| Author |
Message |
WanMan
Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 10270
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2011 6:23 pm Post subject: EyeOne Display 3 vs. PRO (w ChromaPure Standard) |
|
|
Ok, so the wife wants to buy me something that I want. $419 or $569. Is the PRO meter, compared to the standard, as sensitive as my Morlockian eyes?
_________________
Trust no one. Absolutely no one. Advice of the board.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Nashou66
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 16171
Location: West Seneca NY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WanMan
Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 10270
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks, Nash
_________________
Trust no one. Absolutely no one. Advice of the board.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WanMan
Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 10270
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wife ordered the PRO.
_________________
Trust no one. Absolutely no one. Advice of the board.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WTS
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 1276
Location: Calgary
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 2:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The pro may be more accurate to start with but won't it go out of calibration just as fast as the standard version?
_________________
Thanks
Walter
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 2:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| WTS wrote: | | The pro may be more accurate to start with but won't it go out of calibration just as fast as the standard version? |
Both will be prone to drifting over time in the way way.
Something to keep in mind however is that if a meter's more accurate to begin with, it'll take longer before the drift starts to be noticeable.
Kal
_________________
Support our site by using our affiliate links. We thank you!
My basement/HT/bar/brewery build 2.0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WTS
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 1276
Location: Calgary
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I suppose that would depend on what made or makes it drift in the first place wouldn't it?
_________________
Thanks
Walter
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WTS
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 1276
Location: Calgary
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 13, 2011 2:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm still pondering which one to get, the display3 or the I1pro/ chromapure package. Yeah it's 500 bucks more but I like the longivity of the calibration not drifting. If it's only moisture causing drifting over time then it wouldn't be too affected here in Calgary considering how dry it is here. Hmmmm.
_________________
Thanks
Walter
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 13, 2011 2:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I would go with the Display 3 PRO. The i1Pro doesn't read very fast at low light output so it's not your best choice as the "only" meter. The Display 3 reads considerably deeper.
Give this FAQ a read: https://www.curtpalme.com/forum_archived/viewtopic.php@t=11436.html
Put the extra money into recalibrations for the Display 3. The price difference will give you a meter that should give you accurate results for many many years.
With the release of the low priced Display 3 it's become pretty easy to make recommendations on what to get. I tell 99% of people to get the Display 3 Pro. Before the spread used to be more difficult (ie: Go for a lower priced Display 2 or a higher priced Chroma 5?). The Display 3 is considerably better than both at a price lower than the Chroma 5 so it's become a no-brainer.
Kal
_________________
Support our site by using our affiliate links. We thank you!
My basement/HT/bar/brewery build 2.0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ron W
Joined: 07 Aug 2009
Posts: 860
Location: Mississauga
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 13, 2011 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kal wrote: | I would go with the Display 3 PRO. The i1Pro doesn't read very fast at low light output so it's not your best choice as the "only" meter. The Display 3 reads considerably deeper.
Give this FAQ a read: https://www.curtpalme.com/forum_archived/viewtopic.php@t=11436.html
Put the extra money into recalibrations for the Display 3. The price difference will give you a meter that should give you accurate results for many many years.
With the release of the low priced Display 3 it's become pretty easy to make recommendations on what to get. I tell 99% of people to get the Display 3 Pro. Before the spread used to be more difficult (ie: Go for a lower priced Display 2 or a higher priced Chroma 5?). The Display 3 is considerably better than both at a price lower than the Chroma 5 so it's become a no-brainer.
Kal |
Yep, I would fully concur with Kal on this one. I have an Eye Display 2 and just recently purchased the Display 3 Pro. Obviously, with any of this, one never knows until one has something of which to compare. The Display 3 Pro reads considerably quicker and I noticed the Display 2(two years old),was no longer reading REDS as accurately as it should, especially at the lower IRE Grayscale levels, resulting then in a noticeable overshift of REDS in both grayscale and CMS readings. Once the Display 3 Pro was used, this was all corrected with a noticeable improvement in all areas. One thing about the accuracy longevity question is that since the Display3 Pros sensors are sealed and the 2's are not, I am sure that would make a significant difference as well. With the Pro I am also prepared for the future for any other display technology that I ultimately might purchase.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 13, 2011 5:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ron W wrote: | | One thing about the accuracy longevity question is that since the Display3 Pros sensors are sealed and the 2's are not, I am sure that would make a significant difference as well. |
That's a good point. I forgot to mention that. How much it helps is anyone's guess at this point because the meter's so new. There's no data to support how much it drifts over time against (say) a different meter where the filter(s) are not sealed.
The Hubble meter's been around for a while and also has sealed filters and they do indeed degrade less quickly. So the proof is there, just no 'hard evidence' with the Display 3 (yet). I'm pretty sure it does help.
Stick it in a tupperwear container with a desiccant (silica gel) when not in use and it'll keep better.
Something like this device work well and it's reusable: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0025OO8DO/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=curtpalmecrtp-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B0025OO8DO
Just pop it in the oven once it's saturated and you're good to go again.
(Note: The one above does not contain Cobalt Chloride (II) which has been linked as being possibly carcinogenic to humans and been labeled as hazardous material in some countries).
Kal
_________________
Support our site by using our affiliate links. We thank you!
My basement/HT/bar/brewery build 2.0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WTS
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 1276
Location: Calgary
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 13, 2011 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah that's a tough call. I'm not too concerned about speed, if a cal takes 20 mins. longer who cares. I'm looking for a piece of equipment that's going to last me 10/15 years and still be usuable and fairly accurate. I don't like buying throw away equipment. BUt the D3 is quite tempting, but like you say not enough history yet to really know. I think Nash has both of these units doesn't he.
Yes silica gel would be a must for this unit, seal it a pirex container with the clamp lid. I've used silica gel in the past in other applications like drying the sample gases before they enter into a gas chromatograph. Cheap and easy to use/reuse.
_________________
Thanks
Walter
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nashou66
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 16171
Location: West Seneca NY
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 13, 2011 8:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Walt, if you want a device to last 10-15 years and not worry about it then the i1 Pro spectroradiometer would be the better choice and to speed things up get a cheap tri stimulus like the D2 to profile against the i1 Pro.
Many if I get a chance some day I'll do a run of the i1 Pro and then profile all my tri stimulus's to it and re read the greyscale/Gamut to see how far off they all are.
Athanasios
_________________
Don't blame your underwear for your crooked ass~ unknown Greek philosopher
"Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the Democrats believe every day is April 15." --- President Reagan
One Smart Dog!!!
Marquee High Performance Bellows now shipping!!
Marquee Modifications and Performance Enhancement
Marquee C-element and Bellow removal
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WTS
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 1276
Location: Calgary
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 13, 2011 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was thinking maybe get the i1pro and then maybe get a cheap LT, I've seen them for as lilttle $70.
But is a cheap one even really necessary, you would get one because why, just for a little faster readings. It was noted that the low level readings on the i1pro aren't the best or most accurate. BUt if you're using the i1pro to build a calibration table for a cheaper unit like the LT then how does that make the the LT more accurate at the low end. Are you assuming it is linear down to very low levels if calibrated at a higher level.
I also read that the D3 might even be a little more accurate, really, what's the difference between a reading of 0.006 and 0.0008(if the inaccuracies are in that range) in the big scheme of things, can your eyes even perceive that small of a difference, I doubt it.
Correct me if I'm wrong in my thinking here.
_________________
Thanks
Walter
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WanMan
Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 10270
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2011 12:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
About low light level sensitivity ... is this really a big concern with digital? While I clearly see how much better my RS20 is compared to the VW60, neither is what I might consider challenging compared to something like a G90 or 9500.
_________________
Trust no one. Absolutely no one. Advice of the board.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2011 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nashou66 wrote: | Walt, if you want a device to last 10-15 years and not worry about it then the i1 Pro spectroradiometer would be the better choice and to speed things up get a cheap tri stimulus like the D2 to profile against the i1 Pro.
Many if I get a chance some day I'll do a run of the i1 Pro and then profile all my tri stimulus's to it and re read the greyscale/Gamut to see how far off they all are.
Athanasios |
I believe Derek and Tom posted their readings over at AVS on the comparisons.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ron W
Joined: 07 Aug 2009
Posts: 860
Location: Mississauga
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2011 1:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| WTS wrote: | I was thinking maybe get the i1pro and then maybe get a cheap LT, I've seen them for as lilttle $70.
But is a cheap one even really necessary, you would get one because why, just for a little faster readings. It was noted that the low level readings on the i1pro aren't the best or most accurate. BUt if you're using the i1pro to build a calibration table for a cheaper unit like the LT then how does that make the the LT more accurate at the low end. Are you assuming it is linear down to very low levels if calibrated at a higher level.
I also read that the D3 might even be a little more accurate, really, what's the difference between a reading of 0.006 and 0.0008(if the inaccuracies are in that range) in the big scheme of things, can your eyes even perceive that small of a difference, I doubt it.
Correct me if I'm wrong in my thinking here. |
In many respects, when it comes to these differences, your assessment is quite correct here. When you buy the Pro3 version, Tom Huffman sends you a copy of the documentation showing the calibration offsets between the regular Display 3 and the Pro model and when you take a long hard look at it, the differences really are only significant when it comes to LCDs and especially the LED backlit models. Quite frankly, when it comes to plasmas and CRTs, from what I see, the differences are quite small.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WTS
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 1276
Location: Calgary
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2011 3:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
The main use for the probe is going to be for the FRT projector, which ever technology I buy to replace my Zenith 1200pro.
That's the only difference in the D3 standard and Pro model, hmmm hardly worth it (for me) for just those 2 additions. As long as it will do which ever technology I end up with for a projector and my plasma is good enough for me. The LCDs I have don't need the attention.
Spanky do you have the link for that thread. So what units did they compare?
_________________
Thanks
Walter
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2011 4:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I believe it was the i1 Pro vs D3 which one to buy thread. IIRC Derek found a larger difference than Tom. They are both using high end meters, but Derek is using a top of the line Minolta. The consensus in the thread seemed to be the i1 Pro, but I think one would be fine with the profiled C6 or D3 Pro. They both have gotten into arguments over their profiling, but I doubt it is going to be that big of a deal for a FP with a regular bulb.
Personally I think spot on accuracy to the sixth decimal point is overrated. There is to much variance in the program material to be able to know what is correct. I remember twenty years ago driving to the Grand Canyon and thinking how interesting a shade of blue the sky was. If someone saw this on their pj, then they would think the color was incorrect when it actually wasn't.
Since you are talking about a pj (digital), I would caution you on the Epson. I mentioned it at AVS that it is a nice pj. I am just not sure I would want to own this years rLCD Epson. At $2600, I would rather own the RS45 and buy a Lumagen for the CMS (if that is important).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
