HCFR - Open source projector and display calibration software - Page 21 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 56Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #601 of 4233 Old 05-09-2012, 03:20 AM
Member
 
Nerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 70
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnAd View Post

The new meter code only displays meters in the list that are detected or have legacy but free support. So it's to be expected that it's not in the list and it should work when it's plugged in

John

I am freshly new in this software, never use before, planning for a virgin trial, so my questions maybe a bit dumb.

In sensor selection upon creating a new file, shall I just select "SIMULATED SENSOR", click the dial with "Create a new meter correction file"? It goes to calibrate the sensor after that, shall I play the DVE color patch on projector as it says and will be able to complete sensor calibration?

P.S. I don't have the sensor yet, planning to buy a i1 display 3. Just want to make sure I can do this before purchase, thanks.
Nerd is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #602 of 4233 Old 05-09-2012, 03:44 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
zoyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Planet Dog
Posts: 4,456
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Liked: 315
To use the simulated sensor click "no" for calibrate sensor. Then just run any of the measurement sequences, grayscale, primaries, etc. and the program will populate the measurements with dummy data. No projector or meter required.
zoyd is online now  
post #603 of 4233 Old 05-09-2012, 04:07 AM
Member
 
Nerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 70
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks.

I am also confused when searching the i1 on ebay and amazon.com, there are 3 names when I search i1 display,

1. i1 display 3
2. i1 display pro 3
3. i1 display pro

All have the same look and cost similarily at around USD250. Are they actually the same?

Xrite.com has only one namely i1 display pro, no 3, but most of you were talking about i1 display 3, how come? I am so confused what to look for.
Nerd is offline  
post #604 of 4233 Old 05-09-2012, 04:15 AM
Advanced Member
 
fahrenheit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 705
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nerd View Post

All have the same look and cost similarily at around USD250. Are they actually the same?

Xrite.com has only one namely i1 display pro, no 3, but most of you were talking about i1 display 3, how come? I am so confused what to look for.

If they look the same, then yes, they are the same meter.

There are however OEM and retail versions (which look the same other than packaging). You won't find the OEM ones on Amazon, but if you see a secondhand one on ebay which doesn't include the box/X-rite software, then it may be an OEM.
fahrenheit is online now  
post #605 of 4233 Old 05-09-2012, 04:29 AM
Member
 
Nerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 70
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by fahrenheit View Post

If they look the same, then yes, they are the same meter.

There are however OEM and retail versions (which look the same other than packaging). You won't find the OEM ones on Amazon, but if you see a secondhand one on ebay which doesn't include the box/X-rite software, then it may be an OEM.

Big thanks, that clear the hassle. I guess what people calling i1 display 3/pro3 is OEM from Chromapure, the curtpalme.com which is sell in bundle with their software.

I will go for Xrite i1 display pro in ebay then.
Nerd is offline  
post #606 of 4233 Old 05-09-2012, 05:14 AM
Advanced Member
 
fahrenheit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 705
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nerd View Post

I guess what people calling i1 display 3/pro3 is OEM from Chromapure, the curtpalme.com which is sell in bundle with their software.

I have seen those names you mention applied to all of the different variants, not just Chromapure.
Chromapure officially call their enhanced version 'PRO' (all caps).

X-Rite surprised a few people when the product launched without a '3' at the end. Stores already had the item for preorder under those unoffical names and some still do.
Before it was officially released, these were the common names being used to talk about it here, so that is why those names are still being commonly used today.
fahrenheit is online now  
post #607 of 4233 Old 05-09-2012, 06:36 AM
Member
 
Nerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 70
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoyd View Post

To use the simulated sensor click "no" for calibrate sensor. Then just run any of the measurement sequences, grayscale, primaries, etc. and the program will populate the measurements with dummy data. No projector or meter required.

I didn't mean to do simulate calibration, I mean doing the actual calibration though. There is no Eye one to select in sensor selection menu, what shall I do?
Nerd is offline  
post #608 of 4233 Old 05-09-2012, 07:01 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
zoyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Planet Dog
Posts: 4,456
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Liked: 315
zoyd is online now  
post #609 of 4233 Old 05-11-2012, 03:06 AM
Senior Member
 
anta1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Ukraine
Posts: 310
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
When
Calculations corrected (see http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...0#post15611490 )?
anta1974 is offline  
post #610 of 4233 Old 05-11-2012, 03:22 AM
Senior Member
 
Thebes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 447
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Hi,

IMHO, it's only a problem of options :

1) In the preferences menu (General tab), why would you ever put in the option for Use measured colors (when available))? This only leads to an incorrect graph in the Saturation-shifts chart. If this is checked, it makes it looks as though all of the measured 100% saturation points are correct, when they really aren't. It also makes all the other saturation and Hue points on the chart incorrect due to this.

If you want the real position, you must not take "Use measured colors (when available)" in "preferences" and "general".

About the Delta E, it's the same problem IMHO : In "prefrences" and "advanced", if you want the "real delta E", take the option " do not use luminance in Delta E formula".

About saturation adjustment, one "obligation", the white point must be adjusted before all another adjustment on RGBCYM. If you don't do this, target will be false.
Thebes is offline  
post #611 of 4233 Old 05-11-2012, 03:38 AM
Senior Member
 
anta1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Ukraine
Posts: 310
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Very very very thanx!
Thank you very match!!!
anta1974 is offline  
post #612 of 4233 Old 05-11-2012, 03:54 AM
Senior Member
 
Thebes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 447
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Hi,

you're welcome...

As I said, IMHO, this software doesn't need "correction" but only to choose the good "option".
Thebes is offline  
post #613 of 4233 Old 05-11-2012, 01:52 PM
Senior Member
 
65Cobra427SC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Washington PA
Posts: 418
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebes View Post

If you want the real position, you must not take "Use measured colors (when available)" in "preferences" and "general".

I noticed I had the above item selected but I didn't select it on my own so was that the default setting? If not, there may have been an earlier instruction to check that box or I could have done it accidentally...but it's unchecked now

Couple questions...

When adjusting Grayscale, I have an issue using the 30% screen to adjust RGBLowEnd... Green stays fairly stable. Red bounces the most... by as much as 13 percentage points. Blue also bounces but not as much. No issue when I use the 80% screen to adjust RGBHighEnd. Is this typical or is there a problem somewhere?

The CurtPalme instructions for adjusting the Color Control using the AVS HD 709 test disc says to first select the "100% Gray window" to get the Y (luminance or brightness) reading... but it must really mean the "100% White window"... correct?

No matter what I try... I cannot get Red color level within a reasonable distance. Following instructions, I end up with Red at 0.015 distance from reference, and after much tweaking the best I can do is 0.013 distance from reference. Any comments or suggesstions because I'm debating on making a change in the Service Menu of the display (Panny P60ST30) to see if I can nudge it a little closer. Surprisingly Blue and Green are within 0.003 distance from reference.
65Cobra427SC is offline  
post #614 of 4233 Old 05-13-2012, 10:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kjgarrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northwest Wisconsin
Posts: 2,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoyd View Post

Thanks for the link, I hadn't seen that rack-up before. The i1d3 variability results are truly impressive. I think the best approach for plasma users of the d3 will be to get hold of a correction matrix based on a high-end spectrometer but I don't know any DiYers who have one. Barring that the i1pro would be the next best choice, although I was a bit surprised by the mean dE2000 of ~4 for the white point comparison between the i1pro and the reference.

I might have one. I came to this thread looking to figure out how to use my calibrated d3 in HCFR. I need to look at your posts to see how to do all this.

My d3 is an OEM meter from ChromaPure and I'm curious to see if measurements taken with HCFR and CP agree. My certificate of calibration shows WRGB corrections for several types of TV. As you may recall we have the same plasma Samsung 51D8000.

The corrections are all xy format, and the biggest correction for any of the TVs is 0.011. This is the only correction >0.010

For plasma the max is 0.007 and 3 of the 8 corrections are 0.000.

So now to look at the matrix you posted and see if the fact I only have xy correction (no Y, but I think I saw on the CP thread that Y was very accurate.) Also need to see if I have to convert to XYZ as I notice that is what HCFR calls for ...

Too late tonight.
kjgarrison is offline  
post #615 of 4233 Old 05-15-2012, 01:34 AM
Member
 
Stridsvognen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 26
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I just tested the Spyder 4 on my screen, with CRT projector.

It makes very nice dark readings from 0-40% But from 50-100% its a mess, i cant repeat the same values.
When making continious measurements on primary colors its jumping around to.

Im missing the posibility to adjust my reed time. I can generate the same problem with the old HCFR, and the spyder 3 if i put the read time to 1000ms. normaly i run with 3000ms.

