John_T Offline Image Upload: On
|
I think if you read the fine print somewhere, they say the before/after bit is just an example, not actual. Sorry, but marketing BS in my book.
I wasted a lot of time and frustration with Spyder1 back when, and frisbeed it for the Xrite Monaco Optix XR Pro which did a great job until I installed Vista 64-bit for which there were no USB drivers for the Xrite DTP94 puck. So like a silly fool I bought a Spyder2 Pro kit because it has Vista 64 drivers. At first I thought the calibrations were ok, but slowly found that they weren't. What really clinched it was when I got my Eizo CG241 monitors for which the CE Color Navigation software supports the DTP94 puck. Just to get at the truth, I did side-by-side calibrations with the Spyder2 puck and the Xrite DTP94 puck, and you guessed it, the DTP94 calibrations were way better, both monitors are exactly matched and the calibration runs much faster with the DTP94. According to ShootSmarter, all the Spyders are a waste of time, and I'm afraid I have to agree.
That said, on some less expensive monitors and less critical applications, any calibration kit is better than nothing, and maybe even sufficient.
My 2centavos
Edited on Dec 08, 2007 at 01:07 PM
|