Re: NEC 2690 SpectraView
Re: NEC 2690 SpectraView
- Subject: Re: NEC 2690 SpectraView
- From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:05:23 -0700
- Thread-topic: NEC 2690 SpectraView
On 11/27/07 12:49 PM, "Derrick Brown" wrote:
> We could start by you looking at the necdisplay site and trying to
> purchase. Its out of stock, all versions.
OK, they are out of stock on the site (or the site needs updating), at least
just the software (the puck and software are in stock). I don't want this to
be a huge shock but sometimes, products are out of stock. Even products for
the imaging community.
> I was (and still am) preferring to purchase and use their own
> software (with the NEC monitors I own) and therefore give the product
> (the NEC 2690) more of the benefit than of doubt, than simply
> providing the performance as I have found doing hardware calibration/
> profiling on these displays with my own software. What ive seen im
> not thrilled about.
Your software isn't as good! Or you have a problematic unit, that's not
impossible. As I said the other day, you have one sample, I have one sample.
We're setting very different things. Why don't you call up whoever sent you
the unit and ask them to send you a new one with the software?
> I recall you mentioning NECs suggestion of a minimum luminance of
> 150cd/m2. I am finding (on more than one unit) that the value should
> not go much below 200cd/m2. If you do, the white point becomes less
> stable, enough so that you can see the color of white changing. I
> have found this with DTP94s, EyeOne D2s, Eye One Pros and even the
> Spyder3s.
> I have found the black to also be rather poor, ie.....values in the .
> 6 to .8 cd/m2 and often much higher if you run over 200 cd/m2.
> This is what lead me (ok, i assumed, shame on me) to believe it was a
> PVA panel, ie..lower my expectations. Being a high bit LUT display i
> would expect that value to be half of what ive measured.
>
> As for white point calibrations D50 versus D65 this model doesnt
> appear to like D50. The color correction to achieve D50 seems too
> aggressive (watching the LUTs behavior) to maintain the the luminance
> in the minimum range to remain stable(noted above(for white)). Keep
> in mind the peak luminance on these are in the 350cd/m2 range. So
> asking for D50 at 200 cd/m2 is almost a bit too much to ask for,
> ie.......softproofing in a press room. If you want to run your
> calibrations at D65 its relatively "ok" as the corrections are closer
> to that of native white of the display (approx 6350k).
> I have found the trade off is you have to run a higher luminance to
> get that stable white point but then you lose the black level
> accuracy. To obtain the more stable black value you need to run
> closer to the 150 luminance target but then you compromise the white
> point stability.
>
> The ColorComp tool (ive seen this also on more than one unit) appears
> to be a screen uniformity enhancement tool. I find that turning that
> on gives me a green/pink compromise (upper to lower). So much so that
> it was better by turning that function off.
I can't comment on any of this because I don't have "your software" and the
software I'm using doesn't have some of the options you mention (its a real
easy product to use) and I find the results using the software you
don't yet have to produce excellent results as did Karl Lang and Chris
Murphy when the tested the product in their lab using some pretty darn
expensive devices and custom software. So when you say "this model doesn't
appear to like D50" I simply don't know what that means. I also don't know
if this is at all representative of what the product can provide when driven
in an ideal manner.
I'm sorry you can't find the software this week. Last week was a holiday so
I think maybe we can cut some folks some slack. I can't send you the
software, that's not kosher or legal. So until you can get the software, or
a different unit, we don't know what the issues may be on your end.
> Now , this could be different with SpectraviewII software and if it
> is im more than happy to report that, but I have to be able to [buy]
> it before I can test it. I can only assume there would be some level
> of proprietary calls that may well improve this displays performance.
Understood, no argument.
Andrew Rodney
http://www.digitaldog.net/
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden