Datacolor SpyderX in test

Calibration can, or rather should, help with this. Why else are such products sold? For example, the SpyderX from Datacolor, which was so highly praised by the editorial team.

What is the SpyderX?

SpyderX Pro is a colour measurement device which – according to the manufacturer Datacolor – was designed for “dedicated photographers and designers” and consists of a colourimeter – now with a stylish future look – and software. The software can match different screens and also measure various targets – according to the manufacturer, it is wonderfully accurate with all kinds of additional features such as measuring the display performance, assigning certain colour profiles and so on. If you want to have this yourself, you will pay around 170 euros – as of May 2019 – or 280 euros for the extended Elite functions.

In a very first test of the haptics and application, we noticed – regardless of the results – the enormous speed compared to its predecessor. The latter – full programme – took a good hour per screen (including measuring and so on). With the SpyderX Pro, you are back in your favourite 3D software after a quarter of an hour (same tests). The price is identical, the physical features have only changed in that the underside of the device is adorned with a large lens and no longer has the facets of previous generations. The software has not changed visually or in its description – anyone familiar with the Datacolor tools can click through with their eyes closed.

We ask ourselves the question: How far can you currently get with it? In the past, we have already analysed various measuring probes several times and did not achieve really good results, especially with the cheaper entry-level products and the displays tested at the time. The Datacolor products in particular did not generally perform particularly well. We have also recently experienced several Spyder customers who have not been able to match their various monitors, which is a typical problem or the result of the technical limitations of the inexpensive probes.

However, a new product is always a reason to investigate whether something has improved. I will reveal this much: We did indeed find a significant improvement, although that alone is not enough.

Built-in problems

What are the typical problems of inexpensive probes?

• Inexpensive probes are so-called colourimeters. Similar to cameras, normal image sensors are installed on the basis of colour filters. Anyone who has ever taken photos of two different monitors, which were actually very well calibrated and visually identical, usually realises that they can look completely different in the photo. This is because the spectral properties may be different, but are still perceived identically by the human perceptual apparatus. This is due to the properties of the colour filters on the camera sensor. Colourimeters sometimes measure different values, just like the camera sensor. That would be bad, because it would lead to incorrectly calibrated monitors – or, as in the customer example we experienced, to the fact that it is not possible to match two different monitors so that the images displayed with them look the same.Practical: We carry out a colour correction on an iMac monitor with DaVinci Resolve. This should resemble the customer’s monitor (usually a TV set) and, as a colour-accurate screen, a class 1 reference monitor such as the Sony BVM X300. So we match an LCD TV with the Sony OLED. This makes it difficult because they are two completely different display technologies and, as RGB OLEDs, Sony OLEDs in particular have a white point error because they deviate from the usual colour models due to their extreme spectral properties (although this is more of an exception).
• Inexpensive probes are not temperature-stabilised; a major reason why colorimeters are not suitable for taking measurements with several hundred or thousand colour locations in order to generate a calibration suitable for reference using the 3D LUTs calculated from them. This is because the colourimeter – like any electrical device – produces heat during the measurement time and primarily absorbs heat from the display, which is usually the larger heat component. This heat changes the electrical resistance of the individual light spots on the sensor, causing the colours to drift. So if you want to compare colours, you should do so at the same temperature, and even more importantly: the displays should have warmed up for about 60 minutes.
• Inexpensive probes are not calibrated against the different or specific spectral properties of different display technologies. A crucial point, as already described in point 1, is that probes based on colour filters are usually unique (enough) in their measurement behaviour. This problem can only be solved with very expensive spectroradiometers by measuring the deviations of the colourimeters from the specific display and correcting the measurement results using the correction values calculated from this. Spectroradiometers work in a similar way to pinhole cameras and are also regularly calibrated or checked by the manufacturer. However, these are also not suitable for complex, lengthy measurements as they are very slow and, above all, do not usually cover a very wide luminance range. In addition, they cannot measure total black as with OLEDs or extremely dark LCDs. with them, 5% grey can take 2 minutes for one colour value.