Or is that option relocated.?

Stridsvognen is offline  
post #616 of 4233 Old 05-16-2012, 06:12 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
zoyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Planet Dog
Posts: 4,456
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Liked: 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjgarrison View Post

I might have one. I came to this thread looking to figure out how to use my calibrated d3 in HCFR. I need to look at your posts to see how to do all this.

My d3 is an OEM meter from ChromaPure and I'm curious to see if measurements taken with HCFR and CP agree. My certificate of calibration shows WRGB corrections for several types of TV. As you may recall we have the same plasma Samsung 51D8000.

The corrections are all xy format, and the biggest correction for any of the TVs is 0.011. This is the only correction >0.010

For plasma the max is 0.007 and 3 of the 8 corrections are 0.000.

So now to look at the matrix you posted and see if the fact I only have xy correction (no Y, but I think I saw on the CP thread that Y was very accurate.) Also need to see if I have to convert to XYZ as I notice that is what HCFR calls for ...

Too late tonight.

What are the WRGB xy corrections for your plasma? -0.007x appears to be typical (and smaller for y), Y corrections are not really necessary.
zoyd is online now  
post #617 of 4233 Old 05-16-2012, 07:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kjgarrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northwest Wisconsin
Posts: 2,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoyd View Post

What are the WRGB xy corrections for your plasma? -0.007x appears to be typical (and smaller for y), Y corrections are not really necessary.

You mean for my D3? It is that "plasma" was listed as one of the 10 display types my probe was tested against. Not bad, really considering that at most they would round to only 0.01 adjustment. Results below; checked 3 times.

W: 0.007, 0.000
R: 0.007, -0.004
G: 0.006, -0.006
B: 0.000, 0.000

Do you know how to use these to create an XYZ matrix that will work in HCFR?

I made a spreadsheet to convert xyY to XYZ using 'correct to spec' Y values (W: 1.0, R: 0.213, G: 0.715, B: 0.072)

Here is what I get for WHITE. You can see that x correction was 0.007 and y correction was 0.000. Would I use the XYZ for the reference probe?

MY probe | Reference probe

x 0.309 X 0.9224 | x 0.316 X 0.9433
y 0.335 Y 1.0000 | y 0.335 Y 1.0000
Y 1.000 Z 1.0627 | Y 1.000 Z 1.0418
kjgarrison is offline  
post #618 of 4233 Old 05-17-2012, 12:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JohnAd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: London
Posts: 1,725
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stridsvognen View Post

Im missing the posibility to adjust my reed time. I can generate the same problem with the old HCFR, and the spyder 3 if i put the read time to 1000ms. normaly i run with 3000ms.

Or is that option relocated.?

The argyll drivers that we now use don't have direct support for changing the read time. I'm surprised you're seeing issues at higher light levels, what meter options did you pick and would it be possible to send the stderr.log file.

Thanks

John

My Company - Upsilon Software
Free Projects - DScaler & hcfr fork
JohnAd is offline  
post #619 of 4233 Old 05-17-2012, 12:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JohnAd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: London
Posts: 1,725
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Things have been quiet recently, there is some work going however there are a couple of annoying memory and compatibility issues that are preventing a release at the moment, I hope to get to the bottom of these soon.

John

My Company - Upsilon Software
Free Projects - DScaler & hcfr fork
JohnAd is offline  
post #620 of 4233 Old 05-17-2012, 03:31 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
zoyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Planet Dog
Posts: 4,456
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Liked: 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjgarrison View Post
You mean for my D3? It is that "plasma" was listed as one of the 10 display types my probe was tested against. Not bad, really considering that at most they would round to only 0.01 adjustment. Results below; checked 3 times.

W: 0.007, 0.000
R: 0.007, -0.004
G: 0.006, -0.006
B: 0.000, 0.000

Do you know how to use these to create an XYZ matrix that will work in HCFR?

I made a spreadsheet to convert xyY to XYZ using 'correct to spec' Y values (W: 1.0, R: 0.213, G: 0.715, B: 0.072)

Here is what I get for WHITE. You can see that x correction was 0.007 and y correction was 0.000. Would I use the XYZ for the reference probe?

MY probe | Reference probe

x\t0.309 X\t0.9224\t|\tx\t0.316\tX\t0.9433
y\t0.335 Y\t1.0000\t|\ty\t0.335\tY\t1.0000
Y\t1.000 Z\t1.0627\t|\tY\t1.000\tZ\t1.0418
Did you ask Tom for the correction matrix? I don't think you can back it out unless you have the reference points it was corrected to. The nice thing about these probes though is they have very little unit to unit variability. I measured the correction for white against my i1pro2 yesterday and it was 0.0078 for x\t and -0.0012 for y. Plus the fact that the corrections are small I think if you use a 4-color correction built from my i1pro2 your errors will be small enough. It may also be possible to read the corrections using the probe driver, you'd have to ask Graeme about that.

@JohnAD - What's is HCFR's matrix correction algorithm right now? The one in the attached paper is better than rms based algorithms.

 

FourColorCorrection.pdf 39.310546875k . file
Attached Files
File Type: pdf FourColorCorrection.pdf (39.3 KB, 44 views)
zoyd is online now  
post #621 of 4233 Old 05-17-2012, 06:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JohnAd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: London
Posts: 1,725
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoyd View Post

@JohnAD - What's is HCFR's matrix correction algorithm right now? The one in the attached paper is better than rms based algorithms.

It is the one from that paper.

John

My Company - Upsilon Software
Free Projects - DScaler & hcfr fork
JohnAd is offline  
post #622 of 4233 Old 05-17-2012, 07:01 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
zoyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Planet Dog
Posts: 4,456
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Liked: 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnAd View Post

It is the one from that paper.

John

ok, cool, and it computes the Y correction too. So what does it do with the secondaries measurements as they are not needed?
zoyd is online now  
post #623 of 4233 Old 05-17-2012, 08:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kjgarrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northwest Wisconsin
Posts: 2,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoyd View Post

Did you ask Tom for the correction matrix? I don't think you can back it out unless you have the reference points it was corrected to. The nice thing about these probes though is they have very little unit to unit variability. I measured the correction for white against my i1pro2 yesterday and it was 0.0078 for x and -0.0012 for y. Plus the fact that the corrections are small I think if you use a 4-color correction built from my i1pro2 your errors will be small enough. It may also be possible to read the corrections using the probe driver, you'd have to ask Graeme about that.

@JohnAD - What's is HCFR's matrix correction algorithm right now? The one in the attached paper is better than rms based algorithms.

The reference points I provided next to my meter measures are what they provided. You can see that the correction for white x is. 007, y is 0.

They provided the same info for RGB.
kjgarrison is offline  
post #624 of 4233 Old 05-17-2012, 08:21 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
zoyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Planet Dog
Posts: 4,456
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Liked: 315
oh, ok - if you have all the measured and reference locations (and using z=1-x-y) then solve kr and km using eqns. 6 and 7. Then plug the k's into eqns. 1 and 3 and finally solve for R with eqn. 8.
zoyd is online now  
post #625 of 4233 Old 05-17-2012, 04:01 PM
Advanced Member
 
vega509's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Northeast
Posts: 803
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nerd View Post

Thanks.

I am also confused when searching the i1 on ebay and amazon.com, there are 3 names when I search i1 display,

1. i1 display 3
2. i1 display pro 3
3. i1 display pro

All have the same look and cost similarily at around USD250. Are they actually the same?

Xrite.com has only one namely i1 display pro, no 3, but most of you were talking about i1 display 3, how come? I am so confused what to look for.

Will both the retail and the OEM version of the i1 display will work with the new version of HCFR? I'm considering upgrading my d2, but the OEM must be purchased with Chromapure or CalMan. At this point, with the add on licenses price is just getting out of my affordability range for a hobby. I can likely get a retail version for @ $210-$250, where as $420-$589 is the OEM with CP or CM software.
vega509 is offline  
post #626 of 4233 Old 05-17-2012, 07:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kjgarrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northwest Wisconsin
Posts: 2,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoyd View Post

oh, ok - if you have all the measured and reference locations (and using z=1-x-y) then solve kr and km using eqns. 6 and 7. Then plug the k's into eqns. 1 and 3 and finally solve for R with eqn. 8.

OK, this is my first try with matrix math. Here is what I did.

Instead of just using the xy values for WRGB as measured for the two probes, I 'assumed' the reference probe was at Rec709 spec. I then used the correction I was given to create the WRGB xy values that my probe would measure.

Example: white x correction was .007 and y correction was 0 based on .309/.329 for my D3 and .316/.329 for the reference . So I 'shifted' reference to Rec709 spec and used .313/.329 and for my 'measured' probe I used .306/.329. When my probe reads .306/.329 the white point is actually spot on at .313/.329. I don't know enough about matrix math to know if this creates an error, but since those are actually the measurements that would be obtained, I was thinking it wouldn't matter. It just helped me 'see' what I had to do about my measurements in the matrices.

So, after going through my maiden voyage into matrix math, Google and I came up with this final value for R. I had some difficulty deciding how to do in Eqn. 8 the ^ -1. The matrix below is based on this interpretation:

R = Nrgb x (Mrgb ^ -1)

and not R = (Nrgb x Mrgb)^ -1

For those who have seen these corrections entered, does this look like a reasonable one given the xy corrections I've already posted for WRGB?

1.024 0.000 0.000
0.000 0.994 0.000
0.000 0.000 0.987
kjgarrison is offline  
post #627 of 4233 Old 05-18-2012, 02:24 AM
Member
 
Stridsvognen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 26
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnAd View Post

The argyll drivers that we now use don't have direct support for changing the read time. I'm surprised you're seeing issues at higher light levels, what meter options did you pick and would it be possible to send the stderr.log file.

Thanks

John

I tested different meter options, same result. Im 99,9% sure it will be fixed with longer read time. For sure it is not usable at all like this with spyder 4 over 50% IRE.

ill try get somone to help me finding those files for you.. im no good at that stuff..

Stridsvognen is offline  
post #628 of 4233 Old 05-18-2012, 03:38 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
zoyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Planet Dog
Posts: 4,456
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Liked: 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjgarrison View Post

OK, this is my first try with matrix math. Here is what I did.

Instead of just using the xy values for WRGB as measured for the two probes, I 'assumed' the reference probe was at Rec709 spec. I then used the correction I was given to create the WRGB xy values that my probe would measure.

Example: white x correction was .007 and y correction was 0 based on .309/.329 for my D3 and .316/.329 for the reference . So I 'shifted' reference to Rec709 spec and used .313/.329 and for my 'measured' probe I used .306/.329. When my probe reads .306/.329 the white point is actually spot on at .313/.329. I don't know enough about matrix math to know if this creates an error, but since those are actually the measurements that would be obtained, I was thinking it wouldn't matter. It just helped me 'see' what I had to do about my measurements in the matrices.

I don't follow why you are assuming anything, you have the actual measured and reference points. The x,y shifts will be different depending on where you are in the gamut, that's why you need the matrix.

Quote:


So, after going through my maiden voyage into matrix math, Google and I came up with this final value for R. I had some difficulty deciding how to do in Eqn. 8 the ^ -1. The matrix below is based on this interpretation:

R = Nrgb x (Mrgb ^ -1)

and not R = (Nrgb x Mrgb)^ -1

For those who have seen these corrections entered, does this look like a reasonable one given the xy corrections I've already posted for WRGB?

1.024 0.000 0.000
0.000 0.994 0.000
0.000 0.000 0.987

Your interpretation of where the inverse goes is correct but all matrix entries should have a non-zero entry so something didn't work. If you want a shortcut plug the measured and reference points in HCFR and it will do the calculation for you.
zoyd is online now  
post #629 of 4233 Old 05-18-2012, 04:44 AM
Newbie
 
johnegilliam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
This new version of HCFR with my new Spyder Pro 4 is a awesome setup.
Over the years ,I have being preforming lots of different calibrations on my LG 47 LCD and it never look this good.
I too had the problem of the meter not showing up in the drop down list.
After some hours, I realize that Windows was automatically loading a driver that the program will not see the meter.
I went to the Device manager and pointed to the driver in the HCFR folder.
It worked !!
Thank you so much for this software update.
John G
johnegilliam is offline  
post #630 of 4233 Old 05-18-2012, 05:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JohnAd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: London
Posts: 1,725
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoyd View Post

ok, cool, and it computes the Y correction too. So what does it do with the secondaries measurements as they are not needed?

There are 2 places where a correction is made, the matrix correction/meter calibration code within HCFR which uses a (currently slightly broken) 4 colour method and the ccss code in argyll for the i3pro which uses a least squares method. The first lot of code doesn't use secondaries.

John

My Company - Upsilon Software
Free Projects - DScaler & hcfr fork
JohnAd is offline  
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