madVR 10-bit Display Support Test

[Arm3nian]

450 cd/m^2 :eek:

That is very bright. This is why your contrast is so low, with the brightness that high your black level is very high. Try 160-220 cd/m^2. I use ~140 cd/m^2. :o

Or it could be backlight bleed? That can change the black level a lot.

a dark room calibrated screen should have a brightness of 100-120 CM². people should look like plastic with such a high brightness.

Black level goes up when you increase the brightness, but so does the white level, so the ratio stays constant. For my display, it's fairly uniform, according to my tests and this (http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/viewsonic_vp2780-4k.htm)

My display has some backlight bleed, as almost all IPS displays do, but it's on the edges and corners. The spyder is measuring in the center of the display, and I can't see any major bright spots in that location.

I tried different brightness/white level settings. Same results:

http://i.imgur.com/hlAAkZh.png

http://i.imgur.com/O6tTJH4.png

Regarding colorimeter, the spyder is known to read black level incorrectly, you can easily compare same monitor review using spyder vs i1d3/i1pro2.

The TFT review uses the i1 display pro and results are completely different:

http://i.imgur.com/BSdgIP0.png

[Arm3nian]

I noticed the TFT review luminance values are different than what I measured. They say 100 brightness level on their unit is about 411 cd/m2. But to get around 411 cd/m2 on mine I have to lower brightness to 87. I don't think the spyder is inaccurate in measuring white level because the calibration reports that came with the display also show the display reaching 450 cd/m2.

Here is the measurement to compare:

http://i.imgur.com/mnmb5us.png

Big difference in black point and CR. Maybe something internal is set too high and the black level can't keep up with the white level?

[Asmodian]

It is usual to have very different brightness between individual units. With four identical monitors I had to set each one to a different brightness to hit 120 cd/m^2 on all of them.

Do not use what TFTCentral set if you have your own meter, tweak the settings while measuring with the meter. It does sound like your black level is much too high, 0.65 is well above the ~0.3 cd/m^2 I would expect. Try moving the meter around on the screen a bit, I have seen displays with patches of very high black level. This would tell you what was wrong with the display but not help you solve it.

[Arm3nian]

My specific unit is 100 cd/m2 above what the manufacturer claims, seems a bit odd. I would have expected to LED backlight to be dead by now.

Do you think the spyder 4 is reporting accurate black levels? As huhn said, It would be unlikely that a popular unit like the spyder 4 couldn't report an accurate value on a fundamental measurement. I noticed in dispcal you can adjust black level. My first time through the calibration I had it on "as measured", so obviously the calibration didn't improve the contrast ratio. Would setting it to a specific value make any difference? The default target when you enable the control is 0.0001 cd/m2, which is insane. Maybe I should use the TFT review as a reference and try .12 cd/m2 black level at 120 cd/m2 white level.

[XMonarchY]

My specific unit is 100 cd/m2 above what the manufacturer claims, seems a bit odd. I would have expected to LED backlight to be dead by now.

Do you think the spyder 4 is reporting accurate black levels? As huhn said, It would be unlikely that a popular unit like the spyder 4 couldn't report an accurate value on a fundamental measurement. I noticed in dispcal you can adjust black level. My first time through the calibration I had it on "as measured", so obviously the calibration didn't improve the contrast ratio. Would setting it to a specific value make any difference? The default target when you enable the control is 0.0001 cd/m2, which is insane. Maybe I should use the TFT review as a reference and try .12 cd/m2 black level at 120 cd/m2 white level.

A lot of seriously crappy things are popular - that doesn't make them good for what they should be doing. One way or another - ColorMunki Display is the absolute minimum for decent accuracy.

[Arm3nian]

A lot of seriously crappy things are popular - that doesn't make them good for what they should be doing. One way or another - ColorMunki Display is the absolute minimum for decent accuracy.

They're all the same gimmicky crap that hide in the shadow of professional equipment. There is no magic going on here, look at the electronics inside...

You might a get a little better accuracy in reference to something much better going from one brand to another and generation to generation, but all of them should be able to give you similar results. The main thing that changes is the bundled software and they are all awful, which is why everyone uses 3rd party applications.

[Asmodian]

Do you think the spyder 4 is reporting accurate black levels? As huhn said, It would be unlikely that a popular unit like the spyder 4 couldn't report an accurate value on a fundamental measurement. I noticed in dispcal you can adjust black level. My first time through the calibration I had it on "as measured", so obviously the calibration didn't improve the contrast ratio. Would setting it to a specific value make any difference?

I do not know about the Spyder 4 but 0.6 is very high, do your blacks look gray?

Contrast is simply [white level] / [black level], calibration can only make it worse.

[Arm3nian]

I do not know about the Spyder 4 but 0.6 is very high, do your blacks look gray?

Contrast is simply [white level] / [black level], calibration can only make it worse.

No the blacks look like the blacks on any other IPS monitor. Maybe even better than the P2715q I had before this. Perhaps something is wrong with the argy and spyder combo, as hcfr gives the same results.

I'm currently trying a calibration with adjusted black level, worth a shot I guess. I'm not going to buy another colorimeter and spectrometer as I already have one and the cal files for the spyder 4, it would be a waste of money, especially since the factory calibration doesn't even look that bad.

[nevcairiel]

Colorimeters are often very bad at accurately measuring low-light conditions, so an accurate black level may not be something it can do very well.

[baii]

Colorimeter is supposedly better at low light level :), and pretty much hold true for current products. I1pro1 vs i1d3. I1pro2 can read down there but it is "new gen."

The Spyder read black level wrong, period. Reviews using spyder constantly read 600ish :1 on 1000:1 monitors.

Sent from my SM-T700 using Tapatalk

[Arm3nian]

Colorimeter is supposedly better at low light level

That doesn't make much sense. Lower light levels mean the sensor needs to be more sensitive, and you run into big problems there (sensor quality, adc picking up noise, etc...), especially on low end equipment like consumer grade colorimeters. Black itself is difficult to measure, because it is the absence of light.

The Spyder read black level wrong, period. Reviews using spyder constantly read 600ish :1 on 1000:1 monitors.

Seems like it. I doubt my display actually has a CR of 640:1. I tried calibrating with the spyder software and the contrast decreased to 600:1 :angry:The blacks look pretty good with native settings.

The question is, how much of an impact would incorrect black level measurements have on the calibration as a whole.

[baii]

That doesn't make much sense. Lower light levels mean the sensor needs to be more sensitive, and you run into big problems there (sensor quality, adc picking up noise, etc...), especially on low end equipment like consumer grade colorimeters. Black itself is difficult to measure, because it is the absence of light.



That is compare to a spectro, It have something to do with SNR and temperature on a spectro, at least that is what I read. ofc there are higher end colorimeter and lower end, but low end doesn't mean bad, avs forum people (more like hcfr developer zoyd) have done extensive test on these so you can find info there.

[Arm3nian]

That is compare to a spectro, It have something to do with SNR and temperature on a spectro, at least that is what I read. ofc there are higher end colorimeter and lower end, but low end doesn't mean bad, avs forum people (more like hcfr developer zoyd) have done extensive test on these so you can find info there.

If there isn't any light, then there is nothing to measure. So you can imagine the more light there is, the more accurate your result will be. Kind of like how a camera works. You can have a great general use camera but it will perform better in good lighting vs dark scenes.

A colorimeter has a couple of filters and a photoresistor. A sprectrometer is a completely different beast.

You are right though in saying the black accuracy is not great on the spyder. Looks to be better on other meters. Shame.

[Arm3nian]

Maybe it is my display...

max brightness
http://i.imgur.com/kQn6ukC.jpg

Using my phone camera on a samsung VA tv is a completely dark picture...

[Asmodian]

That looks normal to me, probably 0.2-0.3 cd/m^2; you could tell if it was 0.6, that is a terrible black level. Based on reviews and including the fact that cell phone camera photos are basically impossible to judge. ;)

A bad black point measurement is possible to work around using Argyllcms but we should probably stop this in this thread. :o

[Arm3nian]

I guess we've learned two things. IPS panels can't display black. But it doesn't matter, because the spyder 4 can't read them :p

Back on topic. Using DP 1.2, I can get select 10 bit in NCP. But my display also has a hdmi 2.0 port, and so does my 980 ti. I can select 4k @60Hz but only 8 bpc with hdmi. The bandwidth should be enough. I wonder if this is limited by the specific display or hdmi spec, or maybe even the gpu.

[nevcairiel]

Back on topic. Using DP 1.2, I can get select 10 bit in NCP. But my display also has a hdmi 2.0 port, and so does my 980 ti. I can select 4k @60Hz but only 8 bpc with hdmi. The bandwidth should be enough.

HDMI 2.0 is limited to 8-bit when transmitting 4K, 60Hz, RGB.

Have a chart:
http://www.avsforum.com/photopost/data/2351937/9/97/97b5932c_HDMI2-Bandwidth.jpeg
(Nevermind the last entry)

Interestingly, one TV vendor (Panasonic) actually put a DisplayPort on their latest TV series. I hope that catches on and more do it!

[XMonarchY]

They're all the same gimmicky crap that hide in the shadow of professional equipment. There is no magic going on here, look at the electronics inside...

You might a get a little better accuracy in reference to something much better going from one brand to another and generation to generation, but all of them should be able to give you similar results. The main thing that changes is the bundled software and they are all awful, which is why everyone uses 3rd party applications.

No, i1Display Pro (also known as i1D3) has changed the whole "gimmicky crap" picture when it came out. Previous i1D1 and i1D2 colorimeters used different plastic-based technology and did not provide very accurate readings. However, i1D3 changed that drastically. It has been tested against $7000 Klein K-10 professional colorimeter on several displays and its readings were extremely close (within dE 0.6 or so). ColorMunki Display uses the same exact hardware i1Display Pro, but it lacks certain features, like software support, speed, ambient diffusion cap, and some other things.

[XMonarchY]

Colorimeters are often very bad at accurately measuring low-light conditions, so an accurate black level may not be something it can do very well.

No, colorimeters are much better at reading low-light levels than spectrometers, including i1Pro, ColorMunki Photo, and i1Pro 2. That is WHY it is advised to use spectro-profiled colorimeter to get accurate readings instead of just using spectrometer by itself.

[nevcairiel]

I have an i1Display Pro, and it seemed to always produce accurate values, at least judging with my eyes and what made logically sense. Like any meter it has issues with absolute black, but otherwise it seemed fine. Much better than the Spyder I had before.
Of course I never compared it to a proper "professional" device, as those things are just way too expensive.

[XMonarchY]

I have an i1Display Pro, and it seemed to always produce accurate values, at least judging with my eyes and what made logically sense. Like any meter it has issues with absolute black, but otherwise it seemed fine. Much better than the Spyder I had before.
Of course I never compared it to a proper "professional" device, as those things are just way too expensive.

AFAIK, i1Display Pro is good enough to calibrate very high-end plasma TV's with very low light levels.

[Arm3nian]

colorimeters are much better at reading low-light levels than spectrometers
Source?

[Asmodian]

Source?

It is well known. e.g. The i1Pro has worse low light performance than the i1 Display Pro. It is best to have both a colorimeter and a spectrometer, you can use the spectrometer to calibrate the colorimeter on the display and then use the colorimeter to run the calibration.

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/i1_pro.htm

One of the Cons: "More limited at the low luminance end than many colorimeters"

[Arm3nian]

Yeah it does seem colorimeters can read lower light levels. Even something like this (http://www.jeti.com/cms/index.php/instruments-55/radiometer/specbos/specbos-1211/40-products/radiometer/90-specbos-1211-uv) only goes down to .1 cd/m^2.

Damn I wish I had gotten an i1 instead of this crap spyder. I would even be ashamed to sell it on ebay based on its performance. I'd basically be lying to try and fund another device. I'll give it one more shot and if it doesn't work I'll just throw it out the window and order an i1.

[Arm3nian]

I sent their CS an email saying their product doesn't perform well at all. Maybe they'll send me a spyder 5 or something. Idk how I'm supposed to perform a calibration with a meter that can't see black or anything near it...

[baii]

I believe calibration work fine just that the reported number is disturbing? Though I haven't really seen any test/source that say either ways.

Sent from my 306SH

[Asmodian]

I believe calibration work fine just that the reported number is disturbing? Though I haven't really seen any test/source that say either ways.

Sent from my 306SH

If you are using BT.1886 (which I would recommended for a 1000:1 IPS) the gamma will be bad. :(

However, you can force the black point which should help a lot. The meter will be able to read close to black fine; luminance goes up very quickly as you move away from black.

[Arm3nian]

I already tried forcing black level, and it made no difference. I think it made it worse, because it skews the curves dramatically to try to reach the value, but it never can, because the meter always reads high...
Black point doesn't do anything either.

[nevcairiel]

When I calibrated with my Spyder back in the day I just discarded the values for the black, and that gave somewhat usable calibrations. Was not that big of a deal.

[chros]

Is there a step-by-step tutorial to calibrate my LCD TV (IPS panel) for madVR (using the above mentioned i1 Display Pro, ColorMunki Display)? I'm completely stupid about this topic.
Thanks

[nevcairiel]

This might get you started: http://www.avsforum.com/forum/139-display-calibration/1471169-madvr-argyllcms.html

[XMonarchY]

Spyder 1 is horrible... I once used it to calibrate plain old CCFL LCD color gamut and very low dE reading made red look orange. It may not be the case with all displays and Spyder 5 MAY be as good as i1Display Pro, but why go with MAYBE instead of what is known to be accurate, such as i1Display Pro or at least ColorMunki Display?

[Arm3nian]

Look at this response I got back:
thank you for your message. The contrast ratio can be based on different measurements, there is no standard and the manufacturers tech specifications are not a reference. In addition to that, such a measurement need to be done in a dark room with no reflections from walls etc. But to make long story short, please keep in mind that a photography workflow needs a contrast range that is much (very much) smaller than the capabilities of such a display. Switch off the light in your room and calibrate the monitor. That's all you need and it will deliver an accurate calibration result, as long as your operating system doesn't contain any other color adjusting tool.

CR is derived from White level / black level... that's how everyone in the industry does it. This guy basically said that the static contrast ratio spec a manufacturer provides is meaningless.

Then he claims the SI unit for luminance is not a reference...

Then his hypocrisy comes out when he says CR doesn't matter. What does that even have to do with the fact the spyder 4 can't read black levels. It doesn't mean the display's CR automatically goes down because a flawed piece of hardware can't do its job.

This company is an absolute joke.

[XMonarchY]

Look at this response I got back:


CR is derived from White level / black level... that's how everyone in the industry does it. This guy basically said that the static contrast ratio spec a manufacturer provides is meaningless.

Then he claims the SI unit for luminance is not a reference...

Then his hypocrisy comes out when he says CR doesn't matter. What does that even have to do with the fact the spyder 4 can't read black levels. It doesn't mean the display's CR automatically goes down because a flawed piece of hardware can't do its job.

This company is an absolute joke.


There IS a chance that its just a bad monitor unit. Does it also measure 600:1 CR before any kind of calibration? Use the most default settings with all auto-brightness, power-savings, and whatever crap modes there are. It is true that IPS monitors have very high black levels and even Spyder 4 SHOULD be able to read such high levels...

[Arm3nian]

There IS a chance that its just a bad monitor unit. Does it also measure 600:1 CR before any kind of calibration? Use the most default settings with all auto-brightness, power-savings, and whatever crap modes there are. It is true that IPS monitors have very high black levels and even Spyder 4 SHOULD be able to read such high levels...

I really doubt it's my monitor. But I guess the only way to find out is to buy an i1. I guess it's worth it if spending $700+ on a monitor to begin with right?

[XMonarchY]

I really doubt it's my monitor. But I guess the only way to find out is to buy an i1. I guess it's worth it if spending $700+ on a monitor to begin with right?

It is worth spending money on it. Period. You can use it on your current monitor, TV, projector, and future displays. Its a one-time buy and enjoy for a looong time without the need to update.

I would also advise profiling it with i1Pro if you can get your hands on it. If not, I strongly advice on rent ColorMunki Photo, which is just as accurate as i1Pro. You can rent it for 2-3 days for $40 + $20 shipping
from here - https://www.lensrentals.com/rent/calibration/colormunki . You only need 1 minute to profile i1Display Pro with ColorMunki Photo. As it was explained, spectrometers like i1Pro and ColorMunki Photo are more accurate than colorimeters like i1Display Pro because they read the actual light, while colorimeters have profiles/tables/presets that are based on display type, BUT these profiles are not always accurate for the exact display a person may have. When you profile your colorimeter with a spectrometer on your own display, you create a profile that is specific to your display and colorimeter. That way you will get awesome accuracy.

[ryrynz]

It is worth spending money on it.

Better off just buying it second hand or new, using it and then reselling it.. You'd lose less.

[Arm3nian]

I haven't tried a full on 4+ hour calibration yet, just quick ones for testing. I still think I can get a decent result if I leave the things related to black level alone. Obviously the spyder 4 is useless if trying to aim for a certain black level setting but I don't really have that requirement. Hard to justify spending $250 on something you technically already have. I wonder how something with a 14bit internal 3D LUT would respond to my specific calibration. Hopefully well.

When I calibrated with my Spyder back in the day I just discarded the values for the black, and that gave somewhat usable calibrations. Was not that big of a deal.

[XMonarchY]

Just to make sure - do have 0-255 (Full) range selected in your graphics card drivers?

[spacediver]

nothing wrong with a used i1 pro.

btw, the reason that colorimeters can read lower luminance levels is because each of the (three) sensors receives light that has been integrated across a relatively wide swath of the spectrum. Also, because you only need three sensors, they can be quite large and sensitive.

Good white paper over here (http://www.lumita.com/site_media/work/whitepapers/files/xrite-wp-3a.pdf).

If you want to read super low light levels, you could always try out this method (http://www.avsforum.com/forum/139-display-calibration/1717442-using-camera-measure-very-low-black-levels-methods-results.html). (I measured my CRT's black level at 0.0006 cd/m^2)

[huhn]

spectrometer/colorimeter getting inaccurate when they age. a i1d3 is the first meter i know that's relatively stable and doesn't age to fast.

but aren't we slowly done with calibration in the 10 bit output thread?

[spacediver]

The old DTP-94 (also known as MonacoOptix XR) is also a very stable colorimeter.

i1 pros (which is both a spectroradiometer and a spectrophotometer) are also very stable over time. If you do end up purchasing a used one, be sure to go for the revision D.

[Arm3nian]

Tried calibrating with a specific black level and CR got worse... 590:1

Is this the one you guys are talking about? (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/798930-REG/X_Rite_EODIS3_i1Display_Pro.html) I might as well just buy since the spyder 4 pro seems to be a useless piece of garbage. Besides the failure to measure black level, the calibration looks like absolute crap.

Is there no successor coming? i1 display pro is 4 years old.

[huhn]

i haven't heard anything from xrite.

but yes that's THE meter.

got quite expensive over the last years.

if i remember correctly i paid 150 euro now it's at 200 euro.

[Arm3nian]

Dispcal says the Colormunki Display is the same thing as i1 display pro, just slower. Probably worth saving $100, but why would it be slower if it's the same hardware...

Knowing my luck, the moment I buy the i1, the updated revision will come out, or the price will magically drop by $50. The problem with waiting is that I only got 15 more days to return my monitor if it's the problem. I would guess they would release something to compete with spyder 5 (probably crap).

[spacediver]

If you're comfortable using HCFR and/or ArgyllCMS, and don't mind the slower speeds that occur at higher luminances with the colormunki display, then you might as well save money and go with that. I believe the colormunki's speeds are intentionally crippled, but not 100% sure. Be aware, however, that the colormunki display will not work with commercial calibration software other than xrite's stuff. This isn't a big deal if you know how to use the free stuff like HCFR and ArgyllCMS.

Some info here (http://www.avsforum.com/forum/139-display-calibration/1845913-colormunki-display-i1-display-pro.html).

btw, just to clarify, the i1 pro is different from the i1 display pro (the former is a spectro, the latter is a colorimeter).

The i1 display pro / colormunki display is an excellent device.

[XMonarchY]

If you have high-refresh rate or light-strobing displays, I strongly advice i1Display Pro instead of ColorMunki Display because ColorMunki Display does not have "Refresh" mode and is not as good at adjusting to refresh rate speeds as i1Display Pro.

i1Display Pro is already very accurate - in many cases just as accurate as $7000 Klein K-10 colorimeter (reference level). Anything X-Rite may release that is even more accurate than i1Display Pro would provide a very VERY marginal benefit over i1Display Pro.

At this point - please PM either me or Spacediver or Asmodian because this thread if for 10-bit madVR discussion and we have off-tangent long enough!

[Arm3nian]

B&H photo said I can return the colorimeter within 30 days if I don't like it, so I just ordered the i1 display pro. We'll find out Friday what the problem is...
Back on topic everyone!:)

[chros]

At this point - please PM either me or Spacediver or Asmodian because this thread if for 10-bit madVR discussion and we have off-tangent long enough!
Can you create a different topic for this? I'm (and probably not just me) interested in it. Thanks

[Arm3nian]

Well since there isn't much 10 bit discussion...

A quick update :D :D :D

http://i.imgur.com/vfcYug5.png

http://i.imgur.com/V8h0S02.png

Spyder 4 took a couple of minutes for that measurement. i1 display pro takes 5 seconds...