![]() Is the extra 90 dollars worth it for the Display? Is very well priced too and seems very well rated. The Smile is half the price, for about $89. Quote from: GWGill on October 09, 2019, 07:02:03 pm Not really.It seems that the ColorMunki is popular and I see two reasonably priced models (I am not a pro, so don't see the need to spend too much, if I get high quality results from the tool anyway) the Smile and the 'Display'. In this video I show you how to calibrate your display I also talk about how important color calibration is. Self calibration works for reflective measurement only, since there is a white reference for it to calibrate against. My color calibrator of choice is called the Colormunki Smile by X-rite. There is no self calibration for emissive (i.e. Display) measurement, since there is no reference source it can use. The accuracy depends on the initial factory calibration and the instrument remaining stable over time and any abuse. The good news is that diffraction grating based spectrometers such as the ColorMunki/i1Pro/Spectrolino spectro's seem to be relatively slow to drift, as long as they aren't given a severe knock (which could displace the optical path, causing a wavelength shift), and as long as they haven't got excessively dirty or dusty etc. This is in distinct contrast to dye filter based colorimeters, that have a reputation for markedly drifting over a few years. Thin film based filter colorimeters (like the i1d3 series, SpyderX or possibly the ColorMunki Smile) are likely to be much more stable. This is really the most important point here- A colormunki being a spectro with a grating isn't going to shift color as badly since it's not relying on interagreement of multiple different color filters. ![]() I would say you're well into the world in which scientific precision begins to break down and some element of subjectivity needs to be taken into account. You'll never have a perfect match of any screen to any print, or any screen to any other screen using a different backlight/phosphor technology. IMO, if the grey tones look tinted, change them until they look good to your eye and calibrate for that. Or pick a paper you'll be printing on most of the time and do a visual match of the white point. But if you're using your monitor for doing print proofing, video color grading, DICOM viewing, etc. all at the same time, then you've just got to pick a happy medium (or be insanely diligent about switching built in LUTs). I'd keep your current spectro, but add an i1displaypro3 or colormunki display, and use the spectro to create a correction matrix for the colorimeter using displaycal. Colorimeters are MUCH better at seeing detail in dark tones (SNR gets too high for spectros to accurately read near-blacks in emissive/transmissive modes) but your spectro will be more accurate at obtaining accurate values for color primaries, as explained by Pat earlier.īesides getting better at reading dark values, the only way I can see spectrophotometers really "upgrading" in the near future would be to decrease the space between the grating steps, therefore measuring in higher detail to deal with very spikey spectra, but a better solution for that would be for our display technology to just get better at providing a smooth response. There's a post on AVSForum talking about the recently released i1pro3 and how it basically doesn't improve upon the previous versions for profiling displays.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |