New 24" iMac instead of Mac Pro?

[Jerry Skrocki]

Andrew,

I use the DataColor Spyder3 Elite colorimeter which does contain the proper filter array for both LED and wide gamut monitors. I do get excellent results on the 15" MacBook Pro LED screen.

Maybe you should try the Spyder3 for your comparison.

Apple's LED backlit screen was easier to calibrate and showed a wider gamut than it's CCF predecessor. This was demonstrated eloquently by Rob Galbraith in the article I posted earlier.

Jerry

[AndrewRodney]

Originally Posted by Jerry Skrocki

I use the DataColor Spyder3 Elite colorimeter which does contain the proper filter array for both LED and wide gamut monitors.

You've just confirmed what I said above about filter matrix!

The EyeOne Display that ships with the NEC LED is also tweaked for that device and suffers no issues. Point is, with newer display technologies, not all Colorimeters will produce acceptable results (but all Spectrophotometer's can).

[Martin_Doudoroff]

Originally Posted by AndrewRodney

Point is, with newer display technologies, not all Colorimeters will produce acceptable results (but all Spectrophotometer's can).

Very interesting information. Thank you! So I gather that a ColorMunki would be a reasonable choice for profiling an LED-backed LCD, and much better than an Eye1 Display.

[Jerry Skrocki]

Most people agree that a colorimeter is still the superior instrument for accurately calibrating/profiling monitors.

http://www.lumita.com/site_media/wor...rite-wp-3a.pdf

[AndrewRodney]

Originally Posted by Jerry Skrocki

Most people agree that a colorimeter is still the superior instrument for accurately calibrating/profiling monitors.

http://www.lumita.com/site_media/wor...rite-wp-3a.pdf

You need to read what Karl speaks of again.

A tuned colorimeter (tuned to the display) is the ideal instrument to use. That's why Karl's products (Artisan and PressView) both shipped with Colorimeters with filters specifically turned for the display.

An untuned colorimeter in the case of this discussion is a good door stop.

A Spectrophotometer doesn't suffer this issue in terms of tuning, its reading spectral data. Where a Spectrophotometer isn't ideal is in measuring dark colors, at least not the Spectrophotometer's any of us can afford.

The accuracy you speak of is true for very dark colors but there's no question, that a Spectrophotometer that isn't as accurate in measuring darks will to a vastly superior job overall compared to a colorimeter who's matrix are way way off in terms of the display its measuring.

[Jerry Skrocki]

Originally Posted by AndrewRodney

You need to read what Karl speaks of again.

Ditto....

Karl Lang:
"Take notice of the fact I am using the term “spectroradiometer” not “spectrophotometer.” A spectrophotometer measures reflectance and is used on surfaces or printed materials. A spectroradiometer measures radiation such as that from an emissive display like a CRT or an LCD.
My experience has shown that to accurately calibrate a display with a spectroradiometer you need to spend at least $10,000 on the device."

His conclusion:
"A laboratory spectroradiometer is an invaluable instrument when you need to measure an unknown light source. Nothing is more accurate or more expensive. When your color measurement task involves a source of known characteristics, a “purpose built” colorimeter will provide greater accuracy at a much lower cost. The colorimeter is always the superior solution if you need to measure the full gamut of such a device with speed and accuracy."

[AndrewRodney]

Originally Posted by Jerry Skrocki

Ditto....

Karl Lang:
"Take notice of the fact I am using the term “spectroradiometer” not “spectrophotometer.” A spectrophotometer measures reflectance and is used on surfaces or printed materials. A spectroradiometer measures radiation such as that from an emissive display like a CRT or an LCD.My experience has shown that to accurately calibrate a display with a spectroradiometer you need to spend at least $10,000 on the device."

An EyeOne Pro or similar device is BOTH. That's how one can use it to measure patches to build profile targets OR use it to profile a display. GretagMacbeth has a patient on an instrument that is both a Spectrophotometer and a Spectroradiometer in one unit.

His conclusion:
"A laboratory spectroradiometer is an invaluable instrument when you need to measure an unknown light source. Nothing is more accurate or more expensive. When your color measurement task involves a source of known characteristics, a “purpose built” colorimeter will provide greater accuracy at a much lower cost. The colorimeter is always the superior solution if you need to measure the full gamut of such a device with speed and accuracy."

And where do you hear him saying that a colorimeter with filters not appropriate for the display is in any way useful or superior to a Spectroradiometer?

You can try to put me on the spot by using Karl's piece, its not going to fly (for one, Karl WAS the tech editor on my book).

This is very simple. A colorimeter with mismatched filters will NOT preform as well, it will actually fail to work correctly where as a Spectrophotometer like the EyeOne Pro, in its spectroradiometer mode will easily out preform said colorimeter.

On can see this today or one could take an older colorimeter with filters that are expecting an old CRT and see equally awful results when used on an CCFL LCD.

The illuminant in many, modern white or full color LED's will cause some (most) Colorimeters to produce awful results. Which is what I thought we were talking about no? Or was my first post difficult for you to understand:

The other issue is the displays pretty much suck and, if LED, very difficult to calibrate and profile.

You wrote:

Most people agree that a colorimeter is still the superior instrument for accurately calibrating/profiling monitors.

Would you like me to ask Karl to tell you personally that a colorimeter in the situations being discussed (wrong assumption of filter matrixes) will be inferior?