or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Display Calibration › LightSpace CMS Now Supports Lumagen + eeColor 3D-LUT 4 All
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

LightSpace CMS Now Supports Lumagen + eeColor 3D-LUT 4 All - Page 3

post #61 of 710
Easy - because when we do use Signal Generators, we are using $200K's worth of Mistika, Scratch, Pablo, BaseLight, or other Digital Intermediate system, or 10'sK worth of Davio, Pluto, Tcube, etc....

See: http://www.lightillusion.com/lightspace_plugins.html

And we compare those system outputs with or approach of NOT using a Pattern Generator...

We can actually digitally record all the various output and compare them to single bit depth.

So, yes, they are all proven - perfectly.

There is a real benefit coming from the high-end professional market some times...

biggrin.gif

(But, I do agree some DVD and Blu-Ray platers can be a lot less than perfect, but we have no control over them!)
post #62 of 710
So you are saying you have to use a plug in supported by a reference generator to get a reference signal. How does this help someone without said reference generator to guarantee the non-reference device they are using is reference?
post #63 of 710
Thread Starter 
Consumer Total Cost View:

THX CineCube HD (Locked to REC.709 Target Only): 1895$ + Currently No Support for eeColor, you will need DAVIO: 4.995$ + iD3 OEM Meter: 295$= 7.185$

LightSpace CMS: 2.690$ + eeColor: 600$ + iD3 OEM Meter: 295$ = 3.585$

CalMAN Enthousiast: 399$ + ColorBox: 1.595$ + Supported Pattern Generator by CalMAN Enthousiast Licence: Lumagen Radiance Mini-3D: ~1.600$ + iD3 OEM Meter: 295$ = 3.889$

From Personal Testing:

LightSpace/THX CineSpace: Time To Calibrate 17-Point Cube (4913 Patches) with iD3: 6 Hours for a display with deep blacks/low luminance readings, that depends on the display.

LightSpace Quick Profile using Lumagen Radiance Mini-3D with iD3 (141 Patches) with iD3: 12 Minutes for a display with deep blacks/low luminance readings, that depends on the display.

CalMAN: Time To Calibrate Lumagen 5-Point Cube (125 Color + 21-Step Grayscale) with iD3: ~About 15-20 Minutes for Grayscale + About 35-50 Minutes for Colors = ~50 Minutes - 1 Hour 10Minutes Minimum (for 145 Patches)

CalMAN: Time to Calibrate 17-Point Cube (4913 Patches) with iD3: ? Buzz can help us here with a total time from his experience with his old iD3 meter.

Using a Klein (without having personal experience):

LightSpace: Time to Calibrate 17-Point Cube (4913 Patches) with Klein: ? Max 4 Hours but Buzz can help us here with a total time from his experience with new Klein K-10A meter.

CalMAN: Time to Calibrate 17-Point Cube (4913 Patches) with Klein: ? Buzz can help us here with a total time from his experience with new Klein K-10A meter.

Total Costs are generally high (consumer level) for that type of performance we are searching, the same time that most expensive TV sets available at market costs lower.
Total cost can be reduced if proffesional calibrators perform these 3D LUT Calibrations using their more accurate/faster meters.
post #64 of 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

LightSpace: Time to Calibrate 17-Point Cube (4913 Patches) with Klein: ? Max 4 Hours but Buzz can help us here with a total time from his experience with new Klein K-10A meter.

I'm not sure I even follow the business model? What calibrator is going to wait around for a 4 hour processes to calibrate a single display in the consumer market? Yes for the pro markets they let it run overnight if needed. But for the consumer market I’m not sure anyone could justify spending 4 hours calibrating a LUT box including a Radiance.
post #65 of 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by derekjsmith View Post

So you are saying you have to use a plug in supported by a reference generator to get a reference signal. How does this help someone without said reference generator to guarantee the non-reference device they are using is reference?

I guess the fact we have tested many, many different PC setups kinda proves that...
And tested agianst the best possible 'Pattern Generators.

It is how we found the problem wit the BMD HDlink Pro, which BMD have since admitted is there.
(And why they haven't fixed it is beyond me!)

And it's how we knwo many of the 'pattern generators out there are actually not accurate.

mad.gif
post #66 of 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by derekjsmith View Post

What calibrator is going to wait around for a 4 hour processes to calibrate a single display in the consumer market? .

many, the good ones anyways - what am I missing here? 3-4 hours is common for a single mid to highend consumer level display/fp to get it right and that's just for the Display's controls (no processor, no luts).. often it can go more, just ask ChadB, he'll put the time in and can go 6-8 hours to get it right biggrin.gif. I supposed you could cut 1 hour off by removing the education.

anyways, I know many of the Calibrators I track will often spend up to 3-4 hours for the job.. it takes some calibrators more time to setup/packup with all their gear than a BB calibrator spends on the entire calibration.
Edited by turbe - 11/27/12 at 2:54pm
post #67 of 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by derekjsmith View Post

I'm not sure I even follow the business model? What calibrator is going to wait around for a 4 hour processes to calibrate a single display in the consumer market? Yes for the pro markets they let it run overnight if needed. But for the consumer market I’m not sure anyone could justify spending 4 hours calibrating a LUT box including a Radiance.

That is just for the 17x17x17 cube based profiling...
Should you want to do a 5x5x5 profile, as some others do, it would take just 6 minutes as an average - faster with higher-end probes.
Or a 21 step RGBW profile as well, for another 4 mins.

This is the beauty of separating profiling from calibration - all options are there.

And the reason many opt for the full 17x17x17 cube based profiling (or 14x14x14, or... you get the picture) is because of the results.
post #68 of 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Light Illusion View Post

I guess the fact we have tested many, many different PC setups kinda proves that...
And tested agianst the best possible 'Pattern Generators.
It is how we found the problem wit the BMD HDlink Pro, which BMD have since admitted is there.
(And why they haven't fixed it is beyond me!)
And it's how we knwo many of the 'pattern generators out there are actually not accurate.
mad.gif

So Steve you are going on record as saying every PC/Mac with a HDMI output port is guaranteed by you as being a true RGB triplet reference? I’m not sure I would be as bold to make that statement and stake my reputation on that.

Hint: We to have a lot of test gear from various companies including ones used in professional markets. We also work with the video card chipset manufactures on various projects.
post #69 of 710
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 #70 of 710
Ok - my bed time night, night one and all!

biggrin.gif
post #71 of 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzard767 View Post

The box contains remote control selectable slots for 6 separate LUTs. Only the original profile is required though, as it can be converted to:
P3 DCI D55
P3 DCI D65
Rec601_NTSC
Rec601_EBU
Rec601_RP145
Rec709
sRGB
DCI XYZ
ACES
ITU-R BT.1886
Vision
Premier
Fuji
or Custom

so you only characterize the display ONCE ?

I'm assuming you have to create different LUT's (from the characterization) for each desired color space and then store them in any of the 6 slots ?
post #72 of 710
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Mike View Post

so you only characterize the display ONCE ?
I'm assuming you have to create different LUT's (from the characterization) for each desired color space and then store them in any of the 6 slots ?

Exactly, One measurement of all color patches you want, selectable 3x3x3* till 17x17x17*. Then after having these measurements with a conversions you can create (for example): One LUT with REC.709 with Gamma 2.22, One with 2.20, one with 2.25, one with REC601 etc. Conversion takes from 5 sec. till 5 min to be calculated, after that you can upload each LUT to different memory of eeColor to make LUT comparisons etc.

THX CineCube HD, LightSpace CMS, FilmLight TruLight... these software soluitions that used at all major Movie Studios are using that method of calibrating 3D-LUT, So calibrating your display with that way, will get you closer.

BTW I have tested THX CineCube HD & LightSpace CMS, i don't own these software solutions, i don't have eeColor Hardware, I'm currently using CalMAN with Lumagen Mini-3D.

* With iD3 to measure Cube with Resolution of:

10x10x10 (1000 Color Patches) takes 1 Hour 20 Minutes Max.
11x11x11 (1331 Color Patches) takes 1 Hour 50 Minutes Max.
12x12x12 (1768 Color Patches) takes 2 Hour 25 Minutes Max.
13x13x13 (2197 Color Patches) takes 3 Hour 05 Minutes Max.
14x14x14 (2744 Color Patches) takes 3 Hour 50 Minutes Max.
15x15x15 (3375 Color Patches) takes 4 Hour 40 Minutes Max.
post #73 of 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Mike View Post

so you only characterize the display ONCE ?
I'm assuming you have to create different LUT's (from the characterization) for each desired color space and then store them in any of the 6 slots ?

Mike, you have hit on a key difference with LightSpace - you profile any display once, and then can make any calibration LUT from the profile data.
And this makes profiling very, very fast. with the probe defining the actual speed.
But LightSpace only ever measures each colour patch once (with integrated measurements for accuracy), and then uses its internal colour engine to calculate the calibration requirement very, very accurately.
More accurately than the guess-work approach used by other systems.

It is this colour engine that is the heart of LightSpace, and is the reason for the ability to profile a display once, and then generate any calibration from it.

You do not need to tell the system the target gamma or gamut in advance...

But, we do recommend pre-calibration set-up, as defined on the website instruction pages, to minimise issues such as colour temperature clipping if the source and target white point is too far out, and obviously you do need to pre-set black and white points manually.

Steve
post #74 of 710
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbe View Post

many, the good ones anyways - what am I missing here? 3-4 hours is common for a single mid to highend consumer level display/fp to get it right and that's just for the Display's controls (no processor, no luts).. often it can go more, just ask ChadB, he'll put the time in and can go 6-8 hours to get it right biggrin.gif. I supposed you could cut 1 hour off by removing the education.
anyways, I know many of the Calibrators I track will often spend up to 3-4 hours for the job.. it takes some calibrators more time to setup/packup with all their gear than a BB calibrator spends on the entire calibration.

Customer Pays The xxx$ Calibration Fee.
Calibrator Spends About 4-8 Hours to calibrate 21-Step Grayscale + 6 Colors! 27 Color Patches! Using customer display only.

Customer Pay The xxx$ Calibration Fee. + 600$ For eeColor
Calibrator Spends 6 Hours (*4 Hours for measuring) ta calibrate 4.913 Color Patches wink.gif using eeColor 17x17x17 ala Hollywood Standard Cube Resolution 3D-LUT.

Calibrator spending less than 10 minutes for total conversions, he can upload 6 different LUT's with different Gamma, ColorSpace etc. to customers eeColor. Without needing to take new measurements.

* During the 4 hour measurements, the calibrator will have plenty of time to educate with examples the customer with every detail and have time to answer to any question.
Edited by ConnecTEDDD - 11/28/12 at 5:54am
post #75 of 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

* With iD3 to measure Cube with Resolution of:
10x10x10 (1000 Color Patches) takes 1 Hour 20 Minutes Max.
11x11x11 (1331 Color Patches) takes 1 Hour 50 Minutes Max.
12x12x12 (1768 Color Patches) takes 2 Hour 25 Minutes Max.
13x13x13 (2197 Color Patches) takes 3 Hour 05 Minutes Max.
14x14x14 (2744 Color Patches) takes 3 Hour 50 Minutes Max.
15x15x15 (3375 Color Patches) takes 4 Hour 40 Minutes Max.

these time stamps are from Lightspace or THX CineCube HD ?

Yeah, I think buzz mentioned roughly over 4 hours for the largest cube, which makes sense mathematically... 17^3 = 4913 / 4913 x 3 sec (i1D3 interval) = 14739 secs / 14739 : 3600 = 4.09 hours...

I have to say though that I don't care how long the initial characterization takes, the sheer fact that you can convert to any given color space after that in a few minutes is very useful...
post #76 of 710
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Mike View Post

these time stamps are from Lightspace or THX CineCube HD ?
Yeah, I think buzz mentioned roughly over 4 hours for the largest cube, which makes sense mathematically... 17^3 = 4913 / 4913 x 3 sec (i1D3 interval) = 14739 secs / 14739 : 3600 = 4.09 hours...
I have to say though that I don't care how long the initial characterization takes, the sheer fact that you can convert to any given color space after that in a few minutes is very useful...

CineSpace/LightSpace = Same Time.

I have used 5 sec (iD3 Interval) because some dark patches requires 5 sec to read, others need only 2 sec, I have used 5 sec for my calculations. (for displays with deep blacks)
post #77 of 710
These timings are for DIP mode (Display Independent Profiling).
This uses a fixed time per patch.

If you use Closed Loop mode the probe dictates the timings per patch, with bright patches running much faster, so the overall time will come down.

Steve
post #78 of 710
Presently the K10-A is run in the DIP mode at the standard 3 seconds and will until the closed loop sync is worked out. The result should be 2 seconds or less even at the darkest luminance reads. The meter itself is like greased lightning so it's all about syncing.

No limitation, 141 reads: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbrVVDHvnls

cool.gif
post #79 of 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

With respect to your comment, i know your background already.
Plasma Technology is very sensitive from the quality of the power it gets. I very simple example that ALL Plasmas are coming from factory with better power cable than LED-LCD and with ferrite attached at cable ends. Have you seen any LED with ferrite attached at the cable?
Plasma when it's working they polute the other devices connected to the same outlet because they return noise due to their design (due to their switching power supply).
A better cable is reducing this or cancels entirety this.

This is an incorrect assumption. In the world of electronics, there is only ONE reason that there are ferrites applied to a power cord... they are required to be there in order to meet electrical regulations set by various various countries and regulatory agencies... the standards are these agencies set vary somewhat. Ferrites are very narrow-bandwidth devices. If you have a electronic product that has an emission problem with 14,000 Hz, 21,238 Hz, and 33,174 Hz, you would need 3 separate ferrites... one to suppress each frequency. Ferrites are not wide-bandwidth noise eliminators. I received one LCD panel for review with 5 clip-on ferrites that had to be snapped-on to the power cord in order to use the product legally. That doesn't mean the product is "better" for having ferrites. It simply means the product REQUIRED the ferrite(s) to pass regulatory agency requirements for electrical (or RF in some cases). (One of my jobs over the years involved agency compliance testing and power supply design). In general, plasma TVs use more power than LCD TVs and you should find that most plasma power cords have a larger wire gauge than LCD power cords on average. But that does not mean the plasma power cords are "better". They are different because they need to be different. Using a "plasma" power cord on an LCD TV does not make the LCD TV better. Audiophiles have been misled, mostly by ignorant reviewers but sometimes by tweak vendors looking to sell something that's unnecessary). Ferrites are not used to make the INCOMING power better, they are used to solve emission problems due to a product's operating characteristics. Generally, if there is an emission problem with a power supply, there are 2 ways to fix it... redesign the power supply (fairly expensive and time consuming) or apply a ferrite to the power cord (cheap and quick if you can find a "stock" ferrite that suppresses the frequency you are having trouble with... if there is no "stock" ferrite that's ideal for your application, manufacturers of ferrites have a "custom design" option where you tell them what frequency you need to have suppressed and how many dB the suppression has to be and they design a ferrite for that application. This is a little more expensive, but is typically much cheaper than redesigning the power supply. Plasma pixels operate at a 600 Hz rate (most common rate in current displays)... plasma pixels are either on or off... there is nothing in the middle. And a power cord, power conditioning, or HDMI cable cannot and does not affect the 600 Hz rate, nor the on/off nature of the pixel. To make a 10% red pixel, the pixel is "on" for only 10% of the operating cycles... but to keep entire gray areas in the screen from pulsating together, plasma displays randomize the "on" cycles and that is easy to see when you are very close to a plasma display... dark areas look like a swarm of mosquitoes rather than like a smooth, steady, gray surface. LCD pixels are "clear" for 100% (or 109%) red, green, or blue and "opaque" for black (color comes from filters layered with the LCD layers). LCD pixels can be "partially" gray so that only some light is blocked. You could make an argument that LCD pixels are more sophisticated than plasma pixels since plasma pixels can only be 100% on or 100% off at any time. Of course, LCD pixels have other issues like latency.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

I didn't see any improvement in Color Gamut or Luminance Levels using Power Conditioner or Expensive Power Cable, but i saw more 3D Depth in image , was more solid, more analog-like image.

