If you only have this device, then you need to know the answer to this, or you can stick your head back into the sand. If I am a potential client to a calibrator that only pulls out a tri-stim device to calibrate my TV, I’d want to know the answer to this.
Here is some additional data on how calibration tables come about. For some reason, a lot of enthusiasts have come to believe that these offset tables are a result of examining the performance of perhaps hundred of displays. Lots of data points to build to a conclusion that one brand of TV behaves a certain way. This is the idea of clustered data. 95% of the samples behave in a similar way with the occasional outlier data points. Create the tables based on the performance of the 95%. Reasonable approach to things.
Well, the hundreds of displays number is actually closer to one or two or three displays at most. Those are big conclusions to draw that an entire line of display technology will all behave in a manner exactly like three samples.
Displays within the same model run don’t even behave in a consistent manner when the manufacturer changes its supplier of LED light bulbs in the middle of the production run. It’s not like they owe it to anyone to make an announcement that such a thing is happening. People buying a TV for the first 4 months of a production run could have very different results versus those in the last 4 months of the same run.
I don’t need to draw conclusions for you. The information is laid out here on how tables work and how they might not work. The best cheap solution is still to profile the tri-stim meter against a reference spectrometer even as inexpensive as a colormunki. People are always free to continue believing whatever they want, but I won’t take the word of salesmen that something is just as good as a spectro.
Addendum … With four samples displayed here, I wonder if anyone has noticed a certain trend? The errors get larger as the patterns get brighter. A proper 6500K reading from the Jeti always seems to end up about 300K to 500K on the blue side. So if people are relying on the C6 here, it would always end up with calibrated numbers on the redder side of things, say 6100K range. Couldn’t another correction factor be used here that subtracts out 300K to 500K for patterns at 40% intensity or more? Again while not perfect, it would improve all the dE numbers by 2 to 3 or more across the board. Just food for thought. Take your readings and add 400K to the blue side and you have your own tables.
Further to this one person asked about not knowing if the i1 pro was accurate to begin with. Well here is a picture of the results on the same panasonic LCD set from above take with my I1 Beamer (before it was called the i1 pro) … circa 2002 when I first got that unit. It has never been sent back for recalibration. (A testament to the industry people that said that the i1 pro units don’t drift much at all if you take care of them). This is what I expected from a more budget spectro and as expected, the probe has more difficulty reading the 10% and 20% patterns. It is not $11000 like the Jeti, but it is pretty close … as we expect. This is what a reading of a tri-stim probe with tables should look more like.
This second set is looking at the LG LED/LCD 55LX9500 set I have in my living room. A reader asked if I could take a reading with my i1 on this LED type tv and compare it to the JETI. Easier said than done, given the lighting in the room, but I sort of figured out a way. I draped this large black fleece blanket over the Display and the tripod mounted i1 Beamer. I took a series of readings and because there was some light leakage , I figured I would take another set of readings with the Jeti under the same room conditions. So these jeti readings will not look like the other ones taken at night in a dark room. But they are consistent with the i1 for an apple to apple comparison.
Not the same, but the results seem to reflect a dE difference of about 1.0 between the Jeti and the i1 Beamer under the same light conditions. Not that different than what was seen on the Panasonic LCD set. One anomolie occurred during the first run with the i1 in Calman so I ran it again with my THX Chromapure program just to double check. The Jeti ran the same on both programs and the i1 beamer ran normal. I put the i1 back to Calman and it ran normal this time … matching the behavior seen with the Chromapure program.
Once more, I know going in that the i1 beamer is not going to mirror what the $11000 Jeti reads, but I expect and hope that it will be close and it is in both cases for both displays.