But what I don't understand then is this: why does iColor seem to do a better jobcalibrating the neutral axis than argyll?
What do you mean by "better" ? Better looking, or closer to the target ? If the latter, have you measured it ?
Shouldn't this effect be the same no matterwhich software is used to do the calibration?
Not at all. Each package almost certainly sets the calibration targets in different ways, and goes about matching those targets in different ways.
Would there be a way to combine the calibration adjustments done by iColor with the profiling done with argyll? Because just meshing the two together obviously would be the wrong approach, and iColor does of course not produce .cal files.
Not easily, since software like iColor probably doesn't break out the calibration, but only embeds it in a profile.
The software didn't come with the Eizo. I bought the colorimeter after using the Spyder2 for a while because the results were not satisfactory. iColor also does not seem to be attuned to the Eizo in any special way, as I cannot see any reference to what special display is used, except for the type being an LCD (which has to be set
Well then, either iColor is doing something different with the instrument readings, or it is creating an ICC profile with some technical difference, such as the way it deals with the white point adaptation. Some packages make the absolute colorimetric white point appear to be D50 in display profiles, even though that's not the display white point. Argyll doesn't do that, it makes absolute colorimetric consistent with the raw measurement data.
manually). Although of course different software may have different approaches to measuring these things. But then again, how can one be certain which result would be preferable? I think this is a general problem regarding this topic and would be worth exploring. The iColor Software supports a test of the calibration results according to UGRA standards. Yet again I cannot say if it has any relevance. Also, I am only able to check profiles created by the software itself, not third-party profiles created by Argyll. Maybe there is a tag I can change to trick it into doing it. I will see about that later.
You can verify profiles using argyll's profcheck, but note that this checks the absolute colorimetric table against the raw readings (.ti3 file), so a profile that makes absolute colorimetric appear to have a D50 white point will fare badly.
I'm running Windows XP (32 Bit) with the latest release of ArgyllCMS.
OK, try out <http://www.argyllcms.com/dispcal_win.zip>, and set the (new) -A parameter to some value between 8.0 (the default) and 1.0. e.g. try 4 to start, or even 2, and see if it changes the coloration near black. Note that a value of 1 will create a linear blend between the white point hue and the black point hue. Graeme Gill.