Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: X-Rite i1 Display PRO v X-Rite ColorMunki Display  (Read 18662 times)
amoergosum
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 26


« Reply #20 on: August 02, 2011, 09:22:05 AM »
ReplyReply

The ColorMunki Photo is a Spectrophotometer seen here: http://xritephoto.com/ph_product_overview.aspx?id=1115&catid=149&action=overview
Not to be confused with the ColorMunki Display, the slower colorimeter discussed above. 

I am aware of that.
So for me it is ColorMunki Photo vs i1Display Pro now...
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9188



WWW
« Reply #21 on: August 02, 2011, 09:23:26 AM »
ReplyReply

I am aware of that.
So for me it is ColorMunki Photo vs i1Display Pro now...

You only want to deal with the display, go i1D but if you want to build output profiles for printers, can spend more,  ColorMunki.
Logged

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

Posts: 26


« Reply #22 on: August 02, 2011, 10:55:21 AM »
ReplyReply

You only want to deal with the display, go i1D


Why is the i1Display Pro the better device in terms of monitor calibration in your opinion?
There seem to be different opinions...
I sent an email to a Calumet store in order to ask about their recommendation...they wrote that the ColorMunki Photo
is the better technical device but it has inferior software in comparison with the i1Display Pro.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9188



WWW
« Reply #23 on: August 02, 2011, 10:58:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Why is the i1Display Pro the better device in terms of monitor calibration in your opinion?

Because a Colorimeter is a better instrument for this task (and cost less).

http://www.lumita.com/site_media/work/whitepapers/files/xrite-wp-3a.pdf
Logged

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

Posts: 4118



« Reply #24 on: August 02, 2011, 12:09:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Because a Colorimeter is a better instrument for this task (and cost less).

http://www.lumita.com/site_media/work/whitepapers/files/xrite-wp-3a.pdf

Sure a colorimeter costs less. I designed a colorimeter with a BOM of $2, and made a few prototypes. Each cost less than $100 handmade in the middle of Paris. You can make a 7 channel instrument for that price.

But the fact is that a colorimeter is only a good colorimeter if the filters are close to cone functions, and the amps are good. And your chances that cheap filters are going to be good are *low*. That's why a real colorimeter from Minolta is so expensive.

I prefer recommending ColorMunki Photo.

Edmund

Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9188



WWW
« Reply #25 on: August 02, 2011, 12:11:39 PM »
ReplyReply

But the fact is that a colorimeter is only a good colorimeter if the filters are close to cone functions, and the amps are good.

And in this new device, the filter matrices can be upgraded.
Logged

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

Posts: 4118



« Reply #26 on: August 02, 2011, 12:15:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Andrew,

You can adjust the matrices all you want, it won't help you unless you have very good knowledge of the display. This is a good sales argument to say that the device *can* be customized for wide-gamut displays etc. But it doesn't make the basic knowledge-less instrument better.

BTW, Andrew, I have an idea. Let them make their choices, as the jury is still out on the new devices, and then we can sort out the user experiences.

Edmund
« Last Edit: August 02, 2011, 12:21:18 PM by eronald » Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9188



WWW
« Reply #27 on: August 02, 2011, 12:25:56 PM »
ReplyReply

You can adjust the matrices all you want, it won't help you unless you have very good knowledge of the display.
You (the user) doesn’t do this, X-Rite or OEM’s do it.

Quote
This is a good sales argument to say that the device *can* be customized for wide-gamut displays etc. But it doesn't make the basic knowledge-less instrument better.
Irrelevant. Its new functionality for this product that didn’t exist in the past. Think about the possibility of updating or upgrading the matrices over the web, through software.

Quote
BTW, Andrew, I have an idea. Let them make their choices, as the jury is still out on the new devices, and then we can sort out the user experiences.
Exactly what I did. A colorimeter is a better suited and less expensive instrument of the goal is only to calibrate and profile a display. The Spectrophotometer if budget permits and one needs other tasks like building output profiles. 
Edmund, I have an idea. Let them make their choice, you pay the additional cost over the Colorimeter even if they have no need for a Spectrophotometer.
Logged

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

Posts: 9188



WWW
« Reply #28 on: August 02, 2011, 12:30:31 PM »
ReplyReply

the jury is still out on the new devices

The jury member who tested the hardware in his lab and gave it high marks (Karl Lang) for me means the jury is in and the verdict is good.
Logged

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

Posts: 4118



« Reply #29 on: August 03, 2011, 01:33:54 PM »
ReplyReply

You (the user) doesn’t do this, X-Rite or OEM’s do it.
Irrelevant. Its new functionality for this product that didn’t exist in the past. Think about the possibility of updating or upgrading the matrices over the web, through software.
Exactly what I did. A colorimeter is a better suited and less expensive instrument of the goal is only to calibrate and profile a display. The Spectrophotometer if budget permits and one needs other tasks like building output profiles.  
Edmund, I have an idea. Let them make their choice, you pay the additional cost over the Colorimeter even if they have no need for a Spectrophotometer.

Andrew,

The new Xrite colorimeter hardware looks carefully designed, and I give them an A+, for what it matters.

However, it is still a AFAIK colorimeter;  the matrices will help Xrite a lot to match the device to specific displays, but I don't think they're going to help the consumer in the short run.

Also, I fully agree with you that this device is suitable for 90% of the calibration use cases out there, which nowadays are web design, prepress etc, but for LULA readers who happen to be photo enthusiasts *I* believe the generalist spectro tool is the more appropriate. I don't know about the US, but over here in France it's a free country and I'm still allowed to recommend one instrument over another, especially when I state that both are high quality devices, and both are made by the same company.

Anyway, we've looked at the new stuff some time ago, and I think we agreed we like the new hardware. It's going to be interesting to see what the pro and amateur photographers here think of the new instrument and its software when both get exposed to the nasty real world.

Edmund.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2011, 01:37:58 PM by eronald » Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9188



WWW
« Reply #30 on: August 03, 2011, 01:40:24 PM »
ReplyReply

However, it is still a AFAIK colorimeter;  the matrices will help Xrite a lot to match the device to specific displays, but I don't think they're going to help the consumer in the short run.
So compared to all the other Colorimeters out there, your slant is, they are all weak (this one lesser so) and the solution is a Spectrophotometer despite its known lesser ability to measure darks? No one should use any colorimeter?

Quote
Finally, I fully agree with you that this device is suitable for 90% of the calibration use cases out there, which nowadays are web design, prepress etc, but for LULA readers who happen to be photo enthusiasts the generalist spectro tool is the more appropriate.
The other 10% being what and how do you lump the OP into that group?

Quote
It's going to be interesting to see what the pro and amateur photographers here think of the new instrument and its software when both get exposed to the nasty real world.
Nasty? In terms of the use of Colorimeters vs. Spectrophotometer’s, cost vs. Performance, I’m lost by the comment.
Logged

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

Posts: 4118



« Reply #31 on: August 03, 2011, 02:46:07 PM »
ReplyReply


Nasty? In terms of the use of Colorimeters vs. Spectrophotometer’s, cost vs. Performance, I’m lost by the comment.


I'll let you have the last word for now. Let's watch the threads.

Edmund
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad