New xrite spectracal c6 questions?? - Page 3 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!

Forum Jump: 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 64 Old 10-09-2014, 04:14 AM
AVS Special Member
zoyd's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Planet Dog
Posts: 6,292
Mentioned: 84 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1312 Post(s)
Liked: 1035
Originally Posted by DarrellB View Post
The NIST Certification document that all C6s are shipped with is essentially a traceability document that shows that the certified device matched a reference device to within the listed tolerances in environmental conditions mandated by the National Institute of Standards and Technology. It also provides the necessary information to trace the lineage of the reference device back to any other devices used for its calibration or certification. So, specifically, we list our Konica Minolta’s calibration number which can be checked at any time in order to verify that the reference device was itself within 1 year of calibration (another NIST guideline).
For traceability the numbers on your certification can only be quoted for the specific display spectra/probe characterization convolution that was used to produce them [not specified]. It would be helpful to the end-user trying to decide whether to pursue a potentially more accurate matrix correction for their display technology if you could provide the typical range of tolerances obtained for all EDRs that you provide.

For example: I have two display pro probes and both have residual errors of dx=0.002 (white) when measured against a JETI 1211 using X-rite's supplied plasma EDR. While still a visually small error (dE76(uv) = 0.3) it is 5 times greater than those in the example certificate posted earlier and would presumably not pass your tolerance criteria of dx=+/- 0.001. This residual error can be reduced to the probe repeatability level using the matrix correction calculated with the JETI measurements.
ConnecTEDDD likes this.

Last edited by zoyd; 10-09-2014 at 07:32 AM.
zoyd is offline  
Sponsored Links
post #62 of 64 Old 10-09-2014, 07:20 AM
umass66's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 168
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Does anybody know the repeatability for both chroma and luminance for the xrite i1 Display Pro retail.
umass66 is offline  
post #63 of 64 Old 10-09-2014, 11:55 AM
AVS Special Member
spacediver's Avatar
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,034
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 172 Post(s)
Liked: 85
Originally Posted by umass66 View Post
Does anybody know the repeatability for both chroma and luminance for the xrite i1 Display Pro retail.
I have a support ticket with x-rite about this - hoping to hear back soon. If I do, I'll report it here.
spacediver is offline  
post #64 of 64 Old 10-09-2014, 12:36 PM
numen's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Originally Posted by DarrellB View Post
Each display’s backlight characterization is retained in the meter’s controlling software as an EDR file (which is essentially formatted 1 nm spectral data). Then, in the calibration software, these TWO characterizations are applied together to create a display calibration that is completely unique to that specific meter.
How does it differ from CCSS in Argyll/HCFR? I am raising this question as on my OD LED display i1pro CCSS spectral sample would not match i1d3 readings with a correction matrix created with the same i1pro instrument. This obviously could be a quirk in HCFR's (and Argyll's?) CCSS implementation (it basically looked as if blue was not corrected) and/or the fact the i1pro does not provide spectral readings with 1nm accuracy and thus skews blue readings (red and green were fine though, so this would be strange). Check this post if you are interested in the details (disregard W905a Non-refresh display w Matrix readings as they were off due to a bug in 3.1.5). If you feel like comparing the readings with my CCSS spectral file to your reference one, you can download it here.
Originally Posted by DarrellB View Post
In theory, the 2 stage spectral characterization should be more accurate. But only slightly. It is a nanometer per nanometer correction which is essentially compensating for the sensor/filter errors that are unique in each meter. The 3x3 matrix method is still the standard and is highly accurate.
This is new to me and, as noted earlier, is not what I saw on my unit even though I used the same meter and screen for both. I know that a spectral sample should be more reliable than a matrix if we were to test a bunch of different units. However, a matrix should still be more precise with a particular meter calibrated to a particular screen. If this is not so, would you be able to share some data to support this observation?
Originally Posted by DarrellB View Post
However, in practice, the difference in these two methods is so close, you’re getting down to the repeatability error of the display-meter combination and any difference is probably minimal. The real power of the C6’s two stage spectral characterizations is the ease of having access to updated display calibrations. For instance, both White-OLED and Quantum Dot backlight displays will need new and distinct meter calibrations.
It is nice that QD LED has been recognized as different enough to call for a separate profile. It was high time, that is if I can trust my i1pro readings
Originally Posted by DarrellB View Post
To my knowledge the C6 and i1Display Pro are the only meters that will be able to incorporate those additions without having to send in the meter and pay for a ,calibration.
So in theory x-rite could have created additional EDR profiles for W-OLED, QD-LED and RG-LED (and I am sure a couple of more exotic technologies), but they have not yet, so even more kudos to you for making this effort and supporting C6 owners with a possibility to measure new technology screens more accurately.
numen is offline  
Sponsored Links
Reply Display Calibration

Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off