Print profile hardware question

[evonzz]

I currently use an eye-one Display 2 to calibrate my monitor.  Having looked through various packages and products available - i am not entirely sure what is needed to successfully create custom profiles.

Would this x-rite iO scan table be sufficient?
Or would this photo bundle be more effective?

[Wayne Fox]

The EyeOne i0 table cannot create profiles, but is simply a device to automate the reading of targets.  It does not include the pictured spectrophotometer, and to use it you must purchase an EyeOne profiling solution, such as your second option.

The Photo Bundle contains everything you need (hardware and software) to create good profiles.

[evonzz]

The EyeOne i0 table cannot create profiles, but is simply a device to automate the reading of targets.  It does not include the pictured spectrophotometer, and to use it you must purchase an EyeOne profiling solution, such as your second option.

The Photo Bundle contains everything you need (hardware and software) to create good profiles.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=175862\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

So if i purchase a bundle with the pro spectrophotometer, my Eye-one Display 2 effectively becomes redundant?  
How important do you think the UV filter is or is standard photo bundle sufficient?

[Wayne Fox]

So if i purchase a bundle with the pro spectrophotometer, my Eye-one Display 2 effectively becomes redundant? 
How important do you think the UV filter is or is standard photo bundle sufficient?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=175867\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm stepping out of my expertise a little here, so hopefully if I'm wrong one of our color guru's will correct me.

As I understand it, the Eye One Display 2 is a colorimeter, specifically engineered for profiling displays.  The EyeOne device that comes with the profiling package is a spectrophotometer. and while it does a very good job at display calibration, it's principally designed for reflected light readings from targets.  So while they may be redundant, it sounds like best practice if you already own the colorimeter is to continue using it for your displays, instead of the EyeOne Spectrophotometer.

As far as the UV cut version, the device is quite capable of measuring those wavelengths and account for them when making the profile, so the general consensus I've have seen is that it is unnecessary.  I own two EyeOne's, a standard one and a UV-cut one, and I cannot see a difference when making profiles with both. I'm sure someone with far more expertise than myself, or a color scientist may be able to derive some benefit from the UV-cut device, but I believe it is overkill for most.

[seangirard]

Geez Wayne is there anything you don't own two of?

Seriously though, I think Wayne's comments reflect the received wisdom out there.

-sean

[digitaldog]

So if i purchase a bundle with the pro spectrophotometer, my Eye-one Display 2 effectively becomes redundant? 
How important do you think the UV filter is or is standard photo bundle sufficient?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=175867\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The Colorimeter is a better instrument for handling the display (especially dark colors) although you can use the Spectrophotometer to do double duty. If you don't have a Colorimeter like the EyeOne Display and you want to use a single instrument to also build profiles, go for the Spectrophotometer of course. But if you already have a good colorimeter, use that.

I haven't seen the UV being useful when mated with the X-Rite software which handles this in software. If you decided to use another profile package, you might want UV.

[photographist]

In speaking to Xrite the differnce between the two is now generally moot.  Depending up on the software you're using, eye-match 3.n; ProfileMaker 4.n+ or other high end system will either automatically or can be set manually to account for the UV returned by the OB on a paper without the use of the UV filtered hardware.  

My eye-one is not UV and it works well with most every paper I've tried.

Good luck!

[neil snape]

In speaking to Xrite the differnce between the two is now generally moot.  Depending up on the software you're using, eye-match 3.n; ProfileMaker 4.n+ or other high end system will either automatically or can be set manually to account for the UV returned by the OB on a paper without the use of the UV filtered hardware.   

My eye-one is not UV and it works well with most every paper I've tried.

Good luck!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=176247\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's interesting. There is a lot of difference by nature of the device themselves. Yes the software has hooks in it to bring both devices into a range with over sampling, range checking, redundancy, dark or zero photon counting, but the nature of the device still has hardware specifics that cannot rule out differences in acquired data.
Polarization of the light , chromatic end points both are handled very differently between these technologies. Luckily as I said , software has it's go at regularising the data "massaging" if you like to make the results acceptable with both.

I prefer a colorimeter over the spectro, but it's just plain easier with a colorimeter thanks to it's size , weight.