Since meters are more sensitive than eyes, you would be able to measure a change in gamma if there was more apparent "depth" in images. There's really no other image parameter that could be involved in perceptually improved "depth" in images. In the analog/CRT world, higher quality power MIGHT improve the focus/sharpness of the electron beam and that "tighter" beam might make images look better. This does NOT happen in digital video displays... pixels are ALWAYS exactly the same in digital displays because they are "fixed" in size and shape... you cannot "focus" the pixel better or worse (assuming you are using the best control settings for Sharpness and other TV controls so that you aren't getting blooming or other artifacts).
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

I have no idea if a power conditioner/expensive power cable can improve other technologies like LED,Projectors etc, i'm writing only my personal experience, i have tested before buying these solutions and i saw impovement, the difference is not day/night, but exists with my eyes/ears.
The sound quality while i'm listening music or watching movie with my Plasma Display Opened was noticable better. Before conditioner/cable when i was opening my TV the sound had more background noise.

Understood, but I've experimented with all display technologies. I've tried to see differences with plasma displays made by Samsung, Panasonic,and Pioneer over several model years and none of those were affected in any way by power cords, power conditioning, or HDMI cables. Frankly, if any digital video technology was going to be changed by power cords or power conditioners, it would be LCD because the final drive applied to LCDs has always been analog... until just recently. Sony's new-ish 4K projector has the first LCD imagers (Sony's version of LCoS, SXRD) that have been addressed digitally. But I see no differences with LCD TVs either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

IsoTek is UK based company working at 220V/60Hz like Greece, maybe the filter is working better at that voltage/frequency as it designed mainly to that network specs. Working with a Power Network with problems these conditioners/better cables can improve things. If you have good power network without any conditioner or cable, then adding a conditioner / or expensive cable maybe will not make you any noticable improvement.

Speculating about how things might work doesn't help understand reality. There is engineering and science behind the design of power conditioners and power supplies. You also seem to be ignoring the irrefutable logic of the situation... to change a digital video image, you MUST change the digital bits assigned to each pixel WITH INTELLIGENCE. No random changing of bits will do anything to improve an image and power conditioning and power cords cannot make "intelligent" changes to digital bits. If an electrical engineer makes a filter for 220/50 or 220/60, it is SIMPLE... I mean like counting from 1 to 10... to make a filter that performs the same way for any other line voltage. We made equipment in the US for sale around the world and it was SIMPLE to make the equipment suitable to operate at other voltages and frequencies... there is ZERO magic involved, it is all science/engineering and the results are predictable.

I didn't want to get into a big argument about this... as I indicated in the previous post, it is my experience that everything and anything affects analog & digital music playback and analog video... some of the things I've discovered over the years seem kind of silly, mostly because they can't be explained by what we know today (of course there are a lot of things about the universe our science can't yet explain, that doesn't invalidate them).

Once again, I have to re-state, that the only way a power conditioner, power cord, or HDMI cable can change digital video images is if they change the 1s and 0s... none of those things can do that. You can feed the plasma TV HORRIBLE quality AC power with 20% distortion (or more) and the picture will not change (I have DONE THIS with square-wave AC power applied to a TV I no longer cared about). Poor quality power does not change the 1s and 0s - unless the bad power is so bad that the TV essentially cannot operate. It is the 1s and 0s that tell the pixels what to do. The only time AC power can change the picture is when it is SO BAD that the 1s and 0s are no longer accurate. But when this happens, you get 1 of 2 things... "sparklies" in the images (random pixels that are much too bright or much too dim) or you get no picture at all because data integrity is so bad, the TV can't tell what frame/pixel the data belongs to. Remember, when you send 8 bits of red, 8 bits of blue, and 8 bits of green, there is additional data with the packet of 6+ million pixels per frame that describes the frame sequence. BAD AC power does not change the 1s and 0s, nor does it change the 600 Hz sub-pixel operating frequency. Nor does it change the number of flickers for any plasma pixel (that's based on the 1s and 0s assigned to the pixel in question). Digital pixels ALWAYS look the same... 10101010 always produces the same shade of red or green or blue no matter how good or bad the electrical power is... once the electrical power gets REALLY bad, that 10101010 can get scrambled in some random way... when that happens, you get "sparklies" or no image and there's nothing in between. It's just a fact. A $14,000 meter doesn't lie. It sees changes in grayscale, gamma, and color that I cannot see - and the meter tells me NOTHING changes when I change power cords, power conditioners, or HDMI cables. And as I've come to accept that, I also don't SEE changes in images from those things either. And I had 34 years of professional training in analyzing the quality of still and moving images in all types of media (film, video, cinema, pro photography, cinematography, analog scans, digital scans, printing press, photographic prints, 2D, 3D, CRT, LCD, plasma, projection, direct-view, and even in different optics... lenses, coatings, etc.). Not much gets past me -- the image scientists who trained me are even better than I am at what they do, but I have had image quality assessment training that's just plain not possible to get as a "civilian".

I've said what I had to say... won't be posting any more on the subject here. I hope the logic and explanations are clear enough.
post #80 of 710
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

Doug, with your professional background at video/audio industry, i'm surprised that you haven't used any Proffesional 3D-LUT Solution like THX CineSpace with DAVIO or LightSpace that are world standards to the proffesional community for years now.

Before a week ago you i saw that you had no idea about LightIllusion entirirely as a company that has customers of the most major post-productions facilities around the world.

Do you have any type of Professional 3D-LUT Calibrations Experience that you can share with us?
I'm always interested with respect to your writings.

Thank you for your professional explanation of Power Related Things, but i listened and saw differerence here.

Back 2 Currect Topic, Can you tell us your experience about 3D-LUT Proffessional Systems you have used?
post #81 of 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Mike View Post

so you only characterize the display ONCE ?
I'm assuming you have to create different LUT's (from the characterization) for each desired color space and then store them in any of the 6 slots ?

A typical method of correcting measurement devices for scientific purposes is to measure against a reference, then create apropriate mathmatical equation which is used in output file processing. Once you know what the device is doing relative to a reference you can apply just about any recorrection later. Measurement drift after that is the main issue.
If the correction is linear you just need an offset and multiplyer, or y=a1x - a0
If it is a 4th order polynominal it could be something like, y= a4x^4 + a3x^3 - a2x^2 + a1x - a0

This just deals with one measurement sequence, that is the measured value + correction math = true value

In the case of the lightspace method, as a guess I'd say it might envolve a number of equations working at the same time, which obviuosly makes it quite complex from the outside, but ironically the result can actually be simple relative to a measure and compute, measure and compute routine.
post #82 of 710
I like your 'Hobbit Land' handle...

PRP, responsible for post on The Hobbit, are big customers of ours biggrin.gif

I actually helped design and build their very first DI grading room... and they have a fair few LightSpace CMS licenses.

And I like your math's - not quite what would work as accurately as needed, but you have a good understanding of the approach.
It is indeed much better than the 'guesswork' (measure/compute/measure/compute) approach.

It also means sampling a far greater 'range' of the display, allowing a far greater level of accuracy.
When I get time I'll post an example of what this means.

Steve
post #83 of 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Light Illusion View Post

I like your 'Hobbit Land' handle...
PRP, responsible for post on The Hobbit, are big customers of ours biggrin.gif
I actually helped design and build their very first DI grading room... and they have a fair few LightSpace CMS licenses.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF-wvK3oU3o
post #84 of 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

Back 2 Currect Topic, Can you tell us your experience about 3D-LUT Proffessional Systems you have used?

I worked for an equipment manufacturer (retired in 2006). We did not use commercial software. We had our own calibration and correction science that was tailored to each product. For film scanning products (that produced the data used by studios for digital editing), we had to provide custom correction for each batch of film. If a production used film from more than 1 batch, a the custom correction had to be adjusted to match the film batch on a reel-by-reel basis. Our job (with the scanning products) was to provide the editing studios with the images they start with. I was much less involved with the final editing end of the business... unless there was a problem requiring us to dig-in to what the studio was doing. And when that happened, we typically would only pinpoint the problem for the customer (occasionally it was us, but mostly it was something the customer was doing or not doing). It was up to the customer and the customers' software provider(s) to fix whatever wasn't going right on their end. Calibration processes for our products were proprietary and unique to each type of product. In that business (film-to-digital conversion and theatrical projection), calibration processes were far more detailed and had redundancies aimed at preventing any error from creeping in.
post #85 of 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzard767 View Post

Presently the K10-A is run in the DIP mode at the standard 3 seconds and will until the closed loop sync is worked out. The result should be 2 seconds or less even at the darkest luminance reads. The meter itself is like greased lightning so it's all about syncing.
No limitation, 141 reads: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbrVVDHvnls
cool.gif

buzz,

what display type was that ? LCD ?

What that closed loop mode and what did u set the integration time to ?

... and yeah, that was FAST... ;-)

- M
post #86 of 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Mike View Post

buzz,
what display type was that ? LCD ?
What that closed loop mode and what did u set the integration time to ?
... and yeah, that was FAST... ;-)
- M

The display was a Samsung LN40C630 LCD. Closed loop was used in which there is no method of setting the integration time. A new patch is displayed once the meter reports to LightSpace that it has a stable reading. Presently, Light Illusion and Klein are working together to ensure that low light readings are correct and once that is completed the proper timing should be integrated into LightSpace. Meanwhile, just for fun, I did a closed loop 17 point (4913 reads) profile on my Mitsubishi LaserVue DLP and it only took 38 minutes.



The display has problematic blue to begin with and a profile with 3 second read times handles the tracking. The little dip in cyan is also present in the pre calibrated measurements. I'll be calibrating a bunch of Sharp Elites in a couple weeks and I'm hoping for the opportunity to see how LightSpace adjusts cyan tracking as it can be decidedly bluish in those models.
post #87 of 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzard767 View Post

The display was a Samsung LN40C630 LCD. Closed loop was used in which there is no method of setting the integration time. A new patch is displayed once the meter reports to LightSpace that it has a stable reading. Presently, Light Illusion and Klein are working together to ensure that low light readings are correct and once that is completed the proper timing should be integrated into LightSpace. Meanwhile, just for fun, I did a closed loop 17 point (4913 reads) profile on my Mitsubishi LaserVue DLP and it only took 38 minutes.

The display has problematic blue to begin with and a profile with 3 second read times handles the tracking. The little dip in cyan is also present in the pre calibrated measurements. I'll be calibrating a bunch of Sharp Elites in a couple weeks and I'm hoping for the opportunity to see how LightSpace adjusts cyan tracking as it can be decidedly bluish in those models.

Buzz: I will be interested in your results. Finally able to manually calibrate the Radiance 5x5x5 on my Elite 70X5. All tolled, took about 10 hours but don't want to buy new meter and auto cal software at this point. Results as measured from 25% thru 100% at 5% intervals (16 points) show cyan tracking at 1.5 DE or less for all points. All other primary/secondary points are 1.5 or less with exception of yellow (surprise?) at 3 or 4 points where the numbers are above 1.5 but max at 2.2. Calibration done with IVC Low on and 100% white at ~48-49 FL. IVC Low on vs. LD on vs. LD off seems to make no difference in results. Gamma increased to roughly 2.37 in the 65% thru 75% range and deceased to 2.25 at 85%. Gamma before calibration was very flat at 2.30 from 20% thru 95%. It would be nice if you would measure gamma the old fashioned way before and after the 17 point. I am curious as to how much (if any ) change occurs due to the 17 point profile. Thanks
post #88 of 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzard767 View Post

The display was a Samsung LN40C630 LCD. Closed loop was used in which there is no method of setting the integration time. A new patch is displayed once the meter reports to LightSpace that it has a stable reading. Presently, Light Illusion and Klein are working together to ensure that low light readings are correct and once that is completed the proper timing should be integrated into LightSpace. Meanwhile, just for fun, I did a closed loop 17 point (4913 reads) profile on my Mitsubishi LaserVue DLP and it only took 38 minutes.

The display has problematic blue to begin with and a profile with 3 second read times handles the tracking. The little dip in cyan is also present in the pre calibrated measurements. I'll be calibrating a bunch of Sharp Elites in a couple weeks and I'm hoping for the opportunity to see how LightSpace adjusts cyan tracking as it can be decidedly bluish in those models.

I did quite a lot of tests run with LS on my VT50 (Plasma) and my Sony KDS-R60XBR1 (RPTV)... using an i1D3 profiled to an i1Pro using Closed Loop... with the i1D3 I can set an integration time and I tried out lots of different integration time settings (1.5 sec - 3 sec) as I repeatedly encountered quite a few probe errors on the Plasma... the RPTV was read w/o any probe errors, at least w/o obvious ones that can be detected on the CIE1931 chart... full profiling (17^3) took between 2-4 hours, depending on integration time... looking at that K-10 rocket, I'm thinking about getting one... ;-)

the Sony has huge blue issues (greyscale completely contaminated with blue) and I'm currently polishing up the Rec709 LUT to see how much LS improves this problem...

If u ever profile a Plasma, please post ur findings !

Thanks.

- M
post #89 of 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsinger View Post

Buzz: I will be interested in your results. Finally able to manually calibrate the Radiance 5x5x5 on my Elite 70X5. All tolled, took about 10 hours but don't want to buy new meter and auto cal software at this point. Results as measured from 25% thru 100% at 5% intervals (16 points) show cyan tracking at 1.5 DE or less for all points. All other primary/secondary points are 1.5 or less with exception of yellow (surprise?) at 3 or 4 points where the numbers are above 1.5 but max at 2.2. Calibration done with IVC Low on and 100% white at ~48-49 FL. IVC Low on vs. LD on vs. LD off seems to make no difference in results. Gamma increased to roughly 2.37 in the 65% thru 75% range and deceased to 2.25 at 85%. Gamma before calibration was very flat at 2.30 from 20% thru 95%. It would be nice if you would measure gamma the old fashioned way before and after the 17 point. I am curious as to how much (if any ) change occurs due to the 17 point profile. Thanks

I really appreciate your post. I had heard that the 5x5x5 did not fix cyan but it certainly does. Did you produce the LUT with LD set to off?. Is the varying gamma the same with LD both off and on?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Mike View Post

I did quite a lot of tests run with LS on my VT50 (Plasma) and my Sony KDS-R60XBR1 (RPTV)... using an i1D3 profiled to an i1Pro using Closed Loop... with the i1D3 I can set an integration time and I tried out lots of different integration time settings (1.5 sec - 3 sec) as I repeatedly encountered quite a few probe errors on the Plasma... the RPTV was read w/o any probe errors, at least w/o obvious ones that can be detected on the CIE1931 chart... full profiling (17^3) took between 2-4 hours, depending on integration time... looking at that K-10 rocket, I'm thinking about getting one... ;-)
the Sony has huge blue issues (greyscale completely contaminated with blue) and I'm currently polishing up the Rec709 LUT to see how much LS improves this problem...
If u ever profile a Plasma, please post ur findings !
Thanks.
- M

There is a Light Illusion forum thread on how plasma calibration is difficult because of ABL - here.

I'm sitting in Wisconsin freezing my arse off waiting for the Packer game to start and I shoulda brought a meter with me. I want to try a high point count LightSpace profile to see how it works on the Panasonic VT50 plasma I have here. Last fall I did a 5x5x5 with Calman and a Lumagen Radiance and the result was good with GS and color but the gamma was a tad funky.





When I get back to Florida I'll work with a Samsung PN51D8000 plasma I have there. This display calibrates very well with its internal controls so it'll be interesting to see the results of LUTs produced with a LightSpace 5 minute Quick Profile and a 4 hour 17 point Profile. If Light Illusion is correct there might not be any difference. One of the visible benefits of 3D LUTs is obtaining correct luminance throughout the range of colors but ABL might negate this ability. With the eeColor Box it will be easy to see as the LUT can be switched off and on with a button click on the remote control.

Speaking of Samsungs, for good LUTs, Color Space selection must be Native. The other two options, Auto and Custom, process heavily and won't work.
post #90 of 710
I would think CM 504 would improve not only the Gamma but all the rest.
Link is for my last LUT cube calibration.
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1423111/calman-5-release-notes-and-discussion/630#post_22729749

ss
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Display Calibration
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Display Calibration › LightSpace CMS Now Supports Lumagen + eeColor 3D-LUT 4 All