compared HCFR w/DTP-94 versus toolcrib w/DTP-94, similar to what you did over on the calman forum with calman versus toolcrib?

-George
I've not played with the HCFR software and the dtp-94 yet. Comparisons with toolcrib is not quite the right thing to do. Toolcrib has issues with accuracy under some circumstances. I won't say more on this.

The proper comparison would be between HCFR and CalMAN, as I (and CalMAN developers) are sure that CalMAN is correctly reading and manipulating the data from the DTP-94. I could do that, when I get some time. Has anyone already done this?

Best,
jeff

greeno, richlo:

I've been contemplating getting the Monaco Optix XR from Adorama (found it using Nextag) for about 108 shipped.

Anyone dealt with Adorama before?

-George


they seem to have a very good review on Nextag...

Hi HDholic

Thanks for the table. I checked it, and you can use Getgray. We use the same scale (Getgray matches PAL standard, the scale we use on our side of the pond ;) ).

Simply speaking: In ColorHCFR, 0 IRE is black, 100 IRE is white, and IRE levels are regularly spaced along the scale. When using Getgray disk in NTSC, go to Preferences/Reference, select standard NTSC and put a gamma reference "= 2.2". It will match Getgray percents. When using NTSC IRE values (not getgray), you should check gamma reference "from standard" in this dialog. It changes the reference gamma curve, according to NTSC IRE levels.

ColorHCFR is kind enough to let you use either system ;)

Regards
Georges
Thanks for your response, I'm sure it helps others as well.

In my case, I have my DVD player set to output 540P. Do I still use NTSC as reference for either Getgrey and NTSC IRE? Is HDTV reference only for 720P+?

Is there a known problem with the green saturation test dropping out at 50% and 75%? I also see this happening with yellow and cyan, but only at 75%. I assume this is a problem with the built-in images? (The images on the DVD look fine.) I ran the green test twice to make sure it wasn't a measurement error, and the drop out happened at the exact same points.

Also, as HDolic pointed out earlier, the secondary colors don't show up on the Saturation Luminance Histogram.

BTW, great software. I'm really enjoying using it and learning more about calibration.

Hmm. I thought I was beginning to understand this, but the Saturation Shift Histogram graph has confused me. Isn't the goal to get the three primaries and three secondaries to line up at the 0% line at all saturation levels - ignoring the issues iwith green, cyan and yellow in my previous post. And if all the colors line up at 0%, isn't the Delta E supposed to be 0? I thought Delta E was basically the error factor. Ignoring green, yellow and cyan, take a look at the other colors. As red gets further away from 0% at 25%, 50% and 75% saturation notice that the Delta E becomes smaller, not larger as I expected. The same issue exists with magenta. But red looks ok.

Am just a newbie in the weeds, or is this chart all wrong?

Again, great software, and thanks. I hate to point out potential issues in free stuff.

Laric, been having a few drop out issues with DIY probes on my laptop. That is, the probes lose communication. What is interesting is that they both work fine with my main pc. I read through the HCFR forum(bablefish) looking for the same fault, and there is an occurance of the same issue.
With my laptop there is a relationship with the fan which cycles which made me think that it is a voltage drop on the USB port, the probe drops for a moment then gets stuck in a lost communication.
The 2 probes I have made act differently, one is more sensitive and also came up a fault" HCFR sensor returned an invalid version (y) cannot use sensor"
The other allows me to use the reset button to reboot the probe.
I can get the other probe to kick back into life on my main pc.

I thought the main Cap should be regulating irregular voltage?

With the CIE chart I have been trying to get the Triangle on target to the reference points. I can get the Blue and Red channels on target and can get them to shift about and drop them on the references, but green is proving very difficult.
I am getting stuck out near x.312 y.620 and any adjustment in color, tint, and channel brightness and contrast just pushes green sliding past but never any closer to the reference point.
Either my projector has a color fault or the probe measures off with green or is this typical of readings of a AE900E projector?

happyfunboater i added my PC LCD for reference for you.
Monitor is a Phillips 170B6 with a nvidia6600gt video card.

maybe the 5VDC Power of your USB Port is contaminated/superimposed with HF Signals from the Processor etc.
Could you try a self powered USB Hub?

Hi
Is there a known problem with the green saturation test dropping out at 50% and 75%? I also see this happening with yellow and cyan, but only at 75%. I assume this is a problem with the built-in images? (The images on the DVD look fine.) I ran the green test twice to make sure it wasn't a measurement error, and the drop out happened at the exact same points.

Your luminance saturation graph is really, really strange... Could you post your .chc file, not only jpeg ? I need all internal values to understand what happen.

Also, as HDolic pointed out earlier, the secondary colors don't show up on the Saturation Luminance Histogram.

Did you measure all saturations ? All curves are independant. If you only measure saturation red, you will have only one curve on every saturation charts.

Regards
Georges

Hi

Your luminance saturation graph is really, really strange... Could you post your .chc file, not only jpeg ? I need all internal values to understand what happen.

Did you measure all saturations ? All curves are independant. If you only measure saturation red, you will have only one curve on every saturation charts.

Regards
Georges

I've attached the chc file.

Yes, I measured saturation on all six colors - primary and secondary. You can see that in the Saturation Shift Histogram. Yet the secondaries don't show up in the Saturation Luminance Histogram.

Thanks.

Well, I took a look at your file, and I think your measures are totally unusable... Not only luminance, but also saturation levels are too far away from any normal values.

Anyway, do not put too much importance on saturations. That's experimental, and we do not even know if a spyder is able to measure them properly (we should compare Spyder results with a spectrophotometer measures to know if it is accurate)

Regards
Georges

George -

Where is the confidence level with the dtP-94 with HCFR. I just ordered it.

Hi Richlo

The DTP-94 is a very good probe, it works perfectly with ColorHCFR ;)

Regards
Georges

Hi Richlo

The DTP-94 is a very good probe, it works perfectly with ColorHCFR ;)

Regards
Georges
Georges:

Have you checked the results using the DTP-94 against a high quality spectrophotometer? Is the HCFR probe better? It seems that the HCFR program has calibration for the HCFR probe, but not for the DTP-94 or the Spyder2. I am trying to determine if it is better to build the HCFR probe or just purchase the DTP-94. Of course, I will probably do both anyway just for fun! ;) As many others have already said, thank you for this software/probe! :)

-George

I WISH I COULD BUILD THEIR PROBE..

Hopefully someone around here (preferably USA) can build some and sell them per request..

Put my name on top of that list please..

Well, I took a look at your file, and I think your measures are totally unusable... Not only luminance, but also saturation levels are too far away from any normal values.

Anyway, do not put too much importance on saturations. That's experimental, and we do not even know if a spyder is able to measure them properly (we should compare Spyder results with a spectrophotometer measures to know if it is accurate)

Regards
Georges

Thanks for taking a look at the file, Georges.

I reran the test, this time just ignoring the saturation values, and tweaked the settings on my laptop until I got the attached results. It seems that I got the RGB levels pretty good, with only the extreme IRE values having an unacceptable Delta E. But then I look at the CIE Diagram and the results are WAY off. And it doesn't seem to change much when I change the screen settings.

I'm really not looking for help to tweak my settings, but am just trying to understand the results. Am I using the program wrong? Can I get good RBG levels but a bad CIE diagram? Or is my luminance still screwed up? I'm just not sure where to start in understanding what's wrong.

Thanks.

As I posted above, the dtp-94 has internal programming for calibrating the meter to account for amplifier noise. The meter also has memory for storing factory calibration. so a factory fresh meter has been calibrated to some standard that it uses internally.

It makes software calibration unnecessary. Of course as the meter ages and drifts, software would allow one to compensate. without software calibration, to a known standard, the only recourse is to send it to the factory for re-calibration.

Best,
jeff

happyFunBoater-

actually your RGB levels are WAY OFF. The higher IRE's need alot of work still and that side of the IRE is usually the easier of the two to correct or to get corrected. The blue is drifting more than 20% below and red is drifting as more than 20% over. Keep working on that side, just remember what you do on one end will effect some what the other end of the IRE. Once you get those within tolerance, try to get within less than 10% (or as perfect as you can get it). I would work with 30IRE or 40IRE and 70IRe or 80IRE...as your point of concern

If you click on your results on 80IRE, and then click on DISPLAY MEASURES INFORMATION icon, you will see how much you have to bring down RED and how much more you need to bring BLUE. Not only do you want to get those RGB in line, you want to make sure that when you do, you will be tracking within 6500K (give and take a couple of 100K over or under). Right now your results start at about 6500K and go all the way down to 5000K..

