Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: NEC PA241W europe: SpectraView II o BasicColor/SP Profiler? calibration results  (Read 7133 times)
ZILA
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« on: January 26, 2011, 04:33:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Hello everyone,
I'm Zila (Laura) from Italy. My english is bad.. excuse me. I kindly ask those who respond to this post to write as clear as possible.

I have read all but something I am not clear about monitor calibration.

I purchased a NEC PA241W European version.
I have the Spyder 3 Pro.
I have the software and test : SpectraView II 1.1.05 and BasicColor display software version 4.1.22 and  nec Spectraview Profiler 4.1.24.

I have a mac pro 2010 with  system osx 10.6.6
I am an amateur photographer and my main interest is directed to the web and photo editing.

I tried several times to calibrate  monitor with all the software at my disposal. The results are different. My problem is figuring out which calibration is correct.

I used the same parameters.

I have to specify these things:

Software basicColor / SW Profiler allows only a combined calibration Hard-/software

SpectraView II calibrated correctly, but as my European monitors do not know 'how far can calibrate the internal Lut.

I wonder if this is best done through a combined calibration made with BasicColor or calibration with  SpectraView II.

The spider 3 pro seems to work fine, but not an expert I could be wrong. I might get better results with Color Munki or Nec sensor?
NEC says that the spider 3 pro can be used with its monitor. I do not understand if it relates to the pro version or the elite. The difference is that I can buy a software and transform the pro in  elite spider.

I am attaching screen shots of the calibration
SpectraView II



BasicColor




Thanks

Laura
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9226



WWW
« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2011, 08:35:10 AM »
ReplyReply

I would expect different software to produce different results. The correct one is that which produces a match to your prints next to the display.

I’d stick with SpectraView II software which is designed to work with this hardware. Stick with on product, alter the settings until you get the match. Working with the other products just complicates everything.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
ZILA
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #2 on: January 26, 2011, 08:57:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for replay,
I want to clarify that the basic color software is the general version of the nec specific program Spectraview Profiler.
Basic Color display or SpectraView Profiler iare the same.

For my Nec PA241w europe is better Spectraview II ( sell in usa) or Spectraview Profile (sell in europe ) ?

Thanks

Zila

Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9226



WWW
« Reply #3 on: January 26, 2011, 10:31:25 AM »
ReplyReply

For my Nec PA241w europe is better Spectraview II ( sell in usa) or Spectraview Profile (sell in europe ) ?

That’s up to debate but most users have no options, they have to use one or the other depending on their locations and availably of the software to drive the NEC. Both are made to run the SpectraView II fully (unlike 3rd party solutions) so I suspect you can pick which you prefer and just use that.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7054


WWW
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2011, 12:06:17 PM »
ReplyReply

That’s up to debate but most users have no options, they have to use one or the other depending on their locations and availably of the software to drive the NEC. Both are made to run the SpectraView II fully (unlike 3rd party solutions) so I suspect you can pick which you prefer and just use that.

Andrew, In Europe the display comes equipped with BasicColor and Spectraview, in North America it comes with the latter, but the hardware is the same and profiles very well with BasicColor - an additional purchase for us here in N.A. I tested both on my PA 271W and prefer the BasicColor profile - tonality and hue just seemed a bit more accurate relatve to the print from my Epson 3800 (now 4900) to my eyes - but I know there are others who find the results of Spectraview II fine. I used the NEC adapted i1 Display 2 for making the measurements with both applications, because their puck has been tuned for their display.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
gromit
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 133


« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2011, 02:25:27 PM »
ReplyReply

I purchased a NEC PA241W European version.
I have the Spyder 3 Pro.

The Spyder 3 isn't up to the task. It gave exaggerated gamut and dirty shadows on my PA271W. Try Multiprofiler (a non-puck solution that works very well) instead:

http://www.necdisplay.com/MultiProfiler/downloads/
Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1991


WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 27, 2011, 12:54:16 AM »
ReplyReply

In Europe the display comes equipped with BasicColor and Spectraview
That's not correct the NEC PA series are only supplied with Mutliprofiler in Europe.

If you buy the more expensive, FOGRA certified, NEC Spectraview monitors they are supplied with Spectraview software and a hood. They aren't supplied with any sort of colorimeter and the 'Spectraview' software is re-badged Basicolor, not the US Spectraview II. When updating the European Spectraview software it can loose it's NEC branding and revert to Basicolor. It's also possible to buy the US version of Spectraview and import it to Europe.

In my experience the Basicolor software does the best job of the lot and everything else can be forgotten about. Stick to a colour managed browser and you probably won't have any issues with using a wide gamut display unless you end up using a non colour managed application.

Also worth noting that the panel 'burns in' after a few weeks use and the colour reproduction (validation results) improves.

Paul
In the UK with a PA271 and all the software mentioned above.
Logged
gromit
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 133


« Reply #7 on: January 27, 2011, 02:08:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Also worth noting that the panel 'burns in' after a few weeks use and the colour reproduction (validation results) improves.

The validation results (above) show how closely the generated profile models the performance of the monitor. Given that the same (and likely less than 100% accurate) instrument is used for both set of measurements they aren't particularly meaningful ... though they are an indicator of how linear the monitor is.
Logged
ZILA
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #8 on: January 27, 2011, 02:44:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Help me to understand.
How are the results of calibrations that I attached?
Considering that:
- BasicColor make a combined hard-/software  calibration
- calibration made by SpectraView II do not know 'if it really is made on the monitor LUT

What do you recommend?

the point is this.

Nec unfortunately not precise indication.

Zila
Logged
gromit
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 133


« Reply #9 on: January 27, 2011, 03:12:52 AM »
ReplyReply

What do you recommend?

1. With this monitor you want a solution that supports hardware-only calibration (namely a linear LUT in the video card).

2. Download and use the MultiProfiler software and tweak the whitepoint, black level and luminance level settings to your specific requirements.

3. Get together a set of image files that you can use to evaluate highlights and shadows for neutrality, smoothness and cleanness of gray ramps. Also images with memory colours (skin tones, fruit etc) for naturalness of rendering.

4. Ignore the validation results. For the reasons stated above they aren't particularly meaningful.
Logged
Enchanter
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 30


« Reply #10 on: January 27, 2011, 04:44:08 AM »
ReplyReply

ZILA,

You may find this interesting.

http://www.imagescience.com.au/kb/questions/142/How+To+Calibrate+An+NEC+Monitor+With+SpectraView+II

http://www.imagescience.com.au/kb/questions/146/Calibrate+Multiple+Times+With+Direct+Hardware+Calibration+Systems

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/nec_pa271w.htm   review is PA271W but also information on SpectraViewII
Logged

Wellington, New Zealand
ToniF
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #11 on: January 27, 2011, 11:14:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Laura,

BasicColor is excellent. But from the posted pictures i see that you set max. Luminance. This is way too bright.

Try to set something between 100 and 120cd as a starting point and the compare the screen with a print.

Greetings from Switzerland,

Toni
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7054


WWW
« Reply #12 on: January 27, 2011, 12:02:05 PM »
ReplyReply

That's not correct the NEC PA series are only supplied with Mutliprofiler in Europe.

If you buy the more expensive, FOGRA certified, NEC Spectraview monitors they are supplied with Spectraview software and a hood. They aren't supplied with any sort of colorimeter and the 'Spectraview' software is re-badged Basicolor, not the US Spectraview II. When updating the European Spectraview software it can loose it's NEC branding and revert to Basicolor. It's also possible to buy the US version of Spectraview and import it to Europe.

In my experience the Basicolor software does the best job of the lot and everything else can be forgotten about. Stick to a colour managed browser and you probably won't have any issues with using a wide gamut display unless you end up using a non colour managed application.

Also worth noting that the panel 'burns in' after a few weeks use and the colour reproduction (validation results) improves.

Paul
In the UK with a PA271 and all the software mentioned above.

OK, packaging may differ in different markets - anyhow, I agree, BasicColor does a great job with this display, and I've found the NEC-supplied puck here in Canada works fine - no complaints, as to be expected given that it is custom-tuned for the gamut etc. of this display.

And Zila, yes I generally agree with Toni from Switzerland - unless you work in a very brightly lit environment, you'll most likely want to bring down the display brightness to a level which allows the luminosity of your display to better match the luminance of the print viewed under the lighting conditions in which you would normally view the prints.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
VitOne
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 114


« Reply #13 on: January 29, 2011, 08:05:23 AM »
ReplyReply

I try to report my experience.


1) In Italy (Europe) with have 2 possibilities: PA241W and SpectraView Reference 241. They are the same exact hardware but the SpectraView Reference comes with an hood and with the basICColor software (called “SpectraView Profile 4”) and additional quality certifications and warranties. Asking NEC Europe they told me that it the SpectraView monitor has this advantages:

a) Each single monitor is tested and they check the “quality” of the panel.

b) The software allows to hardware-calibrate the monitor creating a LUT-based profile, which is a better profile than the matrix-based profile created using other software.

Now I read many different opinion about this and my conclusion (I own a SpectraView monitor) are this:

a) It seems to me that almost all monitors would pass the “SpectraView certification” if tested.  The certification is about AverageDeltaE*ab and PeakDE*ab that should be under 2.5 and 4.8 on the surface of the monitor. NEC does not tell how many monitor pass the test.

b) I read on this forum from experts like Andrew (thank you, correct me if I report something wrong here) that the LUT-based profiles are not better than Matrix-based profile in this particular situation (monitor calibration and profiling). So there is no reason to worry about SpectraView II. I also read from other users and in some review that they get an advantage using the SpectraView Profiler software (with SpectraView monitor, so full-hardware procedure) instead of the SpectraView II software.

I don’t know if the basICCsofware that Zila is using allows to have full-hardware calibration or hardware/software calibration only, I would personally recommend to use the software that allows to use a full-hardware calibration.
I have a SpectraView Reference 271 software and both software, but the many difference I notice between one calibration and the other is related to the hardware used (ColorMunki and EyeOne Pro in my case show a noticeable difference: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=50214.0).

The only positive thing that I can say is that, generally speaking, I have the impression that the gradients reproduced with the profiler-calibrated monitor are a little bit more linear.

What you should know is that SpectraView II software is not sold (and should not be) in Europe. So if you don’t know that you can hardware-calibrate all the NEC PA241W with the SpectraView II or if you can’t get the SpectraView II software because you have no American friends, the only solution to have hardware calibration in Europe is to buy the SpectraView monitor. The SpectraView II solution is not offically supported here in Italy.


2) In my opinion the Spyder3 may be not a good solution to calibrate the PA271W. This for two main reasons:

a) The colorimeter could be not compatible with a wide-gamut display (read this: http://www.argyllcms.com/doc/WideGamutColmters.html).

b) The Spyder3 is not a very consistent device (read this: http://lists.apple.com/archives/colorsync-users/2009/Nov/msg00175.html).
I would never suggest a colorimeter like the Spyder3 to be used for calibrating this display.

I personally think that colorimeter are a little bit better than spectrophotometers for display calibration (better low L* readings) and that the Spyder3 could be a good device, but I would use it only if I had the opportunity to compare its results with the ones from a reliable device like the EyeOne Pro (i1Pro) spectrophotometer. I would not use a Spyder3 because I know that I can get an high DeltaE. As all of you know for sure, we should not trust to our eyes when we speak about "good colours". I recently had a speak with a person saying “I have 9 wide-gamut displays calibrated with Spyder3 and I am happy with them” but I had no response when I asked “ok, they could show the same colours between them because you used the same hardware to calibrate them, but are you sure that they are showing the same colour of the monitor of another studio where you have to send you files to be printed”? Now I know for sure that many Spyder3 user are happy with their hardware, but I would think many time if I have to buy one.
« Last Edit: January 29, 2011, 08:08:06 AM by VitOne » Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7054


WWW
« Reply #14 on: January 30, 2011, 08:12:52 AM »
ReplyReply

The NEC PA271 HARDWARE being sold in Europe and North America, according to my sources, is the same quality panel, certified or not certified. IF the panel is perfectly linear a matrix profile of the kind Spectraview II produces should be fine provided you use a decent quality colorimeter which can read the gamut of this display . If the panel is not perfectly linear, an LUT profile of the kind delivered by BasicColor (vintage or rebranded) may provide a superior profile. I have made and tested both and I prefer the BasicColor results. One  can independently test profile performance using a third-party application called Babelcolor Patch Tool for measuring independent sets of patches. For either of these approaches, it is best to use complete hardware calibration if you can, because this way you don't risk introducing inaccuracies fiddling with on-screen display controls. With either of these approaches you do not need Multiprofiler.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad