i1Pro vs i1Pro 2: Appreciable Difference?

[BrianDieckman]

Hello!

Is there an appreciable difference in the measurement accuracy/repeatability of the i1Pro 2 vs the i1Pro?

We have two i1Pro’s (one of which I use with an iO) and I’m using one with our Soft Proofing prototype station. I’m finding that my measurements (with either instrument) result in a soft proof with good a* b* reproduction within the monitor’s gamut but poor L*. (The soft proof is always darker though generally color-accurate)

Would a new instrument help with that?

-Brian

[Patrick_Herold]

No difference at all according to their official specs. The X-Rite specs for both the i1Pro and the i1Pro2 are identical in terms of accuracy and repeatability.

Inter-instrument agreement:
Average DE94 0.4, max. DE94 1.0
(Deviation from X-Rite manufacturing standard at 23C for single measurement mode on 12 BCRA tiles (D50,2)

Short-term repeatability:
DE*94 <= 0.1 (D50,2), with respect to the mean CIELab value of 10 measurements every 3 seconds on white.

The repeatability is very good. In terms of accuracy that Max dE is telling you that compared to the X-Rite standard, these instruments can vary by as much as 1.0 dE off.

So I don’t think a new instrument will automatically help there.

Looking at your IO table, we have found that the consistency you get using an automated system is sometimes offset by a lack of accuracy when the robotic arm raises or lowers a tiny fraction as it passes over the sheet. So that might affect your accuracy and repeatability.