Originally Posted by CFC
Thank you both for the clarification.
I will try 100/100 first, and if I run into issues I'll look at the other options.
Would the "rounding off AVS/DVE" check box in the preferences account for the triplet differences?
Should I also be using APL patterns since I'm testing a plasma? I've turned off all TV settings like "Dynamic Brightness".
Thanks again for the help,
Hi, you should tick the ''use round down levels'' @ HCFR ''Preferences'' -> ''General'' Tab radio box when you only use DVE or AVSHD calibration disks to provide a fix to grayscale differences you will have when you have it unticked.
AVSHD Window patterns have 14.16% size. They are not ideal for Plasma's because due to it's size they will trigger the ABL circuit. Better to use standard 10-11.11% Windows. I'm not a fan of APL patterns.
75% Stimulus provides (usually) better results because the Luminance of 75% Stimulus Patterns has about 50% of the luminance of 100% Stimulus, so your adjustment point is at the center of the color luminance range.
Using 100% Stimulus Patterns your adjustment point is at the highest end of the luminance range but you will probably have larger errors at lower luminance levels.
This works for some displays / don't work to others, some display has better tracking, so even using 100% Luminance / 100% Saturation pattern, it tracks good other saturation/luminance levels, but needs to test your own display to find out.
There displays where you get better final results when you use 100% Saturation than from 75% Saturation, there others where when you use 100% Saturation Patterns, you have great performance to 100% area more errors to the lower Saturation levels.
When you have to calibrate a display using it's internal available calibration controls, because the gamut control points are only a few (1-Point per color) you have to try to find out which patterns you have to use for your gamut calibration which will provide you less average errors to all measured saturation levels + colorchecker.
There is not any golden rule which says which type of patterns to use to calibrate the CMS for each display model, you have to try to your display these 4 options.
(75%/75% - 75%/100% - 100%/75% - 100%/100%) to find out which type of patterns will provide you lower dE overall, try to calibrate based to one of these options (for example 100SAT/75AMPL) and at the end, measure using 4-Point Saturation / 4-Point Luminance / ColorChecker / Fleshtones.
Later re-calibrate your display using another option (for example 75SAT/75AMPL) and remeasure at the end with Saturation/Luminance/ColorChecker etc... and compare these 2 reports to see what patterns are providing you lower dE numbers.
The average Caucasian skin tone resides well away from any grey scale, or primary color. That's why you have to check ColorChecker because it contains skin tones, grass, sky, etc.; which are memory colors.
Initially it will take some time to measure these 4 pattern options to find which patterns are providing better performance but next time you will know which patterns to use for that specific display you are calibrating.
This is happening because you have only 1 control point for each color of Gamut Calibration, so you have to find which point you will use (% Saturation/ % Luminance)...think that you have a display with 1-point Grayscale.....where you have to test to see which grayscale pattern will balance better the whole grayscale and provide the lower errors, from 10% Gray till 100% White.
Usually it's better to do 75% Saturation / 75% Intensity or 75% Saturation / 100% Intensity calibration, where you will improve the color tracking of primary color saturations internally; which is more important from having better performance (less dE errors) only to the gamut edges (100% Saturation).
For problematic display where you want to have the best possible performance at every area, you have to move to 3D LUT calibration/profiling, this will correct multiple saturation/intensity/hue levels.
When you have only a few internal display calibration controls to handle some million colors performance, usually you will have low dE using the patterns you used to do Gamut calibrations and moving away from these colors the errors will be increased, so the more points you will measure, the more errors you will discover. (see there an example
If you want to get the best possible color accuracy to many different hue/saturation/luminance levels, then you have to move to 3D LUT display characterization solution.
If you use HTPC for watching your movies, you can use DisplayCAL (from free solution side, of CalMAN/LightSpace HTL from paid software side) with a software player which support MadVR as a renderer. So DisplayCAL/LightSpace/CalMAN will control the MadVR patch software generator and create a collection file for 65-Point Cube (about 275.000 points...using eeColor 65-Point file format).
If you are using a stand alone blu-ray player or media player for movie playback then you have to get a 3D LUT box which you will hook up between your source and the TV, so the correction file will be loaded to that device.....there a lot of solutions in the market for this job (only eeColor 3D LUT Box is supported from the free software solution DisplayCAL, CalMAN/LightSpace HTL from paid software side..I have posted a list of available 3D LUT Boxes of global market here: CMS controls broken
With 3D LUT you will have to do only basic setup from your internal calibration controls, contrast/brightness/sharpness, find native gamut and pre-calibrate only 100% White.
I have posted some results from 3D LUT corretion using an LG OLED here
, and the Pioneer KURO there
Moving to 3D LUT, it will save you some thousand new hours of trying different patterns and different values of internal calibration controls to minimize your color errors.
Also a good read about deltaE is here: http://www.lightillusion.com/delta-e.html