Rich, thanks for the feedback. I'm clearly a noob, but I'm enjoying learning from you guys. I was trying to get as much of the line as possible at 0%. I figured having the ends look bad was ok. ;-)

Since my post I figured out how to use the "Combined histogram for measurements window" to see a live picture of what I'm doing as I tweek the settings. Very nice. I think that's basically the same as your suggestion of looking at the Display Measurements window, but graphical.

Also, I think I understand the RGB Levels, Delta E and Color Temp graphs in this window, but how do I use Luminance? Is that the same as Gamma, and therefore should be around 2.2?

Lastly, my CIE Diagram is also way off. Does this correspond to the 100IRE section of the RBG levels? I think the answer is no because green on the RBG graph looks almost perfect, yet on the CIE Diagram it's significantly wrong. I've tried to read up on these topics, but I seem to be missing something obvious.

Thank you very much!

happy boater..

Go to page 13 and see my laptop results (bottom of page)..I did not do a CIE on it but look at my tracking for RBG and greyscale..

btw..yes..luminance is the gamma tracking..on some of the reports, you can right click and add more info by selecting or remove info from deselecting

Go to page 13 and see my laptop results (bottom of page)..I did not do a CIE on it but look at my tracking for RBG and greyscale..

Wow. I really suck. :) Nice job.

So if you get RBG at exactly 0 does that mean your color temp will be exactly 6500?

Also, why didn't you create the CIE diagram? Is it superfulous once you create the entire RGB curve?

Lastly, your luminance curve is WAY off from the reference. And your gamma is 0.03, instead of 2.2. Is that ok?

YES...for RBG to 6500K. There is many ways to get 6500K - but having your IRE xy values at .313 and .329 is the accurate way.

I didnt do the CIE because - well its for my laptop - so it really was not a big deal to me..I dont watch any movies on my laptop..Im not sure what happen with luminance..but Im not sweating a laptop results. I was testing the response for the spyder software and HCFR software..to check for (in)accuracy

Hi, I'm planning on building a HCFR colorimeter and was wondering if there are any Australians here that have built one..?? I've got access to almost everything I need (apart from a PIC programmer).
Did you make your own PCB? ...or did you get one made professionally? It's been some time since I made my last PCB (using Protel Easytrax and a Graphtec pen plotter). I found this company :-
www.sesame.com.au
They should be able to handle making a board from the info downloaded from HCFR.
Any thoughts/comments?
Regards,
Michael.

I just purchased the SpyderTV probe, would I be better off with the DTP-94? Help!

Thanks
Rick

Hi Rick -

It looks like that the DTP-94 with HCFR software is the better way -even the creators will suggest this. A couple of pages back someone did a comparison on both the DTP and the spyder probe and from 40IRE down, the DTP did so much better than the Spyder.

I purchased a sypder2express (same probe as the one you have just diff software) and I have recently purchase and waiting on delivery of the DTP-94(Optix-xr is the name actually)

Not trying to detract from the thread.. I've been enjoying reading this and trying to figure out how to use the software. Unfortunately I still need a probe, and have been looking at a Spyder probe. Any of you who are upgrading probes want to sell of your Spyder probe?

I'm not super critical on this stuff (yet) since I'm just starting out, but I think the Spyder probe and this software would be a good combo for me.

PM me if you are interested in selling.. I don't want to change the intent of this thread.

Thanks Rich,

I think I will return the STV and order the Optix-xr .

Rick

rlhammon pm sent

Micheal sounds like you know more about this stuff than me, but that link looks ok. I'd contact that club for the PIC programming if you haven't got someobody in mind, might find someone there with a 28pin programmer setup. The 18f2550 28pin has different pin locations for all the important power, earth and communication than the smaller brother 16 and 20pin PIC's.
If you don't want to build a programmer interface, the PICKit2 starter kit made by microchip can programme them. Needs to be updated to the latest firmware from microchip and you need to make a small interface. I didn't even bother doing it on a board, just ran wires to a PIC holder.

The board itself, if you go for the double sided version make sure you get solder through the holes. Single sided doesn't need it.

You can quite easilly turn any JDM pic programmer to programe the 2550 ;)
Benoit, the probe software creator do this and have a very simple PCB.

