or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Display Calibration › ChromaPure v. CalMan
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

ChromaPure v. CalMan - Page 3

post #61 of 233
Quote:


I have rambled on enough now, but I guess I'm recommending giving SpectrCal a little time to see if they can pull off this effort, and to see if they reconsider their pricing/feature configurations.

Fair enough. I am just an enthusiast also and I don't do calibrations on a daily basis, so comparing the 2 products will take some anyway.

OTOH, learning and using ChromaPure was easy as pie, even with the automation, so I am hoping to have a review up later this week.
post #62 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Sorel View Post

OTOH, learning and using ChromaPure was easy as pie, even with the automation, so I am hoping to have a review up later this week.

That was my experience as well and I got great results. Reasonable price, easy to use, great results.....what's not to like.....
post #63 of 233
I am an enthusiast also deciding between Calman & Chromapure. To me price structure of Chromapure is more palatable. I just want something that has an easy learning curve. I am going to use it primarily to calibrate my displays.
post #64 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Citation4444 View Post

I have a Konica Minolta CL-200, Accupel HDG-4000, Sencore VP403 - all of which are supported only in the Professional license.

Having more than $10k in calibration gear is pretty enthusiastic.
post #65 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Sorel View Post

Why does the Accupel require a professional license while the DPG-1200 require only an Enthusiast license?

I'd guess it has to do with the MSRP of the device which might reasonably point to your intent. I don't what an HDG-4000 goes for (oh wait I do, $1,600) but the Sencore is ~$6,000. Ten times the price of the DPG.

Sencore also has multiple (two) licenses -- their stuff and everything else.

It's all speculation on my part and the likelihood of a professional trying to use an non-pro license seems small but perhaps they have contrary evidence.
post #66 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodosom View Post

Having more than $10k in calibration gear is pretty enthusiastic.

Yeah, I guess you could say that. However, I bought only the HDG-4000 new and the other pieces used. I've got less than $2500 total in all three pieces, but still a lot for a hobbyist for sure.

Bob
post #67 of 233
Tom noted a recent review/comparison between C-HCFR, CalMAN and ChromaPure. I was critical of the "review" but it's not a complete waste of time.

About automation. Ignoring the licensing issues I've found that the fastest way to run patterns is to use the SpectraCal HTPC generator via the network (when it works), the next fastest is auto-advance using AVCHD into my -83 via USB and the slowest is using my DPG + USBIRT. Actually, trying to control my -83 with the USBIRT is the slowest.

I find the DPG to be (sadly) of little value.

It would be very nice if ChromaPure did auto-advance.
post #68 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodosom View Post

It would be very nice if ChromaPure did auto-advance.

It does for the Pre/Post Calibration Grayscale and Pre/Post Calibration Gamut modules.
post #69 of 233
Quote:


It does for the Pre/Post Calibration Grayscale and Pre/Post Calibration Gamut modules.

Yes, it works great! And you can adjust the time interval in seconds between patterns/measurements.
post #70 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

It does for the Pre/Post Calibration Grayscale and Pre/Post Calibration Gamut modules.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Sorel View Post

Yes, it works great! And you can adjust the time interval in seconds between patterns/measurements.

The CalMAN auto-advance is not a timed advance. It detects the pattern change and makes a click when the reading is complete. *click* change the pattern, *click* change the pattern etc. etc.
post #71 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodosom View Post

The CalMAN auto-advance is not a timed advance. It detects the pattern change and makes a click when the reading is complete. *click* change the pattern, *click* change the pattern etc. etc.

No difference. The timer determines the interval between a successful reading and a pattern change, not the interval between pattern changes only.
post #72 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

No difference. The timer determines ...

I'll look again but there is no timer* in CalMAN so it would seem there is some difference.

*well there is the "I think your meter died" timer.
post #73 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodosom View Post

I'll look again but there is no timer* in CalMAN so it would seem there is some difference.

*well there is the "I think your meter died" timer.

Correct we don't use a timer for the pattern auto sense in v3 and v4. We use a pattern change detection algorithm which works much better because you can then use any cal disk. The pattern detection interface and algorithm is copyrighted and has other intellectual property protections within our interface and is why you don't see it in other products.
post #74 of 233
I know people are going to think that I am just plain stupid, but after wrestling with CalMAN 4.0 for a couple of hours now, I have made very little progress. For example, there is a tutorial which loads by default when you open CalMAN for the first time. I tried figuring out how to use CalMAN without reading any docs, and that turned out to be totally hopeless, so I decided to keep my cool and start reading the introductory tutorial. It didn't take too long before I ran into some frustration:

In the workflow window on the upper left I had reached the point labeled "Using Workflows". In that screen the tutorial shows a picture of what a typical workflow screen looks like, but I could not find any such screen...
The tutorial failed to explain 3 very important points:

1. The tutorial itself is a workflow, and until you unload it and load a proper workflow, you will never see the screen that they pictured. My initial assumption was that the tutorial was ALWAYS available (you know, like help files are) and was not in itself considered to be a "workflow" per se, but I was wrong...
2. Before you can see the screen you have shown on that page, you will need to load a different workflow. (Ah, this was key! )
3. The way to load workflows is to left click on the "load workflow" icon just below the workflow window, then pick a workflow from the list, and then click on the "open" button. (Actually you skimmed over this point earlier, but since it had not been referenced yet, it meant very little at the time. I found it later when I went back.)

You never mentioned the first 2 points in your tutorial (or maybe I missed them), and the only way I found out what was going on was by randomly clicking on things until I saw something that I suspected might be the right thing to do. If you had mentioned the 3 points I outlined above, you would have saved me at least an hour of frustration.

Guys, you really need to work on your user friendliness, or, if you can't make the program more user friendly, then you need to write much better tutorials...you know, like the "Dummies" series. I am the original "DUMMY" that inspired the entire series. You need to write this stuff for the lowest common denominator...ME!

Another example - I connected my Chroma 5 meter. I had the software search for the meter and it found it just fine. I initialized the meter, but I have no idea if it is properly initialized or not because the program does not inform me of its status either way. Wouldn't it be nice to simply provide a window saying "meter ready to go" or "initialization failed" or SOMETHING to let me know what is going on? (and yes, I made sure to pick the Chroma 5 in the meter settings window.)
Quote:


Once you've got the Meter Profile Editor open, you simply select the meter, click add profile, then you can manually enter the profile.

Where? When I click on the "add profile" button, nothing happens. At the bottom of that window is an ominous looking chart that has XYZ on the vertical axis and IXYZ on the horizontal, but I have no idea what it is for. The offsets I am looking to enter are in the form of x and y (small x and small y) for RGBYCMW. I will keep looking for a place to enter that data.

Sorry for the rant. It must be me...I'm just totally stupid and inept.

P.S. - There is no need to provide specific answers to my questions/complaints. I would like to struggle along using the tutorial to see just how far I can get without human assistance. I just wanted to give you feedback on my experiences so far. Hopefully the road will be a lot smoother from here.
post #75 of 233
Bob, reading this made me happy I went with Chromapure.....
post #76 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Sorel View Post

... after wrestling with CalMAN 4.0 for a couple of hours now, I have made very little progress.

1) Have you used CalMAN 3? But yes, the implicit everything is an xml file model, can be a bit confusing at first.
2) I had cognitive glitches when learning to use ChromaPure because it's quite unlike CalMAN. Meter selection was particularly troublesome because, as I recall, the instructions didn't match my expectations at all.
post #77 of 233
Quote:


1) Have you used CalMAN 3?

No, I am sorry to say that I have not. The last time I had looked at CalMAN was when it was changing from 1.xx to 2.0.
Quote:


But yes, the implicit everything is an xml file model, can be a bit confusing at first.

Yes, I would suggest to SpectraCal to be very explicit about the ".XML file model" right at the very beginning of the tutorial. It would have saved me a lot of time...
Quote:


2) I had cognitive glitches when learning to use ChromaPure because it's quite unlike CalMAN.

I can understand. When one is familiar with a certain way of doing things, it will always seem easier than a different way. But I just started using both ChromaPure and CalMAN 4.0 at almost the same time, and both of the programs were totally different than my old software.
Quote:


Meter selection was particularly troublesome because, as I recall, the instructions didn't match my expectations at all.

Huh? I have 2 meters, the Chroma 5 and the i1Pro. Next to each name is a button labeled "initialize", and there is even a status indicator to let you know whether that meter is connected or not. I know that the 1.2 version was a little bit different, but it was equally easy. And then once you initialize, you are presented with a little box that tells you that your meter is ready for use. It took me about 15 seconds to figure it out without reading anything in the instructions. How were you confused?
post #78 of 233
I haven't used Chroma Pure so can't comment on that. But I have a Calman 3 license and initially found that confusing, as there were some fundamentals that weren't mentioned in the help. But once I figured it out, I liked it.

I've been trying Calman 4 as a demo, and I find it extremely confusing. There's alot of unnecessary fluff. Like Bob said, the whole XML thing, the fact that the tutorial is a workflow and that you have to load another one to get to where you want to be.

For me, there is no reason to upgrade to V4, it's more difficult to use than V3.
post #79 of 233
I have both Calman v4 and Chromapure, bot purchased at the same time, because I couldnt decide which to go with.

Chromapure was easier to learn. I ran thrugh a calibration with it first.


I followed the next day with Calman. I didnt do a full calibration with it, because it was already done through Chromapure. I did run through greyscale/gamma and and color gamut to see if the results would agree with Chromapure. They seemed to have very similar results so that was cool.

I'm still not sure wich program I would reccomend. I like them both. I should say this is my first venture into DIY calibration so my point was fresh and unbiased. Chromapure was the one that I felt comfortable using right off the bat, and I had good results with it. Calman was easier to understand after I had messed with Chromapure and got comfortable with what everything meant. Calman is definately shiny and pretty if that means anything to anyone. Both are great products. i dont think anyone would be dissapointed with either. Hell, just get both of em, then you dont have to decide.
post #80 of 233
The beautiful thing about Calman though is custom configuration. That fluff can be removed with custom workflows. They have established a good starting point for people with little knowledge. For more experienced calibrators you are correct regarding the fluff. They simply cannot cater to everybody's needs with the few pre-defined workflows. But the great thing about the software is the ability to customize. I can't really say that V4 is any more difficult that V3. Do some of the work flows have some fluff? Yes. A matter a fact in my case it lacked a few things. But those things were available for me to use and place in those workflows. I have not use Chroma Pure so I can't comment on it. I'm sure it's a great piece of software. It all boils down to preference and whether you believe it gives you all that you expect. Let's not forget that everybody's expectations will vary. Anyway, just putting my 2 cents in...

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatjulio View Post

I haven't used Chroma Pure so can't comment on that. But I have a Calman 3 license and initially found that confusing, as there were some fundamentals that weren't mentioned in the help. But once I figured it out, I liked it.

I've been trying Calman 4 as a demo, and I find it extremely confusing. There's alot of unnecessary fluff. Like Bob said, the whole XML thing, the fact that the tutorial is a workflow and that you have to load another one to get to where you want to be.

For me, there is no reason to upgrade to V4, it's more difficult to use than V3.
post #81 of 233
For the most part this sounds like the baby duck syndrome. The first large object you see you follow it around forever.

For what it is worth I have not used CalMan. I assume it may have more features. The interesting thing about ChromaPure is that barely requires you to put your toe in. From a workflow perspective you can pretty much do everything in the pre-calibration.

If you have used HCFR then ChromaPure is a completely logical transition. I guess pro-calibrators may need more, but if I can get grayscle, gamma, and gamut done in two screens I don't really care much about the rest of it. Sure if I want to I can go through the whole workflow.


ChromaPure and the Duo together are something else. I hope we see yet another public beta of the Duo soon... ChromaPure Pro, the enhanced Chroma 5 and and a Duo with the full software feature set will be an astonishing value. I know they make my 82" Mits one heck of a display. Because I have been beta testing the Duo, I have recalibrated my set a bunch of times. I will be doing it yet again this weekend as I am behind on version updates. Hard to keep up. If it wasn't for ChromaPure's ease of use I would be more than one Duo beta behind.

I can't wait to see some integration between the two, on the other hand the current ChromaPure is so easy to use, if that never happens I won't be too disappointed.
post #82 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtgray View Post

For the most part this sounds like the baby duck syndrome. The first large object you see you follow it around forever.

For what it is worth I have not used CalMan. I assume it may have more features. The interesting thing about ChromaPure is that barely requires you to put your toe in. From a workflow perspective you can pretty much do everything in the pre-calibration.

If you have used HCFR then ChromaPure is a completely logical transition. I guess pro-calibrators may need more, but if I can get grayscle, gamma, and gamut done in two screens I don't really care much about the rest of it. Sure if I want to I can go through the whole workflow.


ChromaPure and the Duo together are something else. I hope we see yet another public beta of the Duo soon... ChromaPure Pro, the enhanced Chroma 5 and and a Duo with the full software feature set will be an astonishing value. I know they make my 82" Mits one heck of a display. Because I have been beta testing the Duo, I have recalibrated my set a bunch of times. I will be doing it yet again this weekend as I am behind on version updates. Hard to keep up. If it wasn't for ChromaPure's ease of use I would be more than one Duo beta behind.

I can't wait to see some integration between the two, on the other hand the current ChromaPure is so easy to use, if that never happens I won't be too disappointed.

Re the Duo: if your display has a full CMS--like the JVC RS20 projector--if there anything more that the Due gives you?
post #83 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtgray View Post

For what it is worth I have not used CalMan. I assume it may have more features.

If ChromaPure does the job for you that's good but speculating about software you haven't used is pointless.

ChromaPure has one workflow. CalMAN has an infinite number of them. If you just need one and you're happy with the way Tom does things then you're good to go.

Three examples of things you can't do with ChromaPure:
1) put everything you need for a calibration on one screen.
2) collect pre data for eight modes in eight tabs, plot specific values in particular ways and toggle between the tabs to compare them. Plot CIE results both as xy and uv. Then run two post calibration collections and save all that as a single object for later review.
3) produce a different final report without having to use a spreadsheet.

ChromaPure is an iPhone, CalMAN is a "post-jailbreak" iPhone. Flexibility can be distracting/confusing/overwhelming.
post #84 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

Re the Duo: if your display has a full CMS--like the JVC RS20 projector--if there anything more that the Due gives you?

If your display has a full CMS, then by definition you porbably don't "need" that capability of the Duo. The Duo is also a pattern generator in additon to a CMS based VP. Both ChromaPure and Calman have or will soon have the ability to provide some level of automation with the Duo.

Expect the degree of automation to become more comprehensive and be a competitive point for ChromaPure and Calman over the next year or so. SpectaCal is supposedly working with display OEMs to support that on future display devices in the future.

Then of course the Duo is great hub with support for dual HDMI displays, separate HDMI out for audio, and a host of inputs including 8 HDMI inputs. I don't think the scaler/detinterlacer compares well against the Radiance, but it is better than what is in many if not most display devices.
post #85 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodosom View Post

If ChromaPure does the job for you that's good but speculating about software you haven't used is pointless.

ChromaPure has one workflow. CalMAN has an infinite number of them. If you just need one and you're happy with the way Tom does things then you're good to go.

Three examples of things you can't do with ChromaPure:
1) put everything you need for a calibration on one screen.
2) collect pre data for eight modes in eight tabs, plot specific values in particular ways and toggle between the tabs to compare them. Plot CIE results both as xy and uv. Then run two post calibration collections and save all that as a single object for later review.
3) produce a different final report without having to use a spreadsheet.

ChromaPure is an iPhone, CalMAN is a "post-jailbreak" iPhone. Flexibility can be distracting/confusing/overwhelming.


Interesting list, I had considered CalMan, just to see the other side. Now I know I will pass. What I need are fundamentals.. to use a sports analogy, fundamentals are blocking, passing, tackling, and receiving. Anything beyond excellent fundamentals is for me as a hobbyist, just excessive clutter. If these extra features won't make my display perform dramatically better, than they are features not worth my time to learn. Maybe if I was a pro? On the other hand SpectaCals pro license pricing is rediculous.
post #86 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatjulio View Post

I haven't used Chroma Pure so can't comment on that. But I have a Calman 3 license and initially found that confusing, as there were some fundamentals that weren't mentioned in the help. But once I figured it out, I liked it.

I've been trying Calman 4 as a demo, and I find it extremely confusing. There's alot of unnecessary fluff. Like Bob said, the whole XML thing, the fact that the tutorial is a workflow and that you have to load another one to get to where you want to be.

For me, there is no reason to upgrade to V4, it's more difficult to use than V3.

So having a startup introduction/tutorial on how to use CalMAN is a bad thing? Once you spend 5 minutes walking through the introduction which includes connecting and starting your meters, etc... you select the workflow which best suits your needs which only has to be done once and are from very detailed we hold your hand for every step with lots of help to just show me the data with few steps.
post #87 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtgray View Post

If your display has a full CMS, then by definition you porbably don't "need" that capability of the Duo. The Duo is also a pattern generator in additon to a CMS based VP. Both ChromaPure and Calman have or will soon have the ability to provide some level of automation with the Duo.

Expect the degree of automation to become more comprehensive and be a competitive point for ChromaPure and Calman over the next year or so. SpectaCal is supposedly working with display OEMs to support that on future display devices in the future.

Then of course the Duo is great hub with support for dual HDMI displays, separate HDMI out for audio, and a host of inputs including 8 HDMI inputs. I don't think the scaler/detinterlacer compares well against the Radiance, but it is better than what is in many if not most display devices.

FWIW, if you purchase a Duo from DVDO direct or from us it now includes a copy of CalMAN v4 enthusiasts to calibrate it.

http://www.anchorbaytech.com/company...s/PR060110.php
post #88 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtgray View Post

What I need are fundamentals

I'm glad you're happy but your comparisons are weak -- they even ignore the nuances in ChromaPure.
post #89 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodosom View Post

I'm glad you're happy but your comparisons are weak -- they even ignore the nuances in ChromaPure.

Nuances.. I like that. I should be appreciating the nuances. I could give a flip about nuances. Time out! Let me properly apologize to Mr. Huffman. Sorry Tom. I am not sophisticated enough to appreciate the nuances in your software. Will you be okay if your software just helps me get my display calibrated with no muss nor fuss. Someday I will wander off and spend lots fo money on CalMan just so when I launch ChromaPure I can appreciate the nuances of your masterpiece.

These apps are freaking utilities for gosh sakes. Calibrating a display is a chore. It is not playing a sonatta on piano. Let me hit my target numbers and put the meter back in the case.. Nuances.. man where are you coming from?

If I had my druthers the displays would be right out of the box and would not ever need calibration. I am interested in watching HDTV not farting with knobs and dials on a bunch of gear. I am calibrating out of necessity. If I want to appreciate nuances I will go to a wine tasting or find some contraband Havana cigars.
post #90 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtgray View Post

Nuances.. man where are you coming from?

You suggested you just needed the fundamentals so ChromaPure was (for you) superior to CalMAN. For someone trying to make an informed choice about these products your observations are a disservice (to both products). You are unaware of the simplicity available in CalMAN (click Basic) and are presumably unaware of the nuances (those items beyond the fundamentals) of ChromaPure.

Again this is all well and good for you but someone else reading your comments might think you have more than a passing familiarity with what you're talking about. This is not the ChromaPure thread this is the ChromaPure v. CalMAN thread.

By the way, if you want fundamentals with nothing beyond what's needed to calibrate your display then all the commercial products (and C-HCFR) go beyond your needs and you should use one of the precursor spreadsheets.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Display Calibration
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Display Calibration › ChromaPure v. CalMan