Kurt Kramer , Jun 06, 2012; 01:34 p.m.
Are there any strong reasons to select on Monitor Calibration Device over another? I am using an HP ZR22w monitor. My environment has a lot of windows and, even with adjustable blinds, the light is variable during the day. It's very different in here when days are cloudy or bright. And sometimes I work at night too. If one device has a meaningful and reliable response mechanism to changing light conditions, that might be valuable to me. Thanks for any input.
Patrick Lavoie 
, Jun 06, 2012; 01:46 p.m.
not really about the difference in selecting the device.
no difference if you calibrate with or without sun or on a rainy day.
If one device has a meaningful and reliable response mechanism to changing light conditions, that might be valuable to me
yes, spider4 elite and i1d pro have, but you dont want that.. the worst thing that could append is having your monitor change is brightness during your post work; you are working on a image, suddenly theres a ray of light and your device put the screen brighter.. then you think that your image is too light.. so you add a nice dark curve.. then a moment after, the room is suddendly black and your monitor lower is brightness.. your image is suddendly to dark.. then... well you get the concept ; )
The Spider4 elite is a excellent device, and the lowest price of the 3 device you ask for.. then for most user, the ColorMunki is more than enough; 1 monitor, 6500k, gamma 2.2 and 110cdm2 (last number could vary, but in general under normal illumination 110 is pretty close to what you will look printed) ... then theres the excellent i1d pro, but its pretty expensive, and for most user, wayyyyy too many option where you can get lost.
Scott Ferris , Jun 06, 2012; 01:46 p.m.
I have no experience of the Spyder 4. If you only have one screen then the Color Munki is fine, it works well, is easy to use and does it's job well. If you have more than one screen then the i1 Display Pro has several advantages over the Color Munki and is worth the extra money.
I have found ambient auto control of screen brightness to not be very good, certainly if you are trying to match prints then it is a no no, consistent illumination is very important. But it all really depends on what you are trying to achieve and what is happening to your output.
Kurt Kramer , Jun 06, 2012; 02:46 p.m.
Sorry and embarrassed by the typo in my first sentence. I meant "Are there any strong reasons to select ONE Monitor Calibration Device over another?" Thanks for the responses so far.
Andrew Rodney , Jun 06, 2012; 05:43 p.m.
There is a significant difference between the Spyder (4 or otherwise) and the ColorMunki. One is a colorimeter, the other a Spectrophotometer. A Colorimeter is fine, actually a bit more ideal for dispaly calibration but isn’t worth squat if you want to create printer profiles or even measure reflective media. The ColorMunki can calibrate and profile a display but it can also read spectral data necessary to build a printer profile. And it has a very good track record (something we can’t say thus far for the Spyder).
IF all you want to do is calibrate a display, assuming you are not using some newer, exotic backlight or wide gamut unit, a colorimeter is a bit more precise in measuring dark emissive colors than a Spectrophotometer. At least with this group of products in this price range. If you have some unexpected backlight, if the filters in the colorimeter are expecting something they are not getting, a Spectrophotometer will do a much better job of measuring the white point. Colorimeters use a small set of filters (at least three) to break up the color being measured. A Spectrophotometer breaks up the color into significantly different and finer bands of color. And if you only wish to calibrate a display and want a colorimeter, you might want to look at the EyeOne Display-2 from the same company that makes the ColorMunki.
Any auto ambient compensation process is nonsense! Control your environment.
Kurt Kramer , Jun 07, 2012; 02:30 p.m.
Andrew, thank you. You didn't specify which device uses which kind of metering device. I did further research and the X-rite web-site says the Color Munki uses a Colorimeter. At the DataColor web-site it shows that "in the box" for the Spyder 4s is a Datacolor Spyder4™ (PRO or ELITE) colorimeter. Contrary to what you said, it seems both use Colorimeters. So I am pretty confused.
Over the years, I've had my printer/paper profiles made by someone else and have been generally happy with them. So at this point, I am mostly interested in monitor calibration. I might, at some point, want to profile papers, but I have a hard time believing that these consumer-level products will do as well as the commercial profilers I've used.
Patrick Lavoie , Jun 07, 2012; 02:51 p.m.
Theres 2 ColorMunki device, the Display and the Photo.. I was (and Scott) refering to the Display one, Andrew talk about the Photo one..
ColorMunki Display model is for 1 connected display to your computer.
ColorMunki Photo model is for 1 connected display to your computer + can also do printer profile (mix review here by many user.. i use 3 different CM Photo device, 2 produce very bad profile, 1 was surprisingly good... and it seem its a *common* problem when you read web review about this product)
Andrew Rodney , Jun 07, 2012; 03:49 p.m.
You didn't specify which device uses which kind of metering device. I did further research and the X-rite web-site says the Color Munki uses a Colorimeter.
Yes, I got a bit confused by the newer X-rite marekting too. There are now two Colormunki products, the original a Spectrophotometer (photo) and now the ColorMunki Display. Same hardware as the EyeOne Display-2 but with crippled software. I’d avoid that since the software is key to getting a good screen to display match.
Kurt Kramer , Jun 08, 2012; 03:46 p.m.
Eight or nine months ago, I was lent an i1 Display and a Color Munki. This was after using a loaned Spyder (2 or 3). The Spyder software was totally baffling and the screen view after using the Color Munki seemed closer to my printed output than after calibrating with the i1 Display. So, I was about to jump for the Color Munki. But now you say Color Munki comes with "crippled software". What does that mean? Seems Color Munki has made some big changes, moving from spectrophotometer to colorimeter and then with new software related to that change. What's a guy to do? Kind of odd that X-rite would have two products that seem to compete with each other.
What do you mean by saying Color Munki's software is crippled? Is it hard to follow and use, or does it interpret readings from the colorimeter and give bad results?
Scott Ferris , Jun 08, 2012; 04:01 p.m.
I have the Color Munki Display, it is absolutely fine. To differentiate the product line the software that comes with it is more basic than the other profilers in the X-Rite range, it is also artificially slowed down, something of importance in a professional environment but not that critical in a single user situation. It takes about five minutes to get a custom calibration via expert mode, something I am happy to do once a month.
Where it is more limiting is in matching various displays, trying to do that can be frustrating as the software is a bit basic to do that, but I have done it and am happy.
As I said in my first reply, if you just have one screen then get the Color Munki Display, it is cheap, cheerful and works fine. If you have two screens then I would get the i1 Display just for the ease of matching displays.
