My understanding is that the calibration plate is only require for reflective measurements (i.e., printer profiling).

However, the x-rite software always asks you to put the i1Pro on the "white tile" to calibrate it, even for emissive measurements. With older software such as i1Match & i1Diag, putting the i1Pro and other types of surface will result in a calibration error. With newer software such as i1Profiler, it does not seem to matter what surface you place it on, as long as it's opaque. I even intentionally "calibrated" it on a blue surface, and found that the subsequent measurements are no different than if I calibrated on the correct white tile.

 

Hi, Each i1PRO is calibrated/re-certificated by X-Rite using it's own serial numbered matched White Plate, when I send my unit to X-Rite Factory @ Switzerland they wanted the Plate also. Note that many times at ebay they are selling the meter without the serial matched plate. If you making plans to send that meter to X-Rite for re-certification in the future, you will need the serial matched Plate. X-Rite will not accept older i1PRO's revisions for re-certification.

If you want to check the meter using X-Rite's iDiagnostics, you will need the Plate also.

For initial dark reading (or for taking a new dark reading measurement every 10 min for optimum accuracy.) you can close the i1PRO1 optics hole with a black cloth or your finger or something other with flat surface that don't let light through is required.

For i1PRO2 you need It's Plate because it features a built-in wavelength calibration technology and it's using the white tile to automatically self diagnose and correct for small shifts doing a mechanical alignment (of the 41 10nm increments binned from 128 sensors) based on that white's tile reflectance reading.

 

Without the Place you can't use X-Rite's iDiagnostics to perform some functionality tests to check the meter because if there's any hardware problem, it will reported there.

If you buying a used meter from e-bay, the seller can't prof to you that the meter is working with no problems. (without running the iDiagnostics). You risk your money for something you don't know if it's damaged.

 

I am one of the few who don't recommend buying such equipment from Ebay. You do not know how the product was treated before you got it. If by chance the meter was dropped, it is not worth buying. Look at ChromaPure or SpectraCAL for their offers on the i1Pro2. These units are new and function as they should. The carrying case is a nice feature as well. There are also improvements over the i1Pro.

Now that being said, I have experimented with an old i1Pro and was able to find an alternative for the white tile. I found that a piece of HP Photo printer paper worked well. I ran it through X-Rite's diagnostics test program and it came out fine. The only issue I had was with the Reflectance Test. After it failed the first time, I turned the paper ninety degrees and ran the test again and it came through with flying colors. I made an assumption the the grain of the paper might have been the problem. Since I question the accuracy of this i1Pro meter I never did any comparison tests against my i1Pro2.

To be honest, even though the unit passed the diagnostic test, I can not help feel that if the white tile assists in some form of internal process within the meter. Since an alternative white tile was used, there is a great possibility that the accuracy would be in question.

If someone wants to try this experiment, as well as the comparison testing; please do and post it. Most of my time these days are used up with home reno's.

 

To be honest, even though the unit passed the diagnostic test, I can not help feel that if the white tile assists in some form of internal process within the meter. Since an alternative white tile was used, there is a great possibility that the accuracy would be in question.

It won't affect emissive (it only use black point calibration), but reflective will certainly be mis-calibrated.

 

I'm told that some unscrupulous sellers will leave out the calibration tile from I1Pro's that will not pass the self-diagnostics.

I'd definitely hold out for one that comes with the serial-numbers on both the I1Pro and the matching tile. Even better, a good seller will run and print out the XRite diagnostics report and put that info in the auction. Free software and it gives you how much time is on the bulb and whether it passes self-diagnostics.

Using the tile is the only way you can run the self-diagnostics and calibrate the unit in the field before use. If you ever want to send it in for service or certification, you'll need the matching calibration tile like Ted mentioned.

 

Thanks all for your inputs on this. I guess if budget is a issue. Paying say half for one without the tile compared to one with a tile and diagnostics ran may be a option. Again, I was looking at one mainly because of my issues with calibrating my OLED. I was actually looking around to see if I could rent one for a day just to build the profile. But have not manage to do that here. I am discussing rental with a Klein dealer as well. I was hoping to pay him for a 1 or 2 hours time just to bring over a klein for the profile. Oh well. The search continues.

 

Oliver, i see u r close enuf to me. PM me and we can discuss about ur need for a spectro.

 

You don't need an i1pro for the OLED.


I got an i1pro and the differences where like less than 5%; not even large enough that if you are within 1 deltaE it would be unnoticeable.

The whole tinting issue is not a colorimeter problem, but a profile reading problem. You should set your software to do RAW readings.


If you have wide gamut enabled, the grayscale is really wacky like dark yellow-brown; and it shifts depending on the contrast and brightness. You need to calibrate with standard gamut, that fixes the grayscale problem.

Also 5 IRE is really really bad. One tick flips the entire color chart on it, unless you take it to 2.2 or less, which causes false contouring. Personally, as long as the 5 IRE is not red or green and contains a little too much blue... leave it alone! Changing it makes images false contour really bad, just calibrate 10,15,etc and be done with it.


Whichever software you are using, make sure to set the profile to a raw reading, not using any special profiles. If you try to use OLED, LCD, ETC you can get a green tint.

 

You don't need an i1pro for the OLED.


I got an i1pro and the differences where like less than 5%; not even large enough that if you are within 1 deltaE it would be unnoticeable.

The whole tinting issue is not a colorimeter problem, but a profile reading problem. You should set your software to do RAW readings.

{....}

Whichever software you are using, make sure to set the profile to a raw reading, not using any special profiles. If you try to use OLED, LCD, ETC you can get a green tint.

Ok.

Item 1: Topic drift. I apologize in advance.

Item 2: One person's "experience" should not be extrapolated to a general rule. While it's quite possible that there was a bad "built in" OLED profile on your "colorimeter," that doesn't mean that all colorimeter OLED profiles are bad. The only way to "know" that the profile is "bad" is to compare the readings to a suitable spectro.

Item 3: Mandatory disclaimer: That being said, I can not vouch for the i1Pro(1 or 2) wrt suitability for OLED profile generation a/o standalone readings. Also, I should note that I have *not* been following the ongoing OLED calibration issues/discussions so I may be missing some context here. So FWIW, YMMV, grains of salt, yada, yada, caveats, et. al., etc. ... (83)

 

Thank you for the response. I wasn't sure about the emissive aspects.

Thanks again.

 

BTW, I have placed my i1PRO1 for sale @ Classifieds.

 

I'm confused a bit by Chase Payne's comments about the i1Pro vs. the JETI device. Both are spectroradiometers, the JETI being a higher grade one.

Perhaps he meant the i1-Display-Pro, aka, I1DP3. That is a colorimeter, which needs to be used with a spectral profile of the display being measured, in particular if the display is capable of wide gamut color or has a narrow band RGB light source. I have to look, but as I recall, the i1DP3 comes with a profile for some kinds of RGB oled, but not the white oled technology that LG uses in their consumer displays.

 

I'm confused a bit by Chase Payne's comments about the i1Pro vs. the JETI device. Both are spectroradiometers, the JETI being a higher grade one. {....}

Correct. Also, I'm not sure what exactly is meant by the term "raw" in this context, I'm assuming "raw" == use the built-in OLED profile (if it exists.)

At this point, I suppose I should do some catch up reading in the 'OLED Calibration Anomaly' thread before I spread any more chaos and confusion. (84)

 

I've re-read my posts a few times, and I honestly do not see how you thought I said the spectro was not better. I clearly stated the differences were minimal, not enough to correct the green tint.


Just take a look at these two images. Both of the images have less than a 1 delta error for the entire grayscale. I want you to point out which one is incorrect. Both of these images, the meter reads it is correct.


Want to know the difference between the two? Both of them where actually calibrated with a spectro reference meter.


The only difference between the two is wide color gamut and standard. Wide color gamut on this TV set is broken, it causes the grayscale to look green or yellow.

 

The only difference between the two is wide color gamut and standard. Wide color gamut on this TV set is broken, it causes the grayscale to look green or yellow.

I would be careful jumping to conclusions and making assumptions without access to the whole data that would be needed to have any confidence in said assumptions. To explain this using the example photos you've shown: First, let me say for completeness sake that taking a photo of the screen (which I assume is showing a scene from a video game?) with a camera and then subsequently posting said photo involves already quite a lot of steps before a visual image arrives at the viewer's eyes, i.e. raw RGB values -> graphics card -> your display -> light -> camera sensor -> raw RGB values -> output colorspace -> webbrowser -> viewer display -> light -> viewer's eyes, and that's not even touching on details like multiple YCbCr RGB conversion, color management in webbrowsers and the like), so what we see may or may not be close to what you are seeing in person on your display.
Second, you seem to assume the scene shown is indeed intended to look neutral, i.e. the digital source RGB values in the scene would be equal (R=G=B), which also seems odd for a video game because they usually don't go B&W often. Have you verified this?
To me it seems unlikely that the wide gamut mode affects grayscale (R=G=B). It seems much more likely that the dark walls and floor shown in the photo are indeed slightly green at the digital source signal level (G > RB), which is then intensified by the wide gamut mode because most wide gamut displays achieve a wider gamut by using a very saturated green primary.

 

And a couple of control questions:

4) You get "green tint" with i1Pro or Jeti in "normal/standard gamut" (~REC709) mode. True or false?

5) You get "green tint" with D3/Raw in "normal/standard gamut." True or false?

 

If you re-read my posts, all of your questions have been addressed.