Munki or Spyder?

[ChrisJett]

I am sure this has been beaten to death, but between these two, which would you select?

I am needing to make some prints and recently got a Canon Pixma Pro 100 that I am using for the first time. Of course, the images seem washed out and not as they appear on my monitor, which I should have guessed would happen. So I know I need a calibration tool and have it narrowed down to the X-Rite Color Munki Display (BH $143.99) and the Datacolor Spyder 5 Pro Display (BH $129.99). Both have very similar high ratings, (Munki - 542 reviews with an average of ~4.4 stars / Spyder - 515 reviews with an average of ~4.6 stars). I just want to see the images and colors as they would print out.

I have a MacMini and a MacBook Pro. The Mini is hooked up to Samsung TV/Display, which may not have the ability to get as accurate as the monitor on my MBP, although it is much larger and easier for me to comfortable edit.

Thank you in advance for any assistance!

Chris

[kpz]

This thread may be helpful: https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=127144.0

It seems that someone tested them and found the X-rite products were much more accurate. There's a graph of the results here: https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=103094.msg1004707#msg1004707

[digitaldog]

ColorMunki

[ChrisJett]

Thank you both. That graph was very interesting. I will wait and see if anyone else weighs in, but it does look as if Munki is the way to go. B&H is having another sale tomorrow and I will grab it then. Very appreciated!

[aaronchan]

Munki

[PhilipCummins]

Actually neither... if you're serious about profiling your printer you would want something like the i1Studio (rebadged ColorMunki Photo/Design) which in the long term will let you build profiles for the printer itself if you're planning to use 3rd party inks or want to fine tune (to a degree) a profile for your specific printer. Advanced users can experiment with ArgyllCMS if they like as well if the default i1Profiler software limitations are being problematic. If you're just doing the display generally the i1Display Pro is better choice wise (faster hardware, less limitations and more 3rd party support - it also is more sensitive light wise than the i1Studio for TV use as well, particularly on QLED/OLED displays).

[BobShaw]

I am needing to make some prints and recently got a Canon Pixma Pro 100 that I am using for the first time. Of course, the images seem washed out and not as they appear on my monitor, which I should have guessed would happen. So I know I need a calibration tool ....

Well calibrating your monitor will possibly make the monitor appear washed out also. If that is your objective then great, but I suspect it is not.
There are indicators on the screen such as the histogram that can be fixed with levels and other controls that will possibly have a far greater impact for less money.
If the prints are washed out then finding out why is the important thing.
The numbers don't lie. Your eyes and viewing conditions do.
Good luck.
BTW, I had a Spyder 3. They stopped supporting the software so I had to get a Spyder 4. Now there is pretty much no support for that, but I won't be buying a Spyder 5 (or 6).

[GWGill]

Well calibrating your monitor will possibly make the monitor appear washed out also. If that is your objective then great, but I suspect it is not.

Sorry, but that's bad advice. The point of calibrating and profiling your monitor, is to turn it into a dependable visual reference. If you've done that correctly, and your images still look washed out on the monitor, then that will be because the images are washed out, rather than your monitor making them look that way. So you can then confidently adjust you images to look good on your monitor, and have some hope that others will see your images the same way you now do, and that if you have them printed (via a profiled printing workflow) that the prints will look OK too.

There are indicators on the screen such as the histogram that can be fixed with levels and other controls that will possibly have a far greater impact for less money.

Oh yes, you can make it look OK on your display that way, but it will look terrible on anyone else's display, uness it just happens to be misadjusted in the same way as yours. And then when you print it, it will look different again.
i.e. the whole point of color management, is to cure this type of situation. 

BTW, I had a Spyder 3. They stopped supporting the software so I had to get a Spyder 4. Now there is pretty much no support for that, but I won't be buying a Spyder 5 (or 6).

If you look, there is still support for Spyder 2 through Spyder 5. If you have a choice though, I'd recommend choosing an i1 Display Pro, although the Spyder 5 is noticeably better than it's forbears.

[BobShaw]

Sorry, but that's bad advice. The point of calibrating and profiling your monitor, is to turn it into a dependable visual reference. If you've done that correctly, and your images still look washed out on the monitor, then that will be because the images are washed out, rather than your monitor making them look that way. So you can then confidently adjust you images to look good on your monitor, and have some hope that others will see your images the same way you now do, and that if you have them printed (via a profiled printing workflow) that the prints will look OK too.Oh yes, you can make it look OK on your display that way, but it will look terrible on anyone else's display, uness it just happens to be misadjusted in the same way as yours. And then when you print it, it will look different again.
i.e. the whole point of color management, is to cure this type of situation.  If you look, there is still support for Spyder 2 through Spyder 5. If you have a choice though, I'd recommend choosing an i1 Display Pro, although the Spyder 5 is noticeably better than it's forbears.

We agree. If the print is washed out (say lacking in contrast) then the file IS washed out. It has nothing to do with the monitor. If you fix the levels and save the file then it will "look OK" on your print or if given to someone else. I am not saying don't calibrate your monitor. I am just saying that people were able to print stuff that "looked OK" before there were monitor calibrators or people selling books on it. I am not sure what you mean by "support". To me it means it works on the latest software. Spyder 3 is supported up to Yosemite and Spyder 4 is supported up to Sierra. I am confident that neither will ever be 64 bit.

[GWGill]

Spyder 3 is supported up to Yosemite and Spyder 4 is supported up to Sierra. I am confident that neither will ever be 64 bit.

I mean that ArgyllCMS/DisplayCAL supports the Spyder 2 through 5 on 32 and 64 bit MSWin, OS X and Linux operating systems.

[BobShaw]

I mean that ArgyllCMS/DisplayCAL supports the Spyder 2 through 5 on 32 and 64 bit MSWin, OS X and Linux operating systems.

Old post I know, but the closest I can find on the subject.

So I am now at the point of upgrading to Catalina and my Datacolor Spyder 4 Elite will not work either with its own software for the 2013 27" iMac or ColorNavigator 7 for the Eizo CX241, as the driver is 32 bit.
Are you saying then that the Spyder 4 Elite will work under Catalina with ArgyllCMS/DisplayCAL and calibrate both monitors, please?
Does ArgyllCMS replace ColorSync?
Thanks.

[budjames]

I have been using the X-Rite Munki for over 5 years now. The i1Studio software works fine on my iMacPro running Big Sur to keep my monitor calibration updated once a month.  Highly recommended.

Regards,
Bud James

Please check out my fine art and travel photography at www.budjames.photography or on Instagram at www.instagram.com/budjamesphoto

[PhilipCummins]

So I am now at the point of upgrading to Catalina and my Datacolor Spyder 4 Elite will not work either with its own software for the 2013 27" iMac or ColorNavigator 7 for the Eizo CX241, as the driver is 32 bit. Are you saying then that the Spyder 4 Elite will work under Catalina with ArgyllCMS/DisplayCAL and calibrate both monitors, please? Does ArgyllCMS replace ColorSync?

Datacolor definitely isn't updating their software to support the Spyder 4 (see here), ColorNavigator 7 looks like it still works and is supported (see here) as an option.

The Spyder 4 Elite should be supported via DisplayCal as an option so no harm in downloading a copy to try out (particularly for your non-Eizo monitor). However, since you have a Eizo it is better to use the ColorNavigator 7 for best results (since it can talk direct to the monitor to set LUTs etc).