@Krunoslav-Stifter - Thank you for your link. It's interesting that they recommend NEC with calibration built in.
We recommend NEC’s xx90 or PAxx1w series of monitors with the Spectraview calibration bundle as offering the best bang for the buck.
@Neil Snape - I note that i1Display Pro retails for about $249; ColorMunki Display, $169; and ColorMunki Photo Color Management Solution (different looking device) $449. All prices are sourced from B&H. Given that i1Display Pro goes twice as fast as ColorMunki display, then it's an easy decision for me to spend the additional $80.
Is there any merit in looking at the ColorMunki Photo Color Management Solution? At X-Rite, they seem to call this last device ColorMunki Design.
Although it wouldn't affect me, ColorMunki Design has a dumb-assed three seat license. You can see this at the bottom of the prior link.
ColorMunki Design seems to be a bit more versatile. Whether to me that versatility of any value is another question.
With Neil's comment, I am inclined to purchase i1Display Pro over ColorMunki Display. Thus, is there any benefit in looking at the ColorMunki Design? Does anyone have any experience with this device? Would you recommend it over the i1Display Pro?
Stecyk wrote: Which device would you recommend and why to calibrate your monitor for your retouching needs with Photoshop and be part of your overall color management program?
I have an older device, which suited my purposes. However, I am in the process of upgrading my pc and monitors. So I am looking at my color calibration tools too.
really no option there. colormunki display has a catch, you can't use it with any 3rd party software (like spectraview, basiccolor, etc; only exception is argy) so it is a very bad idea.
i1display pro is good choice.
colormunki design provides less accuracy then i1display pro
Paris, Île-de-France, France
The CM Display and i1 Display Pro is similar hardware but the ADC is quite different, or I'll assume it is. The optics and filters are however the same, housing etc.
Agreed Argyll is always a strong choice for those who can do command line, open source.
The software solution for CM is really amateur based.
Is the CM (spectra) good? As a device it is. The dumbed down software can be great for someone who doesn't look further, yet provides very high quality profiles for a great price point. I made a bunch of profiles and compared them to the i1 Pro with both Profile Maker and i1 Profiler and the differences were minimal.
The reason they had to come out with the CM and i1 Display devices and software was because the current LCD technology became impossible to manage with the older i1 Display 2.
I recently pared down my kit and kept my old trusty i1 Pro, and two i1 Photo 2, the new spectra. I should sell one as I don't need two.
If I had to buy a new one and didn't have anything I'd go with the i1 Pro Display as it is very good at what it does, and the software is also very good.
For those with NEC, perhaps the BasicColor device and soft would be a viable choice too.
Paris, Île-de-France, France
Pictus wrote: Same hardware, but CM is made artificially slow for product differentiation...
The firmware in the CM sets a longer integration time, I bet.
Wouldn't be the first time, I still have a useless HP i1 Display 2 to run a specific HP DreamWorks app, that will not work on anything else.
Yet I cannot say for sure with the new devices. The over sample rates, averaging and weighting could be quite different even if it is a firmware block. As I said I'll assume, as to bet on something means having some certainty about it.
The i1 Pro spectro though is an example of the device hardware and electronics the same for all non uv models regardless of firmware restrictions.
The colorimeters though were not always the same hardware, and the firmware different outside of just license restrictions or handicaps.
Just to say, I was on the development testing of all these devices.....