or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Display Calibration › Calibration meter shootout
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Calibration meter shootout - Page 3

post #61 of 315
Is profiling available on Calman?? if so, how? I dont remember seeing this at the forum.
post #62 of 315
Thanks Derek!


^^^^ ditto a profiling "how to" (or link to reference) with Calman would be good!
post #63 of 315
Yes we have profiling just not feature we have pushed yet

CalMAN\\Textfiles\\Howtos\\MeterProfiling.rtf and
CalMAN\\Profiles
post #64 of 315
Thread Starter 
Derek:

Why when I Google X-Rite Chroma5 or search for Chroma5 on the X-Rite web site I get nothing. Is this a phantom product?

Quote:
Originally Posted by derekjsmith View Post

We don't have a price set on the Chroma5 yet still working it out with x-rite on our discounts. Since you already have a DTP-94 I would recommend just adding the i1Pro.
post #65 of 315
Thread Starter 
BTW, I'd like to make a point relevant to consumers concerning probe support and the various available calibration software packages.

Those vendors who use the X-Rite SDK to provide support for their meters (CalMan and Progressive Labs come to mind) are required to hook their software into the probe's serial #, and in the case of the D2, password as well. Vendors who develop support for the probes independently (HCFR and ColorFacts for example) do not require this. HCFR doesn't require it because it is open source. ColorFacts doesn't require it because it is marketed by X-Rite's primary competitor and they apparently don't play well with one another (ColorFacts still refuses to support the D2 for example).

What implications does this have for consumers?

Well, if you purchased software that requires information about a specific probe, and if that probe ever becomes lost, damaged, or simply wears out over time and you replace it with a new one, you may have to purchase a new software license as well to support the replacement. This is NOT the case with the other software options, since they do not require the serial#/password to work in the first place.

If I have mis-stated anything, I'm sure one of the vendors will be happy to chime in with a correction.
post #66 of 315
Good point Tom!

I would like to know this too as in my situation i would need to licence 2 sensors for profiling with Calman, i1 pro and the DTP-94!

Will this mean i have to pay for 2 licences costs..

$800 for 1 licence and i1pro and then $200 for another licence for my DTP, total $1000?
post #67 of 315
Thread Starter 
Actually this is something I neglected to mention. You will also pay additional fees for the right to use the software with more than a single probe. The precise schedule for those fees will depend upon the policies of the vendor.

I wanted to bring this up because these vendors tout the use of the X-Rite SDK as a feature, and I wanted to make it clear that it also imposes extra costs upon consumers. I can't evaluate whether it offers those vendors advantages over competitors who do not use the SDK, though basic accuracy doesn't seem to be one of them.

I am convincable otherwise, but on the face of it seems to me that for the most part this approach appears to serve the interests of X-Rite more than consumers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neonmod View Post

Good point Tom!

I would like to know this too as in my situation i would need to licence 2 sensors for profiling with Calman, i1 pro and the DTP-94!

Will this mean i have to pay for 2 licences costs..

$800 for 1 licence and i1pro and then $200 for another licence for my DTP, total $1000?
post #68 of 315
Very interresting posts, Tom!
Had no idea about this.
post #69 of 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

BTW, I'd like to make a point relevant to consumers concerning probe support and the various available calibration software packages.

Those vendors who use the X-Rite SDK to provide support for their meters (CalMan and Progressive Labs come to mind) are required to hook their software into the probe's serial #, and in the case of the D2, password as well. Vendors who develop support for the probes independently (HCFR and ColorFacts for example) do not require this. HCFR doesn't require it because it is open source. ColorFacts doesn't require it because it is marketed by X-Rite's primary competitor and they apparently don't play well with one another (ColorFacts still refuses to support the D2 for example).

What implications does this have for consumers?

Well, if you purchased software that requires information about a specific probe, and if that probe ever becomes lost, damaged, or simply wears out over time and you replace it with a new one, you may have to purchase a new software license as well to support the replacement. This is NOT the case with the other software options, since they do not require the serial#/password to work in the first place.

If I have mis-stated anything, I'm sure one of the vendors will be happy to chime in with a correction.

A huge misstatement Tom. Our meter licensing has nothing to do with our SDK license from x-rite we are free to license our software anyway we wish x-rite has nothing to do with it nor restricts it. You are also wrong about our meter licensing fees. For V3 the consumer version is $200 and our customers that upgrade from V2 to V3 it’s free and you can have as many meters as you wish be that 10 different Spyder2's or a S2, D2, DTP94 and a ColorPro II we don’t' care.
post #70 of 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neonmod View Post

Good point Tom!

I would like to know this too as in my situation i would need to licence 2 sensors for profiling with Calman, i1 pro and the DTP-94!

Will this mean i have to pay for 2 licences costs..

$800 for 1 licence and i1pro and then $200 for another licence for my DTP, total $1000?

For your cost it is $200 for the consumer license and another $$825 for the i1Pro hardware itself. So yes it is $1025 for the license and the hardware. If you did not need the hardware then your license would only be $200 for whatever meter(s) you use for our consumer version. The Pro version has support for many more of the high end meters but it also costs most.
post #71 of 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

Derek:

Why when I Google X-Rite Chroma5 or search for Chroma5 on the X-Rite web site I get nothing. Is this a phantom product?

Because it's an OEM only product. Many integrators do sell the x-rite Chroma5 but usually by a different name. Progressive Labs C5, Sencore ColorPro V, etc…
post #72 of 315
I was looking at the Calman software, but I have an i1 pro and 2 different colorimeters. Apparently I'd need to purchase 2 $200 licenses if I want to be able to use both my spectroradiometer and my colorimeters.
post #73 of 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

Actually this is something I neglected to mention. You will also pay additional fees for the right to use the software with more than a single probe. The precise schedule for those fees will depend upon the policies of the vendor.

I wanted to bring this up because these vendors tout the use of the X-Rite SDK as a feature, and I wanted to make it clear that it also imposes extra costs upon consumers. I can't evaluate whether it offers those vendors advantages over competitors who do not use the SDK, though basic accuracy doesn't seem to be one of them.

I am convincable otherwise, but on the face of it seems to me that for the most part this approach appears to serve the interests of X-Rite more than consumers.

Again wrong we sell a single license and for that you can use any Spyder2, Display2, DTP-94, ColorPro II meter you wish or all of them if you have them. We don't tie our V3 product to a meter serial number. So if you change or replace your meter or barrow a different one from a friend we don't care.

One huge advantage you seem to have over looked is the vendors that do license the SDK from x-rite also get updates and support from x-rite for the SDK. So when we had some problems with the Display2 and Plasma we got it solved. When we had some problems with the Display2 and fast scan LCDs again it was solved. Same thing with fast color wheel DLPs. So not having a SDK license and getting support and updates from x-rite leaves the other software to a huge disadvantage.
post #74 of 315
Thread Starter 
Derek:

OK, I am happy to be corrected on this.

However, am I correct that this is a new policy with v. 3? Because when I asked about getting a new license file for a replacement D2, I was told that I would have to buy a new license fee or upgrade to v. 3. Also, v. 2 did tie the meter to the software via the serial # and there were different costs based on the meter license you requested.

I just haven't kept up with the v. 3 policies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by derekjsmith View Post

Again wrong we sell a single license and for that you can use any Spyder2, Display2, DTP-94, ColorPro II meter you wish or all of them if you have them. We don't tie our V3 product to a meter serial number. So if you change or replace your meter or barrow a different one from a friend we don't care.

One huge advantage you seem to have over looked is the vendors that do license the SDK from x-rite also get updates and support from x-rite for the SDK. So when we had some problems with the Display2 and Plasma we got it solved. When we had some problems with the Display2 and fast scan LCDs again it was solved. Same thing with fast color wheel DLPs. So not having a SDK license and getting support and updates from x-rite leaves the other software to a huge disadvantage.
post #75 of 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

Derek:

OK, I am happy to be corrected on this.

However, am I correct that this is a new policy with v. 3? Because when I asked about getting a new license file for a replacement D2, I was told that I would have to buy a new license fee or upgrade to v. 3. Also, v. 2 did tie the meter to the software via the serial # and there were different costs based on the meter license you requested.

I just haven't kept up with the v. 3 policies.

Yes this was all changed and updated when we release V3.
post #76 of 315
Apart from the meter shootout, HOW ABOUT A SOFTWARE SHOOTOUT?! Only then can all claims come to rest. Would the vendors support this...?
post #77 of 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDholic View Post

Apart from the meter shootout, HOW ABOUT A SOFTWARE SHOOTOUT?! Only then can all claims come to rest. Would the vendors support this...?

Happily if the shooters are open about their methodology and can come up with a good methodology. I expect that no one is going to have access to a lab-grade meter to act as the final arbiter, but if you do, or have a good idea of how to create an impartial reference, then we are willing to work with the "shooters".

Bill
post #78 of 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

However, am I correct that this is a new policy with v. 3? Because when I asked about getting a new license file for a replacement D2, I was told that I would have to buy a new license fee or upgrade to v. 3. Also, v. 2 did tie the meter to the software via the serial # and there were different costs based on the meter license you requested.

Yes, to have gotten a new license for v2, you needed to buy a new license. As Derek said, we changed this for v3 when we went to the U3 drive option. Your "cost" to use the new meter with v3 ought to be <$20 (the price of a small U3 drive) with a moment's bit of work on Froogle.

Bill
post #79 of 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear5k View Post

Happily if the shooters are open about their methodology and can come up with a good methodology. I expect that no one is going to have access to a lab-grade meter to act as the final arbiter, but if you do, or have a good idea of how to create an impartial reference, then we are willing to work with the "shooters".

Bill

Unfortunately, I don't have access to any lab-grade meter. Was hoping someone that did would offer. With that said, I own Calman (as you would know) and I'm very happy with it. When is final V3 releasing?
post #80 of 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDholic View Post

Unfortunately, I don't have access to any lab-grade meter. Was hoping someone that did would offer. With that said, I own Calman (as you would know) and I'm very happy with it. When is final V3 releasing?

Very soon. Build 108 is in the works, and that should be the final (gold) version. We will follow with v3.01 pretty quickly to add a "restore all" feature to the save files, and then we are off on to planning the Pro version.

I think a single discussion thread comparing the various software products out there might be helpful, even if we can't get someone to do a "true" shoot-out with a reference meter.

Bill
post #81 of 315
Thread Starter 
I have some new data. I just got a chance to try out the X-Rite Chroma5 on LCD, CRT, and DLP. What I found was that it performed about the same as the D2 on the CRT and LCD. However, It performed significantly better on DLP. The grayscale results were indistinguishable from the i1Pro. Very nice.

I used Progressive Labs and HCFR software for the comparisons. I will continue to test the Chroma5 on other display types, but as of now it looks like a really nice solution: accuracy close to the i1Pro, but easier to use with MUCH better low-light sensitivity. On the other hand, it may just be indicative of the inter-meter variations I've been seeing.

Unfortunately, it is an OEM product that is not widely available. Progressive Labs bundles it with their software, and currently they are the only source I know of (perhaps Sencore).

Using Lab data with the 1976 formula.

post #82 of 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

Unfortunately, it is an OEM product that is not widely available. Progressive Labs bundles it with their software, and currently they are the only source I know of (perhaps Sencore).

Tom I guess you missed this post only a few above yours and even one that you asked about and I told you who was OEMing the Chroma5 including CalMAN.

Quote:
Originally Posted by derekjsmith View Post

We don't have a price set on the Chroma5 yet still working it out with x-rite on our discounts. Since you already have a DTP-94 I would recommend just adding the i1Pro.

Quote:
Originally Posted by derekjsmith View Post

Because it's an OEM only product. Many integrators do sell the x-rite Chroma5 but usually by a different name. Progressive Labs C5, Sencore ColorPro V, etc…
post #83 of 315
Question for two of the above posters...

Derek and/or Bill

a)When do you expect the profiling to be added to CalMAN. As both of you are well aware:

1. I own a PL CA-6X meter in addition to the i1Pro.
2. I find the inconsistency of the i1Pro at low stimulus levels very fustrating.

Thus it would be great to be able to use the CA-6X for low stimulus grayscale calibration PROVIDED so doing would improve the above noted consistency and time issue....to that point, will a profiled CA-6X be materially more consistent at low stimulus levels?


b)What is the best way to use the CA-6X and i1Pro within CalMAN (i.e. CA-6X for low stimulus grayscale and i1Pro for high stimulus grayscale, color decoding and color gamut) in light of the fact that the "start up process" requires the selection of a (i.e. one) meter...or is the idea that once the CA-6X is profiled to the i1Pro to simply use the CA-6X for everything?

TIA.


Tom

As I read your post re: C5 I get the sense that you found the "raw" (i.e. unprofiled) C5 to yield "near identical" results to the i1Pro...am I correct to conclude that given the choice between the C5 and i1Pro you would opt for the C5 because:

1. It is faster at low stimulus leves; and
2. It is more consistent at low stimulus levels?

Apologies for asking "essentially the same questions" to "both" but I am trying to pick as many brains as I can...

TIA,

Joel
post #84 of 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joelc View Post

Derek and/or Bill

a)When do you expect the profiling to be added to CalMAN. As both of you are well aware:

1. I own a PL CA-6X meter in addition to the i1Pro.
2. I find the inconsistency of the i1Pro at low stimulus levels very fustrating.

Thus it would be great to be able to use the CA-6X for low stimulus grayscale calibration PROVIDED so doing would improve the above noted consistency and time issue....to that point, will a profiled CA-6X be materially more consistent at low stimulus levels?

We have both xyY offset and 3x3 matrix profiling in now, though they are not well documented. We will be rolling out a regression-based approach in a point release in the future, though this will be spreadsheet-based for a while (too much UI work is in line ahead of it). The regression-approach requires us to make some additional internal changes, so there is still a little work to be done.

By the way, we do all of the math ourselves on this to ensure that it is done accurately. Excel has had bugs in its statistics libraries for years, and it is just easier for us to go straight to the raw matrix math.


Quote:
b) What is the best way to use the CA-6X and i1Pro within CalMAN (i.e. CA-6X for low stimulus grayscale and i1Pro for high stimulus grayscale, color decoding and color gamut) in light of the fact that the "start up process" requires the selection of a (i.e. one) meter...or is the idea that once the CA-6X is profiled to the i1Pro to simply use the CA-6X for everything?

I would use the CA-6X for grayscale work on most displays, and then use the i1 Pro for gamut work (e.g., CMS, Color Decoder). On "odd" displays, you may want to use the i1 Pro for everything, despite its limited range.

Bill
post #85 of 315
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by derekjsmith View Post

Tom I guess you missed this post only a few above yours and even one that you asked about and I told you who was OEMing the Chroma5 including CalMAN.

No, I didn't miss it, though I may have misunderstood. I took this to mean that you were NOT an OEM source of the Chroma5 now, but that you were in negotiations with X-Rite to become one in the future. Could you clarify?
post #86 of 315
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joelc View Post

As I read your post re: C5 I get the sense that you found the "raw" (i.e. unprofiled) C5 to yield "near identical" results to the i1Pro...am I correct to conclude that given the choice between the C5 and i1Pro you would opt for the C5 because:

1. It is faster at low stimulus leves; and
2. It is more consistent at low stimulus levels?

It's not just that it has better low-light sensitivity, which is certainly does. It is also much easier to use. There is no need to take multiple dark level readings, in fact with PL you take no dark level reading at all, which sort of freaked me out. It also comes with a nice tripod mount and diffuser, which I haven't tested yet. I took the DLP measurements directly off the screen sans diffuser.

As I said, other than the fact that it is 2-3 dE less accurate on some display types (I will continue testing to see if this holds up), the only problem I see is availability. You can't just order it from Amazon. One has to get it from a software vendor bundled with their software.
post #87 of 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

No, I didn't miss it, though I may have misunderstood. I took this to mean that you were NOT an OEM source of the Chroma5 now, but that you were in negotiations with X-Rite to become one in the future. Could you clarify?

We OEM it and have had it as an option for a while now. We have not pushed it because our business has been largely consumer-based where price matters a lot. To a Pro, the incremental accuracy, speed and onboard memory would be a Good Thing.
post #88 of 315
Hey Derek,
I've been playing with CalMan for quite a while. I've basically resorted to the strategy you suggested a few posts ago - greyscale with the C5, color adjust with the iIPro. BUT- with my two meters, I'm always concerned because they do not read the same display the same way. I do have an old Sony "reference" CRT b&W monitor that should read .313, .329 (but doesn't, with any of the probes I have). With no other standard, all of my probes are by definition inaccurate. If I could easily do an offset for both the iI and the C5, I'd know that my displays were at least matching the reference monitor. It's just not obvious how to do this with CalMAN. Can you give a quick "do this" instruction (you did say the offset stuff wasn't well documented...)
Thanks!
post #89 of 315
The offset method is easiest in the old v2 app, but we've obviously added a LOT of additional meters in v3. Finishing the documentation around this is one of my goals for the upcoming weekend.
post #90 of 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

It's not just that it has better low-light sensitivity, which is certainly does. It is also much easier to use. There is no need to take multiple dark level readings, in fact with PL you take no dark level reading at all, which sort of freaked me out. It also comes with a nice tripod mount and diffuser, which I haven't tested yet. I took the DLP measurements directly off the screen sans diffuser.

With respect to the above:

1. Correction...you do take a DARK LEVEL reading...the very first tsep when using the PL software is to take a DARK LEVEL reading as clearly noted in the manual (and yes, I read it)...the problem is with the software in that it DOES NOT force a reading...

2. Mount...I use this for both the CA-6X as well as the i1Pro...very functional..



Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

As I said, other than the fact that it is 2-3 dE less accurate on some display types (I will continue testing to see if this holds up), the only problem I see is availability. You can't just order it from Amazon. One has to get it from a software vendor bundled with their software.

I look forward to your continued testing and reporting...

Thanks a lot...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Display Calibration
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Display Calibration › Calibration meter shootout