4/2/2023 0 Comments Colormunki displaycal![]() You would be far better served by a new/current colorimeter because the DTP94 is now so old that even with a correction table, the filters inside the device were made specifically for the type of screens & backlights that were around a long time ago (in PC terms, 5 years is about the equivalent of 15-20 years because everything advances so quickly). Regarding the ‘correction feature’, just about every current app has the same sort of correction table for slightly older colorimeters. ![]() In that time the colour filters would have become somewhat more opaque & the circuits & technology for the sensors is so much older & further behind what is available today. Even if it were brand-new & purchased today, it would still be a well over 5 year old design & manufactured probably near 4+ years ago. I’d be extremely surprised if it were even possible to purchase a current profiling app which claimed it did not support the Apple screen. Although it says it supports your Apple screen, most any profiling app will support it. The Quato app is a fine profiling application, but is (obviously) made specifically for Quato screens & the options their screens support. And most devices will have some sort of profiling app in the box anyway, it is quite rare to purchase just the colorimeter these days. As far as SW is concerned, a very decent app which is free is dispcalGUI, which is a GUI for Argyll. If you’re trying to save a bit of money, you’d be much better off if you purchase a new colorimeter rather than new software. Can anyone shed any light on why I’m seeing such a difference? Also, which of the two is more accurate for my monitor? I have the DTP94 for 6 years now, and the Colormunki for 3 years. Obviously, the two devices use different technology (colorimeter vs spectrophotometer), but I was expecting at least the color temperature readings to be close to one another. For cross-validation results, the white patch is a close second due to the white balance shift. The maximum values are always for a blue cast on the black patch - the biggest weakness of this monitor. Conversely, validating the Colormunki 5700K profile with itself gives 0.7 (max 2.1) dE and using the DTP94 I get 1.6 (max 2.9) dE. ![]() When I validate the DTP94 6000K profile with the DTP94 I get an average error of 0.7 (max 2.7) dE, and 1.4 (max 2.8) dE when the Colormunki is used. I get a pretty close match when I select 6000K (DTP94) versus 5700K (Colormunki). I find that the Colormunki gives noticeably cooler results than the DTP94, for the same target color temperature. The software supports both my X-Rite DTP94 (Monaco Optix XR) and Colormunki Photo, so I can use both to calibrate/profile with the same target settings. I have encountered a subtle issue when calibrating my Eizo CG21 with ColorNavigator. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |