Hi,

over the last weekend I rented a 3day Lightspace License to calibrate my EIZO CG279X with a full 21^ LUT instead of relying on the 1D+3x3Matrix that Color Navigator uses. I used a i1D3, for both Lightspace and Colornavigator calibration attempts. In short I found the results I got with color navigator better than those with the full 21^ Lut that takes nearly a whole day to characterise, specially with grayscale balance and rgb distribution, not to say that Delta-E were also better in the CN calibration.

Here's a dropbox link to all the reports and the probe settings I ended up using for the display for all measurements:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/scp16qa73on0ioa/AADXBMRfVU9OIJt8MaYQaFEXa?dl=0


I would appreciate some insight on what I might have done wrong or whatever as this was really disappointing.

I'd like to point out that I also tried calculating the CAL LUT using all 4 different math setting (Peak Chroma,Fit Space,Map Space and Hybrid)Peak Chroma and Hybrid gave the best but similar results.

Thank you in Advance!

That indeed isn't correct...
We have never had a 'poorer' result.
But, there are a couple of initial points to be made based on a quick assessment of your uploads.

First, you say you used a 21^3 profile, but the data shows a 17^3?
(But that should still generate a better end result than colorNavigator.)
You also have not used Drift, which with a long profile is always preferable.
(That is exasperated by the relatively long integration time you have used.)
With Intelligent Integration you would be better using a lower value, so the overall profile is faster, with Intelligent Integration dealing with the darker colours - 0.75 sec. for example.
Also, with Intelligent Integration you would be better using Freq. or Period, as per the User Guides.
(AIO is not ideal, as it is a compromise way to use the i1D3.)

(Were the Colornavigator results using the same probe?)

Any help?

Steve

Hi Steve thanks for the quick reply.

I did several characterisations, I forgot that by the fourth time around I didn't have time to do a 21^ 3 profile and instead opted for a 17^3.
Well I'll have to buy a new 3 day license to test this all out, I'll let you know how it went once I do it.
Thanks for giving me the proper settings to use with the I1D3!

Regarding Drift what should I set as drift compensation color with the i1D3? 85% white as the manual recommends?
Also is the value for intelligent integration appropriate for the i1D3 or should I set a higher/lower value?
For my specific Monitor (EIZO CG279X PFS Phosphor) is, Freq, or Period better?
And Finally should patch order be sequential or Anisometric?

Thanks again!


Yes, the Color navigator results were with the same probe!

Best

Sorry one more question:

The drift number in the display characterisation window. Is that the amount of drift compensation patches that will be displayed throughout the profiling? If so, is 100 enough for a i1D3?

Worth mentioning is that what I did with Color navigator was: I created a custom colorspace based on the rec709 template using LS readings for White, Primary and Secondary Colors, and then had Color navigator calibrate that custom colorspace, that drastically improved the results.

Funny enough, what lightspace measured as D65, CN measured as roughly 6300Kelvin.

Drift is a patch added every 'nn' frames.
https://www.lightillusion.com/profiling_manual.html#patch_sequence
So 100 will add a Drift patch every 100 patches.

And the default value (240) is a good choice.
https://www.lightillusion.com/profiling_manual.html#drift_compensation

Anisometric is always better.
We rarely use Sequential for anything, other than for some 'testing'...

For suggested probe settings see the i1D3 Notes section here.
https://www.lightillusion.com/i1_display_pro.html
Frequency is likely better with most LCD displays.
And Intelligent Integration should be set to be just above the level where the probe readings are reliable and stable, and where it will not extend the overall profiling time too much..
1 nit is a good value for most applications.

Interesting info on the need to use a different colour space for Colornavigator...
But also very interesting that your specific display looks to be extremely volumetrically linear!
Probably one of the best Eizo displays with respect to volumetric colour linearity I have ever seen.
All points are with 1dE of the display's native gamut, as ColourSpace shows.
That really is very good!



But one thing the Colornavigator calibration isn't managing well is the excessive blue cast to the shadow colours...

Steve

Oh - Ted is correct with his reply on LGG.
An additional Extra Delay value should be added, to compensate for the delay between the internal LightSpace patch generator and the patch generator within the Eizo.

https://www.lightillusion.com/profiling_manual.html#extra_delay_settings

Steve

Thanks for much for the support!

Another thing I forgot to mention is that both attemps weren't able to put the blue primary into it's designated place. With LS there's a bigger deviation but even CN had a Delta-e of 1.38.

Thanks again!

No - the display is natively low Gamut in blue.
It cannot be 'in the right place'.
But, as the CN correction is only a 3x3 matrix it doesn't correct it 'correctly' to the correct hue.
LightSpace does.
That is the difference you are seeing.

Steve