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 40

post #1171 of 2242
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.

Usually it is. I have tested several Display-Port --> HDMI adapters with my MacBook and LightSpace CMS. The only "problem" I have ever seen was because of the Lumagen Radiance as a pattern generator / 5^3 LUT holder. That's solved but it was more like a steeplechase than "direct" programming.
post #1172 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by praz View Post

Yes. The issue is without proper test equipment there is no way to know that what is generated is accurate.

Thanks Praz (and Airscapes)..

If you get an eeColorBox from Buzz how will you generate the patterns?

I was hoping to use my DUO should I need an eecolorbox for my next Display but as you say not suitable (thanks Derek for explanation why that is so).
post #1173 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by praz View Post

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 PE06MCG View Post

Thanks Praz (and Airscapes)..

If you get an eeColorBox from Buzz how will you generate the patterns?

I was hoping to use my DUO should I need an eecolorbox for my next Display but as you say not suitable (thanks Derek for explanation why that is so).

Using an Accupel 5000 generator for reference I've checked AVSHD with several Panasonic BD players, Lumagen Radiance, and internal patterns from LightSpace, ChromaPure, and Calman. They are all quite accurate. If generating from the software programs, compare the reads to AVSHD. If you don't, you'll never know, like calibrating with an unprofiled colorimeter - shot in the dark....
post #1174 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzard767 View Post


Using an Accupel 5000 generator for reference I've checked AVSHD with several Panasonic BD players, Lumagen Radiance, and internal patterns from LightSpace, ChromaPure, and Calman. They are all quite accurate. If generating from the software programs, compare the reads to AVSHD. If you don't, you'll never know, like calibrating with an unprofiled colorimeter - shot in the dark....

Thanks Buzz.

I have an OPPO BD -player which hopefully is as accurate as your Panny ones.

The AVSHD is the constant I suppose, so a check against my software patterns as you suggest.

Which patterns are necessary to be compared in order to be confident of correct reproducibility?
post #1175 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by PE06MCG View Post

Thanks Buzz.

I have an OPPO BD -player which hopefully is as accurate as your Panny ones.

The AVSHD is the constant I suppose, so a check against my software patterns as you suggest.

Which patterns are necessary to be compared in order to be confident of correct reproducibility?

All I use is R, G, B, & W at 75% saturation. If someone knows a better way, fess up. smile.gif
post #1176 of 2242
deleted - double post
post #1177 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by PE06MCG View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzard767 View Post


Using an Accupel 5000 generator for reference I've checked AVSHD with several Panasonic BD players, Lumagen Radiance, and internal patterns from LightSpace, ChromaPure, and Calman. They are all quite accurate. If generating from the software programs, compare the reads to AVSHD. If you don't, you'll never know, like calibrating with an unprofiled colorimeter - shot in the dark....

Thanks Buzz.

I have an OPPO BD -player which hopefully is as accurate as your Panny ones.

The AVSHD is the constant I suppose, so a check against my software patterns as you suggest.

Which patterns are necessary to be compared in order to be confident of correct reproducibility?

Check this Forum, they have tesTED the Quantum 780 vs. OPPO BDP-105 vs. BDP-103.

http://www.my-hiend.com/vbb/showthread.php?6671-【訊源】OPPO-BDP-105-BDP-103-儀器實測分析

Nothing is bit perfect in this world frown.gif

That's the reason i'm using only my bluray disk as a pattern generator for 17-Point Cube Calibration. wink.gif

If you compare 2 pattern generators also of 1.000$ + 5.000$, you will find that there is a small difference there also. This hunting never ends...
post #1178 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

Nothing is bit perfect in this world frown.gif

Well when we are writting YCC, YUV, RGB or XYZ data directly into a frame buffer it is bit perfect. But as you point out that does come at a cost.
post #1179 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzard767 View Post

All I use is R, G, B, & W at 75% saturation. If someone knows a better way, fess up. smile.gif

As you said previously it is similar to profiling against a reference meter.

Thanks Buzz.
post #1180 of 2242
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.

Anybody have any experience with Virtualbox on a Macbook Pro and Windows XP for Calman?
post #1181 of 2242
I would use something newer than XP if you can.
post #1182 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by PE06MCG View Post

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.

My Disk's 10 or 17-Point Cube Calibration Pattern Chapter will work only with LightSpace, since LightSpace needs 1 read per color point and you can choose each pattern display time, so i have copied the pattern order the software requests them and you have to sync one mouse click to sync the whole proccess.

No other user input will required.

In the future if CalMAN have any similar feature, i can easily add the support for AutomaTED Calibration using the Blu-Ray Disk as a source. wink.gif
post #1183 of 2242
Being in the Computer Service Business, I've seen more than my fair share of cooked or semi cooked video cards, especially NVidia Chipsets in Laptop/Notebooks that were used on laps!, beds, couches, stools, carpet etc! Plus, Video Cards cooling fans so plugged up with dirt, they're more than useless re cooling!
So, as mentioned, who, in their home, has any way of anaylising the video signal quality being produced?
post #1184 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by p5browne View Post

Being in the Computer Service Business, I've seen more than my fair share of cooked or semi cooked video cards, especially NVidia Chipsets in Laptop/Notebooks that were used on laps!, beds, couches, stools, carpet etc! Plus, Video Cards cooling fans so plugged up with dirt, they're more than useless re cooling!
So, as mentioned, who, in their home, has any way of anaylising the video signal quality being produced?

But in the digital world, wouldn't being "cooked" enough to slip digits create large errors? There's as much chance of a low order bit slipping as a high order bit. And if a high order bit slips you'll see a huge error. In other words, slipped bit errors won't be subtle!

I'm not saying device drivers, etc don't get in the way of proper output in a more subtle way, though.
post #1185 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by PE06MCG View Post

As you said previously it is similar to profiling against a reference meter.

Thanks Buzz.

My colorimeter progression has been C5, D3, Klein K10-A and darker reads have never been too much of a problem. It was brought to my attention that because Blue is so low luminance perhaps some meters might have a little trouble at 75/75 and recommended 100/100. That is most likely correct.
Edited by buzzard767 - 3/12/13 at 6:24pm
post #1186 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

My Disk's 10 or 17-Point Cube Calibration Pattern Chapter will work only with LightSpace, since LightSpace needs 1 read per color point and you can choose each pattern display time

CalMAN only reads each color one time, when creating 3D LUTs.

But we could possibly ask for any of the 16.4M 8bit combinations though, so I'm not sure that would work for a disk.
post #1187 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzard767 View Post

My colorimeter progression has been C5, D3, Klein K10-A and darker reads have never been too much of a problem. It was brought to my attention that because Blue is so low luminance perhaps some meters might have a little trouble at 75/75 and recommended 100/100. That is most likely correct.

Thanks Buzz, yes I use 100 / 100 when meter profiling as recommended by Ted.
Better safe than sorry with the lower blue 'Y' values I suppose.
post #1188 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by PE06MCG View Post

Thanks Praz (and Airscapes)..

If you get an eeColorBox from Buzz how will you generate the patterns?

I was hoping to use my DUO should I need an eecolorbox for my next Display but as you say not suitable (thanks Derek for explanation why that is so).
I would use the Mini 3D or DVG-5000 for either the eeColor or ColorBox LUT box.
post #1189 of 2242
Is there any other way using Calman 5.1 with a tutorial license to set your contrast correct. My contrast on the AVSHD disk can go anywhere from 84 to 94. 84 shows all flashing bars. 94 flashes to 235 only.

I know this is subjective and some here like all bars flashing others like just to white, but I am not finding any way to say for sure whhere mine should sit. I know if I hit 94, backlight obviously can be turned down, but I do seem like I run out of red then after minor adjustments to the grayscale. If I go 84, I can be good, but am I robbing myself of the pop and depth look that I am hoping for?

Is there any way to judge the increase on each step up of contrast per color on the Tutorial license so I could go from 84 up and see exactly where I would start to run out of red?

Any other program to try just for this part? I like the Calman software and does what I need just fine, minus my own setting of the contrast to start. Brightness is easy enough to set and basically leave the whole way through.
post #1190 of 2242
Use 84 and don't worry about it.


If you really want to see it instrumented, you'll need a pattern disc that has 1% steps up to 109% and the Basic license. The instrumented dynamic range step is in the HT Advanced workflow.
post #1191 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by praz View Post

I would use the Mini 3D or DVG-5000 for either the eeColor or ColorBox LUT box.

Why would you pick the Colorbox.?

Unless of course you feel Spectracal may be considering 'price matching'.
post #1192 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by PE06MCG View Post

Why would you pick the Colorbox.?

Unless of course you feel Spectracal may be considering 'price matching'.

I didn't mean to imply I would necessarily choose the ColorBox. If I did though the decision would be based on more than just cost. This is not the place for me to discuss this but I would be happy to share my views through PM however.
Edited by praz - 3/13/13 at 11:10am
post #1193 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by sotti View Post

Use 84 and don't worry about it.


If you really want to see it instrumented, you'll need a pattern disc that has 1% steps up to 109% and the Basic license. The instrumented dynamic range step is in the HT Advanced workflow.

What kind of viewing trade off then would I expect if I go with the 84? I have one of my ISF settings at contrast 89 now and my backlight (0-100) is at 46. This gives me about 40 FtL. If I go to 84, I believe my backlight will be around 68 to give me the 40 Ftl. The Brightness stays at 52 roughly for both backlight settings, so should I look for anything in particular on Blu-rays that would say 65 on the backlight is degrading the picture from 46??

That is the confusing part to me. Maybe I am good at 89 right now and just overthinking it. BTW. 89 on contrast IIRC is around 245-247 on white clipping pattern after grayscale is done.
post #1194 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by eghill1125 View Post

What kind of viewing trade off then would I expect if I go with the 84?

I don't look at it as a trade off, that's the correct setting.
post #1195 of 2242
Spectracal,
Was wondering if you have had experience in determining which video chipset manufacturer (Intel, Nvidia, Ati, etc.) produces more accurate patterns using Windows OS and your CalPC client as a pattern generator over HDMI.
post #1196 of 2242
+1, also like to ask that. As a lot of the LS people use graphic cards to generate the patterns due to their so said high accuracy, to me it seems to be senseless to purchase a 1000$ + pattern generator, when a software and a 50-70$ graphic card could do the same job.
post #1197 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by N3W813 View Post

Spectracal,
Was wondering if you have had experience in determining which video chipset manufacturer (Intel, Nvidia, Ati, etc.) produces more accurate patterns using Windows OS and your CalPC client as a pattern generator over HDMI.

It's not that easy to generalize. Different generations of chips with different drivers do different things.
post #1198 of 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by sotti View Post

It's not that easy to generalize. Different generations of chips with different drivers do different things.

Are there any specific chipset/driver combos you have found to be more accurate? wink.gif
post #1199 of 2242
Joe Kane has done extensive work with helping at least 1 manufacturer produce an accurate video board for PC products... he even finally got one company (a few years ago) to produce an accurate video board. BUT, the next year, the "new model" of the same board was just as bad as it was before Joe Kane worked with the manufacturer. The moral of the story is... even if there is an accurate video board this year, there's no guarantee there will be one next year and, in general, none of them pay much attention to being accurate. And you cannot assume a board that was accurate last year will still be accurate this year. But Joe Kane found no accurate PC video boards before he started working with the the manufacturer referenced here. Not only THAT, but a firmware update the manufacturer had to issue to fix some compatibility issues made the newly accurate video board inaccurate again.

So... chances are that every PC video board is inaccurate. And any board that happens to be accurate right now, could be rendered inaccurate by any given firmware update or by even a small manufacturing change that "shouldn't" affect the board's accuracy. I've seen that happen many times over the years when some part used in one of the imaging systems I worked on was replaced with a new part said to be exactly the same as the previous part... problem is, the new part may meet the general spec of the previous part, but there can be very different end results, especially in tuned circuits. I've seen cases where changing a single surface mounted capacitor to the newer replacement part completely disabled a circuit board and in other cases, it could introduce maddeningly difficult to pin-down problems.
Edited by Doug Blackburn - 3/13/13 at 12:33pm
post #1200 of 2242
Thanks for that insight Doug.

I think we are all struggling to sort out truth from myth at the moment.
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