Originally Posted by harlekin
Its the math behind it all. Calman had some upsies in that regard in the past. With Lut calibration. With autocal. With entire workflows they championed publicly but didnt test.
"Great feature in accordance with our partners." And then it didnt work. Used the wrong color ranges, or values for peak white... We've had it all.
In terms of this thread its mostly a marketing term, thats thrown around to sell newbies Calman over other calibration solutions. To them its supposed to mean quality - because everyone is using it (because of "most easy" (but longwinded) step by step workflows, and calibrators basically selling the pdf documentation, that comes out of the program, has logos, and their customer databases, and... Its basically a lock in in that regard.), to the people reading the changelogs, and having issues with lets say LG OLED autocal, its mostly a joke.
Not sure if they have fixed most pressing issues by now (probably) - but in the past they hype released with severe problems quite a few times.
Also if the math checks out - everyone is on the same equal level. With lut generation, there is some weighing (algorythm) stuff going on, where one vendor might have the better algo, but with calibration - no. There you get the same outcomes, regardless of whos product you use. With margins so small, that it could as well be your probes tolerance.
Calman by default measures some runs at 75% stimulus, while other solutions always measure them at 100% then there might be a small difference showing, then people attribute this to Calmans accuracy - because they are the big player in town. When in effect, they'd just have to change a setting in other calibration software to measure the same. Stuff like this has added to the myth.
I really didn't want to comment on this post but someone has to give the other side of the story, you guys are way too critical.
I agree CM almost always has bugs like any other software but as far as the workflows, they are designed so you can change most values, and with the design function make any kind of customized layout. So if you want 100% stimulus, just change the value and save to a customized name. I have several custom workflows I use all the time and a lot of folks here do the same. I know loosing Design Mode is a big issue for this very reason but you can still change some parameters and save the workflow.
LG autocal is not a joke. When we didn't have it everyone wanted something like that. True the 3D LUT has slight banding but time will tell if that will be fixed. But you have a ton of 1D LUT options, Dolby Vision and HDR calibration couldn't be easier.
For a home Enthusiast, CM is very easy to use. Just look at the forums to see how many went out and purchased basic equipment and are calibrating with autocal. It may not be as good as a professional calibration for many reasons but it works and gives a nice result.
As for professional calibrators, you can manage an excellent calibration in a reasonable amount of time, no matter what your process is, for any set in the field which is probably why I believe most use it. I don't believe you professionally calibrate but just try and do a Dolby Vision calibration on an LG manually
What a pain.
I can go on and on and i'm sure you can as well so please don't. I just want to mention some of the other side of the story.
At the end of the day i'm not happy about loosing Enthusiast since some day when I retire for good, I was hoping to downgrade back to it and calibrate my own sets as a hobby. I feel PD is doing a really poor job with this transition which is making everyone very upset. Everyone is correct, there are competitive calibration products so everyone has a choice once the dust clears. It will be very interesting to see what happens.
PD has to:
- Communicate better with it's user base. This is probably the #1
most important thing they need to do.
- Have a clear product line up that makes sense and is priced appropriately.
- Improve their internal testing and use a more formal Beta test program, similar to how Oppo had.
- Fix some of the critical inherent bugs that users have been complaining about for years. If parts or all of the software needs to be re-written, as most software after a while does, then do it
Now that the cost of the product has gone up substantially, users are going to "expect" more "major bug free" releases and more rapid bug fixes.
^^^ Hum this sounds like it can apply to most software development companies.
Everyone has their own opinion depending on their situation, needs, and expectations, that's fine, the above is my opinion for my specific needs and expectations.