On my side, I use this : http://www.conrad.fr/webapps/pic_01_programateur-36.html

--Patrice

I just used the calibration wizard with my Spyder 2express to calibrate my computer monitor, then when it was complete, I decided to run HCFR to see how ACCURATE that was (used VIEW IMAGES)..Id say its pretty darn accurate my spyder after the HCFR results came back

Not sure if this is a good way to tell or not..but I was pretty impress by it..

Did you select LCD in "Calibration Mode"?

I did the same thing with my CRT monitor (and set on CRT) and came up with good results.

So, it seems HCFR-Spyder2 is accurate with both displays technologies as soon as the sensor is working properly. Now, can anybody check (with Calman or Colorfacts) how accurate it is with projectors, and which mode to use?

Thanks.

Hi Rick -

It looks like that the DTP-94 with HCFR software is the better way -even the creators will suggest this. A couple of pages back someone did a comparison on both the DTP and the spyder probe and from 40IRE down, the DTP did so much better than the Spyder.

I purchased a sypder2express (same probe as the one you have just diff software) and I have recently purchase and waiting on delivery of the DTP-94(Optix-xr is the name actually)

WRT the DTP-94, is there any word on how well it works with DLP FP? Not too
much discussion on this unit with DLP on/off the forum.

I selected LCD, which is my default for my HCFR setting...and is an LCD (laptop)..I think the spyder does work - but as stated I want the DTP-94 sensor which is a better sensor, and I will compare it then to see what is coming up. There is a comparison of a tweak DTP-94 - Calman and a Spyder review to see the diff - and there was a diff. The reason is that Calman has offsets for the SPyder and has directly worked with Colorvision to work more accurately with their software.
btw..your results look just like mine..although mine had some weird Gamma issue, I redid it and it came out just like yours...its pretty impressive to me..Mine was actually flat from10IRE all the way to the end..

I've been playing around with the HCFR program and calibrated my LCD monitor good as I can.

But I can't figure out how to measure my projector, without using my PC as source.
What I'm missing here ?

How can I measure grayscale from my DVD player on my projector?

Sure you can, you have to burn our DVD image (PAL) and then chose "DVD Manual" as source generator...

--Patrice

I selected LCD, which is my default for my HCFR setting...and is an LCD (laptop)..I think the spyder does work - but as stated I want the DTP-94 sensor which is a better sensor, and I will compare it then to see what is coming up...

I'm looking forward to your findings.

...btw..your results look just like mine..although mine had some weird Gamma issue, I redid it and it came out just like yours...its pretty impressive to me..Mine was actually flat from10IRE all the way to the end..

What this means is that, at least for display calibration (plasma, LCD, CRT), the HCFR-Spyder2 combo is just perfect (very accurate). BTW would the offset information be denied for a free soft like HCFR? Because I suppose SpyderTVPRO should be using same kind of offsets too, don't you think?

Sure you can, you have to burn our DVD image (PAL) and then chose "DVD Manual" as source generator...

--Patrice

I prefer this as it is fine tuned to the software..instead of going back and forth looking for primaries, secondaries..

I'm looking forward to your findings.



What this means is that, at least for display calibration (plasma, LCD, CRT), the HCFR-Spyder2 combo is just perfect (very accurate). BTW would the offset information be denied for a free soft like HCFR? Because I suppose SpyderTVPRO should be using same kind of offsets too, don't you think?


I am still not sold on the spyder with Rear Proj CRT, each time I do it on mine (which was professionally calibrated a few years ago), it seems a bit too red or something doesnt seem right, for LCD (seems to work for front and rear), DLPs (front or rear), Plasmas, spyder/HCFR combo works, but the CRT that spyder lets you select is for DIRECT VIEW CRT and not RPCRT, so I think although I can track a good greyscale and gamma tracking, I dont think its accurate for RPCRTs...and Ive played enough with it and still not content, hence my purchase of the DTP-94. I am sure that colorvision will have some kind of offset to offer, especially when it stuggles at times on the low-end...If only I could build the HCFR sensor, if you go to their forum and see the results, its impressive that they are able to read down to 10IRE.

Ok guys. i have been following this thread from the very beginning and i would really like to know before i attempt to calibrate my Sony LCD RPTV, is the Spyder2 going to give me close to accurate results or am i going to be wasting 3 or 4 hours? I see that there are so many mixed results here. I would love to see someone who has access with a more known accurate colorimeter than the Spyder do a real in-depth comparison.

Thanks guys.
Carmine.

Only 3~4 hours :D , the hours will wizz by. So far I have been twiddling on 2 different PC's and a projector for days and days, weeks and weeks.
I'm afraid this is because it is all user adjusted for results and we have to learn what does what. There is no simple way but to twiddle and see what it does.

The spyder will be plently accurate enough for you at this stage I'd say.

Just remember if it all goes wrong(as it has for me) reset to defaults and start again.

Dive in and give it a crack. :D

Rich,

would you let me know the Y measurements you got using the spyder pod on your CRT RPTV. I experienced similar red push during my CRT calibration, when capturing xyY data with Y sub 15. I am interested to know at what light levels, you start to get this red push.

I will post my results from the HCFR file that I have for it..I think I just have an issue of how to calibrate greyscale and may be clipping red...I am a novice at hand..

I am still not sold on the spyder with Rear Proj CRT, each time I do it on mine (which was professionally calibrated a few years ago), it seems a bit too red....
You are right, Spyder2 with HCFR tracks red too low, meaning that when you adjust greyscale it will end up too red. I double checked this w/ Calman. After calibrating my RP CRT with HCFR, I then ran Calman and red was too high.

You are right, Spyder2 with HCFR tracks red too low, meaning that when you adjust greyscale it will end up too red. I double checked this w/ Calman. After calibrating my RP CRT with HCFR, I then ran Calman and red was too high.

Interesting, I have never been happy with my Spyder2Pro. I have had several LCD projectors with a da-lite hi-power. After calibration images were always too red for me. From what I hear, the hi-power doesn't help either. Not sure which direction to go right now.

go either spyder with calman or get dtp-94(optix-xr) with HCFR..the safeway is to go calman since you have a spyder..

Richlo,
Aren't the last few posts all saying the the S2 probe is mis-reading low %stim, so that grayscale is not true D65k at low %stim? Why then the recommendation for s2, since it has this defect.

Best,
jeff

greeno, richlo:

I've been contemplating getting the Monaco Optix XR from Adorama (found it using Nextag) for about 108 shipped.

Anyone dealt with Adorama before?

-George

getting mine tomorrow..UPS notification from them today..

Richlo,
Aren't the last few posts all saying the the S2 probe is mis-reading low %stim, so that grayscale is not true D65k at low %stim? Why then the recommendation for s2, since it has this defect.

Best,
jeff


Most software such as Calman, has the offsets built in for probes they suport, such as the Spyder2. I am not sure if actually HCFR recommends the Spyder2, I think they put it out there because of the request to have this probe added, due in part because of its price point..The Spyder does work to certain extent, I think it maybe struggle from 30Ire down (an not necessarily 30IRE), where it works is from 40IRE and up. I like to use 30IRE and 80IRE for balancing my greyscale..

I hope there are some offsets built in later for it, but in seriousness, the HCFR was designed around their own probe..I hope they do end up supporting the sypder and adding offsets to correct this issue.

HCFR seriously recommends using the DTP-94 as the other probe.

Any confirmed results of how well the DTP-94 does with low IRE readings? I'd like to pick one up for myself but before i do i want to make sure it reads the lower IRE values better than my Spyder2 does.


Thanks guys.
Carmine.

Any confirmed results of how well the DTP-94 does with low IRE readings? I'd like to pick one up for myself but before i do i want to make sure it reads the lower IRE values better than my Spyder2 does.


Thanks guys.
Carmine.

go a couple of pages back and you will see a posted link with actual comparison

Richlo,
Aren't the last few posts all saying the the S2 probe is mis-reading low %stim, so that grayscale is not true D65k at low %stim? Why then the recommendation for s2, since it has this defect.
It's not a defect. It's a software implementation issue when CRT is selected to calibrate RP/FP CRT. It works fine with LCD. I tested LCD mode and it's on track with Calman.

Update
I tested LCD mode with filter "ON" on my RP CRT with HCFR and it's almost a carbon copy of Calman(RP CRT mode). I'd suggest those with "too red" problems to give it a shot.

OK, so for the time being:

CRT TV/monitor: filter OFF, CRT mode.
CRT RPTV: filter ON, LCD mode.
LCD TV/monitor: filter ON, LCD mode.

We should complete the list, I'm pretty sure those are really accurate.

Thanks HD Holic..I will give it a try..

Any of yous (chicago lingo) using 16-255 RGB levels insted of 0-255. I am, but when I do RGB for primaries I switch to 0-255 because I know something is not right when I leave it at 16-255 for reading primaries and secondaries..ITS WAY OFF

I'll try my CRT TV next.

Thanks HD Holic..I will give it a try..

Any of yous (chicago lingo) using 16-255 RGB levels insted of 0-255. I am, but when I do RGB for primaries I switch to 0-255 because I know something is not right when I leave it at 16-255 for reading primaries and secondaries..ITS WAY OFF
I always use 16-235 since those are "video" levels. I get accurate readings that match Calman using the method I posted. I'd also suggest using window patterns, which has been discussed to give more accurate reading because of light output limitations.

Most software such as Calman, has the offsets built in for probes they suport, such as the Spyder2. I am not sure if actually HCFR recommends the Spyder2, I think they put it out there because of the request to have this probe added, due in part because of its price point..The Spyder does work to certain extent, I think it maybe struggle from 30Ire down (an not necessarily 30IRE), where it works is from 40IRE and up. I like to use 30IRE and 80IRE for balancing my greyscale..

I hope there are some offsets built in later for it, but in seriousness, the HCFR was designed around their own probe..I hope they do end up supporting the sypder and adding offsets to correct this issue.
Your perfectly got it... ;)

I dunno what will be done in futur release, so far we have other stuff on-going, next release is quite massive improvement on software side (nothing new on probes except 30IRE bug sorted)

HCFR seriously recommends using the DTP-94 as the other probe.
No, I don't think anyone in our team recommends any probes... Except our one, of course :D :D :D

BTW, we plan to support available probes as far as we can integrate them without too much assle... A new one will appear soon...

We have very good calibrators in team and they use various probes, I must say the Spyder is not the most used on projectors, but was it designed for this ?

--Patrice

I always use 16-235 since those are "video" levels. I get accurate readings that match Calman using the method I posted.

Do your read your primaries if you left it at 16-235?/ that is where I have a problem..

Hi Richlo

The DTP-94 is a very good probe, it works perfectly with ColorHCFR ;)

Regards
Georges

Yell at George then.. ;)

No, at least I don't take this as a recomendation ! do you ?
(George don't use a DTP94 ;))

--Patrice

No, at least I don't take this as a recomendation ! do you ?
(George don't use a DTP94 ;))

--Patrice


Tell George to EXCUSE MY FRENCH... :mad: just kiddin..hahah..its still a better probe..

.that stinkin' George ;)

Ok guys. i have been following this thread from the very beginning and i would really like to know before i attempt to calibrate my Sony LCD RPTV, is the Spyder2 going to give me close to accurate results or am i going to be wasting 3 or 4 hours? I see that there are so many mixed results here. I would love to see someone who has access with a more known accurate colorimeter than the Spyder do a real in-depth comparison.

Thanks guys.
Carmine.
Carmine,

I used a Spyder2 probe with Calman on my Sony KDFE50A10 (last year's Grand Wega 5) to calibrate the grayscale.

My goal was to get a good B&W picture with no color tint.
I was very pleased with the results.

BTW, I spent 13 hours that day (my first time). :D

Of course, the day after I spent $100 on Calman, I stumbled across this thread for free calibration software. :( I would have given HCFR a shot first, then maybe spent the money on Calman if my results with HCFR were bad.

Anyway, I'm quite happy with both the Spyder2 and with Calman.

Bob

OK, so for the time being:

CRT TV/monitor: filter OFF, CRT mode.
CRT RPTV: filter ON, LCD mode.
LCD TV/monitor: filter ON, LCD mode.

We should complete the list, I'm pretty sure those are really accurate.
Yes, those seem to be correct based on test I've done. I should point out to use standard gamma option and not 2.2 as it has innacurate calculations when using with Sypder2.

getting mine tomorrow..UPS notification from them today..
I will be expecting a complete first hand user report ;) Seriously, it would be interesting to see the results from the software included with the probe after calibrating your display with HCFR.

A question too anyone who might know, about the references, as what should you choose.

It seems, or appears these days with the global importation of goods there is a mix of hardware and what that hardware is referenced too.

I am in a PAL country, yet my calibration runs I have done are showing I need to select the NTSC(REC 601) for the CIE Triangle to fit, the next best is sRGB and HDTV(REC 709) falling together and then the PAL/Secam.

There is a concern in my head that the DVD player is outputing PAL, since it has only 2 selections, PAL60 or NTSC and I have to select PAL for my region or nothing will play. Then my projector is referenced to NTSC(REC601).

So far I have been screwing with the color/tint to best fit the triangle to the PAL/SECAM.

So the question is, do I just set my color/tint to defaults and select the best fit CIE Triangle that closely resembles my results, then adjust the color and tint from there?

This is a post discovery of my results of my projector and trying to make sense of them. For my PC's I have been using sRGB, I presume this is the correct one. ALthough then again, if a PC is the source for the projector, do I then select one of the other options?

I take it 0-255 for PC output only and 16-235 for TV and (DVD)movie?

I could use a bit of help from the experts.

When selecting the color measurements, what does primary/secondary mean? I was using avia basic and it has colors, but no secondaries..


Second I am using the Spyder TV probe. It does not seem to have any color filters that I've seen mentioned above, Is this correct? Will it affect the software readings?

TIA

Hi richlo

Any of yous (chicago lingo) using 16-255 RGB levels insted of 0-255. I am, but when I do RGB for primaries I switch to 0-255 because I know something is not right when I leave it at 16-255 for reading primaries and secondaries..ITS WAY OFF
That's normal: if your projector is waiting for 0-255 input levels, and you send 16-235, your primary and secondary colors will be way off. If pure full red is attended to be (255,0,0), and you send (235,16,16), the color displayed will be a red with some green and blue inside.

Use 16-235 scale when you know your projector attends that scale. I mean, when you use your PC to calibrate an HDMI input normally devoted to a DVD player, and configured in video mode (or maybe analog component input on a TT configured for that input scale)

Regards
Georges

About DTP-94 "recommandation" ;)

Well, I never used either DTP-94 nor Spyder II by myself. One expert in our team made many comparisons between probes, compared to a spectrophotometer. His conclusion is DTP-94 gives generally results more accurate than Spyder II. The difference is not huge, but it exists. At least when using HCFR software. Second, while reading comments here and on HCFR forums about probes, there are many questions about Spyder II results when using it with HCFR software. And none of that with DTP-94.

And now, we are wondering if calibration files would be interesting with Spyder II... :rolleyes:

Nevertheless, the price is not the same for both probes... There may be a reason ;)

Georges

Update
I tested LCD mode with filter "ON" on my RP CRT with HCFR and it's almost a carbon copy of Calman(RP CRT mode). I'd suggest those with "too red" problems to give it a shot.


thanks HD HOlic-

I tried it this way and re-read this way..and RED was up around 8000, blue and green where pretty close...I ended up putting my old values since those where calibrators by a well known calibrator and read it then, and then I dialed it in...I went from having 12 clicks too much on red previously to the exact same number the calibrator had, and I just made very few minor changes to get an accurate and NOT a red picture..Im very excited about this...it works..Here are my results..targeting 2.5 as my gamma..

and if you notice..this is the 6th time Ive worked on it..no primaries or secondaries ran on this...

Mits 55807 CRT HD

Hi richlo

That's normal: if your projector is waiting for 0-255 input levels, and you send 16-235, your primary and secondary colors will be way off. If pure full red is attended to be (255,0,0), and you send (235,16,16), the color displayed will be a red with some green and blue inside.

Use 16-235 scale when you know your projector attends that scale. I mean, when you use your PC to calibrate an HDMI input normally devoted to a DVD player, and configured in video mode (or maybe analog component input on a TT configured for that input scale)

Regards
Georges


Thanks George - I hope this helps people who are novices like me

When selecting DVD Manual -

Select (under preferance tab) 16-235 as RGB Levels - for Greyscale
Change preferance to 0-255 for reading your primaries..secondaries
Reading Red, Green, Blue, Yellow, Cyan, Magenta

I will be expecting a complete first hand user report ;) Seriously, it would be interesting to see the results from the software included with the probe after calibrating your display with HCFR.

I'll try my best..everyone be patient, as I will end up doing this probably over this weekend...I have to put down calibrating temporarily, my family is giving those shifty looking eyes...spending to much time calibrating..hahahaha.. :eek: cant help it..i enjoy it.. :D

thanks HD HOlic-

I tried it this way and re-read this way..and RED was up around 8000, blue and green where pretty close...I ended up putting my old values since those where calibrators by a well known calibrator and read it then, and then I dialed it in...I went from having 12 clicks too much on red previously to the exact same number the calibrator had, and I just made very few minor changes to get an accurate and NOT a red picture..Im very excited about this...it works..Here are my results..targeting 2.5 as my gamma..

and if you notice..this is the 6th time Ive worked on it..no primaries or secondaries ran on this...

Mits 55807 CRT HD

It is interesting to read your calibration of the 55807, I have the exact same TV. There was lots of dicussion early on regarding the red push on these sets and there was no service menu access to adjust for this. I actually bought attenuators to use on my component Red cables to adjust for this. Are You able to adjust for the Reds using this software in the mits service menu?

Years ago there was a fix for RED PUSH - in this case your mentioning is a COLOR DECODER issue and not related to Greyscale..An attenuator was a temporary fix for component and no other inputs..but the real fix is a hack through an I2C device for the color decoder...read up at the SPot about this..at least it started there..I had that fixed before

The redpush I mention is not the same, its my greyscale having too much red but is correctable..

Hi all

I've run a few calibration tests using S2 and hcfr. I think something isn't working correctly. The luminance chart after taking a manual grey scale measurements is not changing.

Regarding primaries and secondaries, What disc should i use to do the color saturation measurments???? The avia disc i've got does not contain these patterns, Any suggestions? The HCFR iso is PAL and I only have NTSC...

Thanks

What exactly is the 'Reference Measure' for?

Is this used only for the DIY meter?

In manual mode, what dvd disc are you using to take color saturation measurements?

Just look for Red,Green blue windows..etc it in the advance menu, second to last

Just my luck, I was going to purchase the Optix-xr probe from Adorama and they are no longer on their website. This was the lowest price I found (99.00). However, I did find 3 on ebay at a higher price! :o

I would call them..just in case..

Rich, I used those menus to perform primary and seconday color measurements.

However after doing this, there is also the individual color saturation level measurements under the grey saturation levels. I'd like to know what to use for example say a red color saturation measure using 10 samples?????

Thanks for any help.

Hey bean - I think your a bit confused...

the RGB up on top is for greyscale ONLY 0IRE-100IRE - fix by using Red, Blue, Green bias/gains, or cuts/drives, or constrast and brightness

the below, you actually use the RED Saturation, etc

Hi

ldlvr, the reference measure check box allow a document to become the unique reference. Its data appears then on all other documents graphs, in dotted curves. Actually, when you have only one opened document, it changes nothing except window color ;)

About saturations: those measures are experimental, they can sometimes help understand some troubles, but in a classical calibration approch, you don't need them. You can ignore this feature if you use AVIA.

Regards
Georges

Hey bean - I think your a bit confused...

the RGB up on top is for greyscale ONLY 0IRE-100IRE - fix by using Red, Blue, Green bias/gains, or cuts/drives, or constrast and brightness

the below, you actually use the RED Saturation, etc

Yup i was confused.. re-ran the measurements.. for Grey scale... using 0 -- 100 ire
Then ran the Primary colors and secondary colors...

However the charts/graphs don't show color (rgb) levels... Am I doing something wrong?

Also increasing/decreasing brightness/contrast does nothing to impact my luminance chart. I'm trying to calibrate an Optoma HD72... Any help is appreciated.

Thanks

for RBG -greyscale, use RGB Historgram icon..what your tyring to achieve is x= .313 and Y=.329 - across the IRE as best as possible. You are trying to achieve that r,g,b hit 100% on that chart..

for color temperature settings, to show you where if your hitting the mark at 6500K (as close as possible), go to Color Histogram icon - so long as you hit the 100% mark above - the 6500K will fall into its place..

for primaries, secondaries, hit the CIE diagram..

Try your best not to adjust Green for greyscale - that is your luminance, so if you adjust down - your cutting into it..

maybe you should post your results..

btw..the luminance is your gamma tracking..see if you have an adjustment for that..GAMMA

sorry for the dumb question.... but how are you all putting your probs up to a front projection screen? Do you put it up in the light path by the screen sitting on a tripod? Do you stick it slightly lower that the screen and angle it up? I've just never done this before.