Re: real world wide gamut monitor - HP LP2475w - calibration with Spyder3
Re: real world wide gamut monitor - HP LP2475w - calibration with Spyder3
- Subject: Re: real world wide gamut monitor - HP LP2475w - calibration with Spyder3
- From: Steven Dobbelaere <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2009 21:33:29 +0100
Hi David. Thanks for your reply.
See in-line...
On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 12:39:40 -0500, C D Tobie wrote:
HI Steven,
Your results are fairly typical. Without, as you note, a lab-grade
device for comparison, its not a matter of determining accuracy, but
rather consistency and grouping. We find, comparing affordable
calibrators to a lab-standard, that the X-Rite devices tend to group
on one side or lab-standard device, and Spyder devices tend to group
on the other.
This tendency causes those who would like to do their
own comparison tests, but who don't have access to a lab-standard, to
use the most costly of their devices (typically an EyeOne Pro) as a
pseudo-standard, and thus assume that the X-Rite devices are more
accurate, then in fact they are just more consistent to one another.
This gets even messier when you consider that even two lab-standards
devices of different makes and models don't even agree as closely as
one would expect them to; producing whitepoints, for instance, that
might vary by 300 or 400 degrees.
> So if I correctly understand, X-Rite and Datacolor each used another model / brand
> of spectroradiometer device as reference during development for the filters used in the colorimeter?
> And this explains partly the difference I see between my profiles?
The older Optix device (which is in rather a category by itself, as it
was not developed by Gretag, or by Datacolor) tended to beat out both
the Gretag (now X-Rite) colorimeters, and the Datacolor colorimeters,
on older displays, with more sRGB-sized gamuts. On newer wide gamut
displays, the Spyder3 often comes up with the best colorimeter-based
results, though this tends to vary with the particular wide gamut
display in question. I've also heard from a number of users that an
off-the-shelf Spyder3 does about as well (sometimes better) than an
EyeOne Display 2 that has been custom tuned to the wide gamut display
in question.
Due to the favorable results on wider gamut screens with the Spyder3,
a number of wide gamut display and/or calibration software developers
have chosen to add support for it in their proprietary software, and a
few have even chosen to offer display bundles including it, while
others continue to bundle the Display2, though I am not aware of any
that still bundle the Huey.
> I wonder if a bundle also contains a reference icc profile for a specific set of settings?
> Could be usefull to track down issues with the colorimeter... ?
So, messy as this may sound, for some aspects of calibration,
spectrophotometers usually do the best job, for other aspects, the
best of the colorimeters are preferable; and which colorimeter is
preferable for a given display depends on the particular display make
and model (and possibly other factors, such as phase of the moon).
There isn't even any guarantee that the device bundled with a
particular display will give the best results on that display. Sorry
if this doesn't offer a simple, clear answer, but no everything can
boil down to a single simple answer.
> Indeed, no simple answer here. At least I know now that what I experience is not abnormal...
> Thx!
>
> Steven
C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
email@hidden
Datacolor
www.datacolor.com/Spyder3
_______________________________________________
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