Re: Monitor Calibration
Re: Monitor Calibration
- Subject: Re: Monitor Calibration
- From: Steve Kornreich <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 07:05:31 -1000
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 13, 2009, at 9:45 PM, Robin Myers <email@hidden> wrote:
Interesting info on the Light to Frequency converters in the current
display colorimeters. My earlier comments about large sensors were
based on my experiences with the DTP-92 and its ilk. Thanks a bunch
for the technology update.
Robin Myers
On Nov 13, 2009, at 11:18 PM, Graeme Gill wrote:
Andrew Rodney wrote:
Yes it is, but that doesn’t mean its better for calibration of a
display as discussed
here by the fellow who brought us the Radius Pressview and Sony
Artisan:
http://www.lumita.com/site_media/work/whitepapers/files/xrite-wp-3a.pdf
That is a rather carefully worded document for the most part, that
doesn't actually claim that a spectrometer is always inferior to a
colorimeter, and in fact most of its discussion refers to laboratory
grade spectrometers and colorimeters, not the sort of instruments
available to most people.
One basic claim that the spectrometer has lower accuracy at low light
level is not necessarily true - many cheap colorimeters collect
less light
than they might seem to from their size (ever pulled the diffuser
off a Spyder ? it's got basically the same Light to Frequency
sensors that
all the other cheap colorimeters use), and it is easy enough to
increase spectrometer integration time to match or indeed surpass
the repeatability of any such colorimeter. From experience I can tell
you that these light to frequency converters are hard make low
noise readings from at low light levels, because the frequency
becomes very low and is hard to measure. Sometimes the integration
times slip out to more than 20 seconds simply to get two transitions
(or none, which is worse because the reading drops to zero),
while something like a i1pro gives quite repeatable readings at
similar light levels with a fixed 2 second integration time.
I also wonder whether the claims might have made more sense
when it was implicitly talking about something like the DTP92 or
DTP94
(rather well made instruments with glass filters, large light
collection areas and direct A/D converters - but not laboratory
grade)
when used on displays they were designed for, and not the (rather
more
cheaply made) i1display/Huey/Spider using small L to F converters,
plastic filters and used on the more diverse range of displays that
are
available today.
Graeme Gill.
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
@kuau.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