Joined
·
5,049 Posts
There's no other choice than the Spyder for the JVC autocal.Saw the cine4home review of the first jvc auto cal. They didnt recommend to use a spyder on a new pj.
There's no other choice than the Spyder for the JVC autocal.Saw the cine4home review of the first jvc auto cal. They didnt recommend to use a spyder on a new pj.
I have a 5500 and think red is a bit to much and perhaps green too and was wondering to go the spyder 5 way if its precise enough.
What about using your eyes? Lol. I think for colors it should be doable. Gamma curves less so.
For 2015, the subject of this thread, that is true. I think that changes in later model years.There's no other choice than the Spyder for the JVC autocal.
A good Spyder is good enough but it’s unlikely your eyes can judge the results well.Saw the cine4home review of the first jvc auto cal. They didnt recommend to use a spyder on a new pj.
With the current software rev and spyder 5 is the consensus still the same?
I have a 5500 and think red is a bit to much and perhaps green too and was wondering to go the spyder 5 way if its precise enough.
What about using your eyes? Lol. I think for colors it should be doable. Gamma curves less so.
Had an xrite pro a few years back and it was fine but will not go full in again due to time.
OK, so coming back to my question, it means that the calibration done with CMD off is still applied with CMD on (if the gamma and color profile is the same) but maybe suboptimal.My understanding is that with a change to any of the following:
- Lamp high/low
- Filter on/off
- CMD on/off
- Iris (changes of more than a few clicks either way)
You should probably rerun your autocal. In your case, you might be able to correct gamma/grayscale fine using Calman/HCFR with the internal controls. Really depends on how far off they are.
Those 4 factors mentioned by strawberry all affect calibration. I'm not sure where you draw the line between "invalid" and "suboptimal". The calibration results are stored separately, that's why in a complete set of autocal you would change those factors one at a time, and do a save.OK, so coming back to my question, it means that the calibration done with CMD off is still applied with CMD on (if the gamma and color profile is the same) but maybe suboptimal.
It is still not clear to me how the calibration is stored and applied. If I reverse the question, so I calibrate CMD on AND CMD off, those two calibration will be kept separated, or?
Hi Manni...would I be totally whacked to import the BT2020NF profile and not rerun Autocal but continue to use my custom Arve curve, perhaps just adjusting black levels? Just trying to increase my brightness w/o dropping $3k on an increased gain screen...thanksCompletely forgot about that. Both would be incorrect, so I need to look into this (not sure when I'll be able to). You can't just replace color profile after the autocal and expect accurate results. I would expect the results to be better using a colour profile without a filter before applying BT2020-NF, but you need to take measurements after the autocal to find which would give best results.
As I said, it won't be correct. I can't say how incorrect it will be or which profile is better to use during the autocal until I run measurements.Hi Manni...would I be totally whacked to import the BT2020NF profile and not rerun Autocal but continue to use my custom Arve curve, perhaps just adjusting black levels? Just trying to increase my brightness w/o dropping $3k on an increased gain screen...thanks
Ok, imported BT2020NF...chapter 13 BVS, where that monster thing is starting to light up, with fire in its veins, BT2020 is much more accurately orangey fire in the veins where as bt2020 no filter is more clipped white fire in the veins...all using the same custom curve...would u recommend trying to tweak my curve or do u feel this may be more fundamental to the NF color profile and Autocal?As I said, it won't be correct. I can't say how incorrect it will be or which profile is better to use during the autocal until I run measurements.
And I have no idea when I'll be able to do so.
It would be madness to get a new screen just for that reason. First because it would be much cheaper to hire a competent calibrator to get a good calibration with the brightness you have, which is not ideal but is enough to get very good results in HDR using BT2020 and a custom curve, and two because the difference is only 10-15%. It's better than nothing, but it's not enough to give you what a screen with a higher gain would give you if that's really what you need. Problem is, such a screen will also raise your black levels.
So be patient, I'll investigate this when I have the time, but asking about it won't make it happen faster.
In the meantime, there is no harm in trying BT-2020NF without running an autocal. If it's accurate enough to make the moderate increase in brightness worth the loss in accuracy, then just use it like that.
I'm not recommending anything until I have the time to measure and investigate. So please let it go or measure yourself. I don't know when I'll have the time to look into this. As soon as I do, I'll post here.Ok, imported BT2020NF...chapter 13 BVS, where that monster thing is starting to light up, with fire in its veins, BT2020 is much more accurately orangey fire in the veins where as bt2020 no filter is more clipped white fire in the veins...all using the same custom curve...would u recommend trying to tweak my curve or do u feel this may be more fundamental to the NF color profile and Autocal?
Thanks, I’ll let it go...using bt2020 for now...thanks againI'm not recommending anything until I have the time to measure and investigate. So please let it go or measure yourself. I don't know when I'll have the time to look into this. As soon as I do, I'll post here.
Is spyder5 still the only option for RS540?For 2015, the subject of this thread, that is true. I think that changes in later model years.
RS540 uses v10 software which supports Spyder5 and i1Pro2.Is spyder5 still the only option for RS540?
Clarifying question...for basic (non expert lol) testing of black clipping using Arve tool, bbo function and the black clipping track from Ryan Masciola, I should set bbo so that line 77 is perfectly black and faintly see 81? I know there are more technical discussions going on but is this a good start?
That might change though as we're doing tests at the moment to figure out 1) if there are only a couple of 0.005nits titles with raised blacks (Lucy and Oblivion led us to think it was the majority, but in fact it might just be a few poorly mastered early masters) and 2) if clipping black at 77 instead of 64 leads to any significant black crush or not.Yes, that is the best practice/most common recommendation, IIRC, with the Arve tool.