Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: New XRite I1 Display Pro Calibration device  (Read 34363 times)
calydus
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #80 on: December 08, 2011, 09:14:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Considering those, what would you guys recommend if I'm using a MacBook Pro 17" (non-glossy) along with a LED Cinema Display 24".

I tried RGB LED and white gamut with the D65 settings and my screen is way too much warm (yellow-ish). I'll have to try with the White LED display to see if it changes something.

But I'm using Lightroom A LOT, so would I be better using D50?

Let me know your thoughs...!:)

It's hard to say whether or not you want RGB or white LEDs without the model numbers of the displays. If I understand this distinction properly, some "white" LEDs consist of a R, G, and B LED that, in combination, produce white light. The regular white ones are something like blue LEDs that use a phosphor to convert the blue light into a wider spectral distribution that's closer to white.

From the viewing perspective I'm not sure how much 6500K matters, but it matches the default white points of sRGB (for example) so should in theory, I guess, lose less information during color management. Also, I think most typical sRGB monitors tend to be optimized for 6500K as their "native" white point. 5000K is recommended for prepress because that's the 50D standard that's used for viewing booths and everything else. Of course if you're doing prepress or otherwise need D50 for some reason then you'll already know that and so probably don't need to be told.

Thing is though that the white point of ProPhotoRGB is D50 (5000K) which might mean that 5000K is better if you're using Lightroom, but I don't remember if MelissaRGB (Lightroom's internal version of ProPhoto) differs from D50 or not..... If anyone knows please tell me, and let me know how much it matters to use 5000K with lightroom if so.



All modern Apple displays have W-LED backlight. Use D65 rather than D50, as paradoxically it usually gives better visual match, even with the standarized D50 viewing booth.
Don't worry about the difference between the wtpt of your editing space and calibration target, AFAIK the CMM of PS/LR uses color adaptation transform to correct the difference.
Logged
Czornyj
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1371



WWW
« Reply #81 on: December 08, 2011, 09:59:04 AM »
ReplyReply

I tried RGB LED and white gamut with the D65 settings and my screen is way too much warm (yellow-ish). I'll have to try with the White LED display to see if it changes something.

But I'm using Lightroom A LOT, so would I be better using D50?

Let me know your thoughs...!:)

Like I said - White LED for all modern Apple displays. If your Macbook is older - A1151/A1212/A1229/A1261 it may have CCFL backlight, in such case choose "CCFL" as your display technology typ.

You'd better stay away from D50, unless you want your display to be even more yellow-ish Wink
Logged

Paz
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 27



« Reply #82 on: December 08, 2011, 02:56:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Andrew said:
Quote
There are very, very, very few RGB LED's out there

Why are there so few RGB LEDs?

thanks,

Paz
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 5421


WWW
« Reply #83 on: December 08, 2011, 03:12:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Why are there so few RGB LEDs?

Because Red, Green and Blue LEDs blended together to get white light is both difficult and very expensive. White light LEDs are are a lot cheaper now but LEDs with R, G & B emissions are still very expensive. NEC had an RGB LED display...it was about $6K if I remember correctly. Great display but very few people bought them. So, until the cost of R, G, & B LEDs come down, you won't find many displays using them.
Logged
Paz
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 27



« Reply #84 on: December 08, 2011, 03:21:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the explanation, Jeff.

I have one.  Yes, it was expensive, and it hasn't been easy to calibrate successfully either, but I'm getting closer.

I keep reading, often confused here, but I'm learning more and more of the language you guys use! Grin

thanks again,

Paz
Logged
shewhorn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 533


WWW
« Reply #85 on: December 09, 2011, 11:32:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Because Red, Green and Blue LEDs blended together to get white light is both difficult and very expensive. White light LEDs are are a lot cheaper now but LEDs with R, G & B emissions are still very expensive. NEC had an RGB LED display...it was about $6K if I remember correctly. Great display but very few people bought them. So, until the cost of R, G, & B LEDs come down, you won't find many displays using them.

Not only that but I'd say there's a rather small demand for them as well as very few folks seem to have demand for a display that is capable of a gamut that extends beyond AdobeRGB. If there's no demand, that will also affect the price.

I have a feeling that we'll see affordable OLED monitors before we see affordable RGB LED monitors.

Cheers, Joe
Logged
nkpoulsen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 47


« Reply #86 on: December 27, 2011, 01:19:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi
I am the original poster to this thread. Can anyone give me an answer to my questions? I have macbook pro and haven't had good luck with the I1 Display 2 calibration system. Has anyone tested the new I1 Display Pro calibration device on the market? http://xritephoto.com/ph_product_overview.aspx?id=1454 FOR A MACBOOK PRO? It says it's the "Next generation i1Profiler software for calibrating and profiling all modern display and projector technologies including LED & Wide Gamut LCDs"

Should this work well on my macbook pro? I don't edit on my macbook pro (I edit on a separate monitor) but often need to take my laptop to clients homes and need the color to be correct... so having the calibration on both computer screens match would be key.

