[argyllcms] Re: dispcal: Warning - RegOpenKeyEx failed with 2

  • From: lee scratchy <leescratchy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:13:41 +0000

...and should I add that I'm colorblind :)

that sums it up nicely, my quest is finally over...I've found the perfect 
colorimeter app and my cheap s2 does the job quite decently if you let it  work 
 sloooooooooowly.

Thanks again for all the explanations and this fantastic piece of software, I 
guess some serious company should buy some licence for your software and fire 
its internal coders......because nothing compares.

my last annoying problem is that I have a .cal file for my CRT, and another one 
for my DLP projector.

I never use both at the same time, and I would like to somehow force the LUT in 
my dualhead ATI HD2600 PCI-E videocard......so the CRT lut would be forced on 
the primary VGA output and the DLP lut would be forced on the secondary DVI 
output.......I guess this is quite impossible ?

atm I've made batches, and each time I switch displays I run them......not too 
big of a deal, but that would be pretty sweet to be able to force them in the 
videocard LUT's permanently.

I've tried it with .ICM files in the enhanced windows ICM profile tool, but 
that simply doesn't work when I switch displays.....it only works if the 2 
displays are always running at the same time...

Best Regards,

-Maxime

> Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2007 01:09:45 +1100
> From: graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [argyllcms] Re: dispcal: Warning - RegOpenKeyEx failed with 2
> 
> lee scratchy wrote:
> 
> > actually I was more wondering about the DE measurements precision on the s2
>  > compared to the i1 display(which is supposedly very close to the i1 pro).
> 
> > when the s2 gives me a 0.8 average DE, does that mean it's completely off..
>  > ..and might just be >10 average if I was to check with a i1 display ?
> 
> You can't tell what the distribution of errors is from the average. 0.8 DE
> average is generally something that would be regarded as good. But it
> says nothing about the absolute accuracy.
> 
> > but you seem to agree that the s2 is quite off on that point ? also with 
> > LCD ?
> 
> It's impossible to say without a reference instrument to compare it to.
> The self check error reports indicate how well the display has been
> made to conform to the target, and how consistent the measurements
> are. But the absolute accuracy can't really be determined without
> something independent to compare with.
> 
> > I'm already VERY happy with the PQ, but the idea of achieving better DE 
> > with a i1
>  > display is starting to grow on me ;)
> 
> It may be slightly more consistent in its readings, and therefore
> give a lower self check report, but the visible effect would be
> hard to predict. Each type of colorimetric instrument will probably
> have a slightly different calibration for a given type of display,
> and therefore if compared side by side, may look slightly
> different. Once again, compared in isolation you may be
> hard pressed to see a difference due to this cause.
> 
> And just to correct myself:
> 
> >> The main advantage of the Eye One Pro is that it is going to be more
> >> accurate with any spectrum that a colorimeter has been specially
>                                                      ^ not
> >> calibrated to. The disadvantage is that it tends to collect less
> >> light than a colorimeter, so you really need a longer integration time
> >> to give a repeatable reading. 
> 
> Graeme Gill.
> 

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

Other related posts: