

Thread Tools 
Old
05062009, 12:07 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,566
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjgarrison
I think this is more in line with Greg's recommendation on the same subject. I asked him about the "sum of Ys = white Y (1)" concept. Here's the link.
http://www.avsforum.com/avsvb/showt...5#post16404305
Look at posts 130 and 131. I hope I didn't misrepresent or misunderstand your spreadsheet in formulating the question.
I think this is more in line with Greg's recommendation on the same subject. I asked him about the "sum of Ys = white Y (1)" concept. Here's the link.
http://www.avsforum.com/avsvb/showt...5#post16404305
Look at posts 130 and 131. I hope I didn't misrepresent or misunderstand your spreadsheet in formulating the question.
Thanks. I changed the default choice in the spreadsheet to treat white Y as independent of the color Y values, to match our discussion. In the newly uploaded spreadsheet, I highlighted the user changeable data areas and choices and protected the rest, to make it easier and less fragile to use, and fixed a couple minor issues including an error in the Y elasticity calculation when the minimum is approached.
So I take it you tried the spreadsheet and had no problems with it running on your version of Excel? The userfriendly button worked? I have only tested it on Excel 2003 and 2007; which version did you use?
Did you compare the spreadsheet, with the white Y value unconstrained, with the Accupel calculator? If you did, with the spreadsheet choice of CIELUV76, I would expect the dE calculations to be close, but perhaps not exactly identical as a result of differences in arithmetic packages, rounding, etc.
Thanks,
Bill
Sponsored Links  
Advertisement


Old
05062009, 07:18 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northwest Wisconsin
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mitchell
Thanks. I changed the default choice in the spreadsheet to treat white Y as independent of the color Y values, to match our discussion. In the newly uploaded spreadsheet, I highlighted the user changeable data areas and choices and protected the rest, to make it easier and less fragile to use, and fixed a couple minor issues including an error in the Y elasticity calculation when the minimum is approached.
So I take it you tried the spreadsheet and had no problems with it running on your version of Excel? The userfriendly button worked? I have only tested it on Excel 2003 and 2007; which version did you use?
Did you compare the spreadsheet, with the white Y value unconstrained, with the Accupel calculator? If you did, with the spreadsheet choice of CIELUV76, I would expect the dE calculations to be close, but perhaps not exactly identical as a result of differences in arithmetic packages, rounding, etc.
Thanks,
Bill
Thanks. I changed the default choice in the spreadsheet to treat white Y as independent of the color Y values, to match our discussion. In the newly uploaded spreadsheet, I highlighted the user changeable data areas and choices and protected the rest, to make it easier and less fragile to use, and fixed a couple minor issues including an error in the Y elasticity calculation when the minimum is approached.
So I take it you tried the spreadsheet and had no problems with it running on your version of Excel? The userfriendly button worked? I have only tested it on Excel 2003 and 2007; which version did you use?
Did you compare the spreadsheet, with the white Y value unconstrained, with the Accupel calculator? If you did, with the spreadsheet choice of CIELUV76, I would expect the dE calculations to be close, but perhaps not exactly identical as a result of differences in arithmetic packages, rounding, etc.
Thanks,
Bill
I have Excel 2003. I'm not sure which is your current version with the mods you mention above. I think there were a couple of links, just not sure which to use.
Greg updated his calculator to something like 14 digits, so maybe yours and his will match. I'll try some comparisons when I DL your latest.
Old
05062009, 08:33 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,566
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjgarrison
I have Excel 2003. I'm not sure which is your current version with the mods you mention above. I think there were a couple of links, just not sure which to use.
Greg updated his calculator to something like 14 digits, so maybe yours and his will match. I'll try some comparisons when I DL your latest.
I have Excel 2003. I'm not sure which is your current version with the mods you mention above. I think there were a couple of links, just not sure which to use.
Greg updated his calculator to something like 14 digits, so maybe yours and his will match. I'll try some comparisons when I DL your latest.
Thanks. I replaced the version in the most recent note above. Life is confusing enough without having multiple versions attached to different notes.
Old
05062009, 09:51 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northwest Wisconsin
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mitchell
Thanks. I replaced the version in the most recent note above. Life is confusing enough without having multiple versions attached to different notes.
Thanks. I replaced the version in the most recent note above. Life is confusing enough without having multiple versions attached to different notes.
I get an Excel error: Solver not found. This workbook will not work.
Old
05072009, 09:41 AM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,566
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
And on the earlier version you did not see this behavior? Interesting.
Please download and try again. I replaced it with a version saved under Excel 2003. Perhaps this is a case where Excel 2007 saving as an "Excel 972003 workbook" is not quite identical to Excel 2003 saving the same workbook.
That message is generated in a macro when the workbook first opens. I changed it not to be critical, so the workbook will continue. If you get the message again, try going under Tools>Addins and enabling the Solver addin manually. Let me know if that changes anything.
Thanks,
Bill
Old
05072009, 02:48 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northwest Wisconsin
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Same error: Solver not found. The Run Data Solver Buttin my not work.
clicked the button: Runtime error 1004, The macro 'SolverReset' cannot be found.
I looked at the Tools>add ins as well as macros and dont see anything resembling the macro SolverReset
clicked the button: Runtime error 1004, The macro 'SolverReset' cannot be found.
I looked at the Tools>add ins as well as macros and dont see anything resembling the macro SolverReset
Old
05072009, 03:20 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,566
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
If you did not see anything under Tools>Addins with the title "Solver Addin", then you probably do not have a choice under the Tools pulldown labelled "Solver..." either.
One possibility is that Solver was provided with Excel, but not installed on your system. In the Control Panel, Add or Remove Programs, choose your version of Microsoft Office or Excel. Select Change, and there should be a checkbox for Advanced customization of applications. On the next dialog, under Microsoft Office Excel, under Addins, there should be a choice of Solver. If the choice is there, but not currently installed, you should be able to choose that it be installed on your disk, continue on and change the Microsoft Office installation, and the Addin should then appear in the Excel Tools>Addins list.
If the Solver addin is not present in the Advanced customization of applications dialog, then perhaps Microsoft ships different levels of Office and some contain Solver and some more basic versions do not. The Excel 2003 I am testing against is "Microsoft Office Small Business Edition 2003". What is the title of yours in the Add/Remove Programs list? If this is only available in more expensive versions of Excel, I am going to have to figure out what those are.
Thanks,
Bill
Old
05072009, 03:29 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northwest Wisconsin
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
My bad. I'm currently using an old laptop that I didn't realize has Office 97 installed. I'll try on my home PC which has 2003 and get back to you.
Old
05072009, 03:32 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,566
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Old
05072009, 10:18 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northwest Wisconsin
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I had to install solver from original disc, but it works now on my main PC where it is Excel 2003.
Unfortunately when I do calibrations I use the laptop with 97, which doesn't have solver ... and I'm not sure where the disc is. I'll look for it.
Unfortunately when I do calibrations I use the laptop with 97, which doesn't have solver ... and I'm not sure where the disc is. I'll look for it.
Old
05122009, 06:10 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Rockwood,Ontario,Canada
Posts: 1,180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Probably a topic for stereomandan , or anyone actually , but is there a way to produce a 3D Plot of the CIE Diagram that would show the "Y" values for the Primaries and Secondaries and White Point ?
Do we know if the Calibrated "Y" value of any of the Primaries or Secondaries is a straight line to the D65 White Point or is it curved ? I'm assuming that if you have a linear CMS then this should be a straight line . Just curious . I'd like to see this as a 3D representation .
Scott....................
Do we know if the Calibrated "Y" value of any of the Primaries or Secondaries is a straight line to the D65 White Point or is it curved ? I'm assuming that if you have a linear CMS then this should be a straight line . Just curious . I'd like to see this as a 3D representation .
Scott....................
"Home Theatre is a Journey , not a Destination "
Old
05122009, 08:12 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 1,338
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 11
hmm...Google got me this: http://www.gamutvision.com/
Greg
Old
05122009, 09:36 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,566
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott_R_K
Probably a topic for stereomandan , or anyone actually , but is there a way to produce a 3D Plot of the CIE Diagram that would show the "Y" values for the Primaries and Secondaries and White Point ?
Do we know if the Calibrated "Y" value of any of the Primaries or Secondaries is a straight line to the D65 White Point or is it curved ? I'm assuming that if you have a linear CMS then this should be a straight line . Just curious . I'd like to see this as a 3D representation .
Scott....................
Probably a topic for stereomandan , or anyone actually , but is there a way to produce a 3D Plot of the CIE Diagram that would show the "Y" values for the Primaries and Secondaries and White Point ?
Do we know if the Calibrated "Y" value of any of the Primaries or Secondaries is a straight line to the D65 White Point or is it curved ? I'm assuming that if you have a linear CMS then this should be a straight line . Just curious . I'd like to see this as a 3D representation .
Scott....................
I'm trying to visually exactly what your question is, and I'm still not sure. So I'll try several answers, and maybe one of them is your real question.
Obviously, between any single primary/secondary color and D65 white, one could draw a straight line. After all, two points define a line. So that is probably not the question you are considering.
Between all the six 100% color points and 100% D65 white, in some sense, would the lines be coplanar? If one chose to calibrate by tuning all the Y values to match those predicted for a new gamut defined on the actual primaries, then all the lines should be coplanar. If one follows the advice of tuning each Y value to minimize the delta E relative to Rec709, when the actual primaries do not exactly match the Rec709 primaries in the xy domain, then the lines are not coplanar. Rather one should see six triangles around the circle, where each triangle shares an edge with each adjacent triangle.
If the question is really about the intermediate saturation points, then I think these should be in a straight line in the xy domain, provided the actual white point matches D65, and if one tuned the Y values to match a new gamut based on the actual primaries or if the actual primaries matched the Rec709 points. But where one tunes each Y value to minimize the dE of the actual point relative to the corresponding Rec709 point, I think it matters which triangle the CMS uses to generate the corresponding value for saturation point. So I would expect to see minor variation around the straight line in the xy domain. This is where Dan's spreadsheet comes in, as it reveals the variation in the actual from a straight line in the xy (uv) domain.
As regards the Y aspect of the line through the saturation points, this line would be "flat" if the actual gamma matches that used to generate the data. In the discussion of the HCFR data to generate the AVSHD disk, it was determined that the saturation values were chosen to maintain a constant Y value at all the saturation measures assuming a display gamma of 2.2. So, for example, 100% yellow Y, 75% yellow Y, ... 0% yellow Y should all be equal giving a flat line. If one considers these lines for each of the six colors, each should be flat, but they should intersect the column at D65 at different heights. But the line starts varying from flat if the calibrated gamma does not match 2.2. Here, also, is where Dan's spreadsheet comes in. HCFR apparently treats the 100% color point Y values as correct, and displays the intermediate points relative to these. Dan wanted to compare these values, themselves, to the Rec709 Y values for each color, so the individual color 100% Y values could be higher or lower than the target. I contributed a separate spreadsheet to calculate what the target reference Y values should be, when the display gamma is flat but differs from 2.2.
So I can see why, whichever of these effects one wants to see, you would like to see this with some 3D picture. For the saturation points, the HCFR charts with Dan's correction give this information in two 2D pictures, the shifts left and right of a straight line in the xy plane, and the shifts above/below a flat line in the xyY plane.
Bill
Old
05132009, 10:43 AM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Rockwood,Ontario,Canada
Posts: 1,180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mitchell
I'm trying to visually exactly what your question is, and I'm still not sure. So I'll try several answers, and maybe one of them is your real question.
Obviously, between any single primary/secondary color and D65 white, one could draw a straight line. After all, two points define a line. So that is probably not the question you are considering.
Between all the six 100% color points and 100% D65 white, in some sense, would the lines be coplanar? If one chose to calibrate by tuning all the Y values to match those predicted for a new gamut defined on the actual primaries, then all the lines should be coplanar. If one follows the advice of tuning each Y value to minimize the delta E relative to Rec709, when the actual primaries do not exactly match the Rec709 primaries in the xy domain, then the lines are not coplanar. Rather one should see six triangles around the circle, where each triangle shares an edge with each adjacent triangle.
If the question is really about the intermediate saturation points, then I think these should be in a straight line in the xy domain, provided the actual white point matches D65, and if one tuned the Y values to match a new gamut based on the actual primaries or if the actual primaries matched the Rec709 points. But where one tunes each Y value to minimize the dE of the actual point relative to the corresponding Rec709 point, I think it matters which triangle the CMS uses to generate the corresponding value for saturation point. So I would expect to see minor variation around the straight line in the xy domain. This is where Dan's spreadsheet comes in, as it reveals the variation in the actual from a straight line in the xy (uv) domain.
As regards the Y aspect of the line through the saturation points, this line would be "flat" if the actual gamma matches that used to generate the data. In the discussion of the HCFR data to generate the AVSHD disk, it was determined that the saturation values were chosen to maintain a constant Y value at all the saturation measures assuming a display gamma of 2.2. So, for example, 100% yellow Y, 75% yellow Y, ... 0% yellow Y should all be equal giving a flat line. If one considers these lines for each of the six colors, each should be flat, but they should intersect the column at D65 at different heights. But the line starts varying from flat if the calibrated gamma does not match 2.2. Here, also, is where Dan's spreadsheet comes in. HCFR apparently treats the 100% color point Y values as correct, and displays the intermediate points relative to these. Dan wanted to compare these values, themselves, to the Rec709 Y values for each color, so the individual color 100% Y values could be higher or lower than the target. I contributed a separate spreadsheet to calculate what the target reference Y values should be, when the display gamma is flat but differs from 2.2.
So I can see why, whichever of these effects one wants to see, you would like to see this with some 3D picture. For the saturation points, the HCFR charts with Dan's correction give this information in two 2D pictures, the shifts left and right of a straight line in the xy plane, and the shifts above/below a flat line in the xyY plane.
Bill
I'm trying to visually exactly what your question is, and I'm still not sure. So I'll try several answers, and maybe one of them is your real question.
Obviously, between any single primary/secondary color and D65 white, one could draw a straight line. After all, two points define a line. So that is probably not the question you are considering.
Between all the six 100% color points and 100% D65 white, in some sense, would the lines be coplanar? If one chose to calibrate by tuning all the Y values to match those predicted for a new gamut defined on the actual primaries, then all the lines should be coplanar. If one follows the advice of tuning each Y value to minimize the delta E relative to Rec709, when the actual primaries do not exactly match the Rec709 primaries in the xy domain, then the lines are not coplanar. Rather one should see six triangles around the circle, where each triangle shares an edge with each adjacent triangle.
If the question is really about the intermediate saturation points, then I think these should be in a straight line in the xy domain, provided the actual white point matches D65, and if one tuned the Y values to match a new gamut based on the actual primaries or if the actual primaries matched the Rec709 points. But where one tunes each Y value to minimize the dE of the actual point relative to the corresponding Rec709 point, I think it matters which triangle the CMS uses to generate the corresponding value for saturation point. So I would expect to see minor variation around the straight line in the xy domain. This is where Dan's spreadsheet comes in, as it reveals the variation in the actual from a straight line in the xy (uv) domain.
