Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 4 5 [6]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: will X-Rite wake up and smell the coffee?  (Read 36211 times)
WombatHorror
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 299


« Reply #100 on: August 19, 2011, 10:44:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Andrew, I agree with you that to be dead-sure of a hypothesis one should neutralize all variables but one and test for that one. We've seen in this discussion that this would be very difficult to do. The furthest I can take it, when I'm in a position to do so, is to make both matrix and LUT profiles from the same software and measure the results. But if the measurement approach itself is not trustworthy, then there is no concrete answer to this issue and no point starting - again. But I'd be surprised. To avoid wasting my time, I'll do some further consulting on what BasicColor does and what PathcTool does before proceeding, Finally, I wonder why these LUT profiles were developed in the first place if these simple matrix profiles are no worse?

Adding something else to the mix:

Wouldn't it also matter whether the NEC PA series monitors and their color engine are more linear than the measurement probe? It seems possible to me that the typical probes people might use might end up having enough variance to make them end up making the LUT work out worse than the matrix even if a LUT from a $50,000 device might do a better job. Then again maybe not, but I wonder a little.

Another thing, using a matrix profile, I get 0-255 G,R,G,B color spreads with no banding on PA241W. I wonder if a LUT correction might be more prone to adding some bands. I suppose if it could control the monitor internally it might do ok. Using ColorEyesDisplay pro to post make a LUT-based correction makes banding (plus tinted shows since I have to use i1pro with CEDP since it doesn't use wide gamut compensation matrix for the NEC i1D2 puck or DPT94b and doesn't allow to train coloritmeters by spectros) but that doesn't answer how a a program that could control the internal tables would fair.

« Last Edit: August 21, 2011, 04:52:51 PM by LarryBaum » Logged
carl dw
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 68


« Reply #101 on: September 06, 2011, 10:28:43 AM »
ReplyReply

I quizzed X-Rite about the upgrade path/price and received the following answer - it may be of help to someone.  (I use an i1Pro just for profiling my monitors and an Epson 3880)



Hi Carl,

I’m sorry to hear your unhappiness with this recent X-Rite offering. You do have a few no charge options that may solve your situation.
 
Your i1Pro will immediately function with i1Profiler for monitor profiling. You  can download i1Profiler at no charge from our website and begin using it for monitor profiling should you wish to do this. The i1Profiler software will function properly on a Mac running Lion. Or you can continue to use i1Match until such time as you move to Lion. Here’s the link for downloading i1Publish Suite (which includes i1Profiler):
 
http://www.xrite.com/product_overview.aspx?ID=1397&Action=support&SoftwareID=1085
 
In addition, your i1Pro will continue to function on any Mac running 10.6. You might continue to keep at least one Mac running 10.6, build your printer profiles there, and simply copy them over to all your Lion Macs. The ICC profile structure between 10.6 and 10.7 is very likely identical. This will do monitor profiling and monitor QA.
 
You might choose to run dual boot on your Lion Mac. This would allow you to boot in Lion for all of the times when you wish to use the new features in this OS, and then permit you to reboot the computer and come up in Snow Leopard for the times when you wish to build printer profiles only. Please keep in mind that you will be able to build monitor profiles in Lion with i1Profiler at no upgrade cost whatsoever.
 
It’s our hope at X-Rite that you will consider some of these possible options on how you can continue to use and benefit from the investment you have made in your i1Pro. We believe that once you have a chance to see how i1Profiler functions, you might come to believe that it represents a step forward in profiling software, and one that will be worth any additional investment you might make.
 
I hope that you have been satisfied with the performance of your i1Pro over the past years of ownership, and understand that we are making considerable efforts to support our installed user base going forward. Being able to use your i1Pro device on this newest iteration of the Mac OS is important to us, and I hope you will consider our suggestions.

Best regards,






Like so many, I was obviously disappointed to find I have to pay about half of the original purchase price to continue to have the same functionality with Lion.

Given that since purchase the software has to date been "bolt-on" Rosetta code, and also that the new software is written and now supplied with the identical i1Pro hardware it does seem a bit fresh to be charging previous users an additional £365 to £650 here in the UK for an "upgrade" (despite the kit being made in the EU we don't even have the poultry $150 rebate offered across the pond).  Bearing in mind the original purchase price includes the hardware, I could appreciate something in the region of maybe a 10% software upgrade charge, but 50%? - I hope Adobe aren't getting any marketing ideas from X-Rite.

If you've spent £120 on an i1 Display you can have a free update.... but if you spend £1000 on an i1Pro you're stuffed - it's the same download but with the bits you need to profile your printer turned off. Nice.

I guess the X-Rite marketing logic is something along the lines of.... these customers have made a large investment in the our hardware, they won't go elsewhere so let's screw 'em!

Hey-ho... such is life.
Logged
narikin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 861


« Reply #102 on: September 07, 2011, 08:27:17 AM »
ReplyReply

I guess the X-Rite marketing logic is something along the lines of.... these customers have made a large investment in the our hardware, they won't go elsewhere so let's screw 'em!

I appreciate x-rite are a business, but would agree they do forget that loyal customers should not be screwed.

Adding to your above experience, I recently bought an iSis, and i1publish. No small investment. My i1Pro spectro allows the upgrade ('A') to i1publish so I took that option, installed the software, and now the i1 Spectro is surplus to my requirements - I don't use it to profile anything anymore. So I thought I would sell it and recoup a small amount of my x-rite investment costs.

No.
 
The $1200 i1 spectro apparently has to sit there for all eternity acting as a 'dongle'. It isn't just used to activate/validate to software, it has to be attached each time you use the software. Nearly every manufacturer out there dumped 'dongles' a long time ago, but x-rite persist in this archaic design. Surely once you have proven your ownership and past investment, that should be enough to qualify for upgrades, or for a free USB dongle. Not to x-rite - they make you keep the old product forever, plugged in to your computer, for as long as you want to use their software.

Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9192



WWW
« Reply #103 on: September 07, 2011, 09:32:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Adding to your above experience, I recently bought an iSis, and i1publish. No small investment. My i1Pro spectro allows the upgrade ('A') to i1publish so I took that option, installed the software, and now the i1 Spectro is surplus to my requirements - I don't use it to profile anything anymore.

The iSis sucks at ambient and spot measurement and don’t get me started on how difficult it is to hook to a display<g>. I think you’ll find, as I do, that having the i1Pro will be quite useful.
Logged

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

Posts: 540


WWW
« Reply #104 on: September 07, 2011, 09:43:41 AM »
ReplyReply

From an email by Basiccolor I know that the Spectraview II software is identical with BasicColor's software (with a few minor adjustments).

You are right and wrong. Spectraview II is a COMPLETELY different application. It is not written by the folks at BasICColor. There are no similarities whatsoever (well, other than the fact that they are both pieces of software for monitor profiling). The interfaces are different, and they way they respond to various instruments are different as well. So you are wrong there.

Here's where you are right... BasICColor Display and Spectraview Profiler (which again is not the same as Spectraview II which is what's sold in North America) are the same application. Spectraview Profiler is BasICColor Display. If it wasn't for the different splash screen when the app starts up I wouldn't know the difference.

Now, this argument about these two different versions is glossing over some rather important differences. Many of us (myself included) profile with a spectrophotometer. I use an Eye One Pro myself because of everything I have (two Spyder 3's, DTP 94, NEC modified i1Display 2 (2nd copy)) the Eye One Pro renders the most neutral profiles. Spectrophotometers of course have issues with shadows. I'm will to sacrifice a bit (I set my black point to 0.35 cd/m^2) of contrast and give up those super deep blacks, for a more neutral profile. I own SVII, BasICColor Display, and Spectraview Profiler. BCD/SVP does NOT do a very good job of handling an Eye One Pro compared to SVII. It's been my observation that SVII is using longer integration times when measuring shadows and therefor they're probably doing a much better job (at least this is what my eyes tell me) of averaging out some of the noise inherent in my Eye One Pro so given that, LUT or Matrix... doesn't matter. In my experience SVII produces a far superior profile when used in conjunction with an Eye One Pro.

FWIW, this observation about BasICColor Display's handling of the Eye One Pro and shadows holds true when compared to Color Eyes Display Pro as well. CEDP seems to have longer integration times when measuring the shadows and produces superior profiles when used with an Eye One Pro as a result (or at least that's my theory... either way BasICColor Display doesn't seem to play well with the Eye One Pro).

After hearing that Argyll now has support for the i1Display Pro, I placed my order from Chromix last night (I've been using Argyll to profile my non-NEC displays). It will be interesting to do a new comparison of SVII and SVP once both support the i1Display Pro.

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

Posts: 861


« Reply #105 on: September 10, 2011, 04:54:18 PM »
ReplyReply

(I set my black point to 0.35 cd/m^2)

can I ask how you do this in SVII - I need to set mine similarly.
and you have Contrast Ratio at... ?

thanks

Logged
chris moody
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 41


WWW
« Reply #106 on: September 22, 2011, 06:38:22 PM »
ReplyReply

I have stumbled into this party late. But in the hope that some X-rite exec might be browsing this forum I'd like to add my voice to the little chorus of unhappiness.

The way I understand it - a €24 upgrade to Lion is going to cost around around €500 in a software upgrade. (Upgrade A - i1 Photo)

Of course there should be a fee, but €500 on top of the €1200 I originally paid for the device is a bit steep no?

It's just too much. Please correct me if I have got my facts wrong.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9192



WWW
« Reply #107 on: September 22, 2011, 07:32:17 PM »
ReplyReply

The way I understand it - a €24 upgrade to Lion is going to cost around around €500 in a software upgrade. (Upgrade A - i1 Photo)
Of course there should be a fee, but €500 on top of the €1200 I originally paid for the device is a bit steep no?

Why the requirement, the necessities, the demand, to spend €24 and upgrade to Lion? There’s something there that fixes problems you currently have in Snow Leopard? Or instead, it kind of screws up a lot of other currently well running applications? As a Mac user, I see nothing worth €24 to upgrade to Lion, let alone have lots of software I use die in the process.

If and when the time comes I have no option to upgrade to Lion, then I guess push comes to shove, I’ll have to deal with the ramifications. But I don’t see why most people have to spend a little money to end up sending more and lose valuable software in the process (Rosetta).
Logged

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

Posts: 103


« Reply #108 on: September 22, 2011, 10:57:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Why the requirement, the necessities, the demand, to spend €24 and upgrade to Lion?

I agree. There is nothing much in Mac OS X 10.7 (Lion) that compels me to upgrade immediately. Smart adopters are always wise to wait for at least a few point releases before jumping on board. (Though, I wish I could say the same about some people I know... I've had to handle a few downgrades in the fortnight after Lion was released to fix the mess they jumped into).
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6983


WWW
« Reply #109 on: September 23, 2011, 12:04:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Why the requirement, the necessities, the demand, to spend €24 and upgrade to Lion? There’s something there that fixes problems you currently have in Snow Leopard? Or instead, it kind of screws up a lot of other currently well running applications? As a Mac user, I see nothing worth €24 to upgrade to Lion, let alone have lots of software I use die in the process.

If and when the time comes I have no option to upgrade to Lion, then I guess push comes to shove, I’ll have to deal with the ramifications. But I don’t see why most people have to spend a little money to end up sending more and lose valuable software in the process (Rosetta).

EXACTLY!
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
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7703


WWW
« Reply #110 on: September 23, 2011, 12:22:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi!

Yes, I agree.


On the other hand new Macs are probably coming with Lion. Rosetta was a transition technology from Apple to ease conversion from Power PC to Intel and that was quite a few years ago. So Xrite was essentially selling new equipment based on five year old technology they were fully aware of would be phased out sooner or later. Pretty ignorant attitude in my view.

So yes, if you upgrade your problems are well deserved. If you buy a new computer on the other hand than Xrite fails to protect your investment.

Best regards
Erik



Why the requirement, the necessities, the demand, to spend €24 and upgrade to Lion? There’s something there that fixes problems you currently have in Snow Leopard? Or instead, it kind of screws up a lot of other currently well running applications? As a Mac user, I see nothing worth €24 to upgrade to Lion, let alone have lots of software I use die in the process.

If and when the time comes I have no option to upgrade to Lion, then I guess push comes to shove, I’ll have to deal with the ramifications. But I don’t see why most people have to spend a little money to end up sending more and lose valuable software in the process (Rosetta).
Logged

chris moody
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 41


WWW
« Reply #111 on: September 23, 2011, 12:45:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Andrew, whether I upgrade to Lion right now or in a years time, or two years time, it's still going to cost an extra €500 (if I buy in the UK and pay VAT) if I want to continue to use my perfectly good i1 Pro. In my opinion it's an unreasonable amount of money to ask from people who have already forked out for the hardware - some only recently.













Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9192



WWW
« Reply #112 on: September 23, 2011, 09:02:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Andrew, whether I upgrade to Lion right now or in a years time, or two years time, it's still going to cost an extra €500 (if I buy in the UK and pay VAT) if I want to continue to use my perfectly good i1 Pro.

That is not necessarily true. You don’t have a crystal ball. What may be available to use with that perfectly usable instrument in the future isn’t at all clear.  And even if true, there is no reason to hit that issue until you must. By that time, there may well be many other options available to you.

IF you are forced to upgrade (you just purchased a new Mac), OK. But otherwise, you are just asking to spend money in two areas where none is required. For any questionable benefit. That’s just not smart.

« Last Edit: September 23, 2011, 09:07:59 AM by digitaldog » Logged

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

Posts: 540


WWW
« Reply #113 on: September 23, 2011, 10:41:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Why the requirement, the necessities, the demand, to spend €24 and upgrade to Lion? There’s something there that fixes problems you currently have in Snow Leopard? Or instead, it kind of screws up a lot of other currently well running applications? As a Mac user, I see nothing worth €24 to upgrade to Lion, let alone have lots of software I use die in the process.

If and when the time comes I have no option to upgrade to Lion, then I guess push comes to shove, I’ll have to deal with the ramifications. But I don’t see why most people have to spend a little money to end up sending more and lose valuable software in the process (Rosetta).

I just upgraded to Snow Leopard this past weekend on my main workstation! The catalyst was that a new piece of gear required it to work, otherwise I'd still have that machine on Leopard. Smiley

The only feature I find interesting in Lion is the new file saving. It's very version-control-esque and the ex-software engineer in me likes that. It's not enough reason for me to upgrade though. Between Time Machine, and 3 separate copies of everything via Chronosync, I think I've got it covered!

Cheers, Joe
Logged
chris moody
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 41


WWW
« Reply #114 on: September 23, 2011, 11:36:20 AM »
ReplyReply

You don’t have a crystal ball.

How do you know?



Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6983


WWW
« Reply #115 on: September 23, 2011, 11:57:09 AM »
ReplyReply

How do you know?

Actually all this reminds me - in years gone-by I used a piece of risk analysis software called "Crystal Ball" which was a sophisticated, systematic approach to measuring the impacts on projects of many thousands of simultaneous crap-shoots of different assumptions having different probabilities of occurrence using Monte Carlo simulation - in a non-identical manner kind of resembles what consumers are being subjected to with the disjointed issuing of OS updates and new versions of software by discombobulated companies that do old things in new guise a little better or a little worse.
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
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9192



WWW
« Reply #116 on: September 23, 2011, 02:56:14 PM »
ReplyReply

How do you know?

You’d be doing something far more useful and profitable than posting here!
Logged

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

Posts: 1683


WWW
« Reply #117 on: September 23, 2011, 03:13:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Actually all this reminds me - in years gone-by I used a piece of risk analysis software called "Crystal Ball" which was a sophisticated, systematic approach to measuring the impacts on projects of many thousands of simultaneous crap-shoots of different assumptions having different probabilities of occurrence using Monte Carlo simulation - in a non-identical manner kind of resembles what consumers are being subjected to with the disjointed issuing of OS updates and new versions of software by discombobulated companies that do old things in new guise a little better or a little worse.
I trust that this was NOT the software banks and other financial institutions were using to model the safety (or lack thereof) of CDOs prior to 2008 (but then Canada was always way ahead of the curve in terms of not letting their banks get into trouble).
Logged

Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6983


WWW
« Reply #118 on: September 23, 2011, 08:35:00 PM »
ReplyReply

I trust that this was NOT the software banks and other financial institutions were using to model the safety (or lack thereof) of CDOs prior to 2008 (but then Canada was always way ahead of the curve in terms of not letting their banks get into trouble).

At the risk of going way OT, correct - there is no software that could do anything of the kind, because the underlying assets were bundled and completely non-transparent. The only thing that saved our banks was first and foremost innate conservatism and then possibly stricter regulation.
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 ... 4 5 [6]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad