Originally Posted by sotti
At some point you run into bit issues.
If you are measuring tiny dE's, then that's the truth, you are that close to the intended values. But as you add more correction, processors start to run out of bits.
What we do is no different than what you would do through the UI to get the lowest dE's from point to point. If for some reason you would opt to go with a higher dE because the correction starts to create artifacts, that isn't something that can be detected in software.
Yes there is no question I need to play with calman 1092 or when it comes out 5.1. Anyway I have just run a LUT cube using only my I1Pro 2 so there is no profiling involved, just to see if there is a problem with the profiler or or C6. .
Calibration for GS (21pt) took about 17+ min, Cube took about 27+ min. Understanding that there are no raw numbers that are shown, it is hard to tell what is the differences are until I view some test patterns and video.
However if I just go off of the RGB ballance chart, then there is less variation with RGB in the lower IRE's.
Update, Just using the I1Pro 2 and the LUT cube/21pt GS there are the same old problems in the lower IRE's. So imo there is no question that using the I1Pro to profile my C6 is the way to go.
It also seems that using Beta 1092 take a little getting use to or needs time to fully work its way into my LT. Did a LUT Cube last night took 20 min, 21pt GS took 10 min. For what ever reason my report was showing 0 IRE at .002. Also calibrating my VT50, the calibration seems to come out better using Custom mode rather than ISF mode.Edited by sillysally - 1/30/13 at 9:02am