Colorimeter spreadsheet for SpyderTV - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 207 Old 10-03-2005, 07:46 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
rader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: portland, or
Posts: 501
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I modifed an Excel colorimeter spreadsheet for use with the SpyderTV originally posted by forum member garyfritz in the thread "Colorimeter Help?". This is designed to be used with the SpyderTV '/support' option and the black through 100IRE grey window patterns in 'Avia: Guide to Home Theater'. The spreadsheet will plot gamma curve (total, r, g, b), and color temperature.
==========================================================
Update: 12, Nov 2005
- Added macro button for importing colorimeter xyY data from Derek Smith's S2xyY utility. This button is labeled "S2xyY". You will need to enable macros to use this.
- Added Avia correction factors. You can select whether you want to use these from the drop down field in box K3.
- Changed the "Relative RGB Levels" graph so the user can select what reference color they want to use by selecting from the drop down field in box K6.

Update: 31, Oct 2005
- Added sheet for calibrating primary and secondary colors (red, green, blue, cyan, magenta, and yellow)

Update: 26, Oct 2005
- Added a *.ods version of the file to support OpenOffice 2.0 Calc
- Added a tab to support GetGrey's calibration DVD

Update: 25, Oct 2005
- Changed calibration instructions to use Avia Window patterns instead of grey fields.
- Luminance curve is now normalized to account for black level resulting in consistant gamma regardless of brightness setting.
- Color space conversions (XYZ->RGB) now use rec 709 matrix.
- Gamma curve and gamma calculation based on rec 709 idealized monitor transfer function.
- Displays calculated gamma for red, green, and blue curves
- Updated documentation and calibration procedure

Update: 5, Oct, 2005
-Added instructions on first sheet.
-Changed Relative RGB Levels graph to display error relative to ideal RGB value
-Use calculation from BruceLindbloom.com for calculating gamma for a dataset. Excel solver is no longer necessary to estimate Gamma.

Update: 17, Jan, 2006
- Added tab for Digital Video Essentials
- Added color sheet for PAL
- Added color sheet for NTSC
- The color decoder sheets do not show up right in Open Office and I have no idea how to fix this. Hopefully someone can help me out.


Right click save-as to download the zip file with the excel spreadsheet. Please PM me if you cannot download the file and I will email you a copy.

 

Colorimeter007.zip 211.8203125k . file
rader is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 207 Old 10-04-2005, 02:10 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
oferlaor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Modiin, Israel
Posts: 8,222
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Tried on 3 different computers - no luck downloading the file.

Cheers,
Ofer LaOr
www.hometheater.co.il
oferlaor is offline  
post #3 of 207 Old 10-04-2005, 05:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Speedskater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 2,011
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
It downloaded and opened, OK on my PC.
Using MS XP Pro and Mozilla.

Kevin
Speedskater is offline  
post #4 of 207 Old 10-04-2005, 06:13 AM
umr
AVS Club Gold
 
umr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 10,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 29
I would not use this spreadsheet in its current form for the following reasons.

The spreadsheets RGB calculations are not very useful for calibration to D65. The RGB error displayed in this spreadsheet decreases to zero at 100 IRE no matter what the color measurement is. What you want to see is the color error in relative RGB levels at each IRE level to D65 not to the measured 100 IRE value as found in the spreadsheet.

This spreadsheet references only color temperature not D65.

Assuming zero light level at zero signal input to normalize the gamma curve is flawed.

The input signal level is assuming Avia levels for test patterns. This will be incorrect for many other test sources.

I also have other issues with these calculations, but they are less serious.
umr is offline  
post #5 of 207 Old 10-04-2005, 08:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ursa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Inner Loop, Houston
Posts: 5,001
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Gary's spreadsheet was one to which I referred in the STV review. As Jeff says, it has several errors, some of greater and lesser significance.


Later,
Bill
Ursa is offline  
post #6 of 207 Old 10-04-2005, 11:59 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
rader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: portland, or
Posts: 501
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by umr View Post

The spreadsheets RGB calculations are not very useful for calibration to D65. The RGB error displayed in this spreadsheet decreases to zero at 100 IRE no matter what the color measurement is. What you want to see is the color error in relative RGB levels at each IRE level to D65 not to the measured 100 IRE value as found in the spreadsheet.

Thanks for pointing that out. I was just adjusting using gamma and xyY values and never paid much attention to the "Relative RGB Fields". I changed it in the latest version to show error from the ideal RGB values (based on x=.3127 y=.329).

Quote:
Originally Posted by umr View Post

This spreadsheet references only color temperature not D65.

This may sound like a dumb question but what is the difference?

Quote:
Originally Posted by umr View Post

Assuming zero light level at zero signal input to normalize the gamma curve is flawed.

Well, I cannot get the Spyder TV to take measurements on my set below 20IRE, so even if the spreadsheet took into account light level at 0 input level I do not understand what use it would be. I don't really understand this feedback because we are normalizing based on the 100IRE level.

Quote:
Originally Posted by umr View Post

The input signal level is assuming Avia levels for test patterns. This will be incorrect for many other test sources.

Yep. I might do a seperate sheet for DVE, but for now this is just for Avia.
Hopefully the update I posted will correct the major flaws. I appreciate your feedback.
rader is offline  
post #7 of 207 Old 10-05-2005, 05:43 AM
umr
AVS Club Gold
 
umr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 10,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by rader View Post

...This may sound like a dumb question but what is the difference?
..

D65 is a specific color while correlated color temperature is a line in xy colorspace. You must calibrate to D65 for gray scale to achieve the desired results. This link shows these lines. http://www.ecse.rpi.edu/~schubert/Li...%20diagram.jpg

Quote:
Originally Posted by rader View Post

...Well, I cannot get the Spyder TV to take measurements on my set below 20IRE, so even if the spreadsheet took into account light level at 0 input level I do not understand what use it would be. I don't really understand this feedback because we are normalizing based on the 100IRE level...

Your display must have very low black levels. This is also one of the problems with using Avia. The difference between the 7.5 and 10 IRE patterns is not very large. However, all displays will not have levels so low that the SpyderTV cannot measure them. You are in a bind though if it can't.

The problem with the calculation method in this spreadsheet will show up with displays that have higher black levels. Your normalized Y values (P55-P64) are wrong because of this. You are dividing by the maximum value, but you should also subtract the minimum value because your ideal curve is always starting at zero. All displays are not capable of zero black levels and many are fairly high. The error in your calculated gamma will increase with black level.

Here are examples based on simply modifying the spreadsheet to include a variable black level. This is simulated by adding a constant to the measured Y values. The calculated gamma should not change because of a shift in light level up in your form of gamma calculation. Black levels up to 0.4 cd/m2 are not uncommon. Here are the results.

Black Level (cd/m2) Calculated Gamma

0.00 2.33
0.05 2.11
0.10 2.01
0.15 1.95
0.20 1.90
0.30 1.82
0.40 1.77

There are other problems with the gamma calculation because it is not the Rec. 709 equation. The real gamma compensation being used in the majority of displays today is including the linear section found in the specification for gamma compensation. Here is a link to more information on this. Without this linear segment you will be calculating that the gamma compensation is much lower than it really is.

http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~buc/brechb...Q.html#RTFToC5
umr is offline  
post #8 of 207 Old 10-05-2005, 10:58 AM
Senior Member
 
tonyptony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 474
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Gary's spreadsheet was one to which I referred in the STV review. As Jeff says, it has several errors, some of greater and lesser significance.

Bill, I noted in that thread that you have your own spreadsheet that (from the sound of it) is quite comprehensive. If that's true is it available for use?
tonyptony is offline  
post #9 of 207 Old 10-05-2005, 01:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ursa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Inner Loop, Houston
Posts: 5,001
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyptony View Post

Bill, I noted in that thread that you have your own spreadsheet that (from the sound of it) is quite comprehensive. If that's true is it available for use?

Tony - it will be soon. However, I'll have a dedicated thread for it when it's released.
Ursa is offline  
post #10 of 207 Old 10-26-2005, 01:10 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
rader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: portland, or
Posts: 501
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I finally got a chance to update this and take another stab at getting my RPTV calibrated. I posted the updated version at the top of the thread.
Thanks Jeff (umr) for taking the time to point out the errors and providing such a concise and easy to understand explanation. You get my vote for forum MVP!
rader is offline  
post #11 of 207 Old 10-26-2005, 02:10 AM
Member
 
alantkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
thanks rader,

for updating it. I was going to calibrate my pj tonight.

I read somewhere that the AVIA IRE greyscale is a little bit off and DVE is better. I have both. should I use DVE instead, even thought the patterns is only in 20IRE steps.

I am also curious as to why you changed to using the windowed pattern.

Thanks again for the spreadsheet
alantkh is offline  
post #12 of 207 Old 10-26-2005, 06:56 AM
umr
AVS Club Gold
 
umr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 10,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Thanks for the vote rader. It just turns my stomach to see people using calculations that are so flawed. Your calculations look reasonable now.

I would make one more change so Avia or non-Avia gray windows can be used with the spreadsheet. To do this you need to add a variable for 0 or 7.5 IRE black level patterns and calculate the normalized input level with either 100 or 92.5 as the range and 0 or 7.5 as the offset. This is not dependent on what the player outputs, but the percentage level of the pattern itself.

I would also consider adding a color tolerancing function. Delta E 1976 is the most commonly used. You would need to add Lab color calculations to do this. The following is a link to this calculation. To use it so it is color only you need to reference each measurement to the actual measured L value. This will result in L being 100 for each value.

http://www.brucelindbloom.com/index....taE_CIE76.html
umr is offline  
post #13 of 207 Old 10-26-2005, 10:02 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
rader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: portland, or
Posts: 501
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by alantkh View Post

thanks rader,

for updating it. I was going to calibrate my pj tonight.

I read somewhere that the AVIA IRE greyscale is a little bit off and DVE is better. I have both. should I use DVE instead, even thought the patterns is only in 20IRE steps.

What I do is use the Avia Window patterns and the spreadsheet to set the gamma curves so they are as close as possible, and then switch to the DVE window patterns to fine tune greyscale. It would probably be a good idea to add some instructions on how I do this to the spreadsheet.
If I knew the greyscale error in Avia I might be able to add a compensation into the spreadsheet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alantkh View Post

I am also curious as to why you changed to using the windowed pattern.

Two reasons:
1. The Windowed patterns in Avia start off with a black window field which needs to be measured in order to properly calculate gamma (see Jeff's (umr) post above showing how the flawed gamma calculation varies with black level).
2. On CRT based diplays full field patterns at the high IRE levels will cause clipping and make it impossible to set greyscale/gamma unless contrast is reduced to a very low level. I think Guy Kuo says something about this in the forum FAQ thread posted by ChrisWiggles at the top of this forum.

Jeff (umr),
Wow, thanks again. Looks like I have some more homework to do!
Sorry for turning your stomach earlier.
rader is offline  
post #14 of 207 Old 10-26-2005, 10:17 AM
umr
AVS Club Gold
 
umr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 10,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by rader View Post

...Jeff (umr),
Wow, thanks again. Looks like I have some more homework to do!
Sorry for turning your stomach earlier.

No problem, you were just following what others had done before. I am just glad to see that you have something very useful now.

You will need to add more complexity to your calculated curves and gamma if you make the change to include Avia and non-Avia test patterns.

I have posted some correction factors for Avia on my web site. These measurements are based on the gray scale step pattern and show the significance of the errors at low input levels.

http://accucal.org/documents/Avia_Co...on_Factors.doc
umr is offline  
post #15 of 207 Old 10-26-2005, 10:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
derekjsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Mukilteo, WA
Posts: 1,890
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 98
will this also work with the Spyder2Pro, I have one on order so I can cal all my screens including 2 dlp projectors

thanks for putting this together

another suggestion is to also support the calibration disk by GetGray being developed http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...9&page=1&pp=30

These bundled would make a great low cost cal system

Derek

CTO / Founder - SpectraCal Inc.
derekjsmith is offline  
post #16 of 207 Old 10-26-2005, 10:24 AM
umr
AVS Club Gold
 
umr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 10,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by derekjsmith View Post

...another suggestion is to also support the calibration disk by GetGray being developed http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...9&page=1&pp=30

These bundled would make a great low cost cal system

That is what I am suggesting with altering the black level point.

Great is overstating the accuracy of the Spyder. I would rate it as the beginning of a good low cost calibration system. You need to add an optical comparator to your equipment list to touchup the color errors that the Spyder will likely induce in your display to have a system that is adequate.
umr is offline  
post #17 of 207 Old 10-26-2005, 03:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ursa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Inner Loop, Houston
Posts: 5,001
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Jeff - Here you rag on your PVM-96:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6373309

...which lists for $900. Given how frequently you post telling people to add an optical comparator to the Spyder, this seems somewhat inconsistent. If one is too cynical, it might even be somewhat disingenuous given your software interest.

Later,
Bill
Ursa is offline  
post #18 of 207 Old 10-26-2005, 04:45 PM
umr
AVS Club Gold
 
umr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 10,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ursa View Post

Jeff - Here you rag on your PVM-96:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6373309

...which lists for $900. Given how frequently you post telling people to add an optical comparator to the Spyder, this seems somewhat inconsistent. If one is too cynical, it might even be somewhat disingenuous given your software interest.

Later,
Bill

It is not inconsistent at all.

My PVM-96 or any other comparator I have used are not perfect but it is frequently much more accurate than my filter based colorimeters. I recommend a spectroradiometer if you want the most accurate color measurements. What I am saying is if you are targeting something that has a reasonable chance of being good then you should try and use a comparator to touch up the colors.

People here seem to want advice on how to come relatively close at minimal expense. I am offering what I believe would be the best approach for most people with the Spyder if they want to do a decent job. There are other simpler techniques that I and others on this forum have described before that can work as well at approximating D65 that are much less expensive, but those will not work on all displays.

Personally, I just want people to have decent colors and using a filter based instrument alone is not likely to give it. I can't do anything about your cynisim. Most people are buying software other than mine and I only started selling it because you and Ken asked me to. I never intended to offer it for sale to the general public. I could discontinue selling it if that would make you feel better.
umr is offline  
post #19 of 207 Old 10-26-2005, 05:02 PM
umr
AVS Club Gold
 
umr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 10,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Bill,

The following quote captures more of my thoughts on the issue of inexpensive gray scale calibration tools.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&&#post6007324

Quote:


I would rate the options in order of cost and quality in the under $1k category to obtain a good color calibration as follows.

I would only consider a spectroradiometer or an optical comparator if you want accurate colors for anything, but a CRT. This is based on several less than stellar experiences with filter based colorimeters. I cannot begin to tell you how satisfying it is to pay over $1k for a colorimeter that tells you a screen is blue when it is red. If you can adjust the color gamut on your display then an optical comparator is not sufficient.

1. Purchase a Kodak gray card as a D65 reference and a good 6500K light source like this http://www.hellolights.com/150wat65iw.html . This is the lowest cost option and not likely to yield poor results assuming you know how to adjust the cuts and drives to get it right.

2. Hire an ISF calibrator who has a good optical comparator, spectroradiometer, signal generator and test media that fit your sources including possibly DVD, D-VHS and LD. Do not underestimate the importance of quality test equipment and skill.

3. Buy a new Sony PVM-96 D65 monitor and use it as an optical comparator. This is a better optical comparator option and not likely to yield poor results assuming you know how to adjust the cuts and drives to get it right.

4. My software with an Eye-One Pro spectroradiometer for an instrument with excellent accuracy assuming you are unwilling to hire this capability.

You could always sell the Sony PVM-96 or the Eye-One Pro when you are done to reduce the cost if you choose one of those options. You can probably recover more of you cost for the Eye-One Pro than the PVM-96.

umr is offline  
post #20 of 207 Old 10-26-2005, 09:26 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
rader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: portland, or
Posts: 501
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by derekjsmith View Post

will this also work with the Spyder2Pro, I have one on order so I can cal all my screens including 2 dlp projectors

Sure, just select tools->colorimeter from the Spyder2Pro menu. You can use this to get xyY measurements from whatever display you are using. If you have an HTPC hooked to your DLP you can also use the Spyder2 calibration tools.
----
I posted a new update with an additional sheet tab for GetGrey's calibration disk. I adjusted the levels to the best of my understanding from umr's description. I do not have a copy of the disk so I can not test these changes. If someone who has GetGrey's disk could test it out that would be great.
I also included an OpenOffice 2.0 version of the spreadsheet so you do not need to buy Excel. I do not know how to use OpenOffice so the chart formatting could use some work. If anyone knows OpenOffice Calc well I would appreciate some help cleaning up the charts.
I also took a stab at the Delta E 1976 calculation and graph. Have not tested it yet so there is about a 99.9% probability it has some error(s). It is on the "GetGrey" sheet if anyone wants to take a look. I should have it functional for the next revision.
---
Quote:
Originally Posted by umr View Post

I have posted some correction factors for Avia on my web site.

umr, is there any question you don't have the answer for? I will see if I can implement the corrections in the spreadsheet. Thanks again!
rader is offline  
post #21 of 207 Old 10-26-2005, 09:37 PM
umr
AVS Club Gold
 
umr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 10,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by rader View Post

....
I also took a stab at the Delta E 1976 calculation and graph. Have not tested it yet so there is about a 99.9% probability it has some error(s). It is on the "GetGrey" sheet if anyone wants to take a look. I should have it functional for the next revision.
---

umr, is there any question you don't have the answer for? I will see if I can implement the corrections in the spreadsheet. Thanks again!

Your Delta E calculations look correct to me. You should round them to whole numbers. Additional precision is not realistic. The graph should not have negative values for Delta E since it can only be positive.

I don't know the answer to many questions, but I have pondered many of the ones you have asked.
umr is offline  
post #22 of 207 Old 10-27-2005, 07:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ursa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Inner Loop, Houston
Posts: 5,001
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by umr View Post

Bill,

The following quote captures more of my thoughts on the issue of inexpensive gray scale calibration tools.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&&#post6007324

Jeff - This does represent more thought-out advice, especially with the acknowledgment that the filter-based tools have differential accuracy between CRTs and lamp-based displays. However, what I was responding to are the far more common posts from you that do not offer such a nuanced opinion. I respect that you have issues with the filter-based colorimeters, but to state this opinion as an authority as frequently as you do without the background information seems counter to your stated purpose (e.g., several CRT owners thinking that the Spyder is not good enough for them).

What I have never seen you respond to is how to have confidence in the EyeOne at high and low light levels. Per your statements, it can get x and y right compared to a Lightspex. In my own limited testing, Y has been suspect at best at the high and low ends (e.g., readings of 1.2 cd/m^2 in one run, then 0.2 in another -- which matches what my Spyder returns consistently). As you know, x and y are merely transforms of XYZ, so getting x and y correct without getting X and Y right is a violation of basic algebra - unless they are off in exactly the right proportions to one another to make the aggregate ratios perfect (unlikely).

You had chided me previously for using averages in my own testing protocols, but that is in fact what you should do in cases like this. You should also look at standard deviations and standard errors across multiple testing runs. To do otherwise is incorrect. Please note: yes, I believe that the EyeOne is a better meter (it costs twice as much before taking into account your software, so it better be!). However, I have yet to see a good comparison of the Spyder against reference grade equipment. So, could you either a) be more complete in posting your advice, or b) participate in a valid colorimeter shoot-out? The point being not to prove that one is good and the other must stink, but to show where the relative strengths and weaknesses are.

As for your software, if you read my posts (search using the term "Jeff's software" with my userid), you will see that I have been very positive in recommending your software. I think it is a good thing for the market.

Later,
Bill
Ursa is offline  
post #23 of 207 Old 10-27-2005, 08:21 AM
umr
AVS Club Gold
 
umr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 10,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Bill,

I have seen and appreciate your support.

I am completely into statistics as well. I am not saying taking averages or calculating population statistics is worthless. I was quibbling with a statement that implied using an average value guaranteed accuracy. All it is likely to do is increase repeatability. My software actually uses some statistics and averages behind the scenes in a more complex manner than simply averaging xyY values.

The Y reported by the Eye-One is different than the XYZ coordinate system. The xy and Y values are calculated from the SPD of the radiometric measurements. I have not seen the variance you are describing seeing at 1 cd/m2 on the Eye-One.

I have done my own shoot out with my SpyderTV versus my Eye-One. You are welcome to come to my house and see how it performs on the variety of displays that I have (CRT direct view, LCD direct view. LCD RPTV, LCoS RPTV). I am not saying the SpyderTV stinks completely. I am just trying to add some balance to peoples excitement about these instruments.

Here is my take on the SpyderTV based on my own experiments...

It is a useful light meter, but no more sensitive than the Eye-One. The diffuser mounted on it makes it unreliable for luminance measurements. This means it cannot measure screen gain and is less useful for calibrating an RPTV's light levels. It is not calibrated for illumination, but since it has a good diffuser it should take measurements that are relatively linear, but the units will be in error. Therefore, it cannot be used to calculate a projectors lumens.

As a colorimeter it is a mixed bag. On some of my displays it is very accurate on others it is over 0.01 in x or y off. It seems to do well on LCD direct view and CRT direct view sets. It seems to be less reliable on other technologies. As long as its use is limited to those display types my experience with it is good. Other display types are more problematic. Filter based devices also tend to be hygroscopic causing the calibration to drift after several months.

I also find the SpyderTV to be slow and cumbersome to use.

I just think people should understand the caveats of what they are purchasing. The reason I was posting on this thread was to help correct some of the errors people were likely to make using the spreadsheet. I was only suggesting using an optical comparator because that is what I would do if I was attempting to use the SpyderTV to calibrate my display. I can easily live with it if you or anyone else disagrees.
umr is offline  
post #24 of 207 Old 10-27-2005, 08:56 AM
umr
AVS Club Gold
 
umr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 10,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 29
umr is offline  
post #25 of 207 Old 10-27-2005, 09:09 AM
umr
AVS Club Gold
 
umr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 10,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 29
umr is offline  
post #26 of 207 Old 10-27-2005, 11:24 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
krasmuzik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: NewPort, VA
Posts: 11,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I would be willing to send my Milori Spyder2 to just such a shootout - as the only access I have to reference spectrometer is what Milori told me when they sent it - 0.001xy accuracy - which is 3x the marketed spec and 40x the ISF calibration requirements. This self promoting interest in this thread really has no place.

umr, this is a thread about the SpyderTV spreadsheets - exactly why do you need to bring up the EyeOne at all? Stick to the advance on colormath without disparaging peoples choice in equipment.
krasmuzik is offline  
post #27 of 207 Old 10-27-2005, 11:39 AM
umr
AVS Club Gold
 
umr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 10,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by krasmuzik View Post

...umr, this is a thread about the SpyderTV spreadsheets - exactly why do you need to bring up the EyeOne at all? Stick to the advance on colormath without disparaging peoples choice in equipment.

Sorry. I was just trying to be helpful.

I only mentioned it as a quote in a previous post when Bill questioned my advice on using a comparator. I would never have mentioned it otherwise.

I think I will leave this discussion. A simple defense of my position seems to have generated much angst. Please continue without me and my biased perspectives.
umr is offline  
post #28 of 207 Old 11-10-2005, 09:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ursa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Inner Loop, Houston
Posts: 5,001
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Rader - Your XYZ->RGB matrix is transposed (compare your xy values against the CIE Gamut vs. what your RGB graph is telling you - e.g., 0.372 in y is noticeably green).
Ursa is offline  
post #29 of 207 Old 11-11-2005, 08:55 AM
Senior Member
 
mdtiberi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Woodland Hills, CA
Posts: 489
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Ran though my first set of measurements using the Spyder in support mode and your spreadsheet. Thanks again for posting it and keeping it updated.

It was very cool to plug in the data see all these things about ones display. I can't speak to the veracity of the math and the approach but given the feedback from many of the forums experts it seems like you did a yeomen's job.

I have a Sony 34HS420 and a BK Instruments HD Pattern Generator. What's nice about the BK is I can easily change display modes and am not tethered to my DVD at 480i. It can display 0 to 100 IRE at 2.5 increments which is certainly overkill. I did have some issues with the Spyder at 0 IRE but from what I have gleaned it may be better at 7.5. I hesitated pumping up the brightness for the sake of an accurate reading from the Spyder because I have the basic parameters set to what pleases my eye. I did not like the Spyder Wizards suggestions at all.

Most of the information is rather self explanatory but this deltaE thing is still a bit of a mystery, my green channel is really high relative to R and B. Guess I am gonna have to bone up on this. I will be taking a lot more measurements over the weekend. However, collecting data is one thing but interpretation and implementation, well that's a different kettle of fish.
mdtiberi is offline  
post #30 of 207 Old 11-11-2005, 01:04 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
rader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: portland, or
Posts: 501
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I had to transpose the matrix from the Poynton Color FAQ because he uses a XYZ column vector while I had used a XYZ row vector in my spreadsheet. Since transposing the product of two matrices is equal to taking the product of their transposes in the reverse order I also had to transpose the R709 XYZ->RGB matrix also for the product to work out.
I followed this - for two matrices A and B:
transpose(AB)=transpose(B)transpose(A)
It was easier for me to just transpose the 709 matrix than to redo the work I had done earlier with the matrices from Bruce Lindbloom (which assume a row vector XYZ).
The .372 y value isn't actually getting plotted because I only plot 10IRE through 100IRE. If you plug in .3127, .372 for one of the other IRE measurements it will show excess green.
rader 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