X-Rite i1Display Pro Plus (EODIS3PL)

I use this with DisplayCAL on Mac. The i1Display Pro Plus is dramatically faster than my old DTP-94, and highly accurate.Now, my rating is based on the quality of the device itself as I use it in my workflow. I DO NOT like iProfiler. As many reviewers have noted, it's very buggy. And having used many different profiling solutions in the past, it's also entirely unimpressive even when it is working. X-Rite's hardware is great, but its software is terrible.So on to the device:All colorimeters need corrections applied in order to compensate for differences in backlighting between screen models, and in many cases, differences between different devices of the same model. These corrections can only be created with a spectrophotometer. For high accuracy, you need to spend another $1-1.5K for the device, and make your own Colorimeter correction for your device and screen. (Not to mention the need to send your spectro in to the manufacturer along with $150, every year or so to recalibrate and certify it.) Do that, and any colorimeter will be accurate for you.However, most of us cannot afford to spend more on our color correction hardware than we do on our displays. The advantage of the 1iDisplay Pro Plus (as well as the Display Pro, the ColorMunki, and the new Diplay Studio) is that the variance from device to device is very small, way smaller than the competition (I'm looking at you, Spyder). Tight device tolerances, plus the fact that X-Rite provides generic corrections for common display types, and you will have a better profile than any other device will get you. Not perfect, of course, but "good enough."But you can do better without spending money. Since the i1Display Pro varies so little from device to device, you can use corrections provided by other parties, provided that party created a correction on a fairly "average" display of any given model.Here is where using the excellent (and free!) DisplayCal together with an i1Display Pro is a huge advantage. If you are using a popular model of display, you have access to a database of color corrections generated by the community that will get you much closer than X-Rite's generic corrections.And although this is not a DisplayCal review, I would be remiss not to mention that it does a superior job of neutralizing your gray-balance curves, because it does tailored iterations until it has a curve that is as close as your display can get to producing neutral grays across its entire value range. iProfiler, on the other hand, reads a set set of static swatches and does calculations. I mention this only to encourage you not to let the deservedly negative reviews of iProfiler to deter you from purchasing this excellent device.

I have owned several display calibration instruments. In the last year the DataColor Spyder X Pro has fallen behind in its technology. While the instrument may be great, its software is deficient. It is not being properly maintained. The icc created did not work properly on my new computer, even after one year of software updates. It is also important to the consumer to note that the hardware has not been updated in years.So, I searched for a replacement color calibration instrument and found X-Rite i1Display Pro Plus. The “Plus” is important since it denotes greater precision. This instrument is the best that I have owned. It is more accurate than the DataColor Spyder X Pro. While the X-Rite i1Display Pro Plus will cost you more, your eyes will see the difference. I am glad that I bought this product.The instructions for the X-Rite i1Display Pro Plus do not explain that the average consumer will want the following settings:White Point = CIE Illuminant D65Luminance = 80 cd/m2, 100 cd/m2, 120 cd/m2The luminance corresponds to the brightness of screen. Leave the rest of the settings alone, unless you are an expert. You will have to enter a name for the icc if you want to change it. Otherwise, this instrument is simple to use. I have calibrated three MACs and the result is better than Apple's built-in calibration algorithm. This is a quality product.

UPDATE June 2025: The device died on me. My old i1 still works, but this newer unit is not going into the trash.I’ve been using the (original) X-rite i1Display Pro Colorimeter for years, for calibration and profiling of my MacBook Pro Retina display and far more importantly, for my NEC SpectraView color reference displays. I used this original device with the NEC Spectraview software package since the instrument is supported, and this was the same Colorimeter hardware NEC uses for their bundle indicating to me; NEC feels that this is the preferred supported instrument for their reference display systems. When I had added another NEC SpectraView system (PA271Q) to an additional workstation, I decided it was a great excuse to purchase another Colorimeter and decided to go the extra $49 for the i1Display Pro Plus. Some good news is this new instrument was detected and able to be used with the current version of the NEC software so if you use this software, it’s all set to go. I tested both the original and the newer Colorimeters on the PA271Q SpectraView display using the NEC software set for highest quality level (most samplings of color). In both cases, the colorimetric results were nearly identical although as shown in the SpectraView reporting, the newer instrument was a tiny bit more accurate: That is, the values produced were a tiny bit closer to the values asked for. This indicates slightly better color accuracy at least in this test sample. You can see in the slightly lower delteE reporting in both screen captures I’m providing. The contrast ratio is a little closer to the calibrated aim points with the Plus unit as well. Now, these differences are invisible. But none the less, the new instrument is a tiny bit closer to the color values asked for hence, the lower dE values. That’s certainly a good sign. Time to calibrate using both instruments was identical (7 minutes and 53 seconds). Also, it’s useful to see that the two colorimeters produce such close results indicating to me, very close intra-instrument repeatability** in hardware for a task they are both designed for, although the two are slightly different. This means I can continue to use the two devices on two NEC systems and produce the same visual results on each workstation. And the differences in the original i1Display Pro and the i1Display Pro Plus? Well the i1Display Pro Plus is really geared to newer display technologies like OLED where measuring black is quite a different task than measuring black (and dark emissive colors) on the LED displays I’m using. The other difference is, the Plus can measure a much higher luminance display system (2000 nits instead of max of 1,000 nits with the older i1Display Pro Colorimeter). My current computer displays cannot produce such high luminance values nor do I want to edit images on anything that high (I’m actually calibrated to 150cd/m2 to match my GTI viewing booth). So you might ask, why pay extra for this unit over the i1Display Pro Colorimeter? Well first of all, display technology is changing rapidly and while I don’t expect to use high luminance display systems, I can foresee using OLED in the future which produces a ‘perfect black’. I highly supsect the original i1Display Pro Colorimeter would have difficulty measuring very dark saturated colors emitted on an OLED display system. I own an OLED LG TV and might now try calibrating it with software for the task how that I have a Colorimeter that can handle that task. And should the day come I end up hooking up an OLED display system to my Mac, I have a Colorimeter ready for that task. You can’t really go wrong with either version of the i1Display Pro, decide if the extra money is well spent depending on your needs today and in the future. If you’re attempting to use some 3rd party calibration on your OLED TV, then you absolutely want to go with the Plus.** X-rite has a very useful article on their web site: “Understanding Inter-Instrument Agreement“, Posted October 03, 2019 by Mike Huda