Satisfaction with 3D LUT calibrations? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 75 Old 04-28-2014, 08:53 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
lbosley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have been lurking in these forums for some time now gathering information about the calibration tools and technologies emerging around LUT’s. I am about 80% ready to make an investment and join your ranks. But the one thing that seems lacking in all of the discussion is a tangible sense of satisfaction from the owners of these products. I would be very interested in hearing from some of you – not about your test results, but about your perceived overall return on investment. If you spent $2k-$5k (or more) on a total solution (meter, auto-calibration software, 3D-LUT processor, etc.) did you feel a sense of money well spent, or have you honestly had a few moments of second guessing because the final results were less than expected? I know that much of this involves personal expectations and an uncompromising desire for the best. You don’t stumble into a calibration forum without having some interest in perfection. But answer this question honestly. If you had no knowledge of the long rows of low dE results filling your final calibration report, would you be willing to spend what you laid out for the noticeable difference in your display? Sell me folks. Tell me roughly about your investment, your tools, your expectations, and your subjective results.

Thank you for your honesty.
lbosley is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 75 Old 04-28-2014, 10:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Manni01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,221
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 48 Post(s)
Liked: 93
Hi there,

The added value of a 3D LUT calibration is entirely relative to how your display tracks at various levels of luminance and saturation once corrected using its internal controls.

For example, on my JVC X30 which has poor OOTB calibration, no internal CMS and uncorrectable green and cyan at 100% sat, a 3D LUT calibration even with a small LUT (5x5x5) with a Lumagen Mini was like getting a new display. Litterally day and night. Moving from really frustrating to close to perfection (from a color accuracy point of view). I'm sure it would get marginally better with a larger LUT, 9x9x9 or 17x17x17. But even a small LUT made a significant difference, well worth the cost of the hardware+software (to me).

On the other hand, when I evaluated a Sony 500ES recently, it measured so close to reference OOTB at all levels of saturation and luminance (I measured the 125 points of a non calibrated LUT and all points were under 3dEs) that a 3D LUT (at least a 125 points one, I didn't test with a VP offering a larger LUT) would bring very little to this display - in my set up, it might be different with a less neutral screen for example - from a calibration point of view.

Of course the display will drift as the lamp ages, especially regarding gamma, so more corrections would likely be needed after a few hundred hours, but the Sony software allowing to calibrate gamma, along with the autocalibration feature to bring it back to OOTB state might suffice in that case.

So the first thing to do would be to measure your display and see if it tracks well or not at various levels of luminance and saturation. If it tracks well, save the money, or get the equipment for other - valid - reasons, like upscaling, processing, flexibility, etc. If it doesn't track well, then the worse it tracks, the more you'll stand to gain from a good 3D LUT calibration.

This being said, it's also relative to how sensitive you are to color accuracy. I know many who are perfectly happy with a non calibrated JVC, or even with a JVC calibrated using their poor internal CMS. So you need to provide more information, both about your display and your personal standards to get informed replies.

One last thing, it's all great to use low-end meters to get "perfect" calibration, but at the end of the day you only get a calibration as good as your meter. So if the errors to start with are large (like on most JVC), you can only benefit from a calibration, even with a low end meter like an i1d3. But if the errors are small to start with (like on the Sony 500ES), you need reference equipment, otherwise you are calibrating to the meter, not to reference. A lot of people are also struggling with this notion, and obsess about getting down to the last .5 dE of accuracy, when the meter itself might be 3 dEs off or more.

Overall, spend as much as you want to, but only if something frustrates you in the picture, and if you know what it is. Otherwise, save your money to buy a better display or more movies. That would be my advice smile.gif.

PS: One very last thing: although software and hardware manufacturers want you to believe that it's easy to simply set up a meter and press one button to get a perfect calibration, in my experience you need to invest quite a lot of time to get good results, even with autocalibration. So unless you want to invest a good amount of time learning, I would suggest to dissociate the hardware - say a Lumagen (or an eecolor if you don't care about 3D) - and the software+meters. Getting the hardware installed by a good calibrator not only saves you money - no need to buy meters or software - but also a lot of time and headaches. You can spend more time watching movies and less time with meters, software, patterns and bugs. If you are technically minded, calibration can be a great hobby and a fantastic way to waste a lot of time, especially during long winter nights:). However you might end up spending more time calibrating than watching movies, so beware...
GeorgeAB, JimP, WiFi-Spy and 3 others like this.
Manni01 is online now  
post #3 of 75 Old 04-28-2014, 02:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 6,987
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)
Liked: 258
Great post Manni
Manni01 likes this.

Contributing Editor/Writer
Sound And Vision Magazine

Click Here To See My Current Setup
Kris Deering is offline  
post #4 of 75 Old 04-28-2014, 03:00 PM
Advanced Member
 
kaotikr1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Scottsbluff, NE
Posts: 849
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manni01 View Post

Hi there,


One last thing, it's all great to use low-end meters to get "perfect" calibration, but at the end of the day you only get a calibration as good as your meter. So if the errors to start with are large (like on most JVC), you can only benefit from a calibration, even with a low end meter like an i1d3. But if the errors are small to start with (like on the Sony 500ES), you need reference equipment, otherwise you are calibrating to the meter, not to reference. A lot of people are also struggling with this notion, and obsess about getting down to the last .5 dE of accuracy, when the meter itself might be 3 dEs off or more.

Manni01,

What about the service that say Tom with Chromapure offers where you can send your D3Pro back to him to have a correction file for it when he profiles it against a reference device...?
kaotikr1 is offline  
post #5 of 75 Old 04-28-2014, 03:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Rolls-Royce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Victorville, CA
Posts: 1,991
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaotikr1 View Post

Manni01,

What about the service that say Tom with Chromapure offers where you can send your D3Pro back to him to have a correction file for it when he profiles it against a reference device...?

For the best accuracy, the meter should be profiled on the display it will be used with. If the display a vendor uses to profile the meter is close to yours, say within that magical 3 dE, then that profile will probably be good enough. But IMHO, if it's farther off, you could be wasting your time and money having it profiled under those circumstances.

...Royce...

"I never drink...wine."
Bela Lugosi, DRACULA, 1931
Rolls-Royce is offline  
post #6 of 75 Old 04-28-2014, 03:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 9,723
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 368 Post(s)
Liked: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by lbosley View Post

I have been lurking in these forums for some time now gathering information about the calibration tools and technologies emerging around LUT’s. I am about 80% ready to make an investment and join your ranks. But the one thing that seems lacking in all of the discussion is a tangible sense of satisfaction from the owners of these products. I would be very interested in hearing from some of you – not about your test results, but about your perceived overall return on investment. If you spent $2k-$5k (or more) on a total solution (meter, auto-calibration software, 3D-LUT processor, etc.) did you feel a sense of money well spent, or have you honestly had a few moments of second guessing because the final results were less than expected? I know that much of this involves personal expectations and an uncompromising desire for the best. You don’t stumble into a calibration forum without having some interest in perfection. But answer this question honestly. If you had no knowledge of the long rows of low dE results filling your final calibration report, would you be willing to spend what you laid out for the noticeable difference in your display? Sell me folks. Tell me roughly about your investment, your tools, your expectations, and your subjective results.
It depends on a variety of factors related to your specific display. If you can get the the primaries calibrated correctly with the CMS, the color mixing math is correct, the greyscale can be made reasonably flat, and the gamma on target... You'll gain virtually nothing from a 3D LUT.

If your display has a bad CMS where you can't get the primaries dialed in and/or the color mixing math is all messed up, or the gamma is out of whack and can't be corrected, or the greyscale is all over the place and can't be corrected... You'll gain a lot from a 3D LUT.

What TV/projector do you have?
Stereodude is online now  
post #7 of 75 Old 04-28-2014, 05:15 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
lbosley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I am using a 65" Panasonic plasma (GT50) for my home theater viewing - not reference, but a decent panel. I started with a VT30 not long before this model but the calibration was such total frustration I actually returned it and opted for the less expensive and newer model. I am also a DVDO Duo veteran, with a fair amount of calibration experience and enthusiasm. I love the plasma, but I still miss my old Pioneer Elite RPTV (alignment and calibration warts and all).

Manni01 gives a very sound answer to my question of cost/benefit. I appreciate the perspective of display performance and tracking, and I admit to being less than satisfied with the OOTB performance. I am very much color aware, and I can recognize subtle inaccuracies in a display. Like most of you I have spent long nights and weekends in from of my televisions measuring color patterns and producing very nice reports. It interests me, and there is an undeniable satisfaction in creating a picture that others are compelled to compliment. I guess I just want to be done with it. If you calibrate I think you know what I mean - to be able to relax and watch your television rather than look at it and over-evaluate.

I have seriously considered the ChromaPure bundle idea. I really love the software, but I had a weird experience with a meter I purchased from Tom a while back. Every calibration I performed with this meter ended with a visible shift towards red. Results with my old meter were head and shoulders above the new (calibrated D3Pro) meter. I admit it could have been something I was doing, but it remained consistent in several attempts. Still a little snake-bit, I guess. Maybe instead of a new meter a calibration service from a professional would be a better investment?

I know it's very early for a ton of responses, but it seems interesting that only one post mentions their actual experience. Again, this prompts my concern. Maybe there are very few folks out there with 3D LUT calibrations in their home, or they aren't sharing much of their experience? It seems like a 'wow' concept to me, but if you need a $7,000 meter to make it really worth it, is it?
lbosley is offline  
post #8 of 75 Old 04-28-2014, 07:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Doug Blackburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Francisco - East Bay area
Posts: 3,453
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 218
This is something that is impossible to assign any sort of meaningful cost/benefit ratio. You either want the display to be accurate (as it can be made) or you don't care enough to worry about it. If you do care if the display is accurate, only you can decide if spending $XXXX is OK for YOU or not. One thing to consider... the equipment you buy today is likely to be obsolete in 5 years because we will (likely) be transitioning to a new video system replacing HDTV with whatever comes next. If you had bought equipment in 2006 and you wanted 3D in 2011, that 2006 equipment would have been obsolete too. Home video and home theater are changing fast enough that you can't consider today's purchase something that will stand the test of time... beyond 4 to 6 years anyway. Meters also "decay" over time unless they lean more towards spectroradiomete types (cheap ones are slow, fast ones that that read low light levels well are expensive). You can' assume that any meter can be recalibrated...some can, some can't (or the manufacturer may not offer calibration of those meters). You can "characterize" a meter which consists of making 1 or more measurements with a known-good reference meter then making the same measurement with your meter and the software will create a file that will "correct" your meter (sort of, works well most of the time), but the calibration software you use has to support that function or you can't do it.

Some meters are not suitable for measuring light reflected from projection screens so if you think you might be using a projector at any point, select your meter carefully.

There are 2 other factors that are almost never mentioned:

If you have never seen content on an accurate video display, you don't really know what accurate looks like. And your eyes will mess you up if you try to "calibrate" without a meter. So you do need a meter to do this right, but you won't know you are right if the meter isn't good enough to calibrate your particular type of display. Some of the less expensive meters have trouble with CCFL, LED or projection lamp light sources while they do OK with phosphor light sources (CRT and plasma). If your considering spending 4 figures on hardware and software, you won't have that problem with your meter as long as you don't go for a sub-$200 meter (though even some of them are useful on the right sorts of displays).

Once you have your calibrated (and perhaps LUTed) display operating with a good cal and LUT, over a week or two it will become "normal" and you will lose the excitement of seeing everything "right", perhaps for the first time. "Right" will become normal and you will get over the newness. What does stay is the knowledge that your setup is as accurate as it can be, but that seems to not be enough for some people.

If your budget is as high as you indicated, your best bet is probably to get one of the 2XXX series Lumagen Radiance Video Processors, a meter, and software. The Radiance processors support 9x9x9 LUTS (729 points, not the most you can get, but you can't get a LUT box with more points than a Radiance processor that also has Darbee Visual Presence processing, Lumagen;s proprietary SD upconversion, 4 memories, so many settings that are so customizable that the Radiance does things no other video processor can do (and can do far more than any LUT box can do). And the Radiance allows you to calibrate grayscale and CMS just like "normal" PLUS add the 729-point LUT corrections. You can customize gamma, and customize almost anything you can think of. You can have separate calibrattions for 2D and 3D, separate calibrations for day and night, or just about any reason for making a custom calibration. The Radiance processors also have built-in test patterns and can be controlled via USB/Serial by the calibration software (provided the calibration software supports that, something to consider when picking calibration software). Automated patterns is a big help when calibrating. You get real tired of navigating a disc for calibration patterns after a while - and discs don't have the colors you need for the LUT patterns anyway. So the LUT box or Radiance (or standalone pattern generator) has to be able to generate custom pattern colors when creating the LUT. If you get a video pattern generator that only has patterns in red, blue, green, cyan, yellow, magenta, white, gray, and black, you won't be able to create a LUT.


Anyway... just some things to think about...
GeorgeAB likes this.

"Movies is magic..." Van Dyke Parks
THX Certified Professional Video Calibration
ISF -- HAA -- www.dBtheatrical.com
Widescreen Review -- Home Theater & Sound
Doug Blackburn is offline  
post #9 of 75 Old 04-28-2014, 11:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Manni01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,221
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 48 Post(s)
Liked: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaotikr1 View Post

Manni01,

What about the service that say Tom with Chromapure offers where you can send your D3Pro back to him to have a correction file for it when he profiles it against a reference device...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolls-Royce View Post

For the best accuracy, the meter should be profiled on the display it will be used with. If the display a vendor uses to profile the meter is close to yours, say within that magical 3 dE, then that profile will probably be good enough. But IMHO, if it's farther off, you could be wasting your time and money having it profiled under those circumstances.

Agreed with RR, although I would add that the reference meter should also be more accurate than the target meter. For example, when I got an i1d3 (which is a great entry level meter, except for its low light performance which isn't as good as I was hoping for and varies from unit to unit), it was very close to my i1pro2 when measuring my display, so I had no idea which meter was closer to reference. The i1pro2 might have helped on a different display technology, but on LCOS with this specific i1d3 I didn't use profiling because it would only make the results slightly different, not necessarily closer to reference, as I have no way to know how close to reference my i1pro2 is (even if I believe it to be close enough given the excellent results I get with it).

This is why it becomes complicated as soon as you want accuracy, rather than just a picture with no obvious flaw.

It's fairly easy and inexpensive to get 90% there and make a big difference to the display. To go further, you either need a good calibrator with reference equipment, or to spend a lot of money.

The compromise I found was to get an i1pro2 as a spectro that I use as a reference meter, and a Discus that I train to the i1pro2 (on my display) to get speed and low light accuracy. This combo is better than anything else I used before, but it's not reference level equipment.

To go closer to reference, I would need something like a Jeti 1211, and for better speed on larger LUTs I would need at least a Klein K10a. These would pay for a good calibrator to come to your house every six months with the latest equipment for the rest of your life and deliver reference results...

To go back to the OP's question, it goes down to much you enjoy fine-tuning your display and spending time and money doing it. If it's not too late for you, I would really suggest hiring a good calibrator with reference equipment (at least the jeti + Klein combo I mentionned) and let him do your display at least once. You might also ask, in your negociation with the calibrator, for him to measure your meter compared to their reference, so see where it's wrong and by how much. But at least you'd get an idea of what as close to reference your display allows looks like, and how far your meter is. From there, you can decide if it's worth investing thousands of dollars to try to replicate these results yourself, or if you prefer the idea of paying a few hundred dollars whenever your display drifts for someone to come with up to date software and equipment and calibrate your display.

I agree with Doug that a Radiance is a great tool to have, and one that I would personally find difficult to live without. The very latest models will soon be f/w upgradable to a larger 17x17x17 LUT which will be supported by most calibration software out there, so if your display isn't linear at all they might be worth considering (as long as you don't need 4K inputs, as these are still not HDMI 2.0 / HDCP 2.2 compatible).

Maybe the right compromise is to invest more in the hardware and pay for someone to calibrate it? But if you're already bitten by the calibration bug, it might be too late. I know it's too late to save myself... smile.gif

Good luck in your quest!
Manni01 is online now  
post #10 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 02:05 AM
Advanced Member
 
Iron Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 351
lbosley,

get the 3D LUT cal... u won't regret it... it's industry standard in the broadcast and film industry, and u can get (nowadays) very close to that standard - or even exceed it.... what a great time for HT enthusiasts... 3D LUT calibration is by far the best calibration u can achieve nowadays.

it doesn't have to be above 2K.. here's a minimum package with rough prices:

i1D3 OEM (don't get RETAIL version): US$230
i1Pro rev D (used or new off eBay): US$250 (max)
eeColor (65^3 LUT box): US$699 (includes shipping)
LS HCL (Home Cinema Light): GBP400 roughly US$675 (depending on currency exchange rate)
Add-ons and enhancements: DCT Premium US$69 (current promotion) and Ted's disk US$29

Total: ca. US$1,952

You will get an outstanding image with this setup. There's plenty of cal results here and elsewhere on the web. There's peeps who did eeColor 3D LUT cals on a crappy 600 dollar best buy LCD... the eeColor box (and Lightspace) improved the image dramatically... (obviously) ultimately the only limiting factor are the hardware capabilities of the screen... eeColor is a dream come true.

Most importantly, u can use this setup on every TV now or in the future, except when u go 4K... the eeColor only does 1080p, but IMO (true, non-streamed, non-extra-compressed, non-washed-out) 4k content which is readily available and 4K LUT boxes are (unfortunately) a bit away...

Regarding other posts here that claim "once u get the primaries right the rest of the gamut falls picture perfect in place".... absolutely not the case... not even on Pro US$12K very linear screens... it does help, but u can do better... peeps who say that have never run a 1K or 2K validation set on the gamut of their 3pt calibrated screens, otherwise they would know... thorough validation bursts a lot of bubbles... biggrin.gif

there's a reason that even on the most linear Pro grade US$20K+ screens Pros use a large 3D LUT...

regarding learning curve: won't take long... it is actually easier than 3pt/6pt cals... it's all about understanding the process and finding the best pre-profile display setup...

Hope this helps and let me know if u need more detailed info.

- Mike

P.S.: To actually answer your question: yes, ULTIMATE SATISFACTION with an image made in heaven... biggrin.gif

calibration & profiling solutions: Lightspace, Spaceman, Calman, Argyll, ColorNavigator, basICColor
profiling & calibration workflow tools: Display Calibration Tools
meter: Klein K-10 A, i1Pro, i1D3
AVS thread: Lightspace & Custom Color Patch Set & Gamma Calibration on Panasonic 65VT60
Iron Mike is offline  
post #11 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 05:18 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 9,723
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 368 Post(s)
Liked: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Mike View Post

get the 3D LUT cal... u won't regret it... it's industry standard in the broadcast and film industry, and u can get (nowadays) very close to that standard - or even exceed it.... what a great time for HT enthusiasts... 3D LUT calibration is by far the best calibration u can achieve nowadays.
This has to be the worst advice in the thread. Until he knows how off his far off his current display is from the standard there's no way you can possibly tell him the magnitude of the improvement a 3D LUT will bring.
Quote:
Regarding other posts here that claim "once u get the primaries right the rest of the gamut falls picture perfect in place".... absolutely not the case... not even on Pro US$12K very linear screens... it does help, but u can do better... peeps who say that have never run a 1K or 2K validation set on the gamut of their 3pt calibrated screens, otherwise they would know... thorough validation bursts a lot of bubbles... biggrin.gif
Perhaps you can point out where anyone said that in this thread. You're promising him huge improvements from a 3D LUT that might not be there.

Frankly he'd be better off paying the ~$400 to have a well respected ISF guy come out and characterize / calibrate what he has with their Klein. After that they would be in a very good position to tell him how much he might gain by going with a 3D LUT. If you're considering spending several thousand dollars why not spend ~$400 and find out if you need it first.
Chad B and chunon like this.
Stereodude is online now  
post #12 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 05:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
chunon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Wilmington Ohio
Posts: 4,935
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 84 Post(s)
Liked: 459
^^^Good points a traditional calibration will get him a very good result. The GT50 has no major problems and is a very good display.
Chad B likes this.

65VT60
55ST60
Sony BDV-F7 3dbluray/soundbar
Calman Enthusiast
Dish Network with Hopper/Super Joey
chunon is offline  
post #13 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 05:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chad B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Piqua, OH
Posts: 2,042
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 314
Absolutely, I own a GT50 and it is basically a well behaved display with no strange color saturation or luminance problems. It lacks adjustments, but that can be easily handled by the DVDO Duo, which I believe lbosley stated he either owns or has experience with.
Chad B is online now  
post #14 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 05:55 AM
Advanced Member
 
Citation4444's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Georgia Mountains
Posts: 884
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post

It depends on a variety of factors related to your specific display. If you can get the the primaries calibrated correctly with the CMS, the color mixing math is correct, the greyscale can be made reasonably flat, and the gamma on target... You'll gain virtually nothing from a 3D LUT.
 

Not generally good advice.  There are many displays that exhibit correct primaries, grayscale and gamma that go to pot within the color cube and benefit greatly from a 3D LUT.

Citation4444 is offline  
post #15 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 10:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 9,723
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 368 Post(s)
Liked: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by Citation4444 View Post

Not generally good advice.  There are many displays that exhibit correct primaries, grayscale and gamma that go to pot within the color cube and benefit greatly from a 3D LUT.
The comment was spot on. You present a scenario where the color mixing math is not correct. That was one of the stipulations I made in my post for a scenario where the 3D LUT wouldn't help.
Stereodude is online now  
post #16 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 01:23 PM
Advanced Member
 
Iron Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post

This has to be the worst advice in the thread. Until he knows how off his far off his current display is from the standard there's no way you can possibly tell him the magnitude of the improvement a 3D LUT will bring.
Perhaps you can point out where anyone said that in this thread. You're promising him huge improvements from a 3D LUT that might not be there.

Frankly he'd be better off paying the ~$400 to have a well respected ISF guy come out and characterize / calibrate what he has with their Klein. After that they would be in a very good position to tell him how much he might gain by going with a 3D LUT. If you're considering spending several thousand dollars why not spend ~$400 and find out if you need it first.

u don't seem to understand the concept of calibration and more importantly validation at all...

Obviously, nobody here made any "promises of improvement" - naturally I don't know the current state of his set and you don't know the current state of his set, but even if his set was "perfect" right now (which no set ever is), EVERY SET WILL DRIFT OVER TIME. Always.

3D LUTs are by far the best calibration possible today. And fortunately very affordable.

Like I said, why don't u run a simple 1K validation set on your 3pt / 6pt cal........ ? Why don't u run a 1K validation set on a screen that was 3pt calibrated by a "Pro"...... ? Yes, I thought so.... And it's not the "fault" of the calibrator, there's nothing more he can do with limited controls.

the eeColor will blow all of your 3pt cals / 10 pt GS away...... 274,625 correction points with 65 pt GS..... biggrin.gif The Lumagen with (less correction points) will do too.

And which "respected ISF guy" should come out and characterize / calibrate his screen to find out if he "needs" a 3D LUT cal ? biggrin.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gif

In order to accurately guess the "improvement" of a 3D LUT you would have to do (besides other things) a full 6pt cal and then a full 1K/2K val - which again you pay for... and 99% of "Pro calibrators" don't do 3D LUTs, they have don't have the knowledge or the equipment and they don't want to spend the time... that is the reality - besides that the client would need a LUT holder anyways. In order to know the difference you would have to do a full 3D LUT cal and then compare.... would be an eye opener for u, that is for sure...

How many 3D LUTs have you done ?

sorry man, but what you say makes little sense... if at all. You recommend he gets an inferior (but def better than nothing) 3pt cal a few times while he could own the equipment to do superior calibrations himself for the rest of his life....

Give a man a fish and he eats for one day, teach a man to fish.... you know the rest wink.gif

again, regarding the OP I don't know anybody and that includes here or on any other forum that has regretted investing in 3D LUT equipment.

I have the K10-A and it's the best meter ever, but no you don't need it for any cal approach....
buzzard767 likes this.

calibration & profiling solutions: Lightspace, Spaceman, Calman, Argyll, ColorNavigator, basICColor
profiling & calibration workflow tools: Display Calibration Tools
meter: Klein K-10 A, i1Pro, i1D3
AVS thread: Lightspace & Custom Color Patch Set & Gamma Calibration on Panasonic 65VT60
Iron Mike is offline  
post #17 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 01:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 9,723
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 368 Post(s)
Liked: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Mike View Post

u don't seem to understand the concept of calibration and more importantly validation at all...

Obviously, nobody here made any "promises of improvement" - naturally I don't know the current state of his set and you don't know the current state of his set, but even if his set was "perfect" right now (which no set ever is), EVERY SET WILL DRIFT OVER TIME. Always.

3D LUTs are by far the best calibration possible today. And fortunately very affordable.

Like I said, why don't u run a simple 1K validation set on your 3pt / 6pt cal........ ? Why don't u run a 1K validation set on a screen that was 3pt calibrated by a "Pro"...... ? Yes, I thought so.... And it's not the "fault" of the calibrator, there's nothing more he can do with limited controls.

the eeColor will blow all of your 3pt cals / 10 pt GS away...... 274,625 correction points with 65 pt GS..... biggrin.gif The Lumagen with (less correction points) will do too.

And which "respected ISF guy" should come out and characterize / calibrate his screen to find out if he "needs" a 3D LUT cal ? biggrin.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gif

In order to accurately guess the "improvement" of a 3D LUT you would have to do (besides other things) a full 6pt cal and then a full 1K/2K val - which again you pay for... and 99% of "Pro calibrators" don't do 3D LUTs, they have don't have the knowledge or the equipment and they don't want to spend the time... that is the reality - besides that the client would need a LUT holder anyways. In order to know the difference you would have to do a full 3D LUT cal and then compare.... would be an eye opener for u, that is for sure...

How many 3D LUTs have you done ?

sorry man, but what you say makes little sense... if at all. You recommend he gets an inferior (but def better than nothing) 3pt cal a few times while he could own the equipment to do superior calibrations himself for the rest of his life....

Give a man a fish and he eats for one day, teach a man to fish.... you know the rest wink.gif

again, regarding the OP I don't know anybody and that includes here or on any other forum that has regretted investing in 3D LUT equipment.

I have the K10-A and it's the best meter ever, but no you don't need it for any cal approach....
Contradict yourself much? In your first post he won't regret it, but now you're not promising any specific improvement while at the same time saying it will be an eye opener... rolleyes.gif

I'd go through your posts and play the compare and contrast game pointing out all the other times you've said conflicting things with just two posts in this thread, but it's not worth my effort. I'll just leave you to your soapbox, conflicting posts, and smug sense of superiority.
gwgill likes this.
Stereodude is online now  
post #18 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 02:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chad B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Piqua, OH
Posts: 2,042
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 314
If Mike, SS, Buzz, or someone else will provide me with a 1000 pt validation color patch set that can be plugged into CalMAN 5's color checker, next time I do a ZT/VT60 I will run it if I have time. Then I can post the results here with results broken down into dE L, C, H and dE2000 to compare with a LUT result.
Chad B is online now  
post #19 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 02:03 PM
Advanced Member
 
Iron Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post

Contradict yourself much? In your first post he won't regret it, but now you're not promising any specific improvement while at the same time saying it will be an eye opener... rolleyes.gif

I'd go through your posts and play the compare and contrast game pointing out all the other times you've said conflicting things with just two posts in this thread, but it's not worth my effort. I'll just leave you to your soapbox, conflicting posts, and smug sense of superiority.

How many 3D LUTs have you done ?

While your posts merely contain wild guesses and questionable advice, I do applaud u for not posting further with no real world experience. smile.gif

calibration & profiling solutions: Lightspace, Spaceman, Calman, Argyll, ColorNavigator, basICColor
profiling & calibration workflow tools: Display Calibration Tools
meter: Klein K-10 A, i1Pro, i1D3
AVS thread: Lightspace & Custom Color Patch Set & Gamma Calibration on Panasonic 65VT60
Iron Mike is offline  
post #20 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 02:05 PM
Advanced Member
 
Iron Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad B View Post

If Mike, SS, Buzz, or someone else will provide me with a 1000 pt validation color patch set that can be plugged into CalMAN 5's color checker, next time I do a ZT/VT60 I will run it if I have time. Then I can post the results here with results broken down into dE L, C, H and dE2000 to compare with a LUT result.

Chad, will do !

Sotti posted details on how to create and import custom patch sets into CM so it will be possible.

calibration & profiling solutions: Lightspace, Spaceman, Calman, Argyll, ColorNavigator, basICColor
profiling & calibration workflow tools: Display Calibration Tools
meter: Klein K-10 A, i1Pro, i1D3
AVS thread: Lightspace & Custom Color Patch Set & Gamma Calibration on Panasonic 65VT60
Iron Mike is offline  
post #21 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 02:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chad B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Piqua, OH
Posts: 2,042
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Mike View Post

Chad, will do !

Sotti posted details on how to create and import custom patch sets into CM so it will be possible.
Sounds good. Yes, I have actually done some custom patch sets on my own, but with many fewer points.
Chad B is online now  
post #22 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 02:09 PM
Advanced Member
 
Iron Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad B View Post

Sounds good. Yes, I have actually done some custom patch sets on my own, but with many fewer points.

yeah, it takes forever entering each point manually.... eek.gif

calibration & profiling solutions: Lightspace, Spaceman, Calman, Argyll, ColorNavigator, basICColor
profiling & calibration workflow tools: Display Calibration Tools
meter: Klein K-10 A, i1Pro, i1D3
AVS thread: Lightspace & Custom Color Patch Set & Gamma Calibration on Panasonic 65VT60
Iron Mike is offline  
post #23 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 02:20 PM
Member
 
1forsnow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 172
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Mike View Post

yeah, it takes forever entering each point manually.... eek.gif

Why cant you just open up a calman workflow with a 3d lut page, go into the basic workflow options, select your luminance and saturation data points, and just do a read all action instead of autocal?
1forsnow is online now  
post #24 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 02:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sotti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 6,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Mike View Post

Chad, will do !

Sotti posted details on how to create and import custom patch sets into CM so it will be possible.

If there is a standard large set that has been the basis of testing we could easily add that.

I've also been rolling around in my head the idea to extend our Custom Colorset tool to be able to generate N-number of random patches. I wouldn't want anyone to think we've optimized for the test set.
Chad B likes this.

Joel Barsotti
SpectraCal
CalMAN Lead Developer
sotti is offline  
post #25 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 02:39 PM
Advanced Member
 
Iron Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1forsnow View Post

Why cant you just open up a calman workflow with a 3d lut page, go into the basic workflow options, select your luminance and saturation data points, and just do a read all action instead of autocal?

First I'm not sure which points CM offers to select, but more importantly I want to validate various points throughout the gamut, not just a limited selection by CM....

Second, u would want to make sure that ur val patch set contains (some) points that were profiled, (some) points that were interpolated and then (some) points that are not part of the LUT... now keep in mind people use CM and their reports to validate 3pt/6pt cals, CM LUTs, LS LUTs and then Argyll LUTs... all done with different profiling points... so these val patch sets would vary quite a bit if u incorporate the additional logic...

then u want options to scale these validation sets to 1K, 2K, 3K etc depending on ur time, meter etc.... plus u might wanna cut < 10% brt for i1D3 & Co.... otherwise it can contaminate ur results...

in addition there will always be needs for people who want to emphasize a specific region of the gamut (e.g. Red region), because their display/PJ performs poorly there...

calibration & profiling solutions: Lightspace, Spaceman, Calman, Argyll, ColorNavigator, basICColor
profiling & calibration workflow tools: Display Calibration Tools
meter: Klein K-10 A, i1Pro, i1D3
AVS thread: Lightspace & Custom Color Patch Set & Gamma Calibration on Panasonic 65VT60
Iron Mike is offline  
post #26 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 02:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chad B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Piqua, OH
Posts: 2,042
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 314
Chad B is online now  
post #27 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 03:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 9,723
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 368 Post(s)
Liked: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Mike View Post

How many 3D LUTs have you done ?

While your posts merely contain wild guesses and questionable advice, I do applaud u for not posting further with no real world experience. smile.gif
Hold on while I get out my yardstick so we can compare measurements. rolleyes.gif

I see you're projecting and shifting positions yet again. I'm using common sense. He should understand where he's at vs. where he wants to go before spending $2-5k on gear. You're the one making wild guesses and big promises. You're encouraging him to spend a lot of money without knowing if it would be money well spent.

Would you tell someone that they need to go due east to get to New York City without first finding out where they are now?

By the way, you might want to hold your applause. I didn't say I wouldn't be posting further. Your reading comprehension seems to be as poor as your grasp of logic.
LarryInRI likes this.
Stereodude is online now  
post #28 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 04:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
Iron Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post

Hold on while I get out my yardstick so we can compare measurements. rolleyes.gif

I see you're projecting and shifting positions yet again. I'm using common sense. He should understand where he's at vs. where he wants to go before spending $2-5k on gear. You're the one making wild guesses and big promises. You're encouraging him to spend a lot of money without knowing if it would be money well spent.

Would you tell someone that they need to go due east to get to New York City without first finding out where they are now?

By the way, you might want to hold your applause. I didn't say I wouldn't be posting further. Your reading comprehension seems to be as poor as your grasp of logic.

q.e.d.

u have no real world experience and u try to use what u call "common sense" to assess what is the best calibration for his set that u have never seen, touched or evaluated ?

3D LUTs are the best calibration possible. What you or he "needs" is an entirely different story. Please learn to separate the two. As I explained before, no matter where his set is now, it will drift even further... and guess what the best calibration is to adjust it to your color target then..... ? yes, 3D LUTs.

besides all of that, the OP is asking... "I would be very interested in hearing from some of you... about your perceived overall return on investment."..... "Tell me roughly about your investment, your tools, your expectations, and your subjective results."

I personally have calibrated MANY screens using all approaches via cal disks, via 3pt/6pts, via ICC and via 3D LUTs... using many different sw solutions and hardware... I know the difference in results in all of these approaches, solutions and hardware and I've posted lots of data in this forum and others... and as I mentioned before, these screens include end consumer and high-end Pro grade...

now.... smile.gifsmile.gifsmile.gif hahahahaha what is your experience and expertise and how do you claim to know or are able to assess what is best for this user that is already interested in 3D LUTs and has stated that he has done his reading so he knows what he's getting himself into.... ? Plus (as I pointed out) his starting budget of 2K is more than enough....

How many 3D LUTs have u done ? None. On a screen that u've never seen and the owner has the budget for 3D LUTs what's the best possible calibration ? 3D LUTs.

Now if you're trying to weasel your way out of the nonsense that you posted then u could start to talk about perceivable differences which u might win if ur eyesight is as fogged as ur "common sense".... biggrin.gif

calibration & profiling solutions: Lightspace, Spaceman, Calman, Argyll, ColorNavigator, basICColor
profiling & calibration workflow tools: Display Calibration Tools
meter: Klein K-10 A, i1Pro, i1D3
AVS thread: Lightspace & Custom Color Patch Set & Gamma Calibration on Panasonic 65VT60
Iron Mike is offline  
post #29 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 04:33 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
lbosley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Gentlemen, gentlemen, let's try and stick to the topic at hand. There is no shortage of passion in these forums, but let's make sure the self-proclaimed experts are more concerned about delivering their opinions without trashing those of other self-proclaimed experts. Remember that I wanted to hear from folks living and breathing with a calibrated 3D LUT in their home.

Stereodude, I definitely appreciate your suggestion of engaging a professional before significantly cutting into my drinking money. It only makes sense. Rational thinking, but do you speak from experience? I also recognize the enthusiasm in Iron Mike's response. His reply is exactly what I felt was missing from most of these conversations - excitement about the visible results, and it is clear that he has experience.

I think a better way to solve the disagreement would be to have two side by side monitors calibrated by the same software and meter, one using a 3D LUT processor and the other simply calibrated to a legacy 6-point gamut, grayscale/gamma. Forget the charts, would either of you be able to select the winner (the one with the most investment) using actual video content, or would they just look different? I personally think you could, but this is the type of subjective response I really want to gather.

I have the funds. I want the accuracy. I want to be impressed with the result, and not regretting that I went "all in" over the hype of pretty graphs.

Where are the owners??
lbosley is offline  
post #30 of 75 Old 04-29-2014, 04:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chad B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Piqua, OH
Posts: 2,042
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 314
I believe Iron Mike, SillySally, Buzz, and possibly ConnecTED and Zoyd may be the known eeColor owners on here. From what I've gathered, a few of them have actually become dealers of the eeColor box and LS software... Now what percentage of their enthusiasm comes from promoting the product they now sell and what percentage comes from genuine excitement over the PQ difference would be interesting to know.

I have done the 125 point Lumagen Mini 3D LUT calibration in a few systems with JVC front projectors, and I did think it made a worthwhile improvement on them. The eeColor would have made an even bigger improvement, of course. The JVC PJs used did not have great color saturation tracking and linearity on their own. The GT50 you own has better color tracking than them, so I know the improvement would be less significant. But since I have not seen an eeColor/Panny plasma combo I cannot comment more.
chunon and Roland.Online like this.
Chad B 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