In a perfect world ..

… to achieve reference quality, you need temperature-stabilised colourimeters (e.g. Klein K10, approx. 8,000 euros) and a spectroradiometer (e.g. Jeti 1511, approx. 8,000 euros) to calibrate the colourimeter against the respective display. An ageing display, which changes its physical properties, can also produce a deviation, which should also be measured. In high-quality measurement programmes, such counter-calibration functions can be saved as profiles and can therefore be reused. However, my experience shows that I achieve better results if I check the profiling for each measurement and generate a new one if necessary.

And in reality?

So what has Datacolor supplied with the SpyderX Pro and its measurement software to address the latter problem to some extent? Firstly, a selection of which display technology is available.

Datacolor has provided the probe with calibration profiles for some of the most widely used display technologies, which is an essential prerequisite for improved or even just usable measurement results. This also leads to better calibration results, which we have verified with our measurement equipment worth over 25,000 euros.

Now a direct comparison ..

In the default settings, however, we do not find any information about the colour space to be calibrated, i.e. the target colour space that is to be achieved as a result. This will be a problem, as we will find out later. There were also no further setting options available in the settings. Roomlight and room light sources: If you look in Datacolor’s help centre, the explanations are quite meagre, except that there can be different ones and should be measured. It is noticeable in the help texts that the measurement software is primarily intended for “print” use, as a colour temperature of 5,700 Kelvin is described here, which does not correspond to use in film or TV, where 6,500 Kelvin is required. There are also clear standards for ambient light conditions, including room light brightness, which should be approx. 10% of the maximum brightness of the display.

Before we carried out the calibration using SpyderX, we first carried out a measurement using our measuring equipment. In the pre-calibration measurement, you can see that the colour space Rec. 709 (corresponds to sRGB) set for the verification measurement is far exceeded by the Mac display before the device was optimised by the SpyderX software calibration. So we carried out a second pre-calibration measurement with the DCI-P3 colour space as the target, and lo and behold, it was a better match. But red and skin tones in particular are still off.

After the Spyder calibration, however, the results are very good, if you could do something with the colour space. Now the Internet and most computer displays and TVs in the world are currently still Rec. 709 or sRGB. A P3-calibrated display therefore shows the wrong colours – i.e. usually too colourful/oversaturated. As DCI-P3, the cinema colour space requires a display with a DCI white point that is significantly greener than D65 (6,500 Kelvin). At best, HDR would be P3/D65-compatible, but the Macbook Pro display is far too dark for that at 100 nits. Ergo: great calibrated to P3, but ultimately unusable, at least from the point of view of VFX, film or video production. If P3 is sufficient as a wide gamut for viewing photos that are only supposed to work in sRGB for the customer, if the colour management in the photo viewer works, then it can work.

Countercheck

We took the liberty of calibrating the Macbook Pro display to Rec. 709 with our Calman measurement software, and it works and looks like this – see the third screenshot on the left.

Conclusion

Datacolor has made some initial improvements, but unfortunately has completely neglected some other points. The last measurement of the LG OLED in particular illustrates how far off the mark you can be if you misjudge the display type.
Unfortunately, my general conclusion remains the same: only those who have a cheap or often drifting older display that does not provide usable settings, e.g. laptops in general or cheap monitors that come with 9,000 Kelvin (Asian standard), will get some relief from the calibration – provided that the display is still in the sRGB/Rec. 709 gamut.

SpyderX is far superior to its predecessor, but is not suitable for the colour-accurate high-end sector. If you want better colours than the manual settings on the wheel at the back of the screen, you are well served, as are those who want to replace the worst stored colour profiles of various software packages. Those who regularly work with true colours will not be able to avoid purchasing a suitable monitor. Even a SpyderX can only work with the colours that the monitor outputs consistently, and at around €2,000, investing in a professional colour calibration (which is usually in the low three-digit range) is not a deal-breaker.