or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Display Calibration › Can someone recommend a meter?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Can someone recommend a meter?

post #1 of 124
Thread Starter 
I currently own a Spyder3 enhanced with Calman v3 that I have had for a year. After several calibrations on my Sony SXRD A3000 and a Sony LCD V5100 recently, I think the meter may have drifted. (I actually have a feeling that the spyder3 never read the SXRD correctly......the grayscale never looked right with the naked eye after calibration)

What I would like to buy is a meter that can accurately read SXRD, LCD, and LED television sets. Also, it would be best if it can work currently with my Calman v3 (or at least HCFR). My budget is around $500.

Thanks
post #2 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by N3W813 View Post

I currently own a Spyder3 enhanced with Calman v3 that I have had for a year. After several calibrations on my Sony SXRD A3000 and a Sony LCD V5100 recently, I think the meter may have drifted. (I actually have a feeling that the spyder3 never read the SXRD correctly......the grayscale never looked right with the naked eye after calibration)

What I would like to buy is a meter that can accurately read SXRD, LCD, and LED television sets. Also, it would be best if it can work currently with my Calman v3 (or at least HCFR). My budget is around $500.

Thanks

The one I recommend for enthusiasts is the I1 Pro., I've always have over all other meters under $2000 (for #1 choice). Many Professional Calibrators use this as their primary Meter even today.

There is a reason why this option has increased in price over the last few years...

I do suggest you save up more for the EyeOne Pro/I1 Pro.

The next alternative would be the Chroma 5 or ColorMunki and I'm starting to lean towards the Munki for 2nd.
post #3 of 124
Greetings

Munki ...
post #4 of 124
What do you guys think about the EyeOne Lt?
post #5 of 124
I second the Munki

RayJr
post #6 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by BluCheez View Post

What do you guys think about the EyeOne Lt?

Recommending Munki here also for those not willing/able to fork the dough for i1Pro and up. As for LT, I had one, it drifted after a while. Another thing I didn't like about it is its need to warm up. I have a plasma for my primary display and had had to leave it on the screen for an hour while watching TV before I could proceed with calibration.

As for the i1Pro, I had some experience working with it at SpectraCal's calibration seminar tour. The comments on its slowness and inability to measure low levels were not exaggerations. It was literally still on 0 to 20IRE when the Klein K-10s at the other stations finished reading the entire grayscale.
post #7 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkcheng122 View Post

Recommending Munki here also for those not willing/able to fork the dough for i1Pro and up. As for LT, I had one, it drifted after a while. Another thing I didn't like about it is its need to warm up. I have a plasma for my primary display and had had to leave it on the screen for an hour while watching TV before I could proceed with calibration.

As for the i1Pro, I had some experience working with it at SpectraCal's calibration seminar tour. The comments on its slowness and inability to measure low levels were not exaggerations. It was literally still on 0 to 20IRE when the Klein K-10s at the other stations finished reading the entire grayscale.

jkcheng,

Its slow, but isn't it supposed to be more accurate across a broader spectrum? I understand that time is money for a pro but for an enthusiast it should be sufficient, no?

Also since you had the chance to attend a workshop, what were your impressions of the K-10? How were the results compared to an eye one pro and a reference spectro (pr or orb) if they had one there?
post #8 of 124
Greetings

Slow and accurate or fast and inaccurate? Why is this even a question to ponder? It is not about speed, it is about doing it right.

regards
post #9 of 124
Between the i1 Pro and the Chroma 5 Pro, I feel that it is no contest - the Chroma 5 Pro is much faster, at least as accurate as the i1 Pro, has much better low level performance and repeatability, and does not require taking those pesky "dark" readings every 10 minutes or so.

I don't know anything about the Color Munki.

Edit: If what I just read is correct, I would not consider the Color Munki as it requires those pesky dark readings, just like the i1 Pro...Taking dark readings every 10 minutes is a real PITA and will grow old very fast...
post #10 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by venkatesh_m View Post

Also since you had the chance to attend a workshop, what were your impressions of the K-10? How were the results compared to an eye one pro and a reference spectro (pr or orb) if they had one there?

