Spyder3 vs. Eyeone Display

[ChasP505]

I came across a used EyeOne Display puck and since I use third party calibration software, I thought here's a great opportunity to see how both these devices perform, given the same exact conditions-- same monitor, same software with same settings, same lighting conditions.

This is by no means a scientific comparison, only my subjective observations. I typically calibrate my Dell 2209WA every two or three weeks using the Spyder3 puck and ColorEyes Display Pro (CEDP) software. I target 120cd/m2, D65 color temperature, 2.2 gamma. I don't touch any monitor controls while calibrating, only presetting the monitor to 15% Brightness. Calibration is done in a dark room with the monitor adequately warmed up.

I have been getting excellent results from the Spyder3 device. At 15% Brightness, it reports my white luminance to be 120cd/m2, black luminance value to be 0.28cd/m2. The display looks good under subdued daylight conditions and my prints have been matching the display nicely with minimal softproofing, if any. Here's a validation graph from the last calibration with the Spyder3 device.

397645

I ran a calibration using the EyeOne display device with all the same settings. The one difference is the software required me to calibrate the device by placing it on a black surface. I used the matte black surface of my home-made monitor hood. The results reported by the CEDP software were quite different from the Spyder3. The white luminance was reported as 107cd/m2 while the black value was 0.18cd/m2. This black value is more in line with published test reports I've read for the Dell 2209WA, but I can't explain the big difference in the white value. Here's the validation graph.

397646

While the deltaE values are slightly higher, this is still an excellent result and I interpret it as being "smoother". I went and viewed some color and B&W test images in PS CS4 and subjectively, the colors looked slightly more vibrant. On the B&W images, there was slightly less banding and excellent contrast and shadow detail.

Just to reiterate... this is totally subjective and a one time trial comparison, but under these conditions, with this monitor and the CEDP software, I give this one to the EyeOne Display device.

[PixelMagic]

A bit off topic but is there a reason why you chose Gamma 2.2 over the CEDP recommend *L* setting?

[ChasP505]

A bit off topic but is there a reason why you chose Gamma 2.2 over the CEDP recommend *L* setting?

From several posts I've read on this specific issue, and my own limited experience, L* is preferable for high end monitors with built in LUTs. 2.2 works better with consumer priced monitors, even those with decent IPS panels. My experience with trying L* is that I got a lot of banding in shadows and gray tones. If you look at a gray gradient or step chart, the dark tones are all blocked up and it doesn't look smooth. The same applies to B&W photos. I don't get these problems with 2.2.

The people from Integrated Color/ColorEyes will tell you that just the reverse is to be expected, but I've read enough posts by people sharing my own experience to dispute that. Again... I'm talking about affordable consumer level monitors only, not high end Eizos, NECs, LaCies, etc.

[PixelMagic]

Ahhh...ok. I use Lacie Electron22BlueIV CRT monitors, not LCD. I'm going to experiment to see if there are any differences between using 2.2 Gamma and L*. I just always accepted it as the default recommendation.

Back on topic, based on my reading around the Internet, I'd expect the Eye One to outperform the Spyder, and the DTP-94 which was shipped with the Monaco Optix XR calibration package to better them both.

[René Damkot]

I can't explain the big difference in the white value.
Correction in the icc profile lowers the output I think.
My ACD loses about 20Cd/m^2 in calibrating...

[ChasP505]

Correction in the icc profile lowers the output I think.
My ACD loses about 20Cd/m^2 in calibrating...

Makes sense... If I use the RGB controls, the software measures: Red 0, Green +1, Blue -7. So it's probably a result of lowering the Red and Green to balance the Blue.

[ChasP505]

Back on topic, based on my reading around the Internet, I'd expect the Eye One to outperform the Spyder, and the DTP-94 which was shipped with the Monaco Optix XR calibration package to better them both.

I'd like to see a similar comparison on a wide gamut consumer level LCD like the new Dell U2410. I think the results would be much different. Nevertheless, I'll be using the EyeOne Display puck with the Dell 2209WA from now on.