Professional Calibrations = Overrated!!! - Page 6 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #151 of 176 Old 02-11-2012, 11:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
PlasmaPZ80U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 197
I think it needs to be stressed that you cannot eyeball grayscale, gamma, nor color gamut, regardless of any test pattern disc or other pattern source. These things require a meter 100% of the time, and if using a colorimeter, it must be profiled off a spectro first to have any assurance of accuracy. With a setup disc, the best you can do is set brightness, contrast, and sharpness correctly. Setting color/tint without a meter can be done, but generally the results will not be comparable to using a meter. Beyond this, all you can do without a meter is select the best picture mode and color temp preset (roughly), turn off all picture enhancements and get 1:1 pixel mapping. You might be able to select the best gamma and color gamut presets as well, in some cases.

You absolutely cannot set any grayscale/gamma controls by eye, whether they are 1-pt or 20-pt nor any CMS controls. Even selecting presets for these three key areas of metered calibration is an educated guess at best. Anyone who argues to the contrary is just plain wrong, whether or not they are capable of understanding why.
PlasmaPZ80U is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #152 of 176 Old 02-11-2012, 12:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,981
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 144
Well I guess I misunderstood your initial postings, but I still disagree about everyone needing a $1000+ a meter to be better than their eyes (of course it is better to have a more expensive meter), but saying your EYES are better than a cheap meter...

I know you are taking the stance that doing no calibration is better than calibrating with a cheap meter, but that is not what Tom Huffman says in his articles (http://www.chromapure.com/colorscience-meters.asp). So let's be clear, the above information is not agreed to upon by some expert designers of calibraiton software that have calibrated hundreds, maybe thousands of devices. Ordering a meter, and I believe Tom will create an offset for it against the type of device of your choosing.

Well you can get rid of SOME extreme errors in gray-scale if you want even by eye, but you cannot do it ACCURATELY by eye, I agree, that does not mean you cannot remove some MAJOR error out of the gray-scale by eye (you can if you want). I can actually get gray-scale semi-ballpark by eye after having done many calibrations, but if a device is already ballpark I wouldn't attempt it, and since I use a meter I never do.


Quick and Easy Shelf Mount Method for both one projector or dual stacks

Web Calculator v023 & v025
- Quick Peak at the new upcoming calculator
**Current Projector Calculator** -- http://www.eliteprojectorcalculator.com

Coder's Top Projector Picks of 2012 --http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread....

coderguy is offline  
post #153 of 176 Old 02-11-2012, 12:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PlasmaPZ80U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post


I know you are taking the stance that doing no calibration is better than calibrating with a cheap meter.

Actually, my main point is that grayscale/gamma and CMS controls cannot be eyeballed. Whether or not calibrating with a cheap meter is better than using factory settings for the most accurate picture mode or not depends on whether the meter's errors are significantly lower than the display's errors pre-cal. Of course, to know for sure whether that is or isn't the case, you'd need an more expensive meter. A bit of catch-22.
PlasmaPZ80U is offline  
post #154 of 176 Old 02-11-2012, 12:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PlasmaPZ80U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

Well you can get rid of SOME extreme errors in gray-scale if you want even by eye, but you cannot do it ACCURATELY by eye, I agree, that does not mean you cannot remove some MAJOR error out of the gray-scale by eye (you can if you want). I can actually get gray-scale semi-ballpark by eye after having done many calibrations, but if a device is already ballpark I wouldn't attempt it, and since I use a meter I never do.

If you cannot do it accurately by eye, what value does it have from a calibration standpoint where objectivity is critical?
PlasmaPZ80U is offline  
post #155 of 176 Old 02-11-2012, 12:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,981
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 144
Well even the cheap meters ship with a certain degree of error margin in spec. The question really was are these meters within the advertised spec or not.

Tom has measured many many eye-one LT's, and according to him, there is some green error but a new one is certainly going to be more accurate than most people's default OOTB modes.

See the article, you are arguing the binary fallacy.
http://www.chromapure.com/colorscience-meters.asp


Quick and Easy Shelf Mount Method for both one projector or dual stacks

Web Calculator v023 & v025
- Quick Peak at the new upcoming calculator
**Current Projector Calculator** -- http://www.eliteprojectorcalculator.com

Coder's Top Projector Picks of 2012 --http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread....

coderguy is offline  
post #156 of 176 Old 02-11-2012, 12:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PlasmaPZ80U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

Well even the cheap meters ship with a certain degree of error margin in spec. The question really was are these meters within the advertised spec or not.

Tom has measured many many eye-one LT's, and according to him, there is some green error but a new one is certainly going to be more accurate than most people's default OOTB modes.

See the article, you are arguing the binary fallacy.
http://www.chromapure.com/colorscience-meters.asp

I am actually quite familiar with that article and I first read it when it was written a while back. My point is error-prone hardware may or may not produce results that are better the the default settings for the Cinema/Movie mode (or the THX or ISFccc mode(s) in some cases). You can't be sure whether it is or isn't without a spectro, which is a more expensive meter.
PlasmaPZ80U is offline  
post #157 of 176 Old 02-11-2012, 12:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,981
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 144
We seem to be going in circles, or you are misinterpreting the article, he covers that exact and very point.
In the end, the worst you can do is it looks worse to your eyes, then you would just go back to using your eyes, but in reality some of the settings on these meters are spot on.

Like I said, I have no luminance error on a 2-year old eye-one LT that was exposed to humidity, I have gray-scale error yes. Getting most things accurate by the meter, then judging what you have to by eye (even if not further adjusting, you can rollback waht you want, assuming you are not buying the more expensive meter) is almost certainly going to be more accurate than any THX mode over-time. Furthermore, devices drift faster than the meter itself drifts. You can always revert the settings that didn't look right, the meter gives you another reference point.

Having a partially incorrect reference point that is right in some areas is always better than one incorrect reference point that is wrong in other areas, there is no argument to be made there, since at worst case you pick one over the other by eye. How much someone can spend to get a more accurate reference point all depends on their budget, so the article profoundly exclaims this and I do not see how your argument is in agreement with anything the article discusses. You can also try different orders of calibrating (using THX's default gray-scale, but only calibrating gamma and luminance with the meter). There are all kinds of additional combinations you can do to a calibration to see if it yields an improvement, regardless of how expensive or cheap a meter is.

This is not an all or nothing issue, and the article clearly states that.


Quick and Easy Shelf Mount Method for both one projector or dual stacks

Web Calculator v023 & v025
- Quick Peak at the new upcoming calculator
**Current Projector Calculator** -- http://www.eliteprojectorcalculator.com

Coder's Top Projector Picks of 2012 --http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread....

coderguy is offline  
post #158 of 176 Old 02-11-2012, 01:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PlasmaPZ80U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

We seem to be going in circles, or you are misinterpreting the article, he covers that exact and very point.
In the end, the worst you can do is it looks worse to your eyes, then you would just go back to using your eyes, but in reality some of the settings on these meters are spot on.

Like I said, I have no luminance error on a 2-year old eye-one LT that was exposed to humidity, I have gray-scale error yes. Getting most things accurate by the meter, then judging what you have to by eye (even if not further adjusting, you can rollback waht you want, assuming you are not buying the more expensive meter) is almost certainly going to be more accurate than any THX mode over-time. Furthermore, devices drift faster than the meter itself drifts. You can always revert the settings that didn't look right, the meter gives you another reference point.

Having a partially incorrect reference point that is right in some areas is always better than one incorrect reference point that is wrong in other areas, there is no argument to be made there, since at worst case you pick one over the other by eye. How much someone can spend to get a more accurate reference point all depends on their budget, so the article profoundly exclaims this and I do not see how your argument is in agreement with anything the article discusses. You can also try different orders of calibrating (using THX's default gray-scale, but only calibrating gamma and luminance with the meter). There are all kinds of additional combinations you can do to a calibration to see if it yields an improvement, regardless of how expensive or cheap a meter is.

This is not an all or nothing issue, and the article clearly states that.

How are you evaluating the accuracy of your D2? With another meter that also might be off, though (perhaps) less so? What is your reference point here?

Also, my main point for post #151 is that eyeballing grayscale, gamma, and gamut is always a bad idea in the context of (actual) calibration (i.e. as in not doing whatever you feel like to make the image more pleasing subjectively and then calling it 'calibration'). You seem to be more preoccupied with the part about using cheap colorimeters versus a spectro, which is not the focus of that post at all.
PlasmaPZ80U is offline  
post #159 of 176 Old 02-11-2012, 06:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,981
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 144
I know people in the forums will argue forever even when there is nothing left to argue or change the topic in the middle of the argument, I am just saying TH does not agree with your statements, you cannot argue that he does since the article is so clear.

Regarding testing the luminance:
It would be too big of a coincidence that both my meters are off on luminance in exactly the same manner and direction, when one is NIST certified, they would end up being exactly off in the same direction down to some miniscule error less than 0.5 Delta L. The odds of that are astronomically low, besides it is well known the luminance and gamma still usually works...


Quick and Easy Shelf Mount Method for both one projector or dual stacks

Web Calculator v023 & v025
- Quick Peak at the new upcoming calculator
**Current Projector Calculator** -- http://www.eliteprojectorcalculator.com

Coder's Top Projector Picks of 2012 --http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread....

coderguy is offline  
post #160 of 176 Old 02-11-2012, 07:48 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
jack54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Tacoma, WA
Posts: 311
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Hey! I see others think Calibrations is OVERRATED too.
jack54 is offline  
post #161 of 176 Old 02-11-2012, 08:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PlasmaPZ80U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

I know people in the forums will argue forever even when there is nothing left to argue or change the topic in the middle of the argument, I am just saying TH does not agree with your statements, you cannot argue that he does since the article is so clear.

Regarding testing the luminance:
It would be too big of a coincidence that both my meters are off on luminance in exactly the same manner and direction, when one is NIST certified, they would end up being exactly off in the same direction down to some miniscule error less than 0.5 Delta L. The odds of that are astronomically low, besides it is well known the luminance and gamma still usually works...

any meter will read luminance correctly down to it's rated level in the official specs, color accuracy is another issue entirely

Also, just because the C6 is NIST certified doesn't mean you can trust its readings on faith alone. You really need a spectro to be certain of anything color wise.

The article I've quoted numerous times by Michael Chen regarding the C6's accuracy on various LCD TVs proves that NIST certification or not, the C6 can be quite off in terms of absolute color accuracy versus any spectro, even the more affordable ones. I have a C6 too, but after reading that article I'm no longer confident of the results it returns. I just got my LG LCD TV pro calibrated yesterday and the end result was less red/yellow/orange looking than my best efforts with the C6. This seems to confirm that the C6 can read blue too high on some LCD sets.
PlasmaPZ80U is offline  
post #162 of 176 Old 02-11-2012, 10:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pokekevin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 5,064
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by jack54 View Post

Hey! I see others think Calibrations is OVERRATED too.

Thats cool. Go enjoy your tv than lol

No subwoofer I've heard has been able to produce the bass I've experienced in the Corps!

Must..stop...buying...every bluray release...
pokekevin is offline  
post #163 of 176 Old 02-12-2012, 04:50 AM
Advanced Member
 
dovercat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 583
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smackrabbit View Post

As someone that used to ride a bike a lot, it's as if I had my road bike, and adjusted it myself to what I thought fit well. Then I go in to see a professional fitter (yes, they exist, and I've gone) and they use their tools and measurements, swap in different seatposts and handlebar stems to better fit my body and range of motion, adjust the pedal length to fit my legs better, and get it tuned as perfectly as they can, then say "We can't get it perfect since your frame sits a centimeter too far back" and then I say the whole process was worthless since it can't be 100% perfect.

Some bikers won't care that they can be fit to their bike better and will happily use their bikes every single day and not care less. Some of us will want to get every last drop of performance out of that bike, and we will go in and pay $150 for a fitting, and more for parts, so it can perform at it's absolute best. Could I have bought a $10,000 Cervelo bike and had it perform better? Sure, but I don't have a $10,000 bike and I want the bike I do have to be as good as it can.

That's the best analogy I can come up with, and if you still can't understand then I'm fairly certain you never will

Quote:
Originally Posted by PlasmaPZ80U View Post

A very reasonable and fair post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smackrabbit View Post

...That's the best analogy I can come up with, and if you still can't understand then I'm fairly certain you never will

Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgeAB View Post

Regular contributors and readers of this area of the forum already know that select contributors to this thread have heard these principles numerous times before. They will not be persuaded, and only come here to repeatedly, and fairly fruitlessly, annoy those of us who are advocates, educators, and practitioners of display system calibration. They are confronted for their fallacious arguments in an attempt to obviate their error for the newer readers. This process has been repeated so many times over the years, involving the current crop of naysayers, as well as countless others, that it has become profoundly tedious. Unfortunately, there remains in human nature the capacity for some to derive satisfaction from being a menace in constructive community discourse. They expose themselves.

I disagree it is not a fair analogy because the bicycle fitter uses tools to disassemble the bike and swaps in different seat posts and handlebar stems. A professional calibration of a consumer display does not normally include disassembling the projector or TV and swapping out components. A fair analogy would be someone in the bicycle shop using a tape measure to set the seat and handle bars at the correct height. A service normally performed by bike shops for free.


The value of professional calibration it seems to me is highly dependent on the consumers display, the experience, equipment and ethos of the calibrator and what is being included in the calibration.

Maybe in a discussion of if professional calibrations = overrated. Professional calibration should be defined.


So how about taking as a base line a basic ISF calibration. That is professional as they charge for the service.

Using words like imaging science and calibration to me implies expertise and accuracy, image fidelity (can not distinguish between the original and reproduction, or the different reproductions). The use of the ISF logo inspiring the belief that the person is qualified, that there is a quality of service that can be assumed.

Unfortunately ISF seems to be overpriced basic training to enable the use of it's logo for marketing purposes and a attempt to sell new calibrators equipment. It also looks like it might be an attempt at price fixing a minimum price for calibration. The illusion of a valuable service performed by qualified experts.

I say illusion because the value of the service looks to have a minimum price fixed by ISF while having no minimum quality of service and the level of training and equipment appears minimal.

ISF Level one appears to be one days worth of training, I call it one days worth because in the UK you get combined training for people with no previous experience and no minimum qualifications where ISF level 1 is done in a single day, with days two and three covering ISF level 2.

What are the minimum equipment requirements for ISF calibrators and are they adequate?

Does ISF mandate the equipment used to perform calibrations is kept calibrated/certified to ensure it's accuracy/reliability? No

Does ISF have any oversight as to the quality of calibrations done by those using it's logo? No

Is a Basic ISF calibration overrated. I would say yes. Because I think it is overpriced at least in the UK. I think it would be unsafe to assume a ISF logo guarantees any level of competence or quality of service.


THX appears to be a much better bet, with minimum equipment requirements and that equipment being certified, and with some oversight as to the quality of calibrations provided.


Is a professional calibration done by someone with many years experience using very expensive equipment certified as accurate, who comes highly recommended, who is going to do a full calibration including gamma and color management of complex equipment you need or want to be as close to reference as possible. Probably not.

But that is not the quality of service most people are going to think off when they ask is a professional calibration overrated. The OP for example seems to have been talking about upselling at retailers like Best Buy to a basic ISF calibration, being sold as needed to get the best out of your equipment.
dovercat is offline  
post #164 of 176 Old 02-12-2012, 10:18 AM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,851
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 216 Post(s)
Liked: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by jack54; View Post

Hey! I see others think Calibrations is OVERRATED too.

Guitar Tuning = Overrated!!!

I have a new Gibson guitar. It is not tuned proper but it sounds just as good as my neighbor's Gibson guitar which is proper tuned. I can't see where his guitar sounds better than mine'

You're TV is not proper tuned
8mile13 is offline  
post #165 of 176 Old 02-12-2012, 11:58 AM
Advanced Member
 
Smackrabbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Posts: 893
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by dovercat View Post

I say illusion because the value of the service looks to have a minimum price fixed by ISF

Good to see you are making up facts now to help fit your narrative. I'm a Level II ISF and apparently missed the fixed price notice. Could I show up and charge $50? Sure if I valued my time at $10 an hour or less. As you've resorted to making things up now to fit your views I'll be done with this thread.

Chris Heinonen
Senior Editor, Secrets of Home Theater and High Fidelity, www.hometheaterhifi.com
Displays Editor, AnandTech.com
Contributor, HDGuru.com and Wirecutter.com
ISF Level II Certified Calibrator, ReferenceHomeTheater.com
Smackrabbit is offline  
post #166 of 176 Old 02-12-2012, 12:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
GeorgeAB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 3,286
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smackrabbit View Post

Good to see you are making up facts now to help fit your narrative. I'm a Level II ISF and apparently missed the fixed price notice. Could I show up and charge $50? Sure if I valued my time at $10 an hour or less. As you've resorted to making things up now to fit your views I'll be done with this thread.

They expose themselves.
GeorgeAB is offline  
post #167 of 176 Old 02-12-2012, 06:09 PM
 
Phase700B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,508
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

Well you can get rid of SOME extreme errors in gray-scale if you want even by eye, but you cannot do it ACCURATELY by eye, I agree, that does not mean you cannot remove some MAJOR error out of the gray-scale by eye (you can if you want).

I can actually get gray-scale semi-ballpark by eye after having done many calibrations, but if a device is already ballpark I wouldn't attempt it, and since I use a meter I never do.

I agree also, especially after doing purity settings on CRT TV for years and also doing gray scale on commercial and very critical video x-ray systems. If gray scale has enough error in it to have visible discernible tint, removing it will improve picture quality and be closer to the mark. There are ways of making comparison adjustments to gray scale to reduce the adaptive effect on eyes. The end result will be a better white balance that is especially beneficial on B&W material and also improves color program material.

Just because some people are not able to do it does not mean it can't be done.
Phase700B is offline  
post #168 of 176 Old 02-12-2012, 08:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,563
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 207
If you are used to looking at and working with calibrated displays all day long, it definitely gets to the point where you can eyeball most displays to a pretty good state.

Without any reference nearby, I'm pretty good at getting displays in the 100 nits range (tends to be 90-100) in the most accurate greyscale preset, and select the right gamma preset for my target whether it's 2.2 or 2.4. (game/PC or film) Brightness, sharpness etc are trivial.

If there are noticeable errors, I can usually improve greyscale somewhat by eye too. (most displays are at least 500K off with their presets) I'm fine with a 2pt control, but with 10pt you're more likely to be introducing errors by eye unless the display has real problems to begin with.

If there's no CMS and just colour controls (chroma & hue) I can get them spot-on every time, if I have access to reference material that I am familiar with.



This is not calibration, or a substitute for it though. It's the sort of thing I'll do when I get a new display in and want to have some time checking it out before getting out the calibration equipment and setting it up correctly. (you can still evaluate things like viewing angle, contrast ratio, motion handling, processing errors etc. in this state) When I've been waiting in all day for delivery, and then unboxed and set it up, I want to sit down for a couple of hours and relax first.

Films and other content are enjoyable to watch in this state... but they look much better when calibrated.


The biggest difference for me with calibration is always gamma. Gamma presets rarely measure flat, especially if you're targeting 2.4 for film. So while you might have the preset chosen which best approximates your target, you need a 10pt control to get it accurate. I have years of experience, and this is something you cannot set by eye. Gamma presets I can get right, but not 10pt controls.

Gamma is the most important picture control to have a filmic image rather than a "television" one. Even if I can't pinpoint exactly where the problem is to set the controls by eye, anything other than a "flat" gamma looks wrong to me and impacts my enjoyment of watching a film.

And if a display has a CMS? You cannot set that up by eye at all. Secondary hues I find easy enough to get right, but pretty much anything else needs instrumentation.



Factory calibration has improved dramatically in the last couple of years, but they're all targeting 2.2 gamma rather than 2.4, and are less accurate than I would like.

If you want to see a film as the director intendedor at least as close as your display is capable ofyou need it properly calibrated with instrumentation, either a Spectro, or a Spectro & Colorimeter combination.



Something I don't really agree with though, is paying someone $300+ to come out and calibrate your set, or worse, a projector, once when you first get it.

Displays drift over time, and projectors are particularly bad for it. (they sure are dragging their feet when it comes to solid-state lighting) If you are considering paying a professional to come out and calibrate your display, pick someone that will do discounted touch-up calibrations on a yearly basis, or better, buy the tools and learn to do it yourself.

Maybe it just comes naturally to me, but I wouldn't consider calibration to be a difficult thing to do. A lot of it does come down to experience, and that's what you're paying a professional for, but if you have time, the will to learn, and especially if you have multiple displays, it pays off buying the equipment to do it yourself. (I would say your cheapest option is either a ColorMunki spectro, or ideally an i1Pro) I have so many displays, and have changed them so often, that my calibration equipment has paid for itself many times over.


And at the end of the day, calibration just lets you relax. Ever find yourself reaching for the remote when you see something on your screen that doesn't look quite right, to tweak the colour control, gamma, or something else just a bit to get it looking better? I don't.

My display is calibrated, so I know what it's showing me is as it was intended to be seen. Sometimes a disc is just badly mastered, or the director intended there to be a colour tint or other strange look to be there. With a calibrated display, you aren't left wondering if things could look better, you just watch the film and enjoy it.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #169 of 176 Old 02-13-2012, 01:47 AM
Advanced Member
 
dovercat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 583
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smackrabbit View Post

Good to see you are making up facts now to help fit your narrative. I'm a Level II ISF and apparently missed the fixed price notice. Could I show up and charge $50? Sure if I valued my time at $10 an hour or less. As you've resorted to making things up now to fit your views I'll be done with this thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgeAB View Post

They expose themselves.

What as human so capable of error.

I stand corrected.
The similarity in minimum pricing is coincidence then, the going rate, market price.
In the UK we have few ISF calibrators so not much competition.
Did ISF have any input into Best Buy ISF calibration pricing. I think I read something about that but maybe mistaken.
Does ISF have guideline prices.
The ISF Forum gives guideline prices, I take it that is purely ISF calibrator created pricing.

Can similar reassurance be offered on the other concerns I raised about ISF. Particularly the ones about quality of service.
How high is the minimum competence of ISF calibrators?
What is the minimum equipment they have to use and is it adequate to do a good job and are they required to have it regularly calibrated - certified accurate?
Is there any oversight on the quality of calibrations performed so they are up to a required standard?

I believe THX calibration has those benefits.

Are THX calibrators also free to charge whatever they like. Do they have to pay THX a flat fee per calibration for the certificate plaque or whatever it is the customer gets?

Is the following correct.
dovercat is offline  
post #170 of 176 Old 02-13-2012, 05:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Michael TLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: THX/ISF Calibrationist/Instructor, Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 6,755
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 133
Greetings

On the thx end ...

The chart you have needs to be updated a bit. ISF calibrations needed for certification ... not 4 ... now a whopping "1"

Pricing is suggested in the THX class right at the end of the class .. almost as an afterthought ..but on the same slide it also says that people are free to charge anything they want for the service because the economic realities differ from state to state and city to city and country to country.

The plaques cost the calibrator money to acquire so they normally just pass that onto the client or it is factored into the price that is charged. Depending on the plaque handed out ... it could be $35 or something higher.

I'm not aware of any price fixing on the ISF side. Suggested prices again. But BB pricing has been know to fluctuate from $300 down to Free ... depending on what ever promotion they are running.

Regards

Michael Chen @ The Laser Video Experience
ISF/THX/TLV Video Instructor
The Video Calibration Education Hub - www.TLVEXP.com

Michael TLV is online now  
post #171 of 176 Old 02-13-2012, 05:58 AM
 
Phase700B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,508
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

If you are used to looking at and working with calibrated displays all day long, it definitely gets to the point where you can eyeball most displays to a pretty good state.

I agree. When you have familiarized yourself with the controls on a TV or monitor, manual adjustment (with test pattern media) will get most displays in a good state. Especially lower end units with only an RGB white balance or 2-Point.

Without any reference nearby, I'm pretty good at getting displays in the 100 nits range (tends to be 90–100) in the most accurate greyscale preset, and select the right gamma preset for my target whether it's 2.2 or 2.4. (game/PC or film) Brightness, sharpness etc are trivial.

If there are noticeable errors, I can usually improve greyscale somewhat by eye too. (most displays are at least 500K off with their presets) I'm fine with a 2pt control, but with 10pt you're more likely to be introducing errors by eye unless the display has real problems to begin with.


I agree. If there is noticeable tint to gray scale, especially with 2-point, a correction can be made. Sometimes, if a particular IRE of two is so far off as to be visible, it too can many times be corrected a bit to smooth out the viewable gray scale in a 10 point.


If there's no CMS and just colour controls (chroma & hue) I can get them spot-on every time, if I have access to reference material that I am familiar with.

I agree. Very doable also


Films and other content are enjoyable to watch in this state... but they look much better when calibrated.

Agreed. . . the video quality will be much better than out of the box. And a full calibration will most times look somewhat to appreciably better depending on the TV or monitor and the range of available adjustments.

The biggest difference for me with calibration is always gamma. Gamma presets rarely measure flat, especially if you're targeting 2.4 for film. So while you might have the preset chosen which best approximates your target, you need a 10pt control to get it accurate. I have years of experience, and this is something you cannot set by eye. Gamma presets I can get right, but not 10pt controls.

You are very right on this that gamma can not be done by observation without instrumentation. However, the controversy between the 2.2 (or 2.25) and 2.4 gamma curve will always be an issue. So which to choose without compromising some program material. Therefore, unless a display is chosen for one use (say film or video) it will not be optimized for all program material anyway.


Gamma is the most important picture control to have a filmic image rather than a "television" one. Even if I can't pinpoint exactly where the problem is to set the controls by eye, anything other than a "flat" gamma looks wrong to me and impacts my enjoyment of watching a film.

I find that on some films and but others are just fine. I am wondering if it has to do with whether the "film" was first shot on video or if there is moderate or heavy CGI and/or post processing?

And if a display has a CMS? You cannot set that up by eye at all. Secondary hues I find easy enough to get right, but pretty much anything else needs instrumentation.


Factory calibration has improved dramatically in the last couple of years, but they're all targeting 2.2 gamma rather than 2.4, and are less accurate than I would like.

If you want to see a film as the director intended—or at least as close as your display is capable of—you need it properly calibrated with instrumentation, either a Spectro, or a Spectro & Colorimeter combination.



Something I don't really agree with though, is paying someone $300+ to come out and calibrate your set, or worse, a projector, once when you first get it.

Yes, I agree with that also. I wouldn't really suggest a calibration with equipment until at least a few hundred hours on most LCD or plasma. The "100 to 200 HR." point is oft times not long enough. And, after about 1,000 to 2,000 hours things will have drifted. But still not as bad as out of the box "torch mode".


Displays drift over time, and projectors are particularly bad for it. (they sure are dragging their feet when it comes to solid-state lighting) If you are considering paying a professional to come out and calibrate your display, pick someone that will do discounted touch-up calibrations on a yearly basis, or better, buy the tools and learn to do it yourself.

Maybe it just comes naturally to me, but I wouldn't consider calibration to be a difficult thing to do. A lot of it does come down to experience, and that's what you're paying a professional for, but if you have time, the will to learn, and especially if you have multiple displays, it pays off buying the equipment to do it yourself. (I would say your cheapest option is either a ColorMunki spectro, or ideally an i1Pro) I have so many displays, and have changed them so often, that my calibration equipment has paid for itself many times over.


And at the end of the day, calibration just lets you relax. Ever find yourself reaching for the remote when you see something on your screen that doesn't look quite right, to tweak the colour control, gamma, or something else just a bit to get it looking better? I don't.

My display is calibrated, so I know what it's showing me is as it was intended to be seen. Sometimes a disc is just badly mastered, or the director intended there to be a colour tint or other strange look to be there. With a calibrated display, you aren't left wondering if things could look better, you just watch the film and enjoy it.

I don't find myself wondering at all even of I just did a media assisted setting with most TVs. I find more issues with program material such as mastering compromises on a disc, artifacts of various compression or post production issues, or differences in video levels on OTA, cable, or satellite broadcast.



In the end, I think it depends on the owner, level of adjustments the TV or video equipment, and other factors as to whether to obtain an equipment calibration. To me, then, it boils down to how close is "close enough" whether you buy calibration equipment, pay for a calibration, or do a media assisted setting yourself. The difference is in degree. Using calibration media discs like AVS HD709, Spears & Munsil, or a few others will get picture quality closer to ideal than even several years ago was possible. Will it be perfect? No. To insist that it would be so far off the mark as to not be a close representation of the original would be an overstatement. Especially on many of today's TVs.

Also, as you've pointed out, displays drift. I also question why a calibrator would spend 6 or 7 hours to calibrate a TV. If it takes that long to get it right and it will soon drift. . . again, how close is close enough? Getting your own equipment is obviously an option. And then there is the initial cost of both a colorimeter and spectro and keeping them free of any drift by annual recertification. Surely not for everyone.
Phase700B is offline  
post #172 of 176 Old 02-13-2012, 08:02 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Michael TLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: THX/ISF Calibrationist/Instructor, Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 6,755
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 133
Greetings

It should be noted that my calibration sessions typically take 4 to 6 hours because 2/3 to 3/4 of the time is spent on education of the client.

Add to that, when you add in day modes and 10 point grayscale and 10 point gamma and then finding out that some controls don't work as advertised and figuring out compromises and then doing 3D which is starting all over again ... it adds up.

But then again, the BB guy spends 80 minutes in a home and has a good 60 min to do grayscale and user controls on two inputs. He won't be educating anyone.

A Sony LCD set these days can actually take as little as 15 minutes to fully calibrate out.

However ... try presenting a client with a bill for $350 for 15 min of work and see what happens.

Regards

Michael Chen @ The Laser Video Experience
ISF/THX/TLV Video Instructor
The Video Calibration Education Hub - www.TLVEXP.com

Michael TLV is online now  
post #173 of 176 Old 02-13-2012, 08:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,563
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phase700B View Post

Also, as you've pointed out, displays drift. I also question why a calibrator would spend 6 or 7 hours to calibrate a TV. If it takes that long to get it right and it will soon drift. . . again, how close is close enough? Getting your own equipment is obviously an option. And then there is the initial cost of both a colorimeter and spectro and keeping them free of any drift by annual recertification. Surely not for everyone.

This is why I think it's worth the extra money to buy an i1Pro. These meters can be recertified, but honestly, they are so stable that it is not necessary. The only time I would bother re-certifying one of these meters would either be if I was actually required to do so (it seems like THX requires this?) or if it was failing the internal diagnostics. And if it is failing the internal diagnostics, you're far better off spending the money on buying a new one.

The only point where I would let a colorimeter near my display is if it's being profiled off a reference spectro, and being used for greyscale work. These meters are unreliable across various display types and are not stable over time. The good thing is that profiling the meter to a spectrowhich has to be done there and then, on the display being calibrated, not something that can have been done at some point in the pastis that it eliminates all these problems of colorimeters. For CMS work though, a spectro is required in my opinion.

If your display has been calibrated by only a colorimeter, with the exception of the high end such as the Klein K10 (and possibly the Hubble, though I only make that assumption based on its price) I would say that it is only more consistent, not more accurate. When I say that, I mean that you can get the display to have a flat greyscale and gamma, but that greyscale probably isn't actually measuring D65. You might actually be at a flat 7000K rather than 6504K for example.

And with most displays, I don't think a colorimeter is even necessary. While the i1Pro isn't amazing at low light, most displays do not have adequate controls that make it worthwhile to take measurements below the level where you can get reliable readings. (note: I am used to using my i1Pro with CalMAN's low light handler which improves things quite a bit, at the expense of speed)
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #174 of 176 Old 02-13-2012, 08:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Michael TLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: THX/ISF Calibrationist/Instructor, Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 6,755
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 133
Greetings

The Hubble is discontinued ... and the d3 outperforms it now. The Klein is fast ... and consistent ... but still needs to be profiled to a spectro to be sure of accuracy.

It raises the dilemma from hardware sales people as they have to bundle an i1 pro with the Klein to be sure of accuracy .. but it raises the question for the client why a $1000 piece is more accurate than a $6000 piece and why even bothering to spend the money on the $6000 piece in the first place. (Obviously there are still reasons to do this ... but it depends on what the devices are used for)

Regards

Michael Chen @ The Laser Video Experience
ISF/THX/TLV Video Instructor
The Video Calibration Education Hub - www.TLVEXP.com

Michael TLV is online now  
post #175 of 176 Old 02-13-2012, 08:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,563
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael TLV View Post

Greetings

The Hubble is discontinued ... and the d3 outperforms it now. The Klein is fast ... and consistent ... but still needs to be profiled to a spectro to be sure of accuracy.

It raises the dilemma from hardware sales people as they have to bundle an i1 pro with the Klein to be sure of accuracy .. but it raises the question for the client why a $1000 piece is more accurate than a $6000 piece and why even bothering to spend the money on the $6000 piece in the first place. (Obviously there are still reasons to do this ... but it depends on what the devices are used for)

Regards

I knew that the Hubble was discontinued, but I still see calibrators around here using it as their only meter. Due to its price, and relatively poor specs, I had to assume that the reason for its cost would be high stability. (I believe they can be NIST certified?) Obviously if I had any intention of using one, or letting one near my displays, I would have investigated things further.

Interesting to hear that about the Klein, as I know people doing the same thing with themusing them as the only meter because they believe that they are more accurate than the i1Pro. I have always argued that any colorimeter needs profiled to the display it's measuring with a spectro, but it seems that not everyone agrees.

Fundamentally, I think the design of colorimeters is flawed if you are looking for accuracy. Meters like the Klein K-10 are great if you need fast, repeatable low-light readings, but as with all colorimeters, they need to be profiled off a spectro for that display, and I would only ever use them for greyscale/gamma work.

I believe that the Klein is a relatively stable meter though, and better than most colorimeters when it comes to accuracy. It really depends on how accurate you need, I suppose.


Ultimately, that's why I find myself only using the i1Pro these days. I've considered buying one of the new C6 meters to compliment it, but after having a C5 to profile the i1Pro to, I found it to be more hassle than it was worth.

Something like the K10 would be great though, as it should give far more stable measurements than the C5 did, and has significantly better low-light capabilities, rather than only being somewhat better. Can't justify the cost myself though.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #176 of 176 Old 02-13-2012, 08:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
turbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Lake Tahoe, NV
Posts: 4,429
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 88
I know of a used Klein K-10 (not the lower priced Home Theater version) for sale (PM for info).

btw, I'm keeping my K-10, this is from another....

Need to find a Professional Calibrator? Click Here to PM me with your Display & City

Calibrator List - Pioneer ISFccc Interface

Calibration Reports - Pioneer

 

ControlCAL™
Designed by Calibrators for Calibrators™

No need to fumble through the Display's Menu with its Remote Control™

turbe is online now  
Reply Display Calibration

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


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