PR-655 SpectraScan® Spectroradiometer good for plasma?

Greetings

Yes. $13000 or so and more if extras are added. More accurate and more certainty ... in the right hands.

Would it result in a noticeably better end product? Not really ... versus a person that knows how to use his i1 pro properly. It many cases, the probe may have more "resolution" than what the TV controls are capable of.

Imagine if ... 52 was on one side of a correct answer and 51 was on the other side. The probe could tell you that ... but the TV won't allow you to set it to 51.6 which is the absolute best setting.

regards

What timing. I just finished calibrating a Mits LaserVue with its coarse, clunky controls. It received a new light engine today and needed work. All I have with me is an i1Pro but the resulting picture is very good despite the blue primary being a little off.

Back to topic - is there a big bargain spectro available out there somewhere?

The Orb and Jeti models are the closest thing to "bargain" reference spectro. Still very expensive.
One nice thing about them is how compact they are.
I've seen a Photo Research PR-705 and PR-715 for sale on the used market within the past year, both for less than the PR-655. They are compatible with CalMAN, and from everything I can gather they are extremely accurate, but they are bigger and heavier (12 lbs!) than the PR-655. I wonder if they are practical for field use. They have awesome low light sensitivity for a spectro. Has anyone used them?

Can I ask why someone would want to buy something like this if they are likely to only use it once?

Edit: Oh, I get it. It's been a long day...

What were you going to say?

IMO, the PR-655 and Klein-K10 is the ultimate combination/Meter-Combo for the Professional Calibrator per Price-Performance (profiling the K-10 to the PR).

then you obviously have not used a JETI 1211 ;-)

I haven't used one but have heard the great results reported from owners and was one of the early ones pointing out the 1211 specs..

However, the pr/klein combo has an advantage in that some clients would require the pr for the job.

That's not the 1st time I've heard about clients requiring a PR for the job. Why would they when a Jeti or Orb is just as accurate? Gregg, do you have many clients who specify you use your PR over the Orb or Jeti?

hi

when I do post production work, some require a reference instrument, that is a PR
branded unit.


Relating to the above quote. There is zero advantage with that combo, if a client required a PR for the job, they would toss you out on your ear as soon as you pulled the Klien out of its case.

that is what I meant, only the PR would be used for those jobs...

I almost put the hammer down on the 1211 last year to complement my K10, but for the $2K difference, I probably would go the PR route since the K10 still has some advantages when paired up. Now where are those 30-50% off retail used 655's

I am sure we will start to see the 1211/OEM Display Pro 3 combo soon too.

You're reading my mind.

I want to get my hands on one of those DP3..

Is it going to be the K10's younger brother?

With it's speed, low light ability, and assuming it does it's job when profiled, who needs a K-10?

Kick big brother to the curb already?

Why on earth would you bother profiling the DP3 if you have a 1211 ? A serious waste of time.

That's what I'd like to know!

I have to say, profiling seems to be a touchy process, and not always spot on... While I still do it in certain situations (front PJs and/or if I really need to know what's happening below 10%), I try to avoid it if possible.

I didn't realize that. Are you using your i1Pro or do you have something else?

Yep, i1Pro/C5 combo.

I think the i1Pro red primary bug causes the problem sometimes with front PJs.

Lately I've gotten into the habit of turning on the LLH and turning it's threshold up high when profiling, which does seem to help.

Since we're discussing the PR-655 and Jeti-1211....

The PR-655 has a Wavelength resolution of < 3.5 nm, whereas the Jeti-1211 has a 5 nm wavelength resolution.

I have been hearing that if/when laser light displays with a narrower bandwidth become more popular/available, meters that can't read with less than 5 nm resolution may have problems reading accurately.

Any thoughts about the validity of that?

Greg

Although there is no mention of specific nm in the following, it stands to reason that where laser is concerned, the lower the better. I remember a post by umr re: a LaserVue he calibrated where he said it had previously been calibrated by a K-10 profiled from an i1Pro and it wasn't even close.

Below is an excerpt of an X-Rite white paper from: http://www.lumita.com/site_media/wor...rite-wp-3a.pdf

The only difficulty with the production of an XYZ colorimeter is the filters. The XYZ response curves are complex. In order to create these complex filters, many separate filters must be stacked together to achieve the final curves. The filters achieved are never perfect matches to the XYZ curves. However they don't need to be. By calibrating a colorimeter at the factory against reference sources, a mathematical correction called a calibration matrix is stored in the colorimeter. This corrects the minor errors that are introduced by inaccuracies of the filters. This does not create a device that
can measure any color with perfect accuracy. Instead a colorimeter of this type will produce very accurate results from most sources. Certain sources that have very narrow bandwidths like lasers will not be as accurate

The wavelength resolution of the JETI 1211 is 1 nm.

But it's optical bandwidth is 4.5 nm and 5nm seems to be the widely accepted minimum requirement.

"Spectral range specbos 1211 : 350 nm - 1000 nm
specbos 1211 UV : 250 nm - 1000 nm
Optical bandwidth 4.5 nm
Wavelength resolution 1 nm..... "

From: http://www.chromapure.com/products-1211.asp

Specifications
Specbos 1211
Spectral range: 350-1000 nm
Wavelength resolution: 5 nm
Dynamic range (luminance): 0.2-7,000 cd/m2
Dynamic range (illuminance): 2-50,000 Lux
Luminance accuracy: ±2%
Luminance reproducibility: ±1%
Chromaticity accuracy: ±0.002 xy
Chromaticity reproducibility: ±0.0005 xy
Light receiving element: 1024 pixel photodiode array
Power supply: USB
Dimensions: 140 mm x 68 mm x 34 mm
Operating temperature: 10-40 °C
NIST traceable: Yes
Recommended recalibration interval: 1 Year

JETI Specbos 1211 (German Company)

Wavelength Resolution: 1 nm

http://www.jeti.com/cms/index.php/in...r/specbos-1211

Orb Optronix SP-100 (OEM partner of JETI and markets the JETI device in the U.S)

Optical Bandwidth: 4 nm
Wavelength Binning Resolution: 1 nm

http://www.orboptronix.com/product_sp-100.html

This discussion is hampered somewhat by a lack of clarity about terminology. This is not surprising, since the terminology used by the manufacturers is not consistent. In the case of JETI, it is not even consistent between different products. The three relevant specifications are

• the sampling resolution
• the optical resolution
• wavelength accuracy

Sampling resolution is always smaller than optical resolution

According to the manufacturer's published specs:

Instrument	Sampling Resolution	Optical Resolution	Wavelength Accuracy
X-Rite i1Pro	3.5 nm	10 nm	?
Photo Research PR-655	3.12 nm	8 nm/5 nm	1 nm
Photo Research PR-680	1.56 nm	8 nm/5 nm	1 nm
JETI 1211	1 nm	4.5 nm	0.5 nm
JETI 1201	1 nm	5 nm	0.5 nm
Minolta CS-2000	0.9 nm	5 nm	0.3 nm
Microspec	0.195 nm	5 nm	0.5 nm

All sample the entire visible spectrum and all but the i1Pro claim xy0.002 accuracy. The only other relevant considerations are cost, usability, sensitivity, and speed.

Instrument	Sampling Resolution	Optical Resolution	Wavelength Accuracy
X-Rite i1Pro	3.5 nm	10 nm	?
Photo Research PR-655	3.12 nm	8 nm/5 nm	1 nm
Photo Research PR-680	1.56 nm	8 nm/5 nm	1 nm
Photo Research PR-730	1 nm	2 nm	0.4nm
JETI 1211	1 nm	4.5 nm	0.5 nm
JETI 1201	1 nm	5 nm	0.5 nm
Minolta CS-2000	0.9 nm	5 nm	0.3 nm
Microspec	0.195 nm	5 nm	0.5 nm

* Updated