[argyllcms] Re: Argyll V1.3.4 released

  • From: Graeme Gill <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 23:17:28 +1000

Ernst Dinkla wrote:
> Could you comment on their quality compared to the old i1 Display II and
> the Spyder III all dall used with ArgyllCMS?

I haven't done any real comparisons with a spectrometer, but my impression is
that (at least on non-refreshed displays such as LCD's) that they are pretty 
The filters seem very close to the standard observer in shape, and the optical
arrangement captures lots of light, giving good resolution readings, and
(in the case of the i1 Display Pro), very fast readings if the patch is
not too dark. Their precision at low light levels is excellent, although they
slow down a bit.
The optics ensures a narrow acceptance angle, and therefore they seem good
at distant measurements, such as measuring a display including flair,
or measuring projectors.

For refreshed displays such as CRT's, then I think the DTP92 and DTP94
are still superior, since they synchronize properly to the refresh rate.

To get some idea about how close the filters are to the standard observer,
I did the following: For a set of display sample XYZ values of the primaries
+ white, for each pair of calibration matrices for the different display
types, I computed the CIEDE2000 between the values predicted by the two 
Over the 147 combinations, there was an average error of 0.798 DE, and a
maximum of 4.72. I think this hints that the instruments will perform very
well across different types of displays.

Graeme Gill.

Other related posts: