I have investigated on my E8 (FW .55), using i1D3 for generaiung, checking and comparing 1DLUT and 3DLUT.
Here some of the comparison I have done based on 120 Nits Target:
First of all I was quite curious to compare a 13 cube (on the top - 2 hours) with a 17 one (4 hours):
I have found the results very good. Clearly a 17 cube is better, but if you don't have time also a 13 one is good.
I have compared them using Ted's pattern, and I could spot differences.
Also a comparison of the 17 Cube with a manual calibration (on the top)
shows the related improvements. Problem this manual is that red at 100% is out range (moved right - verified with Jeti) - not sure if depending from .55 sw. Anyhow fixed with a 3DLUT and quite evident comparing side to side. Harder to detect on real contents.
Then I have started comparing with an Autocal case. As time is a constraints for 3DLUT, I have generated a 5000 point 3DLUT. Here the CM result (top) compared to LS 17 cube:
Not so bad, but, when I started comparing, I have found colour banding on blu, specifically on Blue Tunnel.
But I have seen some advantages on black levels. See LS results compared to CM ones on a gray ramp and on a 16-27 squares:
Looking to Ted's Black Tunnel pattern, with Calman I can see 1%. I have also given check to the outcomes with a .20 FW, but still LS is too dark.
But blue banding? Any relation with CM 1DLUT? So I have done my last test: over a CM 1DLUT I have run LS 17 cube (on the bottom) - on the top the 17 cube all CM cube:
And, most important thing, the banding is gone. Also grey scale has improved and grey scale either.
My impressions/conclusions: I think that 1DLUT have the capability to improve black levels. I guess i1DIS is not the best instruments for measuring them and I understand @BlackJoker
has gotten better results, but with a Klein.
Worthless to add that 3DLUT generation on LS is great
, but that's something of known