or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Display Calibration › What would you rather have for display calibration?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What would you rather have for display calibration?

post #1 of 21
Thread Starter 
Which would you rather have coupled with CalMan5 Enthusiast, and why?

a) i1 display OEM + colormunki spectro

or

b) C6
post #2 of 21
Greetings

since the munki spectro is a spectro ... and the c6 isn't ...

The accuracy will be on the side of the munki.

but if accuracy doesn't matter ... well ...

regards
post #3 of 21
a
tongue.gif
As Michael said, accuracy will be better. However, it will be harder to use.
FWIW, I use the C6 and Spectracal has done a lot of refining to the sync settings and exposure times since it was introduced. That has led to more stable and faster readings. I am not sure if those improvements have trickled down to the less expensive version, even though it's hardware is the same.
post #4 of 21
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael TLV View Post

Greetings

since the munki spectro is a spectro ... and the c6 isn't ...

The accuracy will be on the side of the munki.

but if accuracy doesn't matter ... well ...

regards

I thought that would be most peoples' stance , but was hoping to hear why some people choose the c6... Is it for the speed and already owning a spectro? Is spectracal concerned offering the colormunki spectro would canabalize their other sales?
post #5 of 21
option a without a doubt!

You won't know if the C6 is accurate on your displays and/or future displays.

There is no performance difference between the C6 and oem/retail i1D3.

IMO, everyone serious about calibration should have a spectro in their kit.

Also, If you are lucky enough to buy a used i1Pro Rev D Spectro at the low-end of the going rate of $250 - $450, adding the i1D3 and you will still be less than the C6 | ColorMunki Spectro + i1D3 $ = C6 $
Edited by turbe - 3/20/13 at 8:59pm
post #6 of 21
Agreed, but aren't there different and more refined read times with the C6 which make it faster and more efficient? And with the C6 you can choose anything from 1 read to a 20 read average. Of course that's a software difference only.
post #7 of 21
yeah, the C6 has adaptive exposure times (which is a completely automatic feature that works behind the scenes)
post #8 of 21
I'll stick to my performance statement.. however, my Klein K-10's speed advantage is meaningless useless if it's not profiled to a spectro (and I'll add, profiled on each display i.e. not just profiled on one plasma model and used for all plasmas) imo.

Now, you are starting to see actual SPD for different models posted by users (and centrally organized) for the i1D3 series / Color Munki Display lead by Graeme Gill and his Argyll CMS.. the OEM / Retail i1D3 have the ability to load custom EDR but there is no official public support so you need to use Graeme's implementation via his drivers and api currently - this could change things a bit in the future but it is reliant on the meter used to pull the spectral data for the display model (wouldn't a jeti 1211 be useful here biggrin.gif )
Edited by turbe - 3/20/13 at 9:58pm
post #9 of 21
Merely being a spectro does not guarantee that it will perform better than a well-engineered tristimulus. The one serious comparison I know of that looked at the ColorMunki showed that it performed considerably worse than both the i1 Display and Discus.

http://www.drycreekphoto.com/Learn/Calibration/MonitorCalibrationHardware.html

My own test of a ColorMunki reinforced this result. When measuring white it was less accurate than a good Chroma 5.

I find that the new generation of colorimeters perform very well, as well or better than low-end spectros. Of course, they perform even better when corrected against a reference instrument, which low-end spectros certainly are not.
post #10 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

Merely being a spectro does not guarantee that it will perform better than a well-engineered tristimulus. The one serious comparison I know of that looked at the ColorMunki showed that it performed considerably worse than both the i1 Display and Discus.

http://www.drycreekphoto.com/Learn/Calibration/MonitorCalibrationHardware.html

My own test of a ColorMunki reinforced this result. When measuring white it was less accurate than a good Chroma 5.

I find that the new generation of colorimeters perform very well, as well or better than low-end spectros. Of course, they perform even better when corrected against a reference instrument, which low-end spectros certainly are not.

Tom,

I read that article some time ago and it was disconcerting that the EyeOne Pro had worse accuracy than the OEM i1Display Pro for white. I guess one would need a proper reference spectro to put the matter to rest, but the results indicate that u r better off using a OEM i1display Pro. I wonder if the results will be different if the 3 primary and 3 secondary colours were checked by this test as well?
post #11 of 21
Thread Starter 
@turbe... If a colorimeter needs to be profiled for each display model, do they need to be profiled as a lamp ages on the same projector, or is the spectrum constant 'enough' over the life of a lamp?
Edited by dougri - 3/21/13 at 3:03pm
post #12 of 21
The spectral distribution common in bulbs used in fp will change as the bulb ages... I can't think of any that can maintain for the life..

For metal halide bulbs, there will be shifts in the chromaticity due to chemical changes in the lamp as it ages.. UHP bulbs are "continuous spectrum" and have stability over their lifetime, but they will to eventually.

However, I recently read something that stated Joe Kane said he never has seen any significant change in a bulb's expected lifetime where the bulb was not defective, especially in the first few hundred hours.. I was a surprised a bit to read that but I'm also not sure if that is an accurate quote from Joe Kane or not and/or the context. The same article mentioned a quote from Joel Silver (ISF) that shifts do occur but not drastic under normal circumstances and nothing calibration can't take care of.

I personally like to profile each time (when using a colorimeter), well not for multiple calibration sessions on the same display in a day (or even perhaps several days).. it really doesn't take long to do, what's the rush?
Edited by turbe - 3/21/13 at 4:49pm
post #13 of 21
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbe View Post

The spectral distribution common in bulbs used in fp will change as the bulb ages... I can't think of any that can maintain for the life..

For metal halide bulbs, there will be shifts in the chromaticity due to chemical changes in the lamp as it ages.. UHP bulbs are "continuous spectrum" and have stability over their lifetime, but they will to eventually.

However, I recently read something that stated Joe Kane said he never has seen any significant change in a bulb's expected lifetime where the bulb was not defective, especially in the first few hundred hours.. I was a surprised a bit to read that but I'm also not sure if that is an accurate quote from Joe Kane or not and/or the context.

I personally like to profile each time (when using a colorimeter), well not for multiple calibration sessions on the same display in a day (or even perhaps several days).. it really doesn't take long to do, what's the rush?

No rush... just trying to reconcile the apparent performance advantage(at least for white and low light) that the newer profiled colorimeters have over entry-level spectros (colormunki & i1 pro) vs the potential need for profiling the colorimeter as a bulb ages. If you have a reference spectro, then it is a no-brainer... I'm trying to decide which instrument(s) to get with a constrained budget. Buying a cheap spectro to profile a decent colorimeter doesn't make sense if the spectro is not itself very accurate... does it make more sense to buy a colorimeter that claims to have accurate profiles for UHP? Yes, the best would be to spend an order of magnitude more on a reference spectro than I did on my projector, but that is not in the cards for me. So, my choices are cheap spectro/colorimeter vs expensive colorimeter. No rush, just trying to decide a path forward that gets the best performance for the money.
post #14 of 21
Well, the i1Pro is still used by many Professionals today (as their only meter) and there are those that have access to reference devices to check the i1Pro.. majority of the reports I have seen show the i1Pro tracking well (admittedly, a very few are not in some areas). Michael posted he has compared his ColorMunki Spectro to his Jeti 1211..

If you are paying the same price for a ColorMunki / OEM i1D3 combo as a C6 (or even less potentially for a used i1Pro Rev D / OEM i1D3), the answer is very clear to me!

EDIT:
You may have gone through these links. If not, you may want to take the time to read all the posts and info.

Why a Spectro, see why here:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1373556/i1-pro-or-d3-if-you-could-only-have-one-meter

http://www.tlvexp.ca/2012/04/do-calibration-tables-really-work-for-tri-stim-devices/

And Read this Thread:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1449310/eye-one-pro-or-display-3-pro

I do want to mention something stated in the Dry Creek Photo link in regards to the i1Pro Spectro
Quote:
Achieving better results from the Eye-One Pro is also possible through software. The open-source ArgyllCMS increases measurement integration and averaging time when reading darker values. This approach improves the accuracy of Eye-One Pro measurements. Calibrations made with Argyll show reduced color shift problems in dark shadows than does any other package we have tested. Argyll is a mostly command line package, does not support DDC to optimize in-monitor adjustments, and has none of the user-friendly features of commercial packages. For those who like to get under the hood, the price is right and the performance good.

This requires abandoning the official X-Rite API.. it's not the first time I've seen reports in regards to this when putting the i1Pro using Argyll up against a reference Spectro.


My first choice is the i1Pro Rev D, even used - I don't care where you get it from.
Edited by turbe - 3/21/13 at 5:28pm
post #15 of 21
Followup:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael TLV View Post

Greetings

Consider that I have had my i1 pro since 2003 and it still has not drifted. Within 1 dE of my Jeti Spectro ($12K meter)

regards


can't find the post about the Munki at this time..
post #16 of 21
Turbe, the efi es1000 is the same as eye one pro ?
post #17 of 21
Yes and there are Rev D's to.. works great for our purpose.. some lucky ones have picked them up for <$100US but that was a couple years ago... both the i1Pro and EFE ES1000 sell used for $250 - $450.. I would get a Rev D.
post #18 of 21
Greetings

some people .... a lot of people ... end up buying the C6 or other colorimeter due to a lack of due diligence on their own part. Don't do your homework, then you get what you get. It's also a case of you don't know what you don't know. A salesman trying to sell you a C6 isn't really going to bring up other options. (Depends on the saleman but many of the industry sales guys are ruthless like that.) They sell people $7000 colorimeters without telling them that they need a $1000 spectro to make sure the $7k piece is accurate.

If you bring that $1000 piece up ... it leads to questions that the sales guys don't want to answer or can't answer.

Regards
post #19 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbe View Post

Yes and there are Rev D's to.. works great for our purpose.. some lucky ones have picked them up for <$100US but that was a couple years ago... both the i1Pro and EFE ES1000 sell used for $250 - $450.. I would get a Rev D.

I have the opportunity to take a EFI ES1000 from 2009 for a price between 200 $ to 300 $ (still being negotiated biggrin.gif ), i'm waiting the seller to confirm if it's a rev D... What do you think ?
post #20 of 21
Quote:
What do you think ?

you know my answer from my replies above wink.gif

obviously, check out the seller, ask the questions, ask for pics, get the base plate with matching serial (really for diagnostics), the counter weight (which came with these) is nice but you can get a Tripod Extension Arm Kit for better flexibility (need a tripod adapter to).. ...

I would ask the seller to run the i1 Diagnostics and email you the report.. it looks like THIS


.
post #21 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbe View Post

you know my answer from my replies above wink.gif

obviously, check out the seller, ask the questions, ask for pics, get the base plate with matching serial (really for diagnostics), the counter weight (which came with these) is nice but you can get a Tripod Extension Arm Kit for better flexibility (need a tripod adapter to).. ...

I would ask the seller to run the i1 Diagnostics and email you the report.. it looks like THIS


.

thanks, i'll ask the i1 diagnostics report wink.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Display Calibration
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Display Calibration › What would you rather have for display calibration?