User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  7
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Third Party Software

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    21 Oct 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    146
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Third Party Software

    I have a Spyder 3 Express which works well enough (or so it seems). If I understand correctly, the more expensive versions of the Spyder only differ in the software. The hardware being essentially the same. I presume the same applies to the Spyder 4.

    I remember seeing a little while ago a 3rd party program that utilised the Spyder hardware but had more detailed settings. Does anyone know if this is still around and is it any good?
    Graham.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    10 Jul 2010
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    6,346
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Had'nt heard of that Graham, But now you've got me waiting for a reply also, I use the Spyder 3 Express as well , Thanks for that
    Canon : 30D, and sometimes the 5D mkIII , Sigma 10-20, 50mm 1.8, Canon 24-105 f4 L , On loan Sigma 120-400 DG and Canon 17 - 40 f4 L , Cokin Filters




  3. #3
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    21 Oct 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    146
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

  4. #4
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,643
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    So what they are doing it selling Spyders etc, alongside their own software.

    I would say the Spider 3 and 4 software does a brilliant job and in this case would question why you would buy a 3rd party software app.

    Yes the hardware between spyder 3 and 4 is virtually the same, but cause there is now a spyder 4 does not make your 3 obsolete. The 3 works very well. Having more detailed settings as this third party software seems to, also means more chance for the user to intervene and change something that stuffs up the process. For calibration of fairly much everything scientific, the idea is that it should be automated to ensure there are no user related errors in the process.

    Keep it simple, let your Spyder 3 do its job
    "It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro

    Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
    Nikon, etc!

    RICK
    My Photography

  5. #5
    Account Closed Wayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Dec 2009
    Location
    Eastside
    Posts
    1,639
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have the Spyder 3 studio (creates profiles for the paper and the printer as well) and there is no need to upgrade to the 4 or any 3rd party software. How much do you think you can better the Datacolor(sic) results with 3rd party software. I would think unless you have an EIZO top of the line (which comes with it's own calibration system) covering the widest gamut, with the highest contrast ratios you will be limited by the capability of the monitor rather than the software used to calibrate it.

  6. #6
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    8,185
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I looked into thirdparty software for my Spyder 3 pretty early on, and thankfully I did.

    I have to go against the norm here and say I hated the Spyder software, when I had two monitors setup, one looked good or the other .. but not both at the same time.

    I went with BasICColor's display software, and for a short time running two monitors, they were well on spot on, and no issues with the software loading the calibration LUT at system startup.
    (I had the Spyder Pro version, with the latest Spyder software back then).
    I don't currently have dual monitors.

    This was about 2 or maybe three years back, and have gone through a couple of monitors(simple replacements, not defects) and BasICColor has been top notch.
    While the Spyder software would usually cause me some grief of some sort, the BasICColor software as been stealthy and non intrusive, other than the occasional recalibration.

    Recalibration is also quicker and slightly easier with the Basic software too .. and more importantly more accurate.
    Basiccolor cost a fair penny, and I rue the day I went with the Pro version(for the software) instead of the simple hardware and saved the extra $100 or so for the Basicolor software instead.
    Live and learn I guess.

    I have to re-iterate tho, I didn't have any issues with the Spyder software calibrating a monitor accurately enough .. confirmed with prints .. it was the actual running of the software on my PC(WinXP Pro) and maintaining dual monitors that gave me grief.

    There is a demo version for those that feel the need to try alternatives.
    Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
    {Nikon} -> 50/1.2 : 500/8(CPU'd) : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8ais : 105mm f/1.8ais : 24mm/2ais
    {Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
    {Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC


  7. #7
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    21 Oct 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    146
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks everyone. I have the Spyder 3 Express which is pretty basic. Only sets colour, not black and white points. Big improvement over no or visual calibration. I was wondering if the Coloreyes (or for that matter the Spyder Pro or Elite) would give me any real difference.

    Coloreyes is about $200 as is the Spyder 4 Elite. Spyder 4 Pro is about $150.

  8. #8
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    8,185
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    IIRC the difference is all in the software going from the Express to the Pro.

    There were a few major differences in what each version of the software could do(all at once) .. and one of those was calibrating multiple monitors with the Pro version.
    I'd say there may also be other tweaks you could also do, but I can't remember them.

    Seeing as you already have the express, I'd say give this BasICColor display a trial run and see if it helps you.
    It's only a little more convoluted in it's initial setup phase, but once that's done, your all set to go.

    But you have to uninstall the old monitor calibration software before you allow another calibration software to setup your monitor at system startup.

  9. #9
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    21 Oct 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    146
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I did say in my original post: "If I understand correctly, the more expensive versions of the Spyder only differ in the software. The hardware being essentially the same. I presume the same applies to the Spyder 4."

    Well I was almost right. The Spyder 4 Pro and Elite have an ambient light sensor. The Express does not.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •