Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Colour Management => Topic started by: rdonson on November 30, 2017, 05:38:58 pm
-
http://xritephoto.com/ph_product_overview.aspx?ID=1115&Action=Support&SupportID=5915
I think I mentioned this earlier in November here on LuLa. Anyway, I contacted support again to see if there was any change since the end of October. I got the same old response. I'm not holding my breath for a software update anytime soon.
-
Try BasicColor Display 5.
-
$120 for the software......hmmmmm. Not a casual purchase.
Does it produce better ICC profiles than X-rite? Is this what you use?
-
$120 for the software......hmmmmm. Not a casual purchase.
Does it produce better ICC profiles than X-rite? Is this what you use?
I consider that reasonable for this class of product. And yes, this is what I use for profiling my two displays. The results are first rate and it's clear and easy to use.
-
Thanks, Mark. I appreciate your suggestion and recommendation.
-
You are welcome Ron. I would suggest you verify compatibility with your computing environment (hardware and software), and check whether they offer a trial of any kind. It's hard to go wrong with this, but just in case.......
-
I believe they do offer a 14d trial. Their licensing is a bit old-school where they give you a license to run it on ONE computer (software lock) although you can get the license rehosted when you want.
The other nice thing is that BasICColor is the only sw package that can also do a hardware calibration of NEC Spectraview. Not sure about Eizo's though.
-
The other nice thing is that BasICColor is the only sw package that can also do a hardware calibration of NEC Spectraview.
But in what way and as complete as SpectraView? DDC is an iffy proposition too! Especially when you don't build your own hardware to drive!
-
Does it produce better ICC profiles than X-rite? Is this what you use?
A difficult question few here can answer colorimetrically. And it depends on your goal for calibration! The settings between the two products will very likely need to be different to produce (if possible) the same emitted and measured color patch!
-
Their licensing is a bit old-school where they give you a license to run it on ONE computer (software lock) although you can get the license rehosted when you want.
One computer licensing is a deal breaker for me at $119
-
But in what way and as complete as SpectraView? DDC is an iffy proposition too! Especially when you don't build your own hardware to drive!
What does a hardware calibration do that either software wouldn't handle? White point, Black point, gamma, profile version, chromatic adaptation, ambient light, ISO standards - anything else?
-
What does a hardware calibration do that either software wouldn't handle? White point, Black point, gamma, profile version, chromatic adaptation, ambient light, ISO standards - anything else?
What can happen is, doesn't work or work properly! And there are differing versions making it more suspect to issues. I cannot see any reason to use any software to drive a NEC SpectraView other than the software designed from the ground up to control the electronics in the NEC panel.
-
From the ColorSync list FWIW, and yeah, Tom knows his stuff:
Hi to all,
As someone who as worked with DDC since 2002, I can say that the situation is bad and it is not getting better. In the early days, I saw the potential for this technology and my team at Sequel Imaging designed the "enable cable". This let us get rid of the graphic card and OS issues. We had our own proprietary USB interface that allowed us to talk to any device that used a VGA port. This got us over the first hurdle and then we were faced with the larger implementation problems. For instance, some displays had the controls reversed, if you increased the number, you decreased the effect. The DDC specification requires what is termed a capabliities string. We have found in many displays, especially cheaper ones, that the capabilities string does not indicate the true display capabilities. If your display has a vga connector and a DVI connector, it is quite probable that the DDC capabilities are completely different based upon the connector. For instance, one very well
known
vendor, emulates a CRT data path when on the VGA connector. This means that the brightness control moves the black point, the contrast control moves the max luminance. When attached to the DVI connector, brightness control is inoperative, and the contrast control controls the max luminance. I believe that we get more complaints about DDC in our display applications than any other area. Here is a break down of some of the issues so you understand why there is so much finger pointing.
1. We don't release a version of software without testing it. So we have normally confirmed that in atleast one instance, the communication works and the application runs fine. I am then left with the question: Where is the problem in a particular situation.
2.In my opinion and direct personal experience about 30 - 40 % of the platforms have some form of hardware, firmware, driver, or other problem that results in a poor implementation. The DDC command structure utilizes a physical I2C interface with a logical ACCESS bus protocol. For me to send one byte to a display, I need to open a driver, which communicates with the display card driver, which is supposed to have an API that allows generation of I2C output. That I2C output may be implemented in firmware on the Graphics Chip, or there may be a real serial interface engine on the chip. The Mac provides an application API at the OS level so it is generally easier to communicate. It is up to the display card vendors to provide a working I2C connection. On a windows machine (non vista) communication to the display card driver is generally through technology provided by one fo three vendors. In Vista it is in the OS, but it is up to the Graphic Card vendor to implement the ap
i. On
the Mac, there is a very low level interface to the I2C bus which again the the Graphic Card vendor must implement.
3. My own feeling is that at least 60-75% of displays do not implement DDC correctly, although for the needs of this group, it is probably more than 30%. The specification is quite complex and subject to interpretation. For instance a "maximum" control value is supposed to represent a physical maximum, not a logical maximum. As an example, a contrast control could have a logical range of 0 -255, but the display will go into saturation at level 180, the spec says that the maximum should be 180. Many vendors fail to indicate the physical port (analog or digital) in the EDID. In at least 5 instances of displays from a single manufacturer, the capbilities string indicated capablities that didn't exist.
4. The windows vista certification process dictated a new "ColorTemperature" control. This lead to complete havoc in the display market because they couldn't get the Vista Logo on the box if they didn't have this ddc control. This control impacted RGB gains (because that is what it changed). This lead to many vendors abandoning RGB gains and using only the SetColorTemp command.
5. There is a new control that relates to backlight brightness, that many vendors have not implemented, hence a software programmer has to examine the "meaning" of the brightness, contrast and backlight commands when confronted with a new display.
6. In general, DDC has been more stable on the Mac than on the PC. This is because it is part of the IOkit. If Apple broke IOkit, shame on them.
As a consumer, you should be putting pressure on VESA because they are the standards org. Their testing solutions are very limited and very old. My direct experience with the Enable cable showed that eliminating the graphics card and OS from the chain still left one with a myriad of problems generated by the individual display vendors. I don't see any solution, either near or long term, to this morass. Realistically, once display port is implemented, no display will work properly for years to come and we will still be trying to work out the kinks.
Regards,
Tom Lianza
-
What can happen is, doesn't work or work properly! And there are differing versions making it more suspect to issues. I cannot see any reason to use any software to drive a NEC SpectraView other than the software designed from the ground up to control the electronics in the NEC panel.
Well, I've been using BasicColor on my NEC panel for years and it works just fine. My screen to print matches, all else equal, worked out better for certain colours with BasicColor than with Spectraview profiling, which is why I switched to BasicColor - and which, BTW is the same profiling software that NEC bundles with their so-called "Reference" Series displays sold in Germany and I believe elsewhere in Europe.
-
As NEC is using BasicColor software in Europe, I could only surmise that between the two companies they have tested it all for proper DDC compliance and it works - hard to sell a display as a "Reference" model (and charge more money for it) if they haven't. Regardless of all that, the proof of the pudding is in the tasting. I've tasted both and I kept BasicColor. Just somewhat better in my experience, and BTW, very useful operating instructions.
-
Well, I've been using BasicColor on my NEC panel for years and it works just fine.
Any colorimetric comparisons to SpectraView? Fine is fine. If you're happy with what you have, be happy you're happy. None the less, if asked, I'd always advise anyone paying the kinds of money for a SpectraView display to drop the mere $100 if not less, for the software that was designed to drive the hardware you paid (dearly?) for.
-
BTW is the same profiling software that NEC bundles with their so-called "Reference" Series displays sold in Germany and I believe elsewhere in Europe.
Same company. Same software? Do compare the code and let us know. ;D
-
Same company. Same software? Do compare the code and let us know. ;D
Yes and yes from primary sources of information; I don't need to compare code and couldn't do so if I were asked.
Question to you: Have you used BasicColor Display 4 or Display 5? If so, what were your findings?
-
Yes and yes from primary sources of information; I don't need to compare code and couldn't do so if I were asked.
Then there can be differences....
I can't recall the last time I looked at BasICColor for displays considering I'm using NEC SpectraViews!
-
Then there can be differences....
I can't recall the last time I looked at BasICColor for displays considering I'm using NEC SpectraViews!
Andrew, I'm interested in results - how they achieve them inside the code is their business. I'm happy that you're happy that I'm happy! :-) OK?
Cheers.
-
Andrew, I'm interested in results - how they achieve them inside the code is their business. I'm happy that you're happy that I'm happy! :-) OK?
Cheers.
OK. I'll stick to my recommendation for SpectraView owners to purchase the software specifically designed for it; no matter where the code is written.
-
As NEC is using BasicColor software in Europe, I could only surmise that between the two companies they have tested it all for proper DDC compliance and it works - hard to sell a display as a "Reference" model (and charge more money for it) if they haven't. Regardless of all that, the proof of the pudding is in the tasting. I've tasted both and I kept BasicColor. Just somewhat better in my experience, and BTW, very useful operating instructions.
I seem to recall a couple of European based folks on LuLa saying they are using Spectraview now. Perhaps NEC is selling it in Europe these days.
-
I seem to recall a couple of European based folks on LuLa saying they are using Spectraview now. Perhaps NEC is selling it in Europe these days.
And there's this:
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=89289.new;topicseen#new (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=89289.new;topicseen#new)
SpectraView II performs better with PAxx2 series than SpectraView Profiler - it makes better use of internal SpectraView engine and has more precise spectral calibration for X-Rite i1Display Pro and NEC SpectraSensor Pro.
-
And...
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=75804.new;topicseen#new
The SV II software is not available internationally unfortunately. It is reasonably basic in settings and features but does a good job nevertheless. You can see information about SV II from our review of the PA271-SV
2) SpectraView Profiler - This is NEC Europe's equivalent software, based around the popular and high end BasICColor Display software package. It is supposedly designed in this way for the "more demanding" European audience and has a larger range of settings and features than SV II. In Europe there are also two versions of the screen, the regular PA241W and the PA241W-SV (sometimes also referred to as the SpectraView Reference 241). The complication comes with these two varieties in Europe. The regular PA241W has an additional firmware lock which means it cannot be used with SpectraView Profiler to hardware calibrate the screen. Therefore you are limited to software calibration in most cases. Interesting the USA SpectraView II software could work with this screen as it does not care about the firmware lock, but there are issues with availability of that software in Europe.
The NEC PA241W-SV edition does not carry this firmware lock. According to NEC they also offer hand picked and factory optimised panels and so supposedly offer that slightly higher level of accuracy in addition to the regular PA241W. Because the PA241W-SV is no firmware locked, it can be used with the SpectraView Profiler for full hardware level calibration. Again, it could work with SV II as well technically.'
-
And...
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=75804.new;topicseen#new
The SV II software is not available internationally unfortunately. It is reasonably basic in settings and features but does a good job nevertheless. You can see information about SV II from our review of the PA271-SV
Andrew, this is the post that I was referring to: http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=121665.msg1012460#msg1012460 I guess NEC now has released Spectraview II in the EU.
-
One computer licensing is a deal breaker for me at $119
yes as it was for me too- they use the computer serial to do that.
So you cannot use it again on a laptop screen + main screen...
-
Yes and yes from primary sources of information; I don't need to compare code and couldn't do so if I were asked.
Question to you: Have you used BasicColor Display 4 or Display 5? If so, what were your findings?
I use both - SpectraView II is better, as it’s the only one that uses custom i1D3 spectral calibration for PA series backlight, and full potential of SpectraView engine. It’s also faster, more convenient, better integrated with excellent MultiProfiler, more stable, and it works with many other, affordable NEC displays (like very good EAxx5WMi series)
-
I use both - SpectraView II is better, as it’s the only one that uses custom i1D3 spectral calibration for PA series backlight, and full potential of SpectraView engine. It’s also faster, more convenient, better integrated with excellent MultiProfiler, more stable, and it works with many other, affordable NEC displays (like very good EAxx5WMi series)
Marcin, could you please unpack this a bit and explain:
- What is the significance of i1D3 spectral calibration?
"Full potential of SpectraView engine"?
advantage of "better integrated with excellent MultiProfiler" (why does one need multiprofiler as well)?
Also, does this version of Spectraview software make matrix or LUT profiles?
-
Marcin, could you please unpack this a bit and explain:
- What is the significance of i1D3 spectral calibration?
"Full potential of SpectraView engine"?
advantage of "better integrated with excellent MultiProfiler" (why does one need multiprofiler as well)?
Also, does this version of Spectraview software make matrix or LUT profiles?
PAxx2 has GBr LED type backlight - green and blue LED with red phosphor. The brightness of G and B LED is controlled independently by display processor, which is called "SpectraView Engine". Problem is that SpectraView/basICColor Profiler doesn't make use of SpectraView engine, and it uses display LUT instead of G an B LED brightness balance to achieve the target white point. It also doens't use PAxx2 specific spectral calibration for i1D3, but the generic X-Rite calibrations, so there's slightly bigger error in comparison to lab grade 5nm FWHM spectroradiometer, than in case of custom spectral calibration, where there's virtually no noticable difference to reference sensor (see my evaluation: http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=103094.msg1004707#msg1004707 ).
NEC uses internal 14(16) bit 17x17x17 3DLUT, so it's not reasonable to use LUT-type profile characterisation (you only get worse tonal transitions).
MultiProfiler allows you to apply metameric correction (to get better match between different backlight type displays), tweak calibration visually, or use hardware softproofig, which I find very useful, as it works in every enviroment (no matter if color managed or not), on whole screen surface, with both RGB and CMYK type output profiles without using CPU computing resources. For example - when you want to prepare photobook in Lightroom you can't use CMYK output profile of digital presses, as (due to stupid Adobe policy) Lightroom doesn't support CMYK profiles at all. The internal hardware softproofing of NEC display may be a good workaround in such cases.
-
Straight from NEC about the rather important SpectraView engine! And yeah, you want all this stuff :P
SpectraView Engine is the “brains” of the display.
In short it does:
1. Uniformity correction
2. Aging compensation
3. Temperature compensation
4. Orientation compensation
5. 3x 1D LUTs
6. 3D LUTs
7. Color gamut mapping
8. Gamma correction
9. Black level correction
10. Ambient light measurement and compensation
11. Backlight luminance measurement and stabilization
12. Picture-in-Picture / Picture-by-Picture
13. Color blindness simulation
14. Metamerism correction
15. Hue/Saturation/Offset adjustment
-
PAxx2 has GBr LED type backlight - green and blue LED with red phosphor. The brightness of G and B LED is controlled independently by display processor, which is called "SpectraView Engine". Problem is that SpectraView/basICColor Profiler doesn't make use of SpectraView engine, and it uses display LUT instead of G an B LED brightness balance to achieve the target white point. It also doens't use PAxx2 specific spectral calibration for i1D3, but the generic X-Rite calibrations, so there's slightly bigger error in comparison to lab grade 5nm FWHM spectroradiometer, than in case of custom spectral calibration, where there's virtually no noticable difference to reference sensor (see my evaluation: http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=103094.msg1004707#msg1004707 ).
NEC uses internal 14(16) bit 17x17x17 3DLUT, so it's not reasonable to use LUT-type profile characterisation (you only get worse tonal transitions).
MultiProfiler allows you to apply metameric correction (to get better match between different backlight type displays), tweak calibration visually, or use hardware softproofig, which I find very useful, as it works in every enviroment (no matter if color managed or not), on whole screen surface, with both RGB and CMYK type output profiles without using CPU computing resources. For example - when you want to prepare photobook in Lightroom you can't use CMYK output profile of digital presses, as (due to stupid Adobe policy) Lightroom doesn't support CMYK profiles at all. The internal hardware softproofing of NEC display may be a good workaround in such cases.
Thanks Marcin and Andrew.
-
Problem is that SpectraView/basICColor Profiler doesn't make use of SpectraView engine, and it uses display LUT instead of G an B LED brightness balance to achieve the target white point.
It doesn't use some or all of the SpectraView engine?
-
It doesn't use some or all of the SpectraView engine?
I'm not sure, but apparently it doesn't use G and B LED brightness balance, which results in worse CR after calibration (PA calibrated by SVII has virtually stable CR in 5000-6500K range).
-
It is now OS X 10.13.2 compliant
http://xritephoto.com/ph_product_overview.aspx?ID=1454&Action=Support&SoftwareID=1874
http://xritephoto.com/ph_product_overview.aspx?ID=1115&Action=Support&SupportID=5915
I think I mentioned this earlier in November here on LuLa. Anyway, I contacted support again to see if there was any change since the end of October. I got the same old response. I'm not holding my breath for a software update anytime soon.
-
And...
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=75804.new;topicseen#new
The SV II software is not available internationally unfortunately. It is reasonably basic in settings and features but does a good job nevertheless. You can see information about SV II from our review of the PA271-SV
2) SpectraView Profiler - This is NEC Europe's equivalent software, based around the popular and high end BasICColor Display software package. It is supposedly designed in this way for the "more demanding" European audience and has a larger range of settings and features than SV II. In Europe there are also two versions of the screen, the regular PA241W and the PA241W-SV (sometimes also referred to as the SpectraView Reference 241). The complication comes with these two varieties in Europe. The regular PA241W has an additional firmware lock which means it cannot be used with SpectraView Profiler to hardware calibrate the screen. Therefore you are limited to software calibration in most cases. Interesting the USA SpectraView II software could work with this screen as it does not care about the firmware lock, but there are issues with availability of that software in Europe.
The NEC PA241W-SV edition does not carry this firmware lock. According to NEC they also offer hand picked and factory optimised panels and so supposedly offer that slightly higher level of accuracy in addition to the regular PA241W. Because the PA241W-SV is no firmware locked, it can be used with the SpectraView Profiler for full hardware level calibration. Again, it could work with SV II as well technically.'
This is out of date information, there has been a policy change. I am in UK and have used NEC SpectraviewII software to calibrate my PA241W and P242W for at least the last 6 months. This is my current version: Version 1.1.34.00 - build 170331 - March 31 2017