FWIW, I can confirm that in my hands, the profiles made by the following techniques: 1) ColorMunki + dispcalGUI/argyll using adaptive mode 2) i1 Display 2 colorimeter using correction matrix generated my ccmxmake using ColorMunki ... are very similar. Doubtful I can tell the difference. If there were some objective way to test the quality of the profiles, that'd be great. I just don't know how to without a reference grade spectrophotometer. Using a hardware device to check itself is useless, as I understand it. To answer Knut's question, I'd assume that even the 7 channel one can generate a 3-channel correction curve. The extra channels just help to correct for mismatches between the filters & primaries. I'd be curious to know of what changed in the new X-Rite ColorMunki Display & i1 Display models introduced today. X-Rite claims these are good for wide-gamut displays, as well as 'future' technologies. How? -Rishi On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Knut Inge <knutinh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Thank you for your input. > > Are there any correction curves out there that I could have a go at? > For instance anyone that has calibrated their Dell u2711s using a > Spyder 3 AND a spectroradiometer, producing a correction for that > setup (ignoring unit-to-unit variance)? Or 2nd best would be (I guess) > anyone doing something similar for a Spyder 3 and any wide-gamut s-ips > CCFL display, perhaps the Nec pa271w or the Apple 27"? > > Should the Spyder 3 correction curve ideally be 7-channel (as it is a > 7-channel native sensor), or is it sufficient to do correction of the > 3-channel default mix of those? > > regards > k > > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:18 PM, Rishi Sanyal <rishi.j.sanyal@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: >> "But then those correction curves would only be strictly valid for a >> given pair of measurement device and display. " >> >> Exactly. Which is why I think they worked better in the days of CRTs >> with less variability between phosphors. These CRTs also typically had >> a sRGB-like response. > >