NEC SpectraViewII update causes color shift?

[Uhooru]

I'm terrible at following instructions, but I've been known to react favorably to kind requests. Your faith in working with measurement results that are suspect in the first place is suspect and here is why: both versions claim to have calibrated my monitor to the same target values but one requires an adjustment to get a match. GIGO.

 

Here's a kind request. why don't you simply try what Andrew suggested and go from there? If it doesn't give you the insight into the issue, than you can just move on. Otherwise this back and forth is simply a waste of time. I think he's answered your questions numerous times over. If you don't want to try, than maybe just move on.

[digitaldog]

Here's a kind request. why don't you simply try what Andrew suggested and go from there?

That would make perfect sense if his post and posting history (more below) indicated that the goal was to solve a problem. It isn't. The solution to maintain the same appearing calibration, actually two of them were presented here days ago. Neither were accepted. And yes, the back and forth is a waste of time but necessary to pinpoint the aim of the original post. Clearly in my mind, it isn't to rectify a solution but either to complain again about NEC, unfounded I'll add, or a call for attention. This is why if you look around the Luminous Landscape forums, you'll see the same posting tactic there as here.

 

A posting history as proof of my concept about the poster follows, I really do not recommend reading them all, rather painful. But I do believe it illustrates a pattern: post about a 'problem', ask for consensus of others to agree the problem exists (rarely if ever does consensus let alone any agreement occur), complain when what he's told doesn't match what he wants to hear, go away for X number of months and start all over again. IOW, an agenda. But to back up my claim, and to illustrate to people like Mary that my 'negative' attitude was swayed over years of posting by this member, here's the paper trail from JUST PhotoNet (Luminous Landscape is equally filled with similar examples):

 

"Issue" updating SpectraView Software:

 

NEC SpectraView update doesn't work

 

"Issue" with SpectraView 'flickering"

 

NEC PA242W with SpectraView problems

 

AND:

 

NEC P242W with SpectraView weird flicker

 

AND again:

 

Flicker, eyestrain or headache when using a monitor with LED backlighting?

 

AND AGAIN:

 

How do you like your 23" NEC P232W-BK-SV with LED backlighting?

 

Lastly his first post I attempted (at first kindly should Mary wish to examine the factual history) to address concerning his misunderstanding of CCT Kelvin values and a rant concerning Solux bulbs:

 

Major update of my article on digital darkroom lighting

 

We got an 'over and out' promise, let's hope it's kept.

--------------------------

"[No man has the] right to mislead others, who have less access to history, and less leisure to study it ... Thus substituting falsehood and deception for truthful evidence and fair argument." — Abraham Lincoln, "Cooper Union Address," 1860

[frans_waterlander]

Uhooru said:

"Here's a kind request. why don't you simply try what Andrew suggested and go from there? If it doesn't give you the insight into the issue, than you can just move on. Otherwise this back and forth is simply a waste of time. I think he's answered your questions numerous times over. If you don't want to try, than maybe just move on."

 

I started this thread because calibrations with the latest version of SpectraView resulted in a color shift. I could get a match with the old version for 5200K, but needed to tweak the calibration to 5500K with the new version to get a match. I wanted, and still want to understand why that is the case. Hence my posting. Besides being incredible rude and annoying, Andrew said basically the following:

- you have already two fixes, two solutions; the old approach and the new approach

- software has bugs

- I don't see this issue with my setup

- revert to the old version

- calculate delta E (from suspect data!)

- etc.

 

I stated clearly that I wanted to understand why there were different results. Nothing that Andrew said, over and over again, helped to understand the issue. And that's where we are today, I don't know, he doesn't know, but pretends to.

[digitaldog]

I stated clearly that I wanted to understand why there were different results.

You got the answer. IF a difference even exists. Which there is zero colorimetric proof (that you still can’t provide) it actually exists. Bug or user error. Exactly like all the old posts of yours I’ve dug up! Color shift/ fake news. :cool: Like the so called “over and out” promise not kept.

[digitaldog]

Besides being incredible rude and annoying, Andrew said basically the following:

- you have already two fixes, two solutions; the old approach and the new approach

- software has bugs

- I don't see this issue with my setup

- revert to the old version

- calculate delta E (from suspect data!)

- etc.

 

You can't accept the above because:

“There seems to be some perverse human characteristic that likes to make easy things difficult.” -Warren Buffett

"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains. however improbable, must be the truth."-Arthur Conan Doyle

And that's the truth. ;)

Edited August 9, 2018 by digitaldog

[frans_waterlander]

Nothing that Andrew said, over and over again, helped to understand the issue.

 

And that's the real truth. People reading this thread will understand what your attitudes towards others are; no need to continue the ranting.

Edited August 9, 2018 by frans_waterlander

[digitaldog]

Nothing that Andrew said, over and over again, helped to understand the issue

 

A wise man once said:

"Listen to understand instead of listening to respond." - Barack Obama

[frans_waterlander]

no need to continue the ranting

OK?

[Mary Doo]

You got the answer. IF a difference even exists. Which there is zero colorimetric proof (that you still can’t provide) it actually exists. Bug or user error. Exactly like all the old posts of yours I’ve dug up! Color shift/ fake news. :cool: Like the so called “over and out” promise not kept.

You are absurd. If the user says it exists then it does. That is the proof.

 

<<zero colorimetric proof >>

If there is a bug there is a bug. If it's user error then it's user error - even with due dilligence If you don't know the answer despite all your knowledge, so be it. The result is that there IS a color shift. Why can't you accept that.:rolleyes:

[digitaldog]

I'll stop *ranting when you stop trolling. Deal? Oh wait, your promises made are not your promises kept. As this thread and the posting paper trail I've provided illustrate. o_O

 

*rant

verb

gerund or present participle: ranting

1. speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned way.
   

[digitaldog]

You are absurd. If the user says it exists then it does. That is the proof.

 

<<zero colorimetric proof >>

If there is a bug there is a bug. If it's user error then it's user error - even with due dilligence If you don't know the answer despite all your knowledge, so be it. The result is that there IS a color shift. Why can't you accept that.:rolleyes:

I have experience with the person posting his 'issues' with the product for one!

Proof? You believe in the Easter bunny too?

 

HAD Frans actually provided the measured data as requested and no, there's absolutely nothing faulty in doing so (his confusion, maybe others who are equally naive about colorimetry), we'd know exactly how much and where in color space a color shift occurred. Kind of telling he can't or will not provide that data but that's water under the bridge.

I'll leave you and Frans with this concept about supplying data for analysis but the history suggests it will fall on 2 and perhaps 4 deaf ears:

 

"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind".

-Lord Kelvin

[digitaldog]

What a vicious troll you are.

"Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish". -Euripides

Indeed, four ears it seems. :rolleyes:

[Mary Doo]

I have experience with the person posting his 'issues' with the product for one!

Proof? You believe in the Easter bunny too?

HAD Frans actually provided the measured data as requested and no, there's absolutely nothing faulty in doing so (his confusion, maybe others), we'd know exactly how much and where in color space a color shift occurred. Kind of telling he can't or will not provide that data but that's water under the bridge. I'll leave you and Frans with this concept about supplying data for analysis but the history suggests it will fall on 2 and perhaps 4 deaf ears:

"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind".

-Lord Kelvin

What a vicious troll you are. How can you be sure there is absolutely nothing wrong? Did you write those programs? - No you are sitting in front of your calibrated computer with a calculator or whatever, that's all.

[Mary Doo]

"Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish". -Euripides

Sure you know everything don't you? I remember I used to think that - when I was six years old.

[digitaldog]

- No you are sitting in front of your calibrated computer with a calculator or whatever, that's all.

It's called a Colorimeter and a Spectrophotometer. I'm more than willing to teach you the differences between the two instruments and when one is more appropriate for measuring emissive color for deltaE analysis of color differences. I do have a calculator, it is use for mathematics, not color measurements (it's not even a measuring device).

[digitaldog]

I remember I used to think that - when I was six years old.

"When I was fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have him around. When I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished at how much he had learned in seven years". -Mark Twain

[Mary Doo]

"When I was fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have him around. When I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished at how much he had learned in seven years". -Mark Twain

Great. Go learn something - there is hope yet. Learning humility is a good start.

[Mary Doo]

It's called a Colorimeter and a Spectrophotometer. I'm more than willing to teach you the differences between the two instruments and when one is more appropriate for measuring emissive color for deltaE analysis of color differences. I do have a calculator, it is use for mathematics, not color measurements (it's not even a measuring device).

You do know something. But not everything. You don't know the reason why there is a color shift even when everything seems right.

[digitaldog]

You do know something. But not everything. You don't know the reason why there is a color shift even when everything seems right.

What color shift?

If you’ve only imagined it you have not experienced it.

You waiting on that measured data from Frans too? :D

[Mary Doo]

What color shift?

If you’ve only imagined it you have not experienced it.

You waiting on that measured data from Frans too? :D

You have not experienced it either. So we are even. Look, I have better things to do than to engage in this circular talk with you. Troll on your own. Thx.

[digitaldog]

You SEE the color shift?

http://digitaldog.net/files/23The eyes don't have it.pdf

I don’t need to see a shift! I need colorimetric measured data.

You own a ruler? A light meter? A thermometer?

Yes do please MoveOn. As you have not provided anything in this conversation of colorimetric value.

[frans_waterlander]

You SEE the color shift?

 

Yes, as a matter of fact I do, comparing the monitor calibrated to the same parameters with both versions to the same print lit by the same SoLux lamps. Got any issue with that?

[digitaldog]

Yes, as a matter of fact I do, comparing the monitor calibrated to the same parameters with both versions to the same print lit by the same SoLux lamps. Got any issue with that?

You back after promising us the 'over and out'?

Yes to answer your question I do. And you again*, utterly missed the point by not reading the article that discusses optical illusions of which I believe, based on all the text you've written over the years (already referenced) you do suffer. As in the past, you're utterly unable to provide any data to back up anything else.

 

*“I do not think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.”Abraham Lincoln

[frans_waterlander]

And you again*, utterly missed the point by not reading the article that discusses optical illusions of which I believe, based on all the text you've written over the years (already referenced) you do suffer. As in the past, you're utterly unable to provide any data to back up anything else.

 

Oh, now I suffer from optical illusions? My, my, it's getting more ridiculous by the minute. Tell me all about optical illusions when I look at the same monitor and the same print illuminated by the same light in a room that's not changed in any way during my various evaluations. The only change is the calibration of the monitor as explained previously.

 

And yes, I could provide the data measured with the Colorimeter Window tool, but I won't and the reason is that if you can't take my word for it, than you are not worthy of the data.

Edited August 9, 2018 by frans_waterlander

[digitaldog]

Oh, now I suffer from optical illusions?

To be kind, that's likely the case. Or your display flickering problems (due to a lack of tin foil hats?). :D

My, my, it's getting more ridiculous by the minute.

It was rather ridiculous after the first three posts or so. Where you were told how to fix the issue.

Tell me all about optical illusions when I look at the same monitor and the same print illuminated by the same light in a room that's not changes in any way during my various evaluations.

Again? You didn't read (or understand) the URL article provided earlier.

And yes, I could provide the data measured with the Colorimeter Window tool, but I won't and the reason is that if you can't take my word for it, than you are not worthy of the data.

I don't think you can and I think it would prove what you don't want to be proven. Sorry, some of us use science and facts to come to conclusions.

"The man of science has learned to believe in justification, not by faith, but by verification".

-Thomas H. Huxley (1825-95) English biologist.

 

You done now? Ready for that real and actual over and out again? As I said days ago, you could have saved all of us a lot of time if you didn't revert to the agenda you've shown in your past posting history. You just need to tell us what you want to hear and maybe someone (Mary) will state that and you really could move on.

Didn't the Q tech support people tell you what you want to hear?