Hi,
My laptop recenty was heavily corrupted with viruses. I had to have it rebuilt. I still don't have it back yet. Anyway, I was thinking of getting a new widescreen monitor for the desktop. I'm looking for suggestions , and or experiences with different monitors, so I can make a choice. I have a convenient way to get a Dell. Is there any reason I should avoid that? I lso would like to know what specs I should be looking for for photo viewing/editing?
I was looking at a 24 inch widescreen. They have Hd, and ultra sharp versions, but not with both. I was thinking hd was better? There is also a 24 inch version with 1600 by 1920 resolution with 3000 to 1 contrast ratio. It is about 1300.00 and I'm not looking to spend that much. Is it worth it, or necessary to go to that level?
Thanks for any help,
Chris
Posted by Kent Staubus on June 30, 2009 at 11:28 PM
I just went through buying a new monitor and computer myself. I ended up putting a custom PC together. After a lot of research I ended up buying a LaCie 324 monitor. It's a lower end pro graphics monitor. One of the numbers I was looking at was percentage of adobe color its does. The LaCie was pretty high at 96%. I found a refurb on eBay and it wasn't all that much money for what I got. It's pretty impressive.
Chris, your criteria for selecting a monitor should be the pixel depth and viewing angle, not resolution, if your primary use will be photo editing. Many lower cost LCD screens are 6 bit, which are really fast, ideal for gaming and watching video, but only capable of displaying 262,144 colors (2^6x2^6x2^6 or 64x64x64=262,144). They are fast because they are not displaying as much information, and they accomplish a decent level of accuracy (for those less critical applications) through heavy use of dithering.
For photo use, a practical pixel depth should be 8, or (2^8x2^8x2^8 or 256x256x256) 16,777,216.
The big difference will be smoother transitions, and highlight/shadow detail retention. For a practical example, I had a friend who was using a laptop monitor to do photoshop. He sent me an image that contained a large expanse of blue sky. When I opened the image on my computer I noticed a large amount of sensor dust which could be easily seen on my old CRT. I mentioned it to him, and he swore I was seeing things. I told him I was, so I accused him of not seeing things, and we went back and forth. The following day he called me from work and apologized. He had opened the image on his CRT at work and finally saw what I had seen.
In terms of technology - there are three choices - S-IPS, S-PVA/MVA or TN. Do not make the mistake of purchasing TN screen. They may look great, have wonderful contrast, be ultra-bright, but are typically completely unsuitable for photo editing. Colors and luminosity will change, even at the same viewing angle, from top to bottom, they will really change as you move left to right, but they will feature a 2ms - 5ms response time.
S-PVA/MVA are better, but suffer from viewing angle related color shift.
S-IPS is the current practical choice. Slow, so generally unsuitable for video or gaming, but highly accurate and not prone to color, contrast or luminance variances as you change viewing angle.
You can find fairly good list of choices for S-IPS screens here:
NED LCDs are the only game in town... that's what's in Eizo and LaCie.
Whatever brand you choose, make sure the display has separate RGB controls. You need this for the most accurate calibration.
And if you're looking for decent screen-to-print matches, don't look for models with super-high brightness and contrast - a print will never look that way.
Don't forget to check that list - it has quite a few options under $1000 from Dell, HP and LG, who private label someone else's panel. But most important, you will be getting either an S-IPS or H-IPS monitor which is what you should be looking for. Be careful with NEC, since they do manufacture various types of screens. You can forget about the low-cost Accusync,P-Series, 90 series - with the exception of their 2690WUXI2 - which cannot display enough colors to go beyond sRGB. The LCD2690WUXI2 covers 96% of the much bigger Adobe RGB color space, which would be far more useful for critical editing - but it does cost $1200. All but the least costly Spectraview II series are all about critical color work, and are equipped with color calibration, most with gamuts that exceed the Adobe RGB spec.
Solve your virus infestation problem and get very high quality displays: move to Macs. The initial purchase price higher, but the maintenance is so much lower you'll save over the life cycle.
Jim, there are no significant differences, other than some software offerings and freedom from viruses on the Mac vs significantly lower pricing for PC. With the lifespan of most machines at 2 yrs, its tough to convince that a $2500 Mac pro will be somehow cheaper over that period than a similarly equipped quad core PC which you can buy for around $1200 these days. But this is the wrong forum to discuss computer platforms - I have pc user since '83, and have also used macs extensively in video and audio editing, and found little advantage of one over the other with the noted exceptions.
Solve your virus infestation problem and get very high quality displays: move to Macs
I sure have seen a lot of complaints from users of these 'high quality displays' for not having the ability to moderate the brightness without using more expensive third party calibartion units.
Understanding that $1,300 is a price you consider high, if you decide to spend that much, I think I would prefer to go the Eizo route with a smaller monitor than Dell for a larger screen. Eizo is the standard to which other high end monitors compare themselves with.
Gene's reply makes some good points about the NEC line.
You can expect to pay $750 minimum for a good display (19 inch); $1000 and up is more in line with pro quality.
Re: the larger color spaces - I haven't found that to be as much of a factor; as long as the display is close to accurate in terms of color balance and brightness, your eye becomes trained to know how that translates to a print. And since I work in ProPhoto, a display that is 98% of Adobe RGB is irrelevant.
I'm currently using a several-year-old Lacie 319 and love it.
Re: Mac displays - though Im a big fan of Apple, due to their lack of adjustments/controls, Apple displays are generally considered not suitable for professional color work.... unfortunately this includes the iMac and the standalone displays.
That dais, back to the issue of training your eye - I have worked with many clients using iMacs and Macs with Apple displays, and it doesn't necessarily need to be a problem. Using the X-Rite calibration systems it is possible to get them somewhere in the ballpark of accurate; maybe close enough for most people.
But again, for true accuracy in a display, the most important controls are Brightness that can go down around 110, and individual RGB controls. In my opinion everything else is bells and whistles - including dot pitch.
Nat, you are right on the money. Calibration is the only way to get consistent, predictable results in any case. However, even if you work in ProPhoto as I do, the larger the color space of the display, the better it is, since you can more easily see the effects of your fine tuning. Trying to do this on a 7 bit or 8 bit monitor that only displays sRGB is an exercise in frustration, especially if you get your prints done by a lab. Which is why the NECs targeted to the professional graphics market are bundled with calibration units.
Thanks for all the feedback, and technical info. It is kind of a foreign language to me though. I didn't really know where the market was for what is considered a high quality monitor. Over a grand is not what I was anticipating. I have been doing all of my processing on a laptop! I know it's not the best, but it seems to have been okay so far. Maybe because I don't have a good monitor to compare the results to? Anyway, I appreciate it. I'll have to contemplate this further, before I make a decision.
The LaCie 324 I bought sells for over a thousand from regular sources. It's very much an entry level pro graphics monitor. By careful shopping and watching eBay, I bought a refurb for $650. I did my homework, was patient, and think I got a pretty good bargain.
There are 11 S-IPS, H-IPS or E-IPS displays that are $900 or less, 7 of which are $600 or less. Don't need to break the piggybank, just need to do some research.
I was looking at the HP LP2475w, (which is on this list) but a friend told me that it does not have internal look-up tables, which affects the ability to do hardware calibration. Is that correct?
I'm having a hard time find out all the really pertinent details on some of these monitors. I'm on dial-up, and I have given up on ever getting onto NEC's website for info....I just never get there.
Discussion
14 repliesMy laptop recenty was heavily corrupted with viruses. I had to have it rebuilt. I still don't have it back yet. Anyway, I was thinking of getting a new widescreen monitor for the desktop. I'm looking for suggestions , and or experiences with different monitors, so I can make a choice. I have a convenient way to get a Dell. Is there any reason I should avoid that? I lso would like to know what specs I should be looking for for photo viewing/editing?
I was looking at a 24 inch widescreen. They have Hd, and ultra sharp versions, but not with both. I was thinking hd was better? There is also a 24 inch version with 1600 by 1920 resolution with 3000 to 1 contrast ratio. It is about 1300.00 and I'm not looking to spend that much. Is it worth it, or necessary to go to that level?
Thanks for any help,
Chris
Kent in SD
For photo use, a practical pixel depth should be 8, or (2^8x2^8x2^8 or 256x256x256) 16,777,216.
The big difference will be smoother transitions, and highlight/shadow detail retention. For a practical example, I had a friend who was using a laptop monitor to do photoshop. He sent me an image that contained a large expanse of blue sky. When I opened the image on my computer I noticed a large amount of sensor dust which could be easily seen on my old CRT. I mentioned it to him, and he swore I was seeing things. I told him I was, so I accused him of not seeing things, and we went back and forth. The following day he called me from work and apologized. He had opened the image on his CRT at work and finally saw what I had seen.
In terms of technology - there are three choices - S-IPS, S-PVA/MVA or TN. Do not make the mistake of purchasing TN screen. They may look great, have wonderful contrast, be ultra-bright, but are typically completely unsuitable for photo editing. Colors and luminosity will change, even at the same viewing angle, from top to bottom, they will really change as you move left to right, but they will feature a 2ms - 5ms response time.
S-PVA/MVA are better, but suffer from viewing angle related color shift.
S-IPS is the current practical choice. Slow, so generally unsuitable for video or gaming, but highly accurate and not prone to color, contrast or luminance variances as you change viewing angle.
You can find fairly good list of choices for S-IPS screens here:
http://www.pchardwarehelp.com/guides/s-ips-lcd-list.php
Hope this clarifies things a bit.
Whatever brand you choose, make sure the display has separate RGB controls. You need this for the most accurate calibration.
And if you're looking for decent screen-to-print matches, don't look for models with super-high brightness and contrast - a print will never look that way.
I sure have seen a lot of complaints from users of these 'high quality displays' for not having the ability to moderate the brightness without using more expensive third party calibartion units.
You can expect to pay $750 minimum for a good display (19 inch); $1000 and up is more in line with pro quality.
Re: the larger color spaces - I haven't found that to be as much of a factor; as long as the display is close to accurate in terms of color balance and brightness, your eye becomes trained to know how that translates to a print. And since I work in ProPhoto, a display that is 98% of Adobe RGB is irrelevant.
I'm currently using a several-year-old Lacie 319 and love it.
Re: Mac displays - though Im a big fan of Apple, due to their lack of adjustments/controls, Apple displays are generally considered not suitable for professional color work.... unfortunately this includes the iMac and the standalone displays.
That dais, back to the issue of training your eye - I have worked with many clients using iMacs and Macs with Apple displays, and it doesn't necessarily need to be a problem. Using the X-Rite calibration systems it is possible to get them somewhere in the ballpark of accurate; maybe close enough for most people.
But again, for true accuracy in a display, the most important controls are Brightness that can go down around 110, and individual RGB controls. In my opinion everything else is bells and whistles - including dot pitch.
Chris
The LaCie 324 I bought sells for over a thousand from regular sources. It's very much an entry level pro graphics monitor. By careful shopping and watching eBay, I bought a refurb for $650. I did my homework, was patient, and think I got a pretty good bargain.
Kent in SD
http://www.pchardwarehelp.com/guides/s-ips-lcd-list.php
There are 11 S-IPS, H-IPS or E-IPS displays that are $900 or less, 7 of which are $600 or less. Don't need to break the piggybank, just need to do some research.
Good luck and let us know what you end up with.
I'm having a hard time find out all the really pertinent details on some of these monitors. I'm on dial-up, and I have given up on ever getting onto NEC's website for info....I just never get there.