Originally Posted by Manni01
Thank you for sharing your results, your posts were perceived as intended the first time. And apologies for adding to the noise by asking you to confirm something that I had missed in your initial post.
I have done a quick test with the Discus and I measure a standard anisometric 10x10x10 in 28 minutes vs your 20 minutes (in my slowest SDR calibration with a peak white of 50nits). If this translated to LCOS, this means that the i1d3 would be about 30% faster, while being less accurate than the Discus in low light. I assume that the K10a would be about 50% faster (15 minutes?) while being more accurate in low light than the Discus.
The main question for me is how accurate would the i1d3 be with a 21points LUT, when reading 5% stim RGBW on LCOS. When I evaluated the i1d3 a few years back, it was not only unable to read black reliably (like the Discus is under certain conditions), which makes it impossible to use for BT1886 or contrast measurements, but it was unable to read 5% white off the screen with my JVC projector at the time.
In the low end, with your "turbo" settings, how low do you expect the i1d3 to read reliably? Is it able to read the darkest patches of a 21pts LUT reliably with these settings? What is your peak white? What is your 5% white Y?
Currently, with the Discus, it takes around 2.5 hours to run a 17pts LUT for HDR tonemapped content (120 peak nits, 5% white around 0.17nits) without low light averaging, and a lot longer with my calibration for SDR content (currently 54nits peak white, 5% white around 0.05nits after calibration using BT1886, would be lower with power 2.4), up to five hours with low light averaging enabled. I currently use an optimised patch sequence of under 4,000 points that runs under 2 hours for my HDR calibration with the Discus profiled to the i1pro2 (I haven't had a chance to try FCVM yet but on LCOS FCCM already worked very well, so I'm not expecting huge improvements) and provides excellent results with CS.
If your results translated to a 30% speed increase here, it would allow me to read 5,000 patches in a bit more than 1.5 hours with the i1d3, which makes a 21pts LUT just about doable at around 3 hours, but only if the results are usable, especially in the low end.
Have you tried measuring a 21pts LUT with your turbo settings, and is your i1d3 reliable reading the darkest patches? Have you tried a calibration with a peak white as low as 50nits (which is the standard for SDR with projectors in a dedicated room) and patches going down as low at 0.05nits for white?
Thank you again for sharing all your results, I don't own an i1d3 currently but your results with turbo settings make me think about getting one to run large LUTs faster than I can with my Discus.
I'd love to not have to upgrade to a K10a, but despite the significant speed improvements that you report with your "turbo" settings in your setup (I assume targeting 100nits in SDR), I'm not sure that an i1d3 would work reliably here with 21pts LUTs, especially with my SDR calibration (50nits peak white, 0.05nits for 5% white).
That's the reason why I had to go with the Discus rather than the i1d3, and I'm concerned that this limitation might still stand given the limited ability of the i1d3 in low light.
Okay so this is absolutely not being directed towards you as it is clear you actually read and understood what I said. But the rest of what has been said today and over the past couple days is getting pretty boring and is completely unwarranted.
I never once said the i1d3 can be turned into a Klein with some cooked up settings. I have repeatedly said that it is just tweaking of the normal settings that are available to anyone with an i1d3 Rev.B meter. They are there, right in the settings menu for all to see. They have always been there. Anyone can do what they want with them and if they work, then great it can make you i1d3 much faster and in fact can make it comparable to a Klein over the 1000 points that I showed. It doesn't magically make the i1d3 able to read any lower than it already could. It doesn't make it any more accurate than it already is. It doesn't make it any more repeatable than it already is. It doesn't do anything other than shorten the read time from whatever Integration time you usually set it at (generic default advice is 0.75 or 750ms) to 0.25 or 250ms. That is quite a bit of gain when measuring over a substantial amount of patch points (note, when used in conjunction with AIO Mode). Then, to ensure that the low light readings it is capable of measuring are stable, just set a threshold for where Intelligent Integration kicks in. Whether that be 2 nits, 5 nits or whatever.
In LightSpace there is a Measure and Log feature (not available yet in CS, but it was one of the first things I requested on WIBNI list during Alpha testing) where you can measure and record whatever you want and check for repeatability of measurements in a CSV log file. On my WOLED panel, with my i1d3, in my environment with my setup, setting Intelligent Int at 2 nit means it will take reads until they are repeatable (up to the meters maximum Integration time) and then move on to the next patch. Very simple.
With my setup, everything measured above 1.5 nits is fine, repeatable and stable with the shortened Integration time of 250ms, whereas below 1.5 nits it is not as repeatable. So to be safe, I set it at 2 nits. Again, very simple.
That is all there is to it and I absolutely for the life of me cannot understand how some people cannot see that, and then go off on some wild mission to twist what was said into something it isn't. I have no interest in justifying my purchase of the i1d3, if anything I would want to justify my purchase of the Klein and say that the i1d3 is rubbish and all should ditch theirs and get a Pro meter so that I'd feel my expensive purchase was not made in vain. My initial first post and subsequent reply to another user was made due to the fact that many/most here use the i1d3 and that the new FCVM probe match method in ColourSpace works very, very well and happened to mention that if you tweak your i1d3 settings you can make it much faster without losing any of its accuracy. It really is that simple, but maybe too simple for some to understand
One final thing on that subject is that they are not "my" turbo settings. This was all discussed a long time ago in the LightSpace thread where people were trying to get things to work faster. Several tried it and it worked for most/all of them IIRC. It is OLD NEWS!
Anyway, sorry for the rant. And again, not directed towards you as it is clear you understood what I said, or at least attempted to and didn't try and twist anything.
To answer some of your questions.
Yes, I have used the i1d3 to do a 21p cube several times for some tests and experiments I was doing a while back just for fun. If I recall, it takes about 30-35 minutes longer than the Klein when using the i1d3 settings above. It was before the Start/End time box and patch counter etc was added in ColourSpace so I timed it roughly and I am sure (with my hazy recollection) it was 30 (ish) minutes longer over 9261 points. Not bad at all I thought!!!
It cannot, and will not ever read the darkest patches any more reliably than it already does no matter what settings yo use. It is hardware. You cannot change the physical characteristics of it. It does not matter if you set Integration at 0.25 or 6.0. It measures what it measures at all times. It will take measurements based on the time you set your Integration value at and with an Intelligent Int value set, it will slow down and "Intelligently" take reads until it is stable and move on as explained above. The key is to set the correct Integration time in the first place. The faster the better obviously, but it needs to be good reads so you can either make repeatable measurements and check for consistency, or use LightSpace Measure and Log function.
I have never calibrated a Projector and do not foresee myself ever having to. I have one SDR picture mode at 80 nits (night viewing when I am tired), one at 100 nits (general normal dark room viewing) and one at 120 nits (day mode). I have done all three of these multiple times with the i1d3 before I got my Klein and achieved great results when using either a 17p or a 21p cube.
In your case, measuring off screen for a projector, I doubt (although I do not know) if you would be able to reduce the Integration time that low, so no, I do not think (nor do I know) if you would see any benefit from using an i1d3 in the way I have described. But this is why I said repeatedly that users would have to test for themselves with their own setup in their own environment, and there are very, very simple ways to do this as I have said above.
If you can justify the cost of a Klein (or CR probe) then absolutely, get one. It is fantastic and I do not regret for one moment buying mine. But I absolutely love the (two) i1d3 probes I have and they are more than worth their money (IMO) and are excellent little probes. Whether the i1d3 would be of any benefit to you, I really could not honestly give an opinion.
Sorry for the late reply, I have been at work all day, but I really hope this clarifies everything fully so as to prevent any more of totally unwarranted, obnoxious and somewhat offensive posts over the past few days.