or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Display Calibration › eeColor Processor - CalMAN - 3D LUTs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

eeColor Processor - CalMAN - 3D LUTs - Page 9

post #241 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

What meter you used?

Can you post the post calibration report, after measuring again the final produced LUT?

K10-A

Sorry, I am not going to run a a final report because of IR.

Maybe this will help.




I didn't run a grayscale because I had the eecolor out of the loop, just hooked to my source player and a different HDMI port on my VT50, so the ee box would keep the LUT (2) displayed I was writing to.from Calman.

ss
post #242 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by sillysally View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

What meter you used?

Can you post the post calibration report, after measuring again the final produced LUT?

K10-A

Sorry, I am not going to run a a final report because of IR.

Maybe this will help.




I didn't run a grayscale because I had the eecolor out of the loop, just hooked to my source player and a different HDMI port on my VT50, so the ee box would keep the LUT (2) displayed I was writing to.from Calman.

ss

The results that counts are the reports of measuring the LUT loaded at eecolor, the results you are posting are useless, means nothing, it's the results of the software correction calculations of A Virtual Cube.
post #243 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

The results that counts are the reports of measuring the LUT loaded at eecolor, the results you are posting are useless, means nothing, it's the results of the software correction calculations of A Virtual Cube.

btw, the after report was after the LUT was loaded in the ee box and the ee box was put back into the loop.

ss
post #244 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by sillysally View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

The results that counts are the reports of measuring the LUT loaded at eecolor, the results you are posting are useless, means nothing, it's the results of the software correction calculations of A Virtual Cube.

btw, the after report was after the LUT was loaded in the ee box and the ee box was put back into the loop.

ss

Ok, got it now, if you have time, run a grayscale, saturation reports etc.
post #245 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

Ok, got it now, if you have time, run a grayscale, saturation reports etc.

I am trying to figure out if in the later part of these 4096 LUT's calibrations, if the actual reads are out of sync.

ss
post #246 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by sillysally View Post

I just checked and yes there is a lot more reads, and that also means the latter 4096 was well over 10,000 reads.



Checking your Chart I noticed that at your selected 16-Point Cube (4096 Color Points), the range of these 16-Steps were 0%(16) thru 109% (255) (means 15-Step Grayscale with 7.3% Gray as the lowest Adjustment Point, second Step is 14.6%).

To perform a 3D Cube Calibration for target range 0%(16) thru 100% (235), the maximum CalMAN's LUT Resolution is 15-Point Cube (3.375 Color Points) (means 14-Step Grayscale with 7.3% Gray as the lowest Adjustment Point, second Step is 14.6%).

I just noticed this as I'm familiar with LightSpace, 17-Point Cube (4.913 Color Points) there has 0%(16)-100%(235) Range, that means 16-Step Grayscale with 4.71% Gray as the lowest Adjustment Point. and 9.8% Gray as the second Step.
Edited by ConnecTEDDD - 4/8/13 at 5:48am
post #247 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

Checking your Chart I noticed that at your selected 16-Point Cube (4096 Color Points), the range of these 16-Steps were 0%(16) thru 109% (255) (means 15-Step Grayscale with 7.3% Gray as the lowest Adjustment Point, second Step is 14.6%).

To perform a 3D Cube Calibration for target range 0%(16) thru 100% (235), the maximum CalMAN's LUT Resolution is 15-Point Cube (3.375 Color Points) (means 14-Step Grayscale with 7.3% Gray as the lowest Adjustment Point, second Step is 14.6%).

I just noticed this as I'm familiar with LightSpace, 17-Point Cube (4.913 Color Points) there has 0%(16)-100%(235) Range, that means 16-Step Grayscale with 4.71% Gray as the lowest Adjustment Point. and 9.8% Gray as the second Step.

Ahh, now that clears up why I was seeing what I was seeing. Thanks.

I will send the other file when I get to my laptop.

Having a ball trying to figure out the bigger LUTs now that I have a eecolor (from Buzz). The Radiance Mini 3D was easy with its cap of 125 points, the eecolor using Calman is a different matter.

ss
post #248 of 406




Hey SS, I have imporTED to my workflow report page the CalMAN's Saved Session you send me.

This is a better view of your Calibration Report.

Just to give some more detail about your setup:

You have performed a 3D LUT Calibration to your Panasonic VT50 Plasma.

Using CalMAN AutoCal with 16-Point Cube (4.096 Color Points) Resolution @ Calibrating with 0%-109% Range.

Your Meter was a Klein K-10A Colorimeter (Low Light Hander Off) with Lumagen Radiance as a Pattern Generator and it took 5 Hours + 33 Minutes with 9.518 Total Meter Reads to complete.
Edited by ConnecTEDDD - 4/9/13 at 2:11pm
post #249 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post


Hey SS, I have imporTED to my workflow report page the CalMAN's Saved Session you send me.

This is a better view of your Calibration Report of your:

Just to give some more detail about your setup:

You performed a 3D LUT Calibrations to your Panasonic VT50 Plasma.

Using CalMAN AutoCal with 16-Point Cube (4.096 Color Points) Resolution @ Calibrating with 0%-109% Range.

Your Meter was a Klein K-10A Colorimeter with Lumagen Radiance as a Pattern Generator and it took 5 Hours + 33 Minutes with 9.518 Total Meter Reads to complete.

Yes you are correct.
Just to add, that LUT was run with low light handler off. If I use low light handler on (30 reads) that will add about 30 minutes more.

Anyway, its not the run time the LUT takes that troubles me, its the erratic behavior of the software after about 5 hours of running time that troubles me.
I can't say why this erratic behavior is happening because there are one two more adjustments I haven't tried yet.

btw, that was the first 4096 LUT I ever ran.

ss
post #250 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by sillysally View Post


Yes you are correct.
Just to add, that LUT was run with low light handler off. If I use low light handler on (30 reads) that will add about 30 minutes more.

Anyway, its not the run time the LUT takes that troubles me, its the erratic behavior of the software after about 5 hours of running time that troubles me.
I can't say why this erratic behavior is happening because there are one two more adjustments I haven't tried yet.

btw, that was the first 4096 LUT I ever ran.

ss

Do you remember what was the time of each Pattern Delay?
Next time take a 21-Step Grayscale also. wink.gif
post #251 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

Do you remember what was the time of each Pattern Delay?
Next time take a 21-Step Grayscale also. wink.gif

1 second.

Are you saying to run a 21 step grayscale before the LUT. ?
I haven't come to any conclusions if a 21 point RGB/Gamma/grayscale helps or not.

I just ran a 771 LUT only, wanted to try my Mini 3D software update. The calibration came out well.

ss
post #252 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

[IMG ALT=""]Your Meter was a Klein K-10A Colorimeter (Low Light Hander Off) with Lumagen Radiance as a Pattern Generator and it took 5 Hours + 33 Minutes with 9.518 Total Meter Reads to complete.

Grab the latest 5.1.1 beta, we updated some of the 3D LUT code so that in step 6 it. It use to do a full x3, and the a x5 before doing the rest of the points now it will also do a full x9 before finishing off the cube, which means the total number of reads drops signfigantly. I was also seeing reads in the >8000 range previously, but now it's dropped to right around 6000. Also since those points we are reading directly line up with the values that are written into the LUT device, it's effectively already validated. You should see no difference (barring read to read diferences and screen drift) between the virtual cube and the final flashed to the box LUT.
post #253 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by sotti View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

[IMG ALT=""]Your Meter was a Klein K-10A Colorimeter (Low Light Hander Off) with Lumagen Radiance as a Pattern Generator and it took 5 Hours + 33 Minutes with 9.518 Total Meter Reads to complete.

Grab the latest 5.1.1 beta, we updated some of the 3D LUT code so that in step 6 it. It use to do a full x3, and the a x5 before doing the rest of the points now it will also do a full x9 before finishing off the cube, which means the total number of reads drops signfigantly. I was also seeing reads in the >8000 range previously, but now it's dropped to right around 6000. Also since those points we are reading directly line up with the values that are written into the LUT device, it's effectively already validated. You should see no difference (barring read to read diferences and screen drift) between the virtual cube and the final flashed to the box LUT.

SS, Did you used the laterst CalMAN 5 Business 5.1.1.1179 (Build 1179-0405.5) version for the above 16-Point Cube calibration?

BTW run 21-point grayscale after the LUT uploaded to your eecolor next time.
post #254 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

SS, Did you used the laterst CalMAN 5 Business 5.1.1.1179 (Build 1179-0405.5) version for the above 16-Point Cube calibration?

BTW run 21-point grayscale after the LUT uploaded to your eecolor next time.

Yes I did use 1179, reads were over 10000 for a 4096 LUT, and erratic behavior in the latter part of the calibration.
However I used low light handler set at 30 reads with normal set a 5 reads.
Joel probably is turning off low light handler, lowering the patter generator intervals and maybe dropping the normal reads down to 1.

The above 4096 LUT calibration was not very good.

Probably if you set your settings as I think Joel set his you may not see the erratic behavior, because it comes when you get into the 8000 read range.

In my case I know my meter is very fast, and of-course that's a big plus, but I am also interested in a very accurate calibration. That's why I am tiring to run the 4096 LUT. The 771 LUT does come out well, but I am tiring to get the best of the best in calibration.

As far as running a 21 point GS after my calibration is complete, I will not be running that anytime soon because of the IR.

ss
post #255 of 406
SS, Are you getting lower dE and better image quality checking with known material from a 771 or 4.096 Color Points with CalMAN so far from your tests?

Try also the 15-Point Cube (3.375 Color Points - 16-235 Range) next time.

(Check the power options of windows disabling all power saving options, disable antivirus, defrag @ idle etc. I'm sure you have setup all these already.)
post #256 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

SS, Are you getting lower dE and better image quality checking with known material from a 771 or 4.096 Color Points with CalMAN so far from your tests?

Try also the 15-Point Cube (3.375 Color Points - 16-235 Range) next time.

(Check the power options of windows disabling all power saving options, disable antivirus, defrag @ idle etc. I'm sure you have setup all these already.)

Yes, I ran a 771 point using all the defaults for my meter yesterday. Matter of fact the only two things I changed from Calman's defaults are Gamma 2.22 and put my Mini 3D to reference patterns. I have now tamed the Gamma line, all in all pretty darn good.

Yes I am going to run your suggestion for the 3375 CP.

Yes I have done all of that and also turned off indexing service. I also clean HD every two days and run defrag once or twice every week (0%).
I am running a 3rd gen Intel Core i7-3520M, 8.0GB, DDR3-1600MHz SDRAM, NVIDIA NVS 5200M (GDDR5 1GB).
The weakest link is because my HD is only 7200rpm, thought about getting a 10K HD but just to small.

Anyway Leaving AVG on or off makes no difference, and I don't think turning off indexing service makes a difference.
The only thing I haven't tried with the 4096 LUT is removing my E/Port, Legacy I/O Expansion Port (RS-232) and using Calmans RS-232 to USB adapter..
Joel has all this info and report when running a 4096 LUT.

ss
post #257 of 406
Tried to run a 3375 point LUT again, Calman crashed.

I don't really think its the mini 3D that is causing the crashes. The reason is that a earlier version fo Calman was able to complete a 4096 LUT, but the results where not all that good.

Anyway I sent Joel the complete log file on this latest crash, so hopefully he can figure out whats happening.

ss
post #258 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by sillysally View Post

Yes I have done all of that and also turned off indexing service. I also clean HD every two days and run defrag once or twice every week (0%).
I am running a 3rd gen Intel Core i7-3520M, 8.0GB, DDR3-1600MHz SDRAM, NVIDIA NVS 5200M (GDDR5 1GB).
The weakest link is because my HD is only 7200rpm, thought about getting a 10K HD but just to small.
ss

sorry for OT, but SS if You really want to boost up Your system the best choice would be a solid state drive. The benefit of a 10K HDD is too small to notice, only slight better transfer rate but nearly same access time and You have to deal with more heat.

Typical HDD 130-170 MB/s / 10-12 ms (even more on random access)
Typical SSD 200-600 MB/s / 0.1-0.2 ms (depending on controller and memory type)

+You will not have any defrag issues anymore

regarding Your defrag sessions, if You don't constantly install / uninstall tons of software You don't need to run defrag as much as You do. Once per month is far enough. And if Your system had no change since the last defrag, You don't need to run defrag.
post #259 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrFaxe View Post

sorry for OT, but SS if You really want to boost up Your system the best choice would be a solid state drive. The benefit of a 10K HDD is too small to notice, only slight better transfer rate but nearly same access time and You have to deal with more heat.

Typical HDD 130-170 MB/s / 10-12 ms (even more on random access)
Typical SSD 200-600 MB/s / 0.1-0.2 ms (depending on controller and memory type)

+You will not have any defrag issues anymore

regarding Your defrag sessions, if You don't constantly install / uninstall tons of software You don't need to run defrag as much as You do. Once per month is far enough. And if Your system had no change since the last defrag, You don't need to run defrag.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5729/western-digital-velociraptor-1tb-wd1000dhtz-review/2

4K random reads/writes is the big bottleneck for most storage systems.

You're looking at 2MB/S for a 10K drive and 60MB/s for a middle of the road SSD and 100MB/s + for a new SSD.

Also they've got 960GB drives now for $600 (250GB for $170), the jump to SSD completely transforms computers.
post #260 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrFaxe View Post

sorry for OT, but SS if You really want to boost up Your system the best choice would be a solid state drive. The benefit of a 10K HDD is too small to notice, only slight better transfer rate but nearly same access time and You have to deal with more heat.

Typical HDD 130-170 MB/s / 10-12 ms (even more on random access)
Typical SSD 200-600 MB/s / 0.1-0.2 ms (depending on controller and memory type)

+You will not have any defrag issues anymore

regarding Your defrag sessions, if You don't constantly install / uninstall tons of software You don't need to run defrag as much as You do. Once per month is far enough. And if Your system had no change since the last defrag, You don't need to run defrag.

Thanks for the tip, I will give it a try.

ss

Update, I got a Intel SSD and you are right as rain, installed it with a clean install of Win 7, very fast.
Edited by sillysally - 4/18/13 at 2:05pm
post #261 of 406
After getting a reply from Joel about my large LUT problem. He seems to think that something got transferred to ee and is working on a fix.
Also Ted wanted to see some test's.
Note; I may not have the correct Gamma set in my VT50 and I lowered the brightness by 1 click in the ISF I used to take these reading. Also I didn't warm up my meter or my VT50.


ss
post #262 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by sillysally View Post

After getting a reply from Joel about my large LUT problem. He seems to think that something got transferred to ee and is working on a fix.
Also Ted wanted to see some test's.
Note; I may not have the correct Gamma set in my VT50 and I lowered the brightness by 1 click in the ISF I used to take these reading. Also I didn't warm up my meter or my VT50.

ss

Can you run a color checker 96 with 100% SATs option?
post #263 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by derekjsmith View Post

Can you run a color checker 96 with 100% SATs option?




ss
post #264 of 406
Ok now we got something.smile.gif

Ran the latest Beta from Calman for a 3375 point LUT, ran very nicely. Below are the results.
I did turn on low light handler 30 reads (normal 5 reads) and threshold of 0.5. Didn't run a grayscale.



ss.
post #265 of 406
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sillysally View Post

Ok now we got something.smile.gif

I assume you used your Radiance as a generator. Was this the first large display profile that did not crash?
post #266 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzard767 View Post

I assume you used your Radiance as a generator. Was this the first large display profile that did not crash?

Yes I did use my Radiance Mini 3D as a pattern generator. I did have the eecolor out of the video loop, but now that I seem to be getting a working large Calman LUT I will figure out what is the best way to go about the ee, in or out of the calibrating loop.

Yes. This was the first large profile that ran the way it it should, and the results from viewing different source material indicated to me this LUT worked the way it should work.

I had a 4096 LUT from a older Calman Build that said it completed and transferred to the ee, but it was all screwed up.

I used the latest Beta build 1188.

The above charts are run with ee back in the video loop.

ss
post #267 of 406
Ran a new 3375 lut with the eecolor in the loop. Took 6 1/2 hours, about two second read times, don't know how many reads because when the LUT finished the popup window didn't popup with the time and reads..Seemed to transfer to eecolor when the calibration was done, every time the LUT would run through a series of reads Calman seemed to communicate with the EEcolor box blue run line would stop every time the meter would read.
There is next to no info in the log file. This calibration is not as good as the above calibration.
Just before I setup Calman I installed Lumagen's latest update for the Mini (040613)

ss
Edited by sillysally - 4/22/13 at 2:30am
post #268 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by sillysally View Post

Ok now we got something.smile.gif

Ran the latest Beta from Calman for a 3375 point LUT, ran very nicely. Below are the results.
I did turn on low light handler 30 reads (normal 5 reads) and threshold of 0.5. Didn't run a grayscale.



ss.

Hey SS, this is a better view of your last calibration report:





Next time run a 21-Step Grayscale Please.
post #269 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnecTEDDD View Post

Hey SS, this is a better view of your last calibration report:

Next time run a 21-Step Grayscale Please.

Ted as you know I ran a 21 step RGB balance with a 3375 LUT, however to be able to run a 21 point grayscale/RGB you do need (I am sure you know this) to have the eecolor in your video loop when calibrating. I am not sure if having the eecolor in the video loop is the best way to go, and therefor keeping the eecolor out of the video loop and doing a ruff 10 point grayscale or even a 2 point GS using the display controls in my VT50 maybe the better way to go.

Also setting eecolor to 65 K or native white, using color space 4:4:4 or 4:2:2 among other small tweaks for my video chain..
Now that Calman has seemed to stabilized (1188 beta) running large LUT's and running my Mini in reference pattern mode , the only thing that is slowing me down is IR from the window patterns and the time it takes to remove IR.

ss
post #270 of 406
Hey SS, the results that counts to check/compare any LUT are the Grayscale/Saturation etc. Charts of the Final LUT Loaded @ eeColor.

Other charts of Virtual Cube Generator etc are useless at this point. Use eeColor connected at Unity LUT while performing AutoCal.

We need the final image to be as accurate as possible... wink.gif

Check also Grayscale/Color Ramps / Clipping Patterns for any problem with the LUT loaded.
Edited by ConnecTEDDD - 4/24/13 at 4:49pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Display Calibration
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Display Calibration › eeColor Processor - CalMAN - 3D LUTs