Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
There is evidence to suggest that once the i1pro has warmed to an operating temperature(heat from light, heat from display) and then a dark reading, the measurement performance settles. However the noise ratio increases for temperature increase (Hi end spectros are cooled for this reason).
However I have found I use the i1pro for the whole process, dispite the low end performance drop off, also I tend to take one or two dark readings then ignore dark reading timers whilst doing main tweaks,then I do dark readings for finishing tweaks. My jeti takes automatic dark readings per measure.
The only real advantage of a C5 over the i1pro is in sub 30% levels, but only if the C5 is profiled. My C5 is an enhanced and 1 year old calibration, yet it has already drifted so far that I have to profile it to be accurate. C5's I feel always need profiling to be used with confedence.
The question if doing 3DLUT with an i1pro is better/worse than a profiled colour meter could be debatible as you are ultimately limited by the accumilated errors of all the devices in use, which includes the source, the display the measurment equipment. Time wise a C5 is not much faster than the i1pro, with LLH off the i1pro is as fast if not faster.
By checking the final result and it returns <3 dE or better for the vast majority of readings then you probably won't do much better than that because you run into the limits of the device abilities.
If you re ran calibrations with both devices many times you will get a scatter of results, all similar but never quite the same, but if the averages fall <3 dE on the whole you won't see any difference.
Masterpiece Calibration Ltd