Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: DeltaE variation  (Read 873 times)

David Budd

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 80
DeltaE variation
« on: December 18, 2018, 04:41:56 am »

Profiling my NEC monitor with both a xRite i1Display Pro and the i1Studio each give a different DeltaE reading.The i1Display 0.60 and the i1Studio 1.25. Both profiles were made within 5 minutes of each other.

As the Display Pro is 8 years old, where as the i1Studio was purchased in October would this have bearing on the results.

Will this drift from .60 to 1.25, given that the monitor is 8 years old have a impact on achieving accurate calibration.

I'm using Spectraview v1.1.38, Mac OS 10.11.6.

-David
Logged

Czornyj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1948
    • zarzadzaniebarwa.pl
Re: DeltaE variation
« Reply #1 on: December 18, 2018, 05:33:50 am »

Profiling my NEC monitor with both a xRite i1Display Pro and the i1Studio each give a different DeltaE reading.The i1Display 0.60 and the i1Studio 1.25. Both profiles were made within 5 minutes of each other.

As the Display Pro is 8 years old, where as the i1Studio was purchased in October would this have bearing on the results.

Will this drift from .60 to 1.25, given that the monitor is 8 years old have a impact on achieving accurate calibration.

I'm using Spectraview v1.1.38, Mac OS 10.11.6.

-David

i1Studio has worse stability and repeatability than i1Display Pro, and is generally less accurate due to FWHM resolution that is too small for tricky LED spectra. I tested a couple of oldest i1Displays (2011), and as long as the lenses were clean they were virtually as accurate as new ones.
Logged
Marcin Kałuża | [URL=http://zarzadzaniebarwa

David Budd

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 80
Re: DeltaE variation
« Reply #2 on: December 18, 2018, 07:48:58 am »

i1Studio has worse stability and repeatability than i1Display Pro, and is generally less accurate due to FWHM resolution that is too small for tricky LED spectra. I tested a couple of oldest i1Displays (2011), and as long as the lenses were clean they were virtually as accurate as new ones.


Did your testing include the Spectraview and iProfiler software and did you find similar issues with the other functions of the i1Studio ie; print profiling.

Thanks
-D.
Logged

Czornyj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1948
    • zarzadzaniebarwa.pl
Re: DeltaE variation
« Reply #3 on: December 18, 2018, 08:02:14 am »

It's decent for print profiling, and not that bad for display profiling - it's simply not as good as i1Display Pro, which is better suited to this particular task. A spectroradiometer optimal for display calibration costs a fortune (20.000-50.000$), so you simply get what you pay for.

Did your testing include the Spectraview and iProfiler software and did you find similar issues with the other functions of the i1Studio ie; print profiling.

Thanks
-D.
« Last Edit: December 18, 2018, 08:06:12 am by Czornyj »
Logged
Marcin Kałuża | [URL=http://zarzadzaniebarwa

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: DeltaE variation
« Reply #4 on: December 18, 2018, 10:57:43 am »

Why a Colorimeter and a Spectrophotometer at 'about' the same price range differ in terms of which device you'd want to use for a display:
http://lumita.com/site_media/work/whitepapers/files/xrite-wp-3a.pdf
As Czornyj says, the Colorimeter in question is better suited for its task.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".
Pages: [1]   Go Up