bronxbombers
Forum Pro
Well it wasn't a lot better (And without having a $30,000 reference I can't be sure it even was a little better, but it can say that it swung a touch closer to the i1 display pro readings and to the factory readins os that makes me think it did do a touch better. My i1D2 is over year old now, I thought it was even closer to the i1 pro last year when for sRGB primaries and WP I believe most values were .000-.001 apart with two above that, I believe one differed by .002 and one by .003, but six of the eight values were the same or only .001 apart then, so really pretty close). Even know it's not like any radical disagreement between them. Also for NEC PA series with SV you don't need to do any dark measurements, so I wasn't comparing dark value accuracy, just bright white point and primaries, if we were to compare dark values on teh set then perhaps the story would change).The i1 Display Pro should handily beat the i1Pro in any measurement criteria: white, dark, colors, etc. I'm somewhat surprised that you find the i1Pro superior to NEC's i1D2, but we have seen enough OEM-tuned lemons that it is not impossible.It seems like a stock off the shelf $250 i1 Display Pro does better than the $900 i1 Pro which itself does better than the $200 custom NEC i1D2 when used in SV II software on a NEC PA wide gamut monitor.
Good point, with most monitors, you won't have the facny 14 bit 3D LUT and extreme linearity so dark value measurements WILL matter and that might overcome any panel to probe tuning differences.The i1 Display Pro comes pre-loaded with correction matrices for all normal monitor types. Choosing the correct one is critical. For a given monitor technology, e.g. wide-gamut CCFL LCD or standard gamut W-LED, there is not a huge range of variability in the spectral nature of the backlight between different panels. We did not measure statistically significant differences in either absolute accuracy or variability between units depending on the brand or version of monitor for a particular technology. Also, there aren't that many manufacturers of the panels themselves, no matter whose name appears on the front. A nice feature of both the i1D3 and Discus is that because they are individually spectrally calibrated, if and when a new display technology arrives, it only requires using a new set of correction matrices to get accurate values.Whether it will do better than the i1pro on other monitors types I don't know yet. Apparently xrite tuned their wide gamut performance to the exact monitor I have, so perhaps when used on more random monitors and different technology the i1 pro would pull ahead again? I don't know yet.
It is certainly possible that a manufacturer's custom branded and tuned i1 Display Pro version may utilize correction values more precisely suited to a given monitor. As for the i1Pro, its inherent lack of sensitivity for darker values and overall lower accuracy make it unlikely to pull ahead.
The ones mentioned, an i1 Pro from x-rite, an i1 Display Pro from x-rite and an i1 D2 custom from NEC. I also tried a couple DTP94b again for kicks (one from spectracal). As I knew they read the WP way wrong with SV II since that applies no compensation matrix for them. They read the blue and even red primary not much differently from the others, it was the green primary and wp were they got much different readings, also they read a lower luminance for the WP than the other probes, especially the one copy.After characterizing 13 i1D3 pucks on over a dozen monitors, I'd say you are right on the money. BTW, what are the three probes?Again take it all with a grain of salt, only tried it on one monitor with three probes, not enough sample sizes there, but taking educated guesses that is what I say for now.
But yeah, as your report stated, the i1 Display Pro does appear to be quite amazing and add in it's relatively low price and I mean wow. I'm glad you did the tests otherwise I might have never bothered giving it a look.