The K-10 performance is superior to i1pro because it is faster and reads much lower light levels. Accuracy wise, I would also give a slight nod to the K-10 when properly configured via a reference spectro (I created my own calibration tables via a 5nm PR-655).
post #11 of 124
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the replies Looks like Munki has the most votes

So which version should I get? The Design or the Photo? Or should I get the 'Enhanced' one from SpectraCal? The ColorMunki Design is for sale at Amazon.com right now with a rebate. I think I'll grab one here....

Questions about software.....
So I have Calman v3 that I bought with Spyder3, will it work with the ColorMunki? Do I have to purchase another version (or upgrade) of Calman to make it work?

Looks like HCFR does not yet support the ColorMunki.
post #12 of 124
The only difference between the Photo and Design is the meter color and the software X-Rite includes.

Do you have CalMAN Home or Enthusiast?

For 4.x, CalMAN Home supports the ColorMunki and the various low price Colorimeters including your Spyder. For 3.x, you need CalMAN Enthusiast or a CalMAN Home for Spectros License....
post #13 of 124
Quote:


For 4.x, CalMAN Home supports the ColorMunki and the various low price Colorimeters including your Spyder. For 3.x, you need CalMAN Enthusiast or a CalMAN Home for Spectros License....

I am wondering why you would recommend the ColorMunki over either the i1 Pro or the Chroma 5. Let's leave any software out of the equation for the time being. How exactly and in what way is the ColorMunki (strictly as a meter and not part of any package) superior to the Chroma 5? I have given 4 very valid reasons for preferring the Chroma 5 over the i1 Pro...now it is your turn.
post #14 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbe View Post

The one I recommend for enthusiasts is the I1 Pro.



I understand the I1 Pro is over the budget of many, I've now started to recommend the Munki for 2nd place over the Chroma 5....

I still feel a Spectrophotometer is the best option, for a wide variety of displays.... of course, all of these should be checked to a reference class meter periodically, there are those that have I1 Pros several years old and they still re-certify (the ColorMunki is to new for us to know but will most likely hold up much better than the colorimeters)...
post #15 of 124
Not being filter based, Colormunki will not be subject to environmentally induced ageing/drift. The actual drift of Colormunki is not known, but being a spectro, based on eyeone pro technology, it certainly should be much lower than the filter based units. Idealy a Colormunki AND a fast (and cheap?) filter based unit is the way to go.
post #16 of 124
Quote:


I still feel a Spectrophotometer is the best option, for a wide variety of displays....

Why is that? Please be specific. I have both an i1 Pro and a Chroma 5 and IMHO there is no contest...for the reasons I have already given in my first post. I have also compared results on several display types (LCD front view, plasma, and LCoS front projector) and the 2 measure very close to each other (when the i1 Pro is able to take a measurement at all... ). Since my Chroma 5 is the "Pro" version, it has offset files which give it an even greater degree of accuracy since it is referenced to a MUCH better 5 nm meter. The i1 is the inferior meter as far as I am concerned....because it is slower, does not read as consistently, has BIG trouble with low light readings, and has to have those pesky "dark" readings that I continue to complain about. Please provide me with some, any kind, of solid evidence of how and why the ColorMunki would be a preferable meter. I am asking this genuinely, as I have never used the meter, but so far you seem to be saying that the ColorMunki is inferior to the i1 Pro and I am saying that the Chroma 5 is superior to the same i1 Pro and therefore even more superior to the ColorMunki, but maybe you know something about the ColorMunki which provides a valid counterpoint. Please share this knowledge...
Quote:


Not being filter based, Colormunki will not be subject to environmentally induced ageing/drift. The actual drift of Colormunki is not known, but being a spectro, based on eyeone pro technology, it certainly should be much lower than the filter based units. Idealy a Colormunki AND a fast (and cheap?) filter based unit is the way to go.

That's not true...spectros drift too. As far as I am concerned, EVERY meter should be recertified at least once a year for an enthusiast, maybe twice a year for a pro. Assuming that you do just that, then why would you prefer a low priced spectro over a quality filter based unit? They will both remain very accurate over the year's time and will both be recertified in one year. And even you profess to use a fast filter based unit in concert with a spectro. Why do that when you can simply get your cake and eat it too by purchasing a high quality filter based unit and having offset files created so that it can be trained to perform like a 5 nm reference meter over a wide range of display types? That seems to me to be an even better performer (and value!) than buying a spectro and filter based unit since the combo will only be as good as the spectro, while the Pro version of the filter based unit will act more like a 5 nm reference unit.

I don't get it...
post #17 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by venkatesh_m View Post

jkcheng,

Its slow, but isn't it supposed to be more accurate across a broader spectrum? I understand that time is money for a pro but for an enthusiast it should be sufficient, no?

Also since you had the chance to attend a workshop, what were your impressions of the K-10? How were the results compared to an eye one pro and a reference spectro (pr or orb) if they had one there?

The station I worked at had the i1pro, I didn't get a chance to work with the K-10 but did see the instruction Jeff Murray use it. We didn't run both devices on the same display so I can't say anything about their accuracy.

I'm still just an enthusiast myself, and while our time isn't as important as those who do this for a living, I found the i1pro to be frustratingly slow. It's imo impossible to use if you want to do your 2-point grayscale with 20% and 80% IRE. You have to use 30% for the lowest IRE on your 2pt calibration. On 30% the meter still took a while to read, which is a bit annoying when you make one click of an adjustment and have to wait like 20 seconds for it to register the change. Rinse and repeat until you have the grayscale at where you want can really take some time.
post #18 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Sorel View Post

Between the i1 Pro and the Chroma 5 Pro, I feel that it is no contest - the Chroma 5 Pro is much faster, at least as accurate as the i1 Pro, has much better low level performance and repeatability, and does not require taking those pesky "dark" readings every 10 minutes or so.

I don't know anything about the Color Munki.

Edit: If what I just read is correct, I would not consider the Color Munki as it requires those pesky dark readings, just like the i1 Pro...Taking dark readings every 10 minutes is a real PITA and will grow old very fast...

Dark reading requirement on the ColorMunki is 20 minutes. Yeah I forgot to mention about the dark reading requirement every 10 minutes for the i1pro. You really need to take 0% and 10% out of your readings if you are using i1pro. Otherwise you pretty much need to take dark level reads after every couple of runs.
post #19 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Sorel View Post

Please provide me with some, any kind, of solid evidence of how and why the ColorMunki would be a preferable meter. I am asking this genuinely, as I have never used the meter, but so far you seem to be saying that the ColorMunki is inferior to the i1 Pro and I am saying that the Chroma 5 is superior to the same i1 Pro and therefore even more superior to the ColorMunki, but maybe you know something about the ColorMunki which provides a valid counterpoint. Please share this knowledge...

That's not true...spectros drift too. As far as I am concerned, EVERY meter should be recertified at least once a year for an enthusiast, maybe twice a year for a pro. Assuming that you do just that, then why would you prefer a low priced spectro over a quality filter based unit? They will both remain very accurate over the year's time and will both be recertified in one year. And even you profess to use a fast filter based unit in concert with a spectro. Why do that when you can simply get your cake and eat it too by purchasing a high quality filter based unit and having offset files created so that it can be trained to perform like a 5 nm reference meter over a wide range of display types? That seems to me to be an even better performer (and value!) than buying a spectro and filter based unit since the combo will only be as good as the spectro, while the Pro version of the filter based unit will act more like a 5 nm reference unit.

I don't get it...

I think the primary reason CM is being suggested over C5 for enthusiasts is the price difference and the high-maintenance nature of the filter-based C5. $700~$800 is a lot of money to spend for an entry level calibrator on an avg salary. While spectros can shift too, it is nowhere to the likelihood and deviation of filter-based meters. I've had 2 colorimeters go bad (i1LT and a C5) myself within a year of use before I found out about this whole humidity shifting the meters issue. Also, the CM comes in a self-contained module with a sliding door to protect its insides from the environment.
post #20 of 124
Quote:


Dark reading requirement on the ColorMunki is 20 minutes. Yeah I forgot to mention about the dark reading requirement every 10 minutes for the i1pro. You really need to take 0% and 10% out of your readings if you are using i1pro. Otherwise you pretty much need to take dark level reads after every couple of runs.

Or you can create an offset file for using the i1 Pro to measure directly in front of the lens (with a diffuser, of course) instead of off the screen. That way you bring the light levels up enough so that the i1 Pro can read somewhat reliably. It still does not perform well in low light, but it is a LOT better than off the screen.
Quote:


$700~$800 is a lot of money to spend for an entry level calibrator on an avg salary.

Where are you getting those figures? A Chroma 5 (not Pro) is $400, the Pro version is $500, and the pro version complete with fantastic software (ChromaPure) is $695. How much does the ColorMunki sell for?
Quote:


While spectros can shift too, it is nowhere to the likelihood and deviation of filter-based meters.

Do you have a reference for this statement, especially concerning the Chroma 5? I am not saying that it is false, but I always thought that ANY meter would need recalibration at least once a year regardless of type. Or are you saying that the Chroma 5 will degrade significantly in less than one year?

Please read this:

http://www.chromapure.com/products-chroma5pro.asp

Tom recommends recalibration about once a year to retain accuracy. I cannot verify this one way or the other, but I trust Tom's judgement. And $100 per year for recertification seems quite reasonable to me.
post #21 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Sorel View Post

Where are you getting those figures? A Chroma 5 (not Pro) is $400, the Pro version is $500, and the pro version complete with fantastic software (ChromaPure) is $695. How much does the ColorMunki sell for?

Haven't checked prices in a while but that's where I remembered the price points at. Where you are seeing the Pro version for $500?

Quote:


Do you have a reference for this statement, especially concerning the Chroma 5? I am not saying that it is false, but I always thought that ANY meter would need recalibration at least once a year regardless of type. Or are you saying that the Chroma 5 will degrade significantly in less than one year?.

recalibration isn't the issue here I think. The drift seems to be permanent and cant be fixed with a re-calibration.
post #22 of 124
If you are going to be performing any CMS work, a spectro is the meter type of choice over a tristimulas meter.

The Color Munki should suffice.
It should be available in your price range.

You can always profile your Spyder3 meter to it if you would like to speed up your readings, and stay accurate.
post #23 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Bailey View Post

If you are going to be performing any CMS work, a spectro is the meter type of choice over a tristimulas meter.

Also, the Colormunki Design is the one supported by Calman software.
It is available in your price range.

You can always profile your Spyder3 meter to it if you would like to speed up your readings, and stay accurate.

THIS...

a spyder3 profiled to a color munki will be the most accurate, fasted way to calibrate.

profiling is super easy in v4.
post #24 of 124
I still need to learn how this profile thing works. Can I basically use this to make my C5 give same results as my colormunki, therefore making up for the red push it causes?
post #25 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkcheng122 View Post

I still need to learn how this profile thing works. Can I basically use this to make my C5 give same results as my colormunki, therefore making up for the red push it causes?

I would say... YES.

There are users who profile their C5's to the i1Pro all the time.

But, it is still only considered valid for grayscale work, as far as I have read.

You do have to perform a Grayscale and Color Gamut run with both meters before you can profile your tristim to the spectro.

The instructions for meter profiling is in Calman V3, in the right hand pane when you select Tools and Editors, then Meters Profile Editor.
post #26 of 124
LT isn't any improvement over the spyder3 in my experience.

Saying that the spyder 3 is only slightly better than the LT . (I've got a spyder2 that seems to be better than the LT and possibly the spyder3)

Colormunki seems pretty good for the money. I didn't find the black recalibration much of an issue. You'll get the advantage of being able to profile the spyder 3 as mentioned as well.
post #27 of 124
I would like to ask for a recommendation as well.

Is ColorMunki Photo a good instrument for display calibration?

My "old" (it is only half-years old...) EyeOne let me down and I want to get something which is WCG-CCFL compatible (and will be LED, OLED, ect. compatible for a long time...).

Is it able to do an acceptable job with low IRE measurements as well? Or should I send my EyeOne back to the factory and request WCG-CCFL compatible filters and firmware for it?

The final costs would be nearly equal (after I sell this EyeOne if I choose the Munki instead, which would be an used one...) and a spectrometer is a much more useful thing. But is it good enough for a WCG-CFFL display? Because I have a printer and scanner as well but I don't really care about them. But I want to calibrate my display well (as good as I can with the available resources...).
post #28 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Sorel View Post

Why is that? Please be specific. I have both an i1 Pro and a Chroma 5 and IMHO there is no contest...for the reasons I have already given in my first post. I have also compared results on several display types (LCD front view, plasma, and LCoS front projector) and the 2 measure very close to each other (when the i1 Pro is able to take a measurement at all... ). Since my Chroma 5 is the "Pro" version, it has offset files which give it an even greater degree of accuracy since it is referenced to a MUCH better 5 nm meter. The i1 is the inferior meter as far as I am concerned....because it is slower, does not read as consistently, has BIG trouble with low light readings, and has to have those pesky "dark" readings that I continue to complain about. Please provide me with some, any kind, of solid evidence of how and why the ColorMunki would be a preferable meter. I am asking this genuinely, as I have never used the meter, but so far you seem to be saying that the ColorMunki is inferior to the i1 Pro and I am saying that the Chroma 5 is superior to the same i1 Pro and therefore even more superior to the ColorMunki, but maybe you know something about the ColorMunki which provides a valid counterpoint. Please share this knowledge...

That's not true...spectros drift too. As far as I am concerned, EVERY meter should be recertified at least once a year for an enthusiast, maybe twice a year for a pro. Assuming that you do just that, then why would you prefer a low priced spectro over a quality filter based unit? They will both remain very accurate over the year's time and will both be recertified in one year. And even you profess to use a fast filter based unit in concert with a spectro. Why do that when you can simply get your cake and eat it too by purchasing a high quality filter based unit and having offset files created so that it can be trained to perform like a 5 nm reference meter over a wide range of display types? That seems to me to be an even better performer (and value!) than buying a spectro and filter based unit since the combo will only be as good as the spectro, while the Pro version of the filter based unit will act more like a 5 nm reference unit.

I don't get it...

You bring up some interesting points, Bob. I use a spectrophotometer from Datacolor everyday and I have to calibrate it to a white tile before each use. I would be curious how much a C5 drifts in an environment like SoFl over a year.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jkcheng122 View Post

I think the primary reason CM is being suggested over C5 for enthusiasts is the price difference and the high-maintenance nature of the filter-based C5. $700~$800 is a lot of money to spend for an entry level calibrator on an avg salary. While spectros can shift too, it is nowhere to the likelihood and deviation of filter-based meters. I've had 2 colorimeters go bad (i1LT and a C5) myself within a year of use before I found out about this whole humidity shifting the meters issue. Also, the CM comes in a self-contained module with a sliding door to protect its insides from the environment.

Curt has the C5 Pro w/CP for $670. A C5 Pro meter is $550.
http://www.curtpalme.com/ChromaPure_Chroma5.shtm
A DTP-94 Pro w/CP is $395.
http://www.curtpalme.com/ChromaPure_DTP94.shtm
THe ColorMunki is $599 w/Cal Home.
http://www.spectracal.com/purchase.html

CP charges $90 to recalibrate and Spectracal $175.
post #29 of 124
Quote:


recalibration isn't the issue here I think. The drift seems to be permanent and cant be fixed with a re-calibration.

Tom over at ChromaPure recalibrates them for $100. From what I understand about the way meters work, there is no such thing as a meter that can't be recalibrated, as all you need to do is profile it to a reference device and then apply the offsets in your software.
Quote:


Where you are seeing the Pro version for $500?

Once again, see Tom over at ChromaPure. AFAIK that is the MSRP or else I would not be discussing it here.

Did anyone here even bother to read the link I posted???
post #30 of 124
Quote:


While spectros can shift too, it is nowhere to the likelihood and deviation of filter-based meters.

Rayjr and sotti, both of you guys work at SpectraCal, don't you? If so, you guys sell the Chroma 5, so what is the deal? Is it anywhere near as bad as the cheap (Spyder) tristims? Can it be recalibrated? Why are you selling it if it is so bad? I can understand selling the Spyders as a CHEAP meter for beginners, but the Chroma 5 is a bit pricey, especially for a filter based meter.

So please chime in and give us the real poop on the Chroma 5...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Display Calibration
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Display Calibration › Can someone recommend a meter?