About the -f parameter, what would be usage scenarios to use -f 1.0 or something like -f 0.5 instead of -f 0. How could I make an educated decision on the -f value?
It's a bit hard to say. In theory -f 0 should give a more visually uniform tonal progression, but -f 1 probably matches the natural response of devices better. All I can suggest is trying these extremes and see which one gets a better fit, and which one gives a black response you are looking for.
I believe this may come back to the Eye-One Pro's weakness with differentiating between very close together dark measurements. Along with the issue of the Eye-One Pro detecting 0.00cdm2 as 0.05cmd2 randomly on my CRT. The Eye-One is probably telling Argyll there is a dead zone, even though I can see with my eyes that there is not. When I am in a dark room that is obviously inaccurate since the screen is bright grey instead of black.
I think you are asking a lot of any instrument worth less than $10000, to expect a good reading below 0.05 cm/d^2. Adaptive mode may improve things at low levels with the i1pro, although because it then switches integration time and gain, it may introduce discontinuities.
If would be nice if you could add some sort of override for heuristic, since it does sounds like it would prove useful for my situation.
dispcal and printcal -V in the next release. Graeme Gill.