Re: monitor calibraters
Re: monitor calibraters
- Subject: Re: monitor calibraters
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 08:48:56 EDT
In a message dated 4/19/01 1:40:34 AM, email@hidden writes:
>
Gene Koehler wrote:
>
>
> i have a new LaCie 19" monitor, should i buy the blue eye or the optical
>
> with the spider ?
>
> both are in my price range if there's something else better i'm all
>
> ears.
I recommended LaCie monitors for years, until their time warp waiting for a
USB calilbrator went on for over a year and a half... the second problem was
that when they finally came out with a USB solution it was the Chroma4; which
other companies resell for about $200US, and which LaCie decided to charge
thier faithful (and extremely patient!) customers $600 for (they've since
backed off a bit on the price, but hardly enough). We'll assume the extra
$400 was for superior software, and the convenience of having the guns
automatically balanced for you. But wait! When I check the RGB gun balance of
a LaCie that has had the BlueEye (aka Chroma 4) used on it, the guns still
aren't as well balanced as they would be if I did them manually, and the
overall calibration either no better than what I get with PhotoCal and a
Spyder, or (I strongly suspect) not as good!
This is not too suprising when you consider that the Spyder is an 8 sensor
device with pretty exacting specs, versus the three sensors of the Chroma4. A
three sensor device can distinguish the luminance of each gun, but is hard
pressed to tell much about the actual color. So the remaining advantage of
the BlueEye (other than color coordination with other LaCie products<G>) is
the fact that it automatically balances the guns, though I am always happiest
if I can independantly varify this... and according to ColorVision their
software should offer direct digital control in the near future, allowing
this function as well.
On to part two: what about other devices? We've heard a lot lately about the
advantages of using real spectrophotometers to calibrate monitors, from
companies that have supported the SpectroCam, and now from Gretag Macbeth
with thier EyeOne moniotor calibrator. "True 64 band spectral data, capable
of reading the quirks and spikes of LCD screens!"... but lets consider the
balance of this capability carefully. If three sensors is unsufficient to
determine the color of monitor phosphors, and only capable of accurately
deermining luminance, what about the other extreme? What value can we place
on 64 bands of spectral data, versus the three in a Chroma4, or the 8 or 9 in
a Monitor Spyder or a DTP92? Considering that these monitor profiles need to
be applied using current technology, there is such a thing as overkill. How
does one apply all that spectral data to a video card that offers no method
of calibrating the monitor except for a single number gamma curve for each
channel? And even when applying the profile in Photoshop, is excess data of
this type offering any significant improvement to the R, G & B curves in the
profile? Not in my experience. Until we are doing something significant with
true 3d look up tables for monitors, then the 8 or 9 sensor level is an
optimal balance for monitor profiling. 64 bands it a bit analogous to carving
it with a scalpel, then applying it with a sledgehammer... but until
ColorVision releases an LCD optimized version of the Monitor Spyder, we won't
know what the practical comparison really is.
C. David Tobie
Design Cooperative
email@hidden