Roger Breton via colorsync-users wrote:
So, from the arguments presented, anything that "breaks" the incoming spectra into small bins is bound to receive "less photons", in all, in each bin? Whereas colorimeters are usually designed with "large collecting areas", which allow them to collect "more'" photons ", more rapidly or, at least, to collect whatever available photons more rapidly?
Beware - many of the entry level colorimeters don't have very good sensitivity or low light resolution. Most rely on cheap L2F sensors, and without augmentation their sensitivity is modest. Something like the i1d3 adds a lens to increase the sensitivity a great deal, but it still doesn't match a high end colorimeter such as a Klien K10-A or similar. Comparing an i1d3 to an i1pro: Both need to use longer integration times to get the best low light resolution. The i1d3 is quantization limited (you can't get lower than one transition in 20 seconds), while the i1pro is noise limited. Accuracy could be poorer than resolution, but without running some tests against a reference instrument, I can't say much about that. Generally in the display calibration/profiling game the recommendation is to use the i1pro to create a calibration matrix for the i1d3, and then use the i1d3, since the result will be faster. Graeme Gill.