Spyder3 owner wondering if Spyder4 enough better to justify purchasel

[l_d_allan]

Sorry if this has been asked before. The first 3 pages of "search hits" didn't seem to apply.

I own a Spyder3 for monitor calibration, and am generally happy with it.

I have what I consider to be a mid-level Dell 2410 monitor with Adobe98 gamut for Photoshop edits. I'm a hobby'ist rather than a professional photographer. I want the monitor color to be very good for WYSIWYG to make color managed A3+ prints, but the spectro device doesn't have to be excellent enough for Pantone matching.

My less-than-informed understandings follow, and I would appreciate someone "correcting the error of my ways":

* the Spyder4 may be faster than the Spyder3. (which to me is a "who cares" as I find something else to do)

* the Spyder4 may work better with newer, higher-end monitors, perhaps those with a 30-bit workflow (which I'm pretty sure doesn't applies to me)

* There is a decent sale on the Spyder4, but my speculation is this means that a Spyder5 may be announced soon.

* Are there other pro's and con's that I'm not aware of?

 

[Sailor Blue]

Let's just say that I haven't upgraded from my Spyder3 to a Spyder4 since I can't see any compelling reason.

 

[Experte]

I don’t there´s so much to choose between spyder 3 and 4 concerning the hardware. The only difference is the ambient light sensor in Spyder 4.

http://spyder.datacolor.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Spyder3_4_comparison.pdf

To get most of the calibration I recommended to use DispcalGUI + ArgyllCMS instead of the pretty basic Spyder software. You get far more accurate result. Of course you must know the basics of display calibration to use it effectively.

 

[l_d_allan]

I don’t there´s so much to choose between spyder 3 and 4 concerning the hardware. The only difference is the ambient light sensor in Spyder 4.

Thanks for the input.

Actually, it appears that for the same "Level", the Spyder3 and Spyder4 will have "ambient light sensor" or won't have "ambient light sensor". Express 3&4 don't, Pro 3&4 do, Elite 3&4 do.

To get most of the calibration I recommended to use DispcalGUI + ArgyllCMS instead of the pretty basic Spyder software. You get far more accurate result. Of course you must know the basics of display calibration to use it effectively.

I'll look into how to do that. I've used ArgyllCMS command line utilities to make unrestricted custom printer profiles, but not monitor profiles.

 

[The Name is Bond]

I believe that the new xrite and spyder 4 have the virtue of not using colour filters that fade with time. Supposedly the older devices only have about 1 to 2 years of life in them and are then practically useless, or have to be recalibrated if that's possible.

It's also the case that if your monitor has a programmable LUT (look up table) that some of them will only work with one device rather than another. For instance, a recent Dell will only accept programming from the x-rite. The advantage to programmable LUTs is two fold, a) that you aren't subject to the vagaries of software colour management (and profiles being transparently unloaded, which you may not notice and which is a problem for windows users) and b)less banding. However, with my midrange Dell I get almost no banding with software colour management anyway, so that benefit is probably more for pros.

 

[l_d_allan]

The Name is Bond wrote:
I believe that the new xrite and spyder 4 have the virtue of not using colour filters that fade with time. Supposedly the older devices only have about 1 to 2 years of life in them and are then practically useless, or have to be recalibrated if that's possible.

That would greatly surprise me, especially for the X-Rite ... but what do I know?

It's also the case that if your monitor has a programmable LUT (look up table) that some of them will only work with one device rather than another. For instance, a recent Dell will only accept programming from the x-rite. The advantage to programmable LUTs is two fold, a) that you aren't subject to the vagaries of software colour management (and profiles being transparently unloaded, which you may not notice and which is a problem for windows users) and b)less banding. However, with my midrange Dell I get almost no banding with software colour management anyway, so that benefit is probably more for pros.

For me, that doesn't apply.

 

[Ken Seals]

I have the same hardware as you. I'm very happy with the Spyder 3. I do think it's important and helpful to use the Spyder 3 Elite software. It allows you to specify a brightness level of the monitor. At an early point in the calibration process, the software presents you with the specified brightness point and the actual monitor brightness point. You then adjust the monitor brightness manually to bring it to the desired level as shown in the software.