CAN ANYONE ADDRESS MY SPECIFIC ISSUE AND QUESTION?

Thanks,
Shannon


So, I'm wondering why it is that your I1 Display 2 isn't working for you?

Are you using Advanced mode?  I use the I1D2 on my MacBook Pro, and it works fine.  What is it about Your results that you don't like?
Logged
shewhorn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 533


WWW
« Reply #87 on: December 29, 2011, 01:51:05 AM »
ReplyReply

So, I'm wondering why it is that your I1 Display 2 isn't working for you?

Are you using Advanced mode?  I use the I1D2 on my MacBook Pro, and it works fine.  What is it about Your results that you don't like?


The i1D2 will work fine for old MacBook Pros which used CCFL backlighting, but for newer MacBook Pros which use LED backlighting, it doesn't work very well at all. The profiles it generates tend to be inconsistent which usually manifest in a color cast. I've observed this with the i1 Display 2, and the DTP-94. The Spyder 3 does okay with LED backlighting, the Eye One Pro (aside from the issues and limitations inherent in using a Spectrophotometer for profiling a monitor) does quite well, as does the i1Display Pro (and without the noise floor issues that the Eye One Pro has when measuring "shadows").

Cheers, Joe
Logged
WombatHorror
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 299


« Reply #88 on: January 09, 2012, 10:35:28 PM »
ReplyReply

The new I1 Display Pro is supposedly more accurate than the EyeOne Pro at low luminance levels.
I would like to know if anyone is getting more accurate measurements with the I1 Display Pro using Spectraview II? Is there a visible difference on displays like a MultiSync PA241W?

Does Spectraview II run on any I1 Display Pro or only those sold by X-Rite and NEC?

Thanks.

It doesn't matter for PA series they let the color engine do almost everything (for the US version, in Europe they handle the PA series very differently). As far as I can tell the color engine receives input for the three primaries and for the white point and some info on what tone response and it does everything itself. So the calibration isn't actually every measuring any dark values, ever, that are actually used to build the calibration nor are they stored in the profile since the profile is a simple matrix gamut change of basis type with also information on the white point and selected TRC. The only place it would show is on the profile sanity check stuff it shows you at the end.

At least that is what I think is happening from everything I've seen it do. I'm 95% sure on this despite what many have posted in various forums.
Logged
WombatHorror
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 299


« Reply #89 on: January 09, 2012, 10:36:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Since the PA series does a lot of the corrections and calculations internally based on it's self monitoring, the low luminance performance of the sensor doesn't have much influence on the calibration. Only the final results shown may have some differences in the contrast ratio and gray tracking due to the sensor performance.

Other models however do rely on the sensor for the full accuracy of the calibration, so there may be some visible differences.

SpectraView II only supports the NEC SpectraSensor Pro, X-Rite iOne Display Pro, and what X-Rite calls "low volume generic OEM" versions.

Ah and I see I have been correct as NEC themselves have now said as much that it works as I thought.
Logged
WombatHorror
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 299


« Reply #90 on: January 12, 2012, 07:23:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Some quick early test do hint that this new unit may be most impressive indeed. I think there is a chance that it might even outdo the 4x the price i1 Pro even on a wide gamut monitor (although it is said they tuned the i1 Display Pro to my particular wide gamut monitor, so perhaps on alternate wide gamuts or other display types the i1 pro might slide ahead again???)
Logged
stormyboy
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 61


« Reply #91 on: January 12, 2012, 11:46:54 PM »
ReplyReply

I have a NEC PA24 and the i1 Display Pro.  I'd like to ask a question about the SpectraView II Preferences window:   Do people suggest keeping them at the defaults, or are there reasons to switch settings?  Thanks for any help.  I have a great match with monitor and prints, but I'm always open to new info. and tips.

For example: I believe Andrew once suggested to check "Extended luminance stabilization time", and I think I remember Jeff saying in their most excellent "Camera to Print and Screen," that he sets Preferences/ICC Profiles to use "Factory measurements."


Tom
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8628



WWW
« Reply #92 on: January 13, 2012, 08:28:19 AM »
ReplyReply

I’d always have the Extended option on (takes longer, presumably does a more through job measuring). As for the factory setting that entirely depends on the insturment being used and if you are dealing with a wide gamut display or not. See page 22 of the manual.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
shewhorn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 533


WWW
« Reply #93 on: January 13, 2012, 11:32:29 AM »
ReplyReply

I’d always have the Extended option on (takes longer, presumably does a more through job measuring).

As far as I know it's not any more "thorough" with it on, than it is with it turned off (there aren't any more patches introduced). All it does is allow more time for the CCFL backlights to stabilize after a change has been made to the luminance which is especially important when making more extreme changes.

Cheers, Joe
Logged
hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1666


« Reply #94 on: January 15, 2012, 03:47:20 PM »
ReplyReply

I just bought the i1d pro packaged with ColorChecker passport.

I have the Dell u2711 and an older Dell 20" lcd side-by-side ("1st" and "2nd" screen respectively in Lightroom). I also have a Spyder 3 Express, and have been using Argyll CMS.

Earlier, I have not been satisfied with calibrations on my 2711. I know that I probably should not expect visual matching between those two monitors, but was expecting them to be "sort of close".

Using the i1d pro with its software I still have this problem that certain saturated reds looks very different - the 2711 shows them with a purple cast, while the old 20" is more orange. The annoying thing is that the 20" looks more realistic when I bring the physical reference into the room. A 10 years old sRGB lcd should not be more perceptually accurate than a brand-new wide-gamut photo-oriented display when both are calibrated with the nicest colorimeter out there?

Then again, perhaps it is the Adobe-supplied camera profiles for my camera that are weird, and the 2711 is just showing me accurately the color that camera/lightroom is telling it to?

-h
« Last Edit: January 15, 2012, 03:49:13 PM by hjulenissen » Logged
WombatHorror
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 299


« Reply #95 on: January 16, 2012, 04:22:39 PM »
ReplyReply

I just bought the i1d pro packaged with ColorChecker passport.

I have the Dell u2711 and an older Dell 20" lcd side-by-side ("1st" and "2nd" screen respectively in Lightroom). I also have a Spyder 3 Express, and have been using Argyll CMS.

Earlier, I have not been satisfied with calibrations on my 2711. I know that I probably should not expect visual matching between those two monitors, but was expecting them to be "sort of close".

Using the i1d pro with its software I still have this problem that certain saturated reds looks very different - the 2711 shows them with a purple cast, while the old 20" is more orange. The annoying thing is that the 20" looks more realistic when I bring the physical reference into the room. A 10 years old sRGB lcd should not be more perceptually accurate than a brand-new wide-gamut photo-oriented display when both are calibrated with the nicest colorimeter out there?

Then again, perhaps it is the Adobe-supplied camera profiles for my camera that are weird, and the 2711 is just showing me accurately the color that camera/lightroom is telling it to?

-h

It is pretty dangerous to judge monitor profiling accuracy based upon Adobe profiles for camera shots!
You should get a Prophoto RGB color checker image and then compare it to a real life color checker chart under as close to D65 lighting as you can get on it.

I calibrated a standard gamut HDTV with i1 Display Pro and sadly none of my probes agreed on it hah. Although the two DTP94b had the closest take. For white balance when i1D Pro said R,G,B were balanced:

1. i1 pro said it had too much R,G and too little B
2. i1D2 said it had too much G and too little B
3. DTP94b1 said it had a lot too much R and a lot too little B
4. DTP94b2 said it had too much R and too little B
hah

the probes all disagreed about whether R or G were correct or too much hah
all did agree that the i1D Pro said it had too little B

I used the i1pro to sample white point grayscale in spectral cal on NEC PA241W and it said (when i1DPro said it was balance) it had a good deal too much R, a trace too little G and too little B. hah. In photoshop I tried taking out 3 parts red and adding 1 green and 2 blue to dark, mid and high tones with the oclor balance chance tool and compared to color checker and it then matched less well than before hand. who knows maybe i1d pro is the best.

adding more B seemed to make a worse match, so maybe the odd many out i1d pro was actually correct on B??
Logged
hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1666


« Reply #96 on: January 16, 2012, 11:17:16 PM »
ReplyReply

It is pretty dangerous to judge monitor profiling accuracy based upon Adobe profiles for camera shots!
Yes I just discovered that. The "Adobe standard" profile seems to look very different from e.g. the "Camera standard" on my wide-gamut display, but much less so on my standard-gamut display. Further, this difference seems to only be visible in develop mode(!). For other colors, this manifests itself as "more saturation", but for deep reds it look like (to me) a shift in hue from orange-ish to purple-ish.

I tried making a profile of my camera using flash and the Colorshecker passport, using that instead of the built-in profiles. But I guess its small array of colors is not really enough to do a full camera characterisation?

-h
Logged
WombatHorror
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 299


« Reply #97 on: January 17, 2012, 12:23:15 AM »
ReplyReply


I tried making a profile of my camera using flash and the Colorshecker passport, using that instead of the built-in profiles. But I guess its small array of colors is not really enough to do a full camera characterisation?

-h

it certainly helps, but still not perfect

for testing display calibration quality you still really need to give it an exact target, the exact colors the CC chart should have and show that on the screen and compare to the CC PP

it probably still won't ever look quite the same since the eye response to the spiky monitor primary colors varies a bit person to person
and the charts on an srgb monitor usually looks a bit different than on sRGB monitor even when a probe says they look the same due
metamerism
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad