Computer Monitor vs. TV.
Candid Arts
Registered Users Posts: 1,685 Major grins
So...eventually going to be getting the MAC tower for editing our photos. Is it better to go with an actual computer monitor or could I use a TV? I'm looking at getting a 26-32" LED LCD TV 1080P. Is a TV capable of editing photos properly or is/will there be a resolution difference between an actual computer monitor and a TV?
Thanks for all your help!
Thanks for all your help!
Candid Arts Photography | Portland Oregon | Fine Art
OneTwoFiftieth | Portland, Oregon | Modern Portraiture
My Equipment:
Bodies: Canon 50D, Canon EOS 1
Lenses: Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, Canon 50mm f/1.4, Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro, Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8
Lighting: Canon 580EXII, Canon 420 EX, 12" Reflector, Pocket Wizard Plus II (3), AB800 (3), Large Softbox
Stability: Manfrotto 190CXPRO3 Tripod, Manfrotto 488RC4 Ball Head, Manfrotto 679B Monopod
OneTwoFiftieth | Portland, Oregon | Modern Portraiture
My Equipment:
Bodies: Canon 50D, Canon EOS 1
Lenses: Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, Canon 50mm f/1.4, Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro, Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8
Lighting: Canon 580EXII, Canon 420 EX, 12" Reflector, Pocket Wizard Plus II (3), AB800 (3), Large Softbox
Stability: Manfrotto 190CXPRO3 Tripod, Manfrotto 488RC4 Ball Head, Manfrotto 679B Monopod
0
Comments
The resolution on a TV is quite low. A 1080p TV is 1920x1080 (or close to it, exact numbers I don't really care ;-) where a typical 23" monitor is 1920x1200. A 23" or 24" monitor is a better choice IMO.
Why would you say a 23" or 24" would be better? How much difference is 1080 to 1200 going to make on a 23" - 32" monitor/tv? I sell and install TVs for a living, so I know that if you're looking at a 32" TV, there is no visual difference between a 1080P and a 720P TV because of the small screen size.
Thanks for the tip.
OneTwoFiftieth | Portland, Oregon | Modern Portraiture
My Equipment:
Bodies: Canon 50D, Canon EOS 1
Lenses: Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, Canon 50mm f/1.4, Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro, Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8
Lighting: Canon 580EXII, Canon 420 EX, 12" Reflector, Pocket Wizard Plus II (3), AB800 (3), Large Softbox
Stability: Manfrotto 190CXPRO3 Tripod, Manfrotto 488RC4 Ball Head, Manfrotto 679B Monopod
So the TV will resolve 1920x1080 pixels. At 26", most computer monitors are 1920x1200, so by the specs alone (not evaluating photo quality) they seem comparable. At 32" you are losing resolution compared to computer monitors, which at 30" typically display 2560x1600 pixels. Are you going to notice this in image quality? Again strictly talking about resolution maybe not. But you will notice in term of pixel real estate for your user interface. In Photoshop, Lightroom, etc. if you do not have as much resolution as you would on a computer monitor, that means you will have less pixel area available to stash your palettes before you crowd out the image.
Now we go beyond mere resolution and talk about image quality. If you get a typical TV, chances are it will not be tuned for optimal photographic image quality. It's made to make sports and movies look good. Can you set it so that it displays a consistent image? For example, if your TV has video-oriented features like dynamic black level or something like that and you don't think to turn off that feature, you'll drive yourself nuts trying to do corrections because it will keep changing what it shows you as you edit. What is the TV's actual gamut? Can the monitor be calibrated and profiled using one of the standard computer monitor hardware pucks? Not all of them work with TVs. Sometimes they sell a separate kind for TVs. What kind of panel is it? Can you get an IPS panel like you can for the high grade photo monitors?
I'm not saying you can't sub a TV for a computer monitor, but do watch out for all the subtle differences between TVs and true computer monitors. You can get a 26" TV for $300, but the highly coveted (by photographers) 26" NEC 2690 is a $1300 monitor, and if you go for the Eizo monitors of that same size that some prepress folks like, you'll pay several hundred more than that.
A lot of it depends on how serious your photo editing on this monitor is supposed to be.
You're sitting in front of it: Likely no more than 2 feet from the monitor. If you're close, a 32" TV is going to be really big with that few pixels. TVs are generally designed and used at a much farther viewing distance than computer monitors.
I have and use this very monitor and at 1920x1200 I consider it perfect for editing. I also have a 32" 1080P HDTV that is great for Blu-ray movies but completely useless for photo editing when compared to the NEC.
Colourbox and CatOne are right on the money with their advice.
I can get a great deal on a 23" Samsung Computer Monitor through my work. So I think we are going to go with that. Don't quite think we can afford the NEC just yet, however that would be nice...
OneTwoFiftieth | Portland, Oregon | Modern Portraiture
My Equipment:
Bodies: Canon 50D, Canon EOS 1
Lenses: Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, Canon 50mm f/1.4, Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro, Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8
Lighting: Canon 580EXII, Canon 420 EX, 12" Reflector, Pocket Wizard Plus II (3), AB800 (3), Large Softbox
Stability: Manfrotto 190CXPRO3 Tripod, Manfrotto 488RC4 Ball Head, Manfrotto 679B Monopod
If you're serious about accurate color don't get this monitor.
I can suggest two other much better monitors for image editing that won't bust your budget (will be within a few dollars of the retail price of the Samsung 23") and will compliment any future systems you acquire.
If you're interested comment here.
.
.
The nice thing about the Samsung is I won't be paying retail for it. I can get it at 5% above cost... So there in lies a huge benefit. I can calibrate it for accurate color no?
What monitors are you talking about?
OneTwoFiftieth | Portland, Oregon | Modern Portraiture
My Equipment:
Bodies: Canon 50D, Canon EOS 1
Lenses: Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, Canon 50mm f/1.4, Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro, Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8
Lighting: Canon 580EXII, Canon 420 EX, 12" Reflector, Pocket Wizard Plus II (3), AB800 (3), Large Softbox
Stability: Manfrotto 190CXPRO3 Tripod, Manfrotto 488RC4 Ball Head, Manfrotto 679B Monopod
re Calibrate for accurate color? Maybe, maybe not. I struggle to get our households' Samsung TN panel monitor to look reasonable where with my Samsung PVA panel I have no issues.
...............
Most Samsung 23" units use a 6bit TN TFT LCD panel. One model, the F2380, uses a c-PVA panel.
In terms of image quality for photo editing, these are the TFT LCD panel types from best to worst:
IPS (newer variants are S-IPS, AS-IPS, H-IPS, e-IPS, etc)
PVA (newer variants are S-PVA, c-PVA)
MVA (A-MVA, P-MVA, S-MVA, maybe no longer produced)
TN
TN panels are NOT ideal for image editing due they are 2 bits short of 8bit and have issues with off angle viewing - the gamma/color changes very quickly as the angle of incidence to your eyes changes.
6bit panels so not show a true 8bit 16.7 million colors. They use electronic techniques to simulate it and sometimes, depending on the quality of the electronics in the monitor, these techniques are not well done resulting in effects such as banding/posterization.
Read.... http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/panel_technologies.htm
The c-PVA panel in the F2380 is frankly, not so good. It is 8bit but has serious issues with black crush.
What exact model were you looking at buying?
I was going to advise you to consider any of the following as they are all 8bit panels and have a variant of an IPS TFT LCD panel which is far superior to a TN panel for off angle viewing. Of course if you work in the AdobeRGB color space they will not be sufficient as they only effectively cover the sRGB space but then, neither would most Samsung 23" units.
......................
Dell 2209WA
..... ~ $309 USD MSRP (usually discounted every 2 or 3 months)
..... was $50 off on Dell USA website earlier this week
..... recently available for $208 CAD from Dell Canada
..... some users report calling Dell USA CSR can get $220 USD.
..... e-IPS panel
..... 22 inch
..... 1680x1050
..... true 8bit screen
..... 100% sRGB color space
..... don't confuse this with other Dell monitors, i.e. the S2209W
..... http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/products/Displays/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&cs=19&sku=2209WA3
..... http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/review/2009/review-dell-2209wa.html
..... http://www.flatpanelshd.com/review.php?subaction=showfull&id=1248173915
......................
NEC EA231WMi
..... ~ $379 USD MSRP @ NEC ($319 on Buy.com recently)
..... eH-IPS panel (per NEC, same tech as the Dell 2209WA panel I believe)
..... 23 inch
..... 1920x1080
..... true 8bit screen
..... 100% sRGB color space
..... note that some reviews and user comments point out possible brightness uniformity issues from the backlight
..... http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/review/2009/review-nec-ea231wmi-bk.html
..... http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/nec_ea231wmi.htm
..... http://www.flatpanelshd.com/review.php?subaction=showfull&id=1265977876
......................
HP ZR22w
..... now available for order; no reviews as yet
..... List $289 USD ($275 on buy.com)
..... probably replaces LP2275w
..... IPS type panel
..... 22 inch
..... 1920x1080
..... true 8bit screen
..... 96% sRGB
..... http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF05a/382087-382087-64283-72270-3884471-4101127.html
......................
.
Well looking at Samsungs site, the model I'm thinking about I can't get through my work, I don't believe. So I may be re-thinking what I'm gonna get. For Samsung, I'd be looking at the 2463UW-1. All of the ones you mention are 1920x1080...everyone else suggested the computer monitor because it is 1920x1200... Is there a reason you only suggested the 1080P versions?
And all these are regular fluorescent lit LCD monitors correct? What about LED...are there any great computer monitors for photo editing that are LED? I would prefer to go that route if possible...
OneTwoFiftieth | Portland, Oregon | Modern Portraiture
My Equipment:
Bodies: Canon 50D, Canon EOS 1
Lenses: Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, Canon 50mm f/1.4, Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro, Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8
Lighting: Canon 580EXII, Canon 420 EX, 12" Reflector, Pocket Wizard Plus II (3), AB800 (3), Large Softbox
Stability: Manfrotto 190CXPRO3 Tripod, Manfrotto 488RC4 Ball Head, Manfrotto 679B Monopod
The Samsung 2463UW-1 uses a 6bit TN panel. I can tell by its' stated 160 degree viewing angle. IPS and PVA monitors are stated to 178 degree. The Samsung is probably a great gaming and video watching monitor but is NOT ideal for image editing.
I suggested those, first - because they all use IPS panels, and second - it seemed to me that $$$ budget was a concern as you'd indicated in your comment about the NEC monitor.
Two of the three suggestions are 1920x1080 because it seems there is a move underway in the monitor industry to that 16:9 ratio in a certain price range. That's what is available with an IPS panel in that budget range. There is very little difference between the 16:10 1920x1200 and the 16:9 1920x1080 in terms of image quality due pixel size or panel height. Yes, you are getting a smaller panel but you are getting a higher quality image due the 8bit IPS panel.
Very few high end monitors use LED's at this time. Apple has a 24" and 27" and HP has a $2000 24".
When you look to the true high end monitors manufacturers whose products are renown in the graphics arts industry, none of them are using LED's for backlights, all are sticking with CCFL's. I'm referring to Eizo, Lacie, and NEC. The CCFL's are more color gamut accurate and possibly illuminate the back panel more evenly.
There are a lot of laptops and "budget" low end monitors using LED's for back lighting. LED's are great in laptops due that they are more rugged than CCFL's and use less energy. LED's are used in desktop monitors for appeal to the "green" energy saver market. They are not necessarily accurate in their color spectrum even though they are a newer technology. IMHO, some of the use of LED for back lights is strictly for the purpose of marketing product to people who have the perception that newer is better.
Notably, Apple has struggled with issues in their new 27" LED backlit panel. There have been a number of complaints about a yellow tinge to the lower half of the panel. Much speculation has revolved around the LED back lighting being the cause.
Dell has released a new 27" using the same IPS panel as the Apple 27" and the Dell uses a CCFL back light. I can't recall reading a report of the yellow tinge in the Dell either in the Dell forums or over at HardForum.
NEC is also about to introduce the PA271w which will also use the same IPS panel and again with a CCFL back light.
Questions for you.... what do you use for editing software?
and... do you work in the AdobeRGB color space?
.
.
Wow, you have a pleathera of information on monitors/panels. Amazing. Thank you.
I am using LR2 and CS3 right now. Hopefully upgrading to LR3 and CS5 at some point.
I am working is sRGB as I was told that 99% of everything reads sRGB more accurate and consistantly than AdobeRGB.
OneTwoFiftieth | Portland, Oregon | Modern Portraiture
My Equipment:
Bodies: Canon 50D, Canon EOS 1
Lenses: Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, Canon 50mm f/1.4, Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro, Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8
Lighting: Canon 580EXII, Canon 420 EX, 12" Reflector, Pocket Wizard Plus II (3), AB800 (3), Large Softbox
Stability: Manfrotto 190CXPRO3 Tripod, Manfrotto 488RC4 Ball Head, Manfrotto 679B Monopod
You're using something like $1200 worth of software with a $300 tool that can't do full justice for effort. Better to go with the smaller panel that has a more accurate color gamut at all viewing angles.
That's somewhat correct. Pretty much all web images should be in the sRGB space. Commercial printers, for the most part, want your images delivered to them with the sRGB color space embedded.
Lot's of issues using wide gamut monitors (100% sRGB + 100% AdobeRGB) where users don't have their software sorted out and are using non-color managed browsers and editors. Reds and greens in particular appear too vibrant or over saturated. If you're not using AdobeRGB why bother having the hassle.
You may want to also check out the new HP ZR24w. Similar to the ZR22w except 24 inch, 1920x1200 , and 97% sRGB coverage. Currently can be found for about $418 via Buy.com or Amazon.com.
Getting pretty good user reviews over in Hardforum. No proper reviews as yet from Prad.de or Flatpanels but one coming soon on TFTcentral.
.
.
http://www.prad.de/en/tv/index3.html
http://www.flatpanelshd.com/reviews.php
Mind you, they are both European web sites so their models may not line up exactly with what you would see in North America.
.
.
Very nice of you to spend the time to explain this so completely.
Anyone not listening to this advice would be a doing themselves a disservice!
Also:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-Bpciih5iI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SjS6VCVAcA&feature=related
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Not to mention a $1200 camera (the Canon 50D in the sig). I know it's a hard thing for a lot of users to swallow (including me!), but if you buy thousands of dollars of cameras, lenses, and software and skimp on the monitor it's like sabotaging the whole effort. In audio, it's like buying high-end audiophile gear and picking really cheap speakers to go with it.
Why is that thing so expensive?
You can get cheaper monitors.
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=5766663&CatId=3774
S.C.
S.C.
Worth every penny!
Actually it's inexpensive compared to other brands.
The price of the NEC starts with the panel type, which is IPS, for better color and wide viewing angles. Actually, the NEC is H-IPS, which is the upper end of IPS. That Samsung you linked from Tiger Direct is very likely the inferior VA or TN type of panel. On top of that the NEC has more advanced hardware driving the panel and controlling color, like the direct digital calibration through a 12-bit lookup table for less banding. Most monitors are 8-bit, cheap ones (and many laptop displays) are actually 6-bit. The NEC is SWOP-certified, which is valued by the printing industry. The Samsung you probably have to calibrate the common way, through a software profile only.
Remember...the NEC price is midrange. At the low end are all the consumer monitors with terrible viewing angles, little control, low bit LUTs and small gamuts. At the high end are the Eizos at $2000+.
The question is are you looking for a monitor, or are you looking for a serious photographer's monitor. If the former, buy on price. If the latter, buy on quality.
I'm sold on the NEC and will likely be getting that puppy pretty quick.
So, what about a new PC to plug that bad boy into?
Sorry for the threadjack.
S.C.
OneTwoFiftieth | Portland, Oregon | Modern Portraiture
My Equipment:
Bodies: Canon 50D, Canon EOS 1
Lenses: Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, Canon 50mm f/1.4, Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro, Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8
Lighting: Canon 580EXII, Canon 420 EX, 12" Reflector, Pocket Wizard Plus II (3), AB800 (3), Large Softbox
Stability: Manfrotto 190CXPRO3 Tripod, Manfrotto 488RC4 Ball Head, Manfrotto 679B Monopod
Of course, I'd love to know what the current low-end IPS recommendation is.
I watch little TV, hardly game at all, and could live in our beloved Photoshop....oh and love to acquire images, too. I just put together a new monster computer and it seems the monitor is now the weakest link since it's old, not an IPS, and failing mechanically.
Gotta love the i7-920 quad core, 6 GB ram, a SSD (solid state drive), and a good GPU. Photoshop opens, completely, in...get this...faster than you can read this sentence!...something like 2 seconds.
So, recommendations?
Regardless, THANK YOU for the excellent information.
--drcarl
PS - After reading a lot, even in light of the occasional brightness and color-shift issues, I am about to pull the trigger on the 23" NEC EA231WMi. If the colors are bad, I'll be willing to make exchanges at $10 a crack through NewEgg.
Newsy via his links sold me on the NEC MultiSunc PA241w...and now that I am using it, it is everything I'd hoped. I also saved some Money via that purchase due to looking at LaCie only and figuring I had to go with one of those. but weeding thru the marketing hyperbole is intense and not satisfying....still left 'me' wondering what I was getting. Not so with this NEC though. And later today when the NEC Hard/software arrive to calibrate, write to the internal LUT and store the profile in the monitor, I'll even further enjoy what I have. Also picked up two extra inches of Monitor for the money AND the Colormetric device.
Being relatively new to the whole world of pro photography, Now approaching three years in, I had to use my budget carefully and wisely to get my primary equipment up to snuff...knowing I needed a color accurate Monitor, but not budgeting for it until now. SO in answer to an earlier post, I do understand how we have to wait to get Some things....hard to do, but also priorities dictate.
The res on this thing is phenomenal, everything so crisp and clear too.
As for the CPU debate. I wrote another thread Here yesterday. I will upgrade my older CPU soon, but don't think it is totally necessary. In fact could be argued that it is totally unnecessary.
You decide.
cheers, and thanks again Newsy!