Looking for some calibration gear

[Blaser]

Hi all,

I would like to calibrate my projector for a more accurate picture. What gear do you use/suggest. Of course there are plenty, but what's best bang for the buck with pretty good results?

I need to measure lumen output, calibrate colours through computer, play with colours charts, use the max out of the Epson CMS.

[lcaillo]

Best bang for the buck is the CalMAN bundle with the I1 pro.

http://www.spectracal.com/purchase.html

A cheaper but more limited alternative is any of several colorimeters and the HCFR software (free).

http://www.homecinema-fr.com/colorimetre/index_en.php

[Anthony]

I'm not disagreeing with you, but it's hard to call something "bang for the buck" when it costs $1200

I've been looking at getting something like this for my installer business and finding that true deal for the casual installer (not full ISF) has been really hard.

The Calman stuff always comes highly recommended.

Is there a reason you don't like the Spyder stuff? I've read mixed reviews over at AVS and welcome a pro's opinion.

[lcaillo]

Relative to the entire market, the I1 is an incredible value. I did point out that there is free software and other cheaper probes.

I have a spyder2 and found it to be ok but it reads more red than my I1 and more with variance.

CalMAN 3 with the I1 pro is $850. Casual calibration should not require the Pro version.

I am not sure why you would do "casual calibration" anyway if you are in the business. You do not have to be ISF certified to be professional. Calibration is only as precise as the tools you use will allow you to be. I guess it is just the difference between using a calibrated mic and someone else's cal file. If it is good enough to satisfy you and your clients, then fine. I just prefer to have the better equipment if I can.

[Blaser]

I think Leonard precisely replied to the "bang for the buck" requirement, if now we find it to be expensive, a roof top $ restriction should have been made

[Anthony]

Thanks for the info. That's what I've heard about the Spyder's as well -- inconsistent results between units. Last time I checked was over a year ago, so I was just curious if anything had changed.

I'm more of an AV handyman than anything else. A lot of times people have projectors or LCD's they want help mounting and wiring up. I would like to be able to do a cursory brightness/contrast/color/tint setup for them and at least point out any grayscale issues that they might want to address. Right now I've just been using an old Avia with the filters, and while that's good enough -- I want it to be better.

But again, this is a small side business and it's hard to justify tools for $2k when it might take me years to recoup that.

Just to get the thread back on topic: what is the difference between the V3 and Pro? I poked around the Calman site and did not find it.

Thanks again. Great information.

[lcaillo]

I never really played with v3 all that much and have been testing the various versions of Pro. I suspect the meters supported and some of the reporting capability may be the biggest differences but I do not recall specifically. I would go to the CalMAN forum and ask there if you don't find it. Everyone there is very helpful.

My experience with the spyder is within unit variance on mine alone. Maybe I have a bad one, but I was never impressed.

If you really are trying to do it low budget, just download the French software and get a cheap probe. Get some experience with that and then see what is important to you.

[Blaser]

I have e-mailed Calman and here is their reply

I would recommend our consumer version of CalMAN with the i1Pro meter bundle. It can handle any display type especially when you get in to CMS calibration.

I think I will begin with a colorimeter and the HCFR free software. I am not ready at this moment to invest something like 1/3 projector price for calibration as I have a feeling picture is quite close already..... This is not to say it doesn't deserve... but just that I also want to add a BD player and so on.
Which calorimeter then? The GretagMacbeth Display 2 should be fine and not that expensive... Correct?

[lcaillo]

Sign up for their forum. There is lots of info there and lots of users more familiar with the low end probes than I am. I have not kept up with that part of the market.

[<^..^>Smokey Joe]

If you want to use HCFR, build the matching probe. I have and it is quite fast and reports to low stimulas levels. It is DIY through and through and excellent value for the DIYer with techo skills.

This is how I cut my teeth.....however when I decided to do other peoples displays I thought it was prudent and respectful of their investment(at what ever level they have purchased) to buy quality equipment that can be trusted, that is the catch I supose. The i1pro is Nist traceable and should be itself be calibrated at the factory once a year. It is the most afforable quality radiospectrometer, others are far to expensive for the majority.

The main problem with the filter based meters is they age with time(and light use) and drift over time, essentially fading. So replacement is required if you were to be using them in the field, the i1s cost to recalibrate. So there you go.

In a DIY sense keeping everything real and cost effective is the game, in the pro sense it always costs to be up to spec.

Software is a little more difficult than probes to choose because the price varies between nothing and several thousand dollars.

I don't get paid by SpectraCal because I use a pro version of CalMAN, however after looking at a few packages myself before starting with CalMAN(then it was v2),I would say the CalMAN v3 is cost effective even compared to the Free HCFR.
If you understand calibration and try HCFR you might get what you need.
If you don't understand calibration CalMAN is better as the help contained within the programme and from the forum helps so much better it offsets the cost in time wasted searching for answers with HCFR.

The pro version is really still in advanced beta development, I might add it contains features which others struggle to do. Some of these features will be brought back into the consumer version once they have been debugged and tested in the field.
For the home user the pro version is not cost effective.

I have found some minor different measurements comparing HCFR to CalMAN. I trust CalMAN, because I compare the results. The differences are minor in some areas, however I am particular about what I do especially when doing someones elses display and CalMAN commands a greater overview ofwhat is going on.

Regards

[mechman]

Ahmed,

I have the i1pro and CalMAN. It took me a short bit to get it running right (driver issue for the i1pro) but now everything seems to be working wonderfully. I highly recommend reading Smokey's write up on CalMAN before using it. It gives you a bit of insight into what it can actually do for you.

Now I just need time to mess with it!! I never seem to have enough time....

[Blaser]

Thanks you Mech! Happy to see your around

[lcaillo]

<^..^>Smokey Joe wrote:

If you want to use HCFR, build the matching probe. I have and it is quite fast and reports to low stimulas levels. It is DIY through and through and excellent value for the DIYer with techo skills.

How did the probe you built compare to the I1? Does it report the same color values in adequate light levels?

[<^..^>Smokey Joe]

The TOAS RGB sensor is better down at low light levels at reporting information, by all accounts many times faster than other filter based meters.

The major main issue with the DIY probe is a calibration file. Typically they run a i1pro as a reference against a display type and create a cal profile for the display type. When I got my i1pro I checked the results and found a fair push towards blue. Red and green were pretty good.

The other issue is IR noise. I had issues with heaters and temperature of items, glowing with heat.
The TOAS sensor website actually suggests IR filters. I was about to get some about the time I got the i1pro, I havent actually used those DIY probes since except for a quick comparison.

Overall the TOAS sensor is possibly arguably better than alot of the filter based probes, with both those issues addressed. I would of liked to try the TOAS sensor with CalMAN, however there is an association issue with HCFR for them too do that, dispite the sensor being made by the DLP creators.

Actually the DIY probe has a built in IR sender for auto advancing DVD players. neat feature.

Like I said earlier though what I saw with my eyes was a better result with CalMAN and the i1pro.

For the pure DIY user who can't help themselves, does everything DIY, HCFR software and probe is a fun approach.
For the part timer calibrator who wants some improvement up a level from DVD's, HCFR and a bought probe that works with that software is a cost effective approach.

For the part timer calibrator who wants a cost effective package that has help towards an accurate result get CalMANv3. The i1pro is the best all rounder probe dispite the low light handling issues alot discuss. A standard filter based probe will work, although best to check with the Spectracal guys for which one to get to suit your display type.

[Blaser]

I am going to pull the trigger on the Xrite Display LT colorimeter. That's the best I can afford right now. It shouldn't be too bad

[jagman]

I got an Xrite Display LT earlier in the week. I burned the free rec 709 BD and HD-DVD calibration images from AVS to a couple DVD-RWs and used ColorHCFR to calibrate earlier today. Wow. What a difference. My front PJ looks night and day better than what I got from DVE. I'm very happy with the results. It cost $150 and I can re-calibrate every couple hundred hours of use as the color temperature of the bulb changes.

[Blaser]

I think that will be my choice as well...very soon