login info join!
Forums > Digital Art and Retouching > i1Display Pro vs. ColorMunki Display vs. Others Search   Reply
Photographer
Stecyk
Posts: 305
Calgary, Alberta, Canada


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.
Dec 07 12 02:16 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Krunoslav Stifter
Posts: 3,866
Santa Cruz, California, US


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.

I'm sure different people will present different opinions and off course there is always the matter of personal and client standards and your budget.

This might help. It's one of many articles on the topic.
http://www.gamutprints.com/color-manage … r-monitor/

Dec 07 12 03:06 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Neil Snape
Posts: 9,470
Paris, Île-de-France, France


The i1 is at least 2x as fast as the CM. Otherwise the devices are the same. The i1 software has nicer features, but it's not a necessity for some.
Dec 07 12 03:15 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Stecyk
Posts: 305
Calgary, Alberta, Canada


@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?

Dec 07 12 04:56 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Aleksandr Olkhovskiy
Posts: 164
Novosibirsk, Novosibirsk, Russia


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

Dec 07 12 09:00 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Pictus
Posts: 1,008
Teresópolis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil


The i1Display Pro and ColorMunki Display are the same hardware, but the Pro is 5x faster and can work with third-party software like basICColor, Icolor, Nec Spectraview...

The  ColorMunki Display default software is more limited, but it can work with the free and excellent Argyll + dispcalGUI
I prefer the result from Argyll over the other solutions...

So, if have or plan to buy a NEC/Eizo/Quato monitor buy the PRO, if not buy the  ColorMunki Display and use with argyll...

Here some tests http://www.drycreekphoto.com/Learn/Cali … dware.html
Dec 08 12 01:45 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Neil Snape
Posts: 9,470
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.
Dec 08 12 02:01 am  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Pictus
Posts: 1,008
Teresópolis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil


Neil Snape wrote:
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.

Same hardware, but CM is made artificially slow for product differentiation...
The firmware in the CM sets a longer integration time, I bet.

Agreed Argyll is always a strong choice for those who can do command line, open source.

dispcalGUI comes to rescue, it is a graphic front end for Argyll.

Dec 08 12 02:09 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Neil Snape
Posts: 9,470
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.....

Dec 08 12 02:33 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Stecyk
Posts: 305
Calgary, Alberta, Canada


Thank you everyone for your help, and especially Neil Snape. I'll be taking Neil's advice.
Dec 10 12 09:04 pm  Link  Quote 
  Search   Reply