Color Calibration: i1 Display PRO vs Spyder 4 Elite

#1

I have this monitor, and even since I got it, I knew I was going to have to have my monitor calibrated. So I did some research and found out about these 2 color meters, and also the Colormunki.

I will be upgrading to a new monitor, like one of the best on Newegg, later. But for now I wanted to buy a color meter to get my monitor as true to true color as I can.

The work I’ll be doing is professional and is mainly video editing, 3d modeling / animation, website design.

So with the video editing and website design I need ACCURATE color. I’m just not sure which is the best. I’ve heard that the Spyder4 software is better to use and such but I want which will get me closest to true color. So does anyone know which is more accurate on the actual color display?

I really need to get my color, brightness, etc, under control before I make these templates. Being a professional I need to know that what I release is based on a true workstation.

I mean what does Pixar, Disney, etc, use? I’m sure their not worried about color because?

Thanks!

#2

There’s no such thing as “ACCURATE” color, there are various color spaces and you try to get as close to those as possible depending on your workflow and the final medium of the work (Rec. 709, xvYCC, sRGB, Adobe RGB, etc.).

That requires a few things, a monitor that can display the required color space or greater (ideally 10-bits per channel, at least 8-bits per channel), a colorimeter to gauge how the monitor reproduces colors, and software on the machine to shift the output based on the calibration data for the monitor.

A few places I’ve been use this software (equalEyes and cineProfiler) to manage the color reproduction on the compositing workstations and it works with a wide selection of colorimeters and operating systems.

http://www.thx.com/professional/thx-technology-professional/thx-color-science/cinespace/

Based on the monitor you’re using now there’s not much point in calibrating the color beyond the basic adjustments in the video card settings. It’s a TN type panel which inherently has poor color consistency (looks different from every angle), doesn’t say anything in the specifications about color spaces so it probably doesn’t even cover all of sRGB, and it’s likely 6-bits per channel internal like most cheap TN monitors so any calibration would cause noticeable banding. That’s probably not the answer you were looking for but hopefully it’s helpful information going forward.

#3

This monitor would be a better choice if the it’s in the budget. Or maybe for the next monitor you get.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236119

It doesn’t have a cheap 6-bits per channel TN panel but a 10-bits per channel IPS panel which is much better suited for a color sensitive workflow (looks the same from all angles, won’t introduce banding if calibrated, covers all of sRGB and then some).

#4

I don’t like the design, doesn’t have too great of reviews, and I really wanted something that’s 120Hz.

But the one you linked me has 1.07 billion display colors and the rest are 16.7 million, I guess this is the main reason why you linked the one you did? The main reason why it’s better with color?

I guess I can’t find anything great with color that’s 120Hz?

#5

You don’t need colour calibration for video editing for webcasting or webdesign.
Colour precision has some relevance when the display target is reliably consistent, IE: Film projection, print and so on.

Targeting the web you have 0 control over how your content is displayed, and there’d be no point in buying a 10bit display since your audience doesn’t have one anyway.

Go buy whatever 8bit 120hz gaming monitor you want to buy, you will be fine.

#6

I understand that what I see on my monitor may not be how my audience sees it. But me and my company are all about being professional and having top notch quality. So I need and want to know that what I release is accurate in color, so that I know I’m doing my part and if their having issues, it’s not me, it’s them.

 I designed this template for this woman and she kept saying that some text image was too dark, and it was perfectly good for me and my friend. But as my monitor was only $100, and it's never been calibrated, I can't tell her for sure that it's all her. I ended up changing it for her anyways.
 
 But I'm getting into some really real professional stuff and I just have to have accurate color, it's a huge part in my tv / film production (color correction), website design, texturing, etc.. This work I'm doing isn't just for fun or on the side, its literally for my [b][u]career[/u][/b]. This is the most [b][u]important [/u][/b]thing in my life.
 
 If I can get a monitor or color meter that will really help and will help me be more accurate, I'll do it. I found out what companies like Pixar, Disney, etc, use for color calibration. And I plan on buying that in the future, but my point is they do it. Why? To know what their producing is as accurate as possible and any color or display issues isn't their fault, but the consumers. This is what I need and want also.
#7

No, you don’t quite understand.
Colour can’t be “accurate” in absolute terms. Colour can be accurate to an output that has a controlled space, such as film, which is why we calibrate our monitors (and other things).

Your audience has no controlled space whatsoever being home users on screens and TVs. You cannot calibrate for that in a similar fashion to how you do for film and print. You simply can’t.
If you want to make sure your audience sees your imagery at their best, buy a shitty monitor like they use and make sure it looks best on that, and then do the same on an ipad and so on.

You calibrate to a specific colour space, your broadcasting medium doesn’t have one. You CANNOT calibrate is what I’m saying.

Now film is another thing, but at what point will you go out on standard projectors that you have to worry about it?

You sound like you bought into some hype without quite understanding the subject (which is no fault, colour spaces are an obscure pain in the arse even to people doing it for a living), and now are dead set on doing something utterly useless.

Buy the VES handbook and start reading the colour sections first.

#8

I know you can’t get color ‘perfect’ nor ‘accurate’ since everyone’s image will be difference depending on what their using and the specs of it. I’m trying to be ‘more accurate’, as accurate, as I can be. So that I know my work is the best as possible, if there are issues color wise, it’s them, not me.

If I rack my brightness all the way up, like when I got the monitor, and created something, the whole color design would be corrupt and crap since I designed the colors based off my inaccurate color, brightness, contrast settings.

I've seen people use these tools and I've seen huge differences where they had green tints and all kinds of stuff. I know my display could be much more 'accurate' and 'correct' with a new monitor and one of these tools. I just don't know which one.

I know color can’t be perfect in any real sense, sadly. We can only get close to what we believe is perfect color. And I believe one of these tools (designed for this task) are quite better then my untrained eyes.

#9

Given your stated purpose those things don’t matter. Reviews seem good to me, four star average based on 100+ reviews. There are lots of other monitors out there that get into the thousands of dollars if you think this one is no good.

That’s the difference between 8-bits per channel and 10-bits per channel. More bits means less chance of banding when calibrated and better color precision.

I respectfully disagree. If you know the target color space of the audience you should work in that color space when possible. Most of the audience will have displays roughly sRGB if we’re talking about websites, maybe not exact but the average will be close to sRGB. The closer to the target color space you can get when creating the content the better it will look for most of the audience.

For example if the monitors are set way too bright and contrasty when creating the content, it will look dark and dull for most of the audience. Like you said, you can’t control how the audience views the content but if you’re closer to the ideal from the start it will look better for most of the audience which is better than nothing. The 30-bit Asus monitor might be overkill but the $100 Acer monitor with the TN panel is terrible with or without calibration.

#10

So no good color monitors like the other one that’s 120Hz?

#11

As far as I know there are no 120Hz refresh rate monitors with 30-bit color. I would consider the refresh rate pretty far down on the list of priorities for a monitor.

#12

So I want a monitor that has:

12 bit color processing
IPS display
1.07 billion colors
1920x1080 + resolution

These are the main needs for a great color monitor for my needs? Anything else I should add?

What about LED Backlight? I dont want that, right?

And you said 30-bit color? The ASUS you linked before is only 12 bit ?? Why you say 30?

#13

Red, green, blue, 10-bits per channel = 30-bit. Not sure if the LED lighting makes a difference, like the refresh rate it would not be high on my list of priorities for a monitor considering all other things. Asus calls it 12-bit because the internal circuitry uses 12-bits per channel but the incoming signal and panel are 10-bits per channel or 30-bit which is what matters.

#14

If you want a recommondation, you can take a look at the NEC PA241W. It comes with a pretty solid internal calibration and it recalibrates automatically over time, which leaves you worry free. I checked mine with Quatos iColor Display and a DTP-94 over the last year and it gives pretty good results.

Like olson said, there is no point in getting a cheap monitor which “enhances” colors, sharpness and contrast for gaming and movies, but it would be also overkill to spend a lot of money if all you do is websites, because your audience will have cheap monitors.
I’d recommend to get a decent pro monitor (i.e. NEC, Eizo, Quato…) and fiddle with the color controls as less as you can. This will give you a good starting point and most monitors will be more than enough for your needs. A good rule of thumb would be to look for a monitor which can display a wide range of sRGB, the possibility to set the Kelvin-Temperature and the brightness per cd/m².

You don’t need a colorimeter if you don’t work in a controlled color environment (i.e. printing office) where everything from image input (scanner) to image output (printing press) needs to be calibrated to the same color targets or if you don’t work in an environment where the same work is done on different workstations. If you do, your company should buy the same or similar monitor for each workstation and they should be calibrated regularly to keep them consistent.

#15

The websites, after their made won’t be doing anymore. But the main thing is video editing, rendering, etc.

The NEC I saw was like $800. :confused:

Just hard to decide what to do… I’m going to be building a 5k PC and I just really need it as good as possible with color and just everything really. But the main focus of the company is the video editing after the websites are made.

#16

5k PC :eek:

Well then I would consider the money for the monitor well spent if you cut down on everything else and spend the saved money for the NEC, for example.

#17

Well, I’m not going to be buying the PC until the end of the year, so… I can wait till then and hope that a good colored monitor comes out thats 120Hz, response time, etc.

I’ma do more research, thanks.

#18

This website is usually pretty good, though I’ve not calibrated my monitors yet.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/monitor-calibration.htm

#19

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.