As regards the Y aspect of the line through the saturation points, this line would be "flat" if the actual gamma matches that used to generate the data. In the discussion of the HCFR data to generate the AVSHD disk, it was determined that the saturation values were chosen to maintain a constant Y value at all the saturation measures assuming a display gamma of 2.2. So, for example, 100% yellow Y, 75% yellow Y, ... 0% yellow Y should all be equal giving a flat line. If one considers these lines for each of the six colors, each should be flat, but they should intersect the column at D65 at different heights. But the line starts varying from flat if the calibrated gamma does not match 2.2. Here, also, is where Dan's spreadsheet comes in. HCFR apparently treats the 100% color point Y values as correct, and displays the intermediate points relative to these. Dan wanted to compare these values, themselves, to the Rec709 Y values for each color, so the individual color 100% Y values could be higher or lower than the target. I contributed a separate spreadsheet to calculate what the target reference Y values should be, when the display gamma is flat but differs from 2.2.
So I can see why, whichever of these effects one wants to see, you would like to see this with some 3D picture. For the saturation points, the HCFR charts with Dan's correction give this information in two 2D pictures, the shifts left and right of a straight line in the xy plane, and the shifts above/below a flat line in the xyY plane.
Bill
Hi Bill ,
Yeah , that pretty much covers it . What I see , in my mind , is the normal , typical CIE Space with the corresponding Gamut triangle overlaid onto it in 2D space . Then as we rotate the Graphic offplane we see a simple "shade" depicting the "Y" value from each RGBYCM xy point to the D65 point . It would have some "height" at the RGBYCM xy point and at the D65 xy point . It wouldn't describe a rectangle as the line from the "Y" points would not be parallel to the CIE plane . To make any of this effective , there should be one "Slice" for the "Theoretical" and another for the "Actual" .The difference would be a "sliver" seen at the top line of the slice.
Whether or not this would be useful or just fanciful is the question .
Scott.................
"Home Theatre is a Journey , not a Destination "
Old
05132009, 10:47 AM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Rockwood,Ontario,Canada
Posts: 1,180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Yeah I've seen that one before . Looks like a little too much visual information . I see something a little simpler , not to say all that info wouldn't be good , just a little overwhelming for what we need to see . Maybe just single planes , six in all ,from each of the RGBYCM points to the D65 point instead of covering all the area in between .
Scott..........
"Home Theatre is a Journey , not a Destination "
Old
05282009, 02:27 PM
 Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,309
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Yes, Y (brightness) is basically the zaxis of the gamut chart. You could make a 3D plot like you describe, but it would be very hard to interpret how good your calibration is. Viewing an offangle 3d plot would look cool, but it would be very hard to see of the z axis is correct.
In my spreadsheet, the saturationbrightness tab basically shows the gamut z axis, since it shows the Y value of each color from 0 to 100% saturation.
Dan
In my spreadsheet, the saturationbrightness tab basically shows the gamut z axis, since it shows the Y value of each color from 0 to 100% saturation.
Dan
Old
09012009, 11:01 AM
Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 163
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Sorry , for a totally newbie question but how I use this sheet ? Can someone link me to the some guide or kind enough to write simple one for me
Old
09012009, 12:08 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 1,338
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Greg
Old
02082010, 11:38 AM
 Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,309
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Just had a request today for this thread, so I'm bringing it back to the top for all you athome calibrators.
Dan
Dan
Old
02082010, 11:24 PM
Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
I was the guy who requested it. This spreadsheet is just exactly what I need. I've been calibrating my LG 47LH90 LCD with LED backlighting. Adjusting the CMS at 100% saturation yielded fleshtones that were sometimes pinkish. Using the saturation shifts and errors in HCFR helped a lot, but I had just figured out that HCFR has errors. My strategy was to reduce overall saturation shift and error by eyeballing the graph and then making the CMS adjustments. I'm thinking that adjusting just the 75% saturation will yield the same or better results.
Thanks for the spreadsheet.
Old
02132010, 01:35 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Springfield, MO
Posts: 7,152
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 511 Post(s)
Liked: 487
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mitchell
Rather, the correct solution to minimize error should be whatever combination of Y values minimizes delta E against the Rec709 points. Because of the way delta E is calculated, minimal error may not be at the point where the Y value at the actual primary equals the Y value in Rec709.
Rather, the correct solution to minimize error should be whatever combination of Y values minimizes delta E against the Rec709 points. Because of the way delta E is calculated, minimal error may not be at the point where the Y value at the actual primary equals the Y value in Rec709.
The problem with this is that different dE formulas yield differentoften substantially differentresults in this regard. Greg uses CIELUV exclusively, which I have much less faith in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mitchell
So I have been experimenting with a new spreadsheet to try to make this optimization easy to do using the Excel Data Solver. One enters the current color measures from HCFR, then use Excel's Data Solver to give the optimum Y values for the six primary/secondary colors that minimize total deltaE. The spreadsheet has a couple of other advantages, for whatif analysis. There is a choice of error measures, CIELUV75, CIE94 or CIE2000. And the calculated values includes an elasticity of delta E with respect to Y, C and H, essentially how much dE would change at each point from a 1% change in Y, chroma, or hue.
So I have been experimenting with a new spreadsheet to try to make this optimization easy to do using the Excel Data Solver. One enters the current color measures from HCFR, then use Excel's Data Solver to give the optimum Y values for the six primary/secondary colors that minimize total deltaE. The spreadsheet has a couple of other advantages, for whatif analysis. There is a choice of error measures, CIELUV75, CIE94 or CIE2000. And the calculated values includes an elasticity of delta E with respect to Y, C and H, essentially how much dE would change at each point from a 1% change in Y, chroma, or hue.
Indeed, this shows just what I have been talking about for some time. Take this oversaturated, but otherwise accurate, green: x0.296, y0.676, Y0.7152 and run the solver for both CIELUV and CIE94 (assume Rec. 709). You get radically different recommendations.
CIE94: 0.687 (Actually, a range of values between 0.6740.701 all yield the same result. 0.687 is a median value)
CIELUV: 0.532 (a range of 0.5180.546)
For a variety of reasons, I think that CIE94 gets the correct result.
BTW, I don't see how you are getting you %C and %H error values. The oversaturated green I defined above has perfect hue, yet your spreadsheet gives it a percentage error of %39.3.
Tom Huffman
ChromaPure Software/AccuPel Video Signal Generators
ISF/THX Calibrations
Springfield, MO
Old
02132010, 06:07 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Rockwood,Ontario,Canada
Posts: 1,180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 13
With AVFoundry's VideoEQ now arriving , I suspect your Spreadsheet will be a little more popular , at least until CalMAN v4 comes out .
Thanks again for all this work .
Scott......................
Thanks again for all this work .
Scott......................
"Home Theatre is a Journey , not a Destination "
Old
02182010, 03:01 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Rockwood,Ontario,Canada
Posts: 1,180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Is there a way to tell , by looking somewhere on the Spreadsheet , which version we have ? I seem to have downloaded quite a few zip files and have quite a few Spreadsheets but I'm not sure I have the latest .
Thanks guys ,
Scott...............
Thanks guys ,
Scott...............
"Home Theatre is a Journey , not a Destination "
Old
02192010, 10:24 PM
 Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,309
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Scott,
That is a good point. I've always updated my first post with the latest version, so if you download that one, you can be assured you have the latest version.
The next time I update the spreadsheet, I'll probably attach a version to it in the filename.
Dan
That is a good point. I've always updated my first post with the latest version, so if you download that one, you can be assured you have the latest version.
The next time I update the spreadsheet, I'll probably attach a version to it in the filename.
Dan
Old
02222010, 08:25 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Rockwood,Ontario,Canada
Posts: 1,180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Thanks Dan , that would be helpful . Have you been following the VideoEQ topics ? Should make your spreadsheet very useful .
Scott...............
Scott...............
"Home Theatre is a Journey , not a Destination "
Old
02232010, 07:42 AM
 Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,309
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Scott,
No I haven't. Wasn't aware of it. Can you provide a link?
Thanks,
Dan
No I haven't. Wasn't aware of it. Can you provide a link?
Thanks,
Dan
Old
02242010, 02:14 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Rockwood,Ontario,Canada
Posts: 1,180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Sure thing...here is the AV Foundry site that builds the box...
http://avfoundry.com/videoeq.php
Then the Link to SpectraCAL , where they are providing support and updates...
http://www.spectracal.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=45
And finally , our own AVS Thread to cover the latest...
http://www.avsforum.com/avsvb/showthread.php?t=1215902
Happy reading...
Scott.....................
"Home Theatre is a Journey , not a Destination "
Old
02012011, 11:04 PM
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northwest Wisconsin
Posts: 2,269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman
The problem with this is that different dE formulas yield differentoften substantially differentresults in this regard. Greg uses CIELUV exclusively, which I have much less faith in.
Indeed, this shows just what I have been talking about for some time. Take this oversaturated, but otherwise accurate, green: x0.296, y0.676, Y0.7152 and run the solver for both CIELUV and CIE94 (assume Rec. 709). You get radically different recommendations.
CIE94: 0.687 (Actually, a range of values between 0.6740.701 all yield the same result. 0.687 is a median value)
CIELUV: 0.532 (a range of 0.5180.546)
For a variety of reasons, I think that CIE94 gets the correct result.
BTW, I don't see how you are getting you %C and %H error values. The oversaturated green I defined above has perfect hue, yet your spreadsheet gives it a percentage error of %39.3.
The problem with this is that different dE formulas yield differentoften substantially differentresults in this regard. Greg uses CIELUV exclusively, which I have much less faith in.
Indeed, this shows just what I have been talking about for some time. Take this oversaturated, but otherwise accurate, green: x0.296, y0.676, Y0.7152 and run the solver for both CIELUV and CIE94 (assume Rec. 709). You get radically different recommendations.
CIE94: 0.687 (Actually, a range of values between 0.6740.701 all yield the same result. 0.687 is a median value)
CIELUV: 0.532 (a range of 0.5180.546)
For a variety of reasons, I think that CIE94 gets the correct result.
BTW, I don't see how you are getting you %C and %H error values. The oversaturated green I defined above has perfect hue, yet your spreadsheet gives it a percentage error of %39.3.
As far as I can tell, this question was not answered.
Anybody still around?
Old
08092011, 10:44 AM
Newbie
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by stereomandan
I created this Excel spreadsheet in hopes that it would make calibrations easier for you all. It has helped me greatly. It is designed to work with HCFR and the AVSHD disc, but you can enter the required information from any measurement software. The saturation measurements should come from AVSHD, since these were the saturation targets I used for the calculations.
The Excel spreadsheet provides the following:
1) Calibration Aid. Provides correct brightness and saturation locations for all color windows in AVSHD. Also provides Brightness targets for 10%, 20% 100% gray windows for a user selectable gamma.
2) CIE Gamut charting, with all color reference saturation points (something not available in HCFR) Now including color background
3) Edit 12109, Updated to include 'u 'v charting. Now including color background
4) Color brightness versus saturation charts (versus the incorrect method in HCFR)
5) Color Saturation %error versus saturation charts, x, y color space
6) Edit 13009, Updated Color Saturation %error versus saturation charts, 'u 'v color space
7) dE charting at all color measurement points (something not available accurately in HCFR)
8) New 2709 Worksheet from Bill Mitchel to adjust primary and secondary llocations and brightness if a gamma of 2.22 is not used. User is able to select any gamma they choose. These calculations are yet to be verified.
9) New 2709 Worksheet from angryht to adjust secondary locations if the primary locations do not line up with the target locations. This is similar to the Accupel calculator
If you open a file in HCFR, and check the editable data box on the main screen, you can then highlight the cells you need and copy and paste them into my file. For example, use the dropdown menu and choose Red Saturation Scale Highlight all 15 of the cells that you need. Choose, Edit, Copy from the top menu bar. Highlight the correct cells for red saturation in the Excel file and choose, Edit, Paste. Repeat for all the colors.
In the first and second worksheet, also simply type in the Y value from your 100% gray window from the Grayscale menu in HCFR and the worksheets will automatically provide brightness targets for accurate 2.22 gamma and primary and secondary color brightness.
I think some of you will be very surprised how far off your 2575% color saturation's are off, even if your 100% saturation's are set optimally.
Note:
A special thanks to Tom Huffman, who's dE measurement calculations were used, and then adjusted, to cover all other color saturation points on the AVSHD disc, not just the 100% saturation points.
Update: 12209. The locations in my files are correct and accurate. Enjoy! To be the most accurate, a gamma of 2.22 should be strived for
Update: 41109. Included HCFR specific % bar values for 100% and 75% saturation windows. These are the bars to the left of the ftL and cd/m2 readings on the bottom left of the HCFR main screen. Simply use your CMS saturation and hue adjsutments to match the %'s listed in my table. Takes a lot of guesswork out of hitting the correct saturation and hue.
Dan
I created this Excel spreadsheet in hopes that it would make calibrations easier for you all. It has helped me greatly. It is designed to work with HCFR and the AVSHD disc, but you can enter the required information from any measurement software. The saturation measurements should come from AVSHD, since these were the saturation targets I used for the calculations.
The Excel spreadsheet provides the following:
1) Calibration Aid. Provides correct brightness and saturation locations for all color windows in AVSHD. Also provides Brightness targets for 10%, 20% 100% gray windows for a user selectable gamma.
2) CIE Gamut charting, with all color reference saturation points (something not available in HCFR) Now including color background
3) Edit 12109, Updated to include 'u 'v charting. Now including color background
4) Color brightness versus saturation charts (versus the incorrect method in HCFR)
5) Color Saturation %error versus saturation charts, x, y color space
6) Edit 13009, Updated Color Saturation %error versus saturation charts, 'u 'v color space
7) dE charting at all color measurement points (something not available accurately in HCFR)
8) New 2709 Worksheet from Bill Mitchel to adjust primary and secondary llocations and brightness if a gamma of 2.22 is not used. User is able to select any gamma they choose. These calculations are yet to be verified.
9) New 2709 Worksheet from angryht to adjust secondary locations if the primary locations do not line up with the target locations. This is similar to the Accupel calculator
If you open a file in HCFR, and check the editable data box on the main screen, you can then highlight the cells you need and copy and paste them into my file. For example, use the dropdown menu and choose Red Saturation Scale Highlight all 15 of the cells that you need. Choose, Edit, Copy from the top menu bar. Highlight the correct cells for red saturation in the Excel file and choose, Edit, Paste. Repeat for all the colors.
In the first and second worksheet, also simply type in the Y value from your 100% gray window from the Grayscale menu in HCFR and the worksheets will automatically provide brightness targets for accurate 2.22 gamma and primary and secondary color brightness.
I think some of you will be very surprised how far off your 2575% color saturation's are off, even if your 100% saturation's are set optimally.
Note:
A special thanks to Tom Huffman, who's dE measurement calculations were used, and then adjusted, to cover all other color saturation points on the AVSHD disc, not just the 100% saturation points.
Update: 12209. The locations in my files are correct and accurate. Enjoy! To be the most accurate, a gamma of 2.22 should be strived for
Update: 41109. Included HCFR specific % bar values for 100% and 75% saturation windows. These are the bars to the left of the ftL and cd/m2 readings on the bottom left of the HCFR main screen. Simply use your CMS saturation and hue adjsutments to match the %'s listed in my table. Takes a lot of guesswork out of hitting the correct saturation and hue.
Dan
What do you mean included HCFR
Old
08172011, 02:16 PM
 Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,309
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 23
I included some HCFR specific % bar values for 100% and 75% saturation points in the calibration aid tab.
I explain it in the "Special Hint" section of Post #1 in my Epson calibration thread.
http://www.avsforum.com/avsvb/showt...7#post16166537
Dan
I explain it in the "Special Hint" section of Post #1 in my Epson calibration thread.
http://www.avsforum.com/avsvb/showt...7#post16166537
Dan
Sponsored Links  
Advertisement



Thread Tools  


Posting Rules  