or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Display Calibration › CalMan 5 Release Notes and Discussion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

CalMan 5 Release Notes and Discussion - Page 39

post #1141 of 2247
@derekjsmith: I'm looking at purchasing CalMan5 in the near future and was wondering if there are any issues with running CalMan5 on my MacBook with Windows Parallels?
post #1142 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoozthatat View Post

@derekjsmith: I'm looking at purchasing CalMan5 in the near future and was wondering if there are any issues with running CalMan5 on my MacBook with Windows Parallels?

CalMAN 5 runs just fine with Parallels, Fusion or Bootcamp and we test on all three. The only issues we have seen with Parallels sometimes is device drivers.
post #1143 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by derekjsmith View Post

CalMAN 5 runs just fine with Parallels, Fusion or Bootcamp and we test on all three. The only issues we have seen with Parallels sometimes is device drivers.

Thanks Derek. Can't wait!
post #1144 of 2247
Feature Request: Ability to specify gamut luminance and saturation targets for AutoCal.

For example, the Sharp Elite is known for its bad color tracking. A better picture quality can be attained by using 75%-80% saturation targets rather than the default 100%.
post #1145 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by N3W813 View Post

Feature Request: Ability to specify gamut luminance and saturation targets for AutoCal.

For example, the Sharp Elite is known for its bad color tracking. A better picture quality can be attained by using 75%-80% saturation targets rather than the default 100%.

not saying that isn't true, but you might want to read this:

http://www.tlvexp.ca/2013/03/color-management-system-pie-eat-half-or-all/
post #1146 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlasmaPZ80U View Post

not saying that isn't true, but you might want to read this:

http://www.tlvexp.ca/2013/03/color-management-system-pie-eat-half-or-all/

Thanks! That was definitely a good and informative read from Michael TLV. biggrin.gif

I agree with his theories that would apply to most TV sets but in the case of the Sharp Elite, there is definitely 'visible' improvement in picture quality when using 75% saturation targets compared to 100%. wink.gif

Here are saturation sweep and dE charts of the Elite calibrated to 100% saturation targets...


Here are similar charts (25% vs 20% sweeps) using 75% saturation targets...
post #1147 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by derekjsmith View Post

One of the reasons we came up with the Tutorial license model. So people could get into calibration without a lot of up front expense but not lose the investment when they want/need to update to more features like those in Control or Enthusiasts.

So I should be able to do a pretty good calibration with the tutorial version? And then Basic and onward will let me fine tune it even further (CMS, 10-point adjustment, etc)?

I'm looking to calibrate my Sharp AQUOS LC-60LE847U.
post #1148 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by RocShemp View Post

So I should be able to do a pretty good calibration with the tutorial version? And then Basic and onward will let me fine tune it even further (CMS, 10-point adjustment, etc)?

I'm looking to calibrate my Sharp AQUOS LC-60LE847U.

I got good results with the tutorial version: http://www.avsforum.com/t/1333561/samsung-d7000-d8000-settings-calibration-thread/3180#post_22855523

I should add that it took so many passes mostly because of known issues with the 10 point controls at low contrast settings on the D7000 series.
post #1149 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by N3W813 View Post

Thanks! That was definitely a good and informative read from Michael TLV. biggrin.gif

I agree with his theories that would apply to most TV sets but in the case of the Sharp Elite, there is definitely 'visible' improvement in picture quality when using 75% saturation targets compared to 100%. wink.gif

Yes, and the same applies to Epson projectors. Calibrating using 100% Saturations make for a washed out image as the Gamut from 75% and down become very unsersaturated.. Calibrate using 75% Saturation patterns and although 100% goes off, everything from 75% and down tracks extremely well, and provides a more accurate image.

I have asked Joel and Derek about this and I have been told that this feature WILL be added to AutoCal soon.
post #1150 of 2247
I have an LCD TV which has a CMS but unfortunately will not fully saturate its blue (or for that matter change its hue at near maximum saturation).

I use a DUO to calibrate so if I use the 100% saturation patterns I get a different incorrect blue every time.

I used a different software at the time to assess whether 75% patterns would benefit me (it measured average dE values as Michael Chen suggests in his article).
From these results it became clear better calibration could be made at 75% saturation patterns despite my 100% dE values being high (it could easily have indicated the reverse).

I think it is most important that the overall dE impact when calibrated at both saturation values is assessed before making a decision as to which is better.

The article refers to the use of the magnificent Colorchecker which assesses dE values throughout the full 3D gamut at non 5x5x5 LUT calibrated points so its patterns have to be interpolated.
As a non technical person I use this in conjunction with its associated Color Comparator to assess the theory (ie check that the mystical dE values and graphs they produce are in fact borne out visually).
post #1151 of 2247
Just to let you guys know... as a point of interest... the second season of Downton Abby has great greens! Everything is fine, looks wonderful. The proper CalMAN 5 calibration seems to be the final arbiter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by erkq View Post

I have no idea where I should post this. I have the CalMAN Enthusiast/Radiance/C6 with a JVC RS20 and am overall very pleased. But watching Downton Abby I see those incredible neon yellow greens that used to plague the RS1 so long ago. Other parts of the series are universally beautiful. It's just the lawns about town and around the abby that are hideous. Occasionally there are lawns with proper greens, and also the trees look spot-on. I haven't seen this on any other Blu-rays.

So... is this a bad color on the disk, or does the disk try to represent a green that gets into a part of the color space that is off... a place that no other disk has attempted to use? How do I tell if it's in the source? It would be helpful if there was some utility that you could mouse over a scene and get the color and luminance values at that spot. Well, I'm sure there is, just not at my pay-grade. smile.gif
post #1152 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by erkq View Post

Just to let you guys know... as a point of interest... the second season of Downton Abby has great greens! Everything is fine, looks wonderful. The proper CalMAN 5 calibration seems to be the final arbiter.

I agree that Calman 5.1 for 3D LUT cube calibration does a very nice, I use a Mini 3D, C6 profiled by a I1 2 pro.

I am getting a eecolor box to be able to do 17^3 LUT calibration whit Calman's next updates for 5.1 Enthusiast.

ss
post #1153 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by sillysally View Post

I agree that Calman 5.1 for 3D LUT cube calibration does a very nice, I use a Mini 3D, C6 profiled by a I1 2 pro.

I am getting a eecolor box to be able to do 17^3 LUT calibration whit Calman's next updates for 5.1 Enthusiast.

ss

Yes, I am using a Mini 3D/C6 combo also. I'm a little confused... I have 5.1 Enthusiast. So Specracal is planning to release a 17^3 version? How awesome! I don't use any of the scaling capabilities of the Mini 3D so I could sell that and get an eeColor box. I assume it would be the same multiple-read process as current, not necessarily a bad thing... but I understand that CalMAN's upgrade to 5.1 separated out the profiling and calibration internally at least. Interesting times...
post #1154 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by erkq View Post

I don't use any of the scaling capabilities of the Mini 3D so I could sell that and get an eeColor box.

Without the Mini 3D you will need a pattern generator capable of displaying the necessary triplets for the eeColor processor.
post #1155 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by praz View Post

Without the Mini 3D you will need a pattern generator capable of displaying the necessary triplets for the eeColor processor.

I wonder if the DUO could be made to act as pattern generator for this?

Otherwise the imminent Disc from Tedd would be the answer I suppose.
post #1156 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by erkq View Post

Yes, I am using a Mini 3D/C6 combo also. I'm a little confused... I have 5.1 Enthusiast. So Specracal is planning to release a 17^3 version? How awesome! I don't use any of the scaling capabilities of the Mini 3D so I could sell that and get an eeColor box. I assume it would be the same multiple-read process as current, not necessarily a bad thing... but I understand that CalMAN's upgrade to 5.1 separated out the profiling and calibration internally at least. Interesting times...

The one catch to the larger LUT's is that the calibration gets put on your HD, so from there you use eecolor's TruVue software to transfer the calibration from your HD to the eecolor.
Also if the Mini does the pattern generation as it does now, I will probably keep it and use it for a second TV.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1461363/ee-colorbox-lightspace-and-3d-lut-calibration

ss
post #1157 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by PE06MCG View Post

I wonder if the DUO could be made to act as pattern generator for this?

Otherwise the imminent Disc from Tedd would be the answer I suppose.

This is beyond the DUO's capabilities. For disk based patterns you would need to verify that the BD player did not alter the output. Also, I can't believe that all players will stay in sync throughout the calibration process assuming the layout is compatible with CalMAN. If there are sync issues or a lack of compatibility I doubt anybody would want to perform a 17 point calibration manually advancing the patterns.
Edited by praz - 3/12/13 at 9:56am
post #1158 of 2247
The Duo can be used as a full triplet pattern generator and can do different window sizes, the next jump starting at $1295 is the Accupel 5000 which is a professional level generator, full triplet, any size window, window with any surround etc.
post #1159 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by praz View Post

Without the Mini 3D you will need a pattern generator capable of displaying the necessary triplets for the eeColor processor.

Yes our processes requires the use of a full RGB triplet pattern generator. Radiance, VideoForge, AP5000, QD780, QD882 or if you know for a fact your PC HDMI output is correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PE06MCG View Post

I wonder if the DUO could be made to act as pattern generator for this?

Otherwise the imminent Disc from Tedd would be the answer I suppose.

This won't work because we do need the ability to generate any RGB triplet as part of our process so over 16 million possible RGB combinations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by turbe View Post

The Duo can be used as a full triplet pattern generator and can do different window sizes

No the Duo won't work either yes it is a limited RGB triplet generator but is in percent 0-100 not bit 0-255.
post #1160 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by derekjsmith View Post

if you know for a fact your PC HDMI output is correct.

Derek, assuming we have meter, software, patterns and know accurate pattern source, what would be the process to determine if the HDMI output of ones laptop is accurate for use as a pattern generator? Has Spectracal got a white paper on the process?
post #1161 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by derekjsmith View Post

Yes our processes requires the use of a full RGB triplet pattern generator. Radiance, VideoForge, AP5000, QD780, QD882 or if you know for a fact your PC HDMI output is correct.
.
Don't forget the Accupel 5000 in the list, full triplet at % or bit as CalMAN uses, starting at $1295 (Standard version may not be listed on the website but is available).
Edited by turbe - 3/12/13 at 10:40am
post #1162 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by airscapes View Post

Derek, assuming we have meter, software, patterns and know accurate pattern source, what would be the process to determine if the HDMI output of ones laptop is accurate for use as a pattern generator? Has Spectracal got a white paper on the process?

Well the only true correct method is using an HDMI protocol analyzer or HDMI wave form monitor. Some have suggested just comparing the outputs with grayscale ramps or pluge which will tell you only one thing, is the output compressed 0-255>16-235, clipped 0-255=16-235 or shifted 0-255>16-255. But won’t tell you if your setup is using dynamic gamma as do many video chips do today and it can’t be disable. So even if you output does look correct it still maybe off a couple of bits here and there which will not work.

No matter what anyone else claims the only true method is using a analyzer to verify.
Edited by derekjsmith - 3/12/13 at 11:42am
post #1163 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbe View Post

Don't forget the Accupel 5000 in the list, full triplet at % or bit as CalMAN uses, starting at $1295

It is listed AP5000.
post #1164 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by derekjsmith View Post


This won't work because we do need the ability to generate any RGB triplet as part of our process so over 16 million possible RGB combinations.
.

Forgot about that Derek, ah well back to trying to convince myself that my next display will show the same linearity that my current one does.
post #1165 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by airscapes View Post

I have seen enough issue with my own BR players and DPG2000 to know that you can not assume anything is correct, and to do so is just plain foolish. Even things that have been verified such as the DPG2000 can have issues where the manufacture screws up the firmware programming causing intermittent inaccuracies that are Way more than just a little off.. Something tells me the HDMI port in my Dell laptop is not held to quite as high a standard as that of a device built specifically for video output, so why would I assume it is correct?

This is so true. While the output of a PC or homemade disk may be good enough it is nonsense to state complete accuracy without testing with a certified analyzer. I can understand Steve's position on this though. One of the major marketing claims of LightSpace is being able to use a PC to generate all needed patterns.
post #1166 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by praz View Post

This is so true. While the output of a PC or homemade disk may be good enough it is nonsense to state complete accuracy without testing with a certified analyzer. I can understand Steve's position on this though. One of the major marketing claims of LightSpace is being able to use a PC to generate all needed patterns.

I didn't realise that there were variations of quality on the HDMI connector standard, irrespective of their proposed use.

I have seen problems with certain hardware that requires a minimum length of cable between its connectors so is it also necessary to verify the HDMI connectors attached to any cable that connects a dedicated pattern generator to its final destination?
post #1167 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by PE06MCG View Post

I have seen problems with certain hardware that requires a minimum length of cable between its connectors so is it also necessary to verify the HDMI connectors attached to any cable that connects a dedicated pattern generator to its final destination?

The cable is either going to work or not work.


Steve, before you respond to my earlier post with some smoke and mirrors please clarify your previous post below. By your own admission the possibility exists that the output of the PC may not be bit perfect. This also holds true for user created test disks. Your continual blanket statements on this forum alluding to the contrary does a disservice to everyone. Please stop this type of approach and market your products in a professional manner. Thank you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Light Illusion View Post

All the PCs we have tested, and we have tested many (and I really do mean many!) have been perfect - yep.
And as you can see, we have access to the most advanced test equipment out there - our customer base is the hight-end film and tv post-production facilities, after all.

Of course, there will always be some crappy graphics cards out there, and it's no surprise we don't use Macs eek.gif
But, we have not seen a poor PC HDMI out (or Display Port) for a long time
- hence out adoption of this approach.
But, we do control the video card as required.

And our team also designs a lot of the high-end image processing systems out there.

We really do know what we are talking about.

biggrin.gif
post #1168 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by praz View Post

The cable is either going to work or not work.



Please don';t misunderstand but surely the point is will it maintain the accuracy that the pattern generator has produced?

I think a previous post suggested that the HDMI port on a Laptop may not be up to 'video use'.

Like you, my experience is that an HDMI cable works or it does not work. However, if the HDMI output connector on a Laptop is a suspect for maintaining accuracy then surely the cable may suffer the same possibility.

Cannot comment on use of laptop cards but hopefully we can agree that whatever is generated is likely to be accurately transferred to its destination via HDMI connectors.
post #1169 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by PE06MCG View Post

Please don';t misunderstand but surely the point is will it maintain the accuracy that the pattern generator has produced?

I think a previous post suggested that the HDMI port on a Laptop may not be up to 'video use'.

Like you, my experience is that an HDMI cable works or it does not work. However, if the HDMI output connector on a Laptop is a suspect for maintaining accuracy then surely the cable may suffer the same possibility.

Cannot comment on use of laptop cards but hopefully we can agree that whatever is generated is likely to be accurately transferred to its destination via HDMI connectors.

I should have been more clear. The physical HDMI port is not the issue, it is the video card that is providing the video output. Computer Video cards are not know for their accuracy and assuming the video signal from your laptop HDMI is accurate is not a wise assumption.
post #1170 of 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by PE06MCG View Post

Cannot comment on use of laptop cards but hopefully we can agree that whatever is generated is likely to be accurately transferred to its destination via HDMI connectors.

Yes. The issue is without proper test equipment there is no way to know that what is generated is accurate.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Display Calibration
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Display Calibration › CalMan 5 Release Notes and Discussion