Re: Spectros better than colorimeters for monitor profiling? [was: X-Rite colormunki]
Re: Spectros better than colorimeters for monitor profiling? [was: X-Rite colormunki]
- Subject: Re: Spectros better than colorimeters for monitor profiling? [was: X-Rite colormunki]
- From: Koch Karl <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 09:51:30 +0200
Hi Marco,
if you feed them peanuts, all you can expect is monkeys <g>
I don´t think there are "better" or "worse" technologies here, it´s a
question of implementation.
My experience is that a spectro with a 20 nm or even 10 nm resolution
is not sufficient. Equally insuffient is a colorimeter with the
"wrong" calibration matrix. And the matrix will always be off, if it´s
not tailored to the respective panel type (backlight, LCD filter
characteristics).
A 1nm or 2nm spectro is doubtlessly the "better" instrument – if money
(and ease of use) is irrelevant.
I prefer a panel-optimized colorimeter over any of the "affordable"
spectros. That´s why basICColor display will have a colorimeter/panel
optimization in one of the next versions.
@Terence Wyse:
Having said that, I've also seen where a spectro is less than ideal
for smooth shadow transitions/calibration when used with non-DDC-
compliant displays.
I don´t see, what instrument technology has to do with DDC.
(Affordable) spectros suck in the (monitor) shadows. Why? You split
the available amount of light into 33 or so separate portions (3 or 4
in a colorimeter with a much larger aperture, too). On a black monitor
there is not much of it to split. Either you end up with a terrible
signal/noise ratio or you have to increase measure time considerably.
This does away with your other statement:
Spectros are a helluva lot faster (measuring time/speed) than a
colorimeter also.
Karl
Am 21.10.2008 um 00:59 schrieb Marco Ugolini:
Curt wrote:
I'm a photographer.
I have been using a LaCie 321 and calibrating with the LaCie EyeOne
software and colormeter.
The results have been very good.
X-Rite has a new product unfortunately named Colormunki.
Very unfortunately -- I agree.
I realize that the naming is clearly facetious, but one could
actually feel a bit insulted (it's all so easy to operate that even
a "munki" could use this product? A "munki" like us prospective
customers? Gee, now I know...).
X-Rite claims that the device is a spectrophotometer and will
create a
superior profile than a colormeter.
Is this correct or is it marketing spin?
You're correct! It's marketing spin! <g>
Well, jokes aside, for some time now there has been an off-and-on
(and unresolved) debate on whether a spectrophotometer is better
than a colorimeter, or vice versa, when it comes to calibrating and
profiling monitor displays.
Arguments have been made for either position, but, honestly, they
seem a bit obscure and not too convincing, and don't hit me with any
of that "aha!"-type of recognition that I get when something makes
obvious sense to me.
If others agree, this could be as good an opportunity as any to hear
the argument for each side stated on this forum -- *but* the idea
would be to have a conversation, not a series of monologues, so no
techy/geeky jargon, please...not unless it's both absolutely
necessary *and* explained, as clearly and convincingly as possible.
Thank you.
Marco
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
@mac.com
This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
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