The OS, Software, and output are all enabled and synced in 10 bit/channel display mode... that's the entirety of the path to display 10 bit on an LCD
That doesn’t answer the question. How does one verify all components in the chain stay high bit through the entire path? Especially the one area I hear is the weak link (applications, specifically Photoshop).
I have some knowledgeable experts in the display industry saying as yet, that’s not necessarily the case. I’m not necessarily taking their word as fact but I’m not necessarily taking your word as fact either. So it begs the question, how does one know?
That doesn’t answer the question. How does one verify all components in the chain stay high bit through the entire path? Especially the one area I hear is the weak link (applications, specifically Photoshop).
I have some knowledgeable experts in the display industry saying as yet, that’s not necessarily the case. I’m not necessarily taking their word as fact but I’m not necessarily taking your word as fact either. So it begs the question, how does one know?
Open this on a 10-bit enabled path and it won't band (of course after following their tutorial)
The OpenGL is what enables PS to render in 10 bit on screen. With the RGB values on the info plane it may still read things in 256 values per channel, but Adobe is working on all of that from what I've read.
The OpenGL is what enables PS to render in 10 bit on screen. With the RGB values on the info plane it may still read things in 256 values per channel, but Adobe is working on all of that from what I've read.
Exactly (at least the blame I’ve heard was directed at Adobe and specifically OpenGL). I’ve asked an Adobe engineer.
Being on a Mac, I don’t know I have any way to open the document without banding despite having a high bit panel (PS271W). I’m not sure any of the necessary video cards are Mac compatible (I’m trying to wade my way through ATI’s web pages). And there is still some question if I’d need to upgrade to 10.7 or if 10.8.X will fly.
Exactly (at least the blame I’ve heard was directed at Adobe and specifically OpenGL). I’ve asked an Adobe engineer.
Being on a Mac, I don’t know I have any way to open the document without banding despite having a high bit panel (PS271W). I’m not sure any of the necessary video cards are Mac compatible (I’m trying to wade my way through ATI’s web pages). And there is still some question if I’d need to upgrade to 10.7 or if 10.8.X will fly.
From a technical view point if the OS doesn't support it, the video card won't work either... if there's another workaround in there somewhere I wouldn't know. Adobe can't make Apples' OS for Apple, Apple makes Apples' OS.
I'd say %99.9 no unless Apple updates the OS to work with it first.
According to posts on the Adobe forums, the issue is Apple’s drivers which are not updated. Even in Lion. Its this blame game all over again (Apple says its Adobe, Adobe says its Apple).
According to posts on the Adobe forums, the issue is Apple’s drivers which are not updated. Even in Lion. Its this blame game all over again (Apple says its Adobe, Adobe says its Apple).
In the IT world, OS is the base of all operations. Keywords: operating system. Literally at a programming standpoint, Apple can't put up a valid argument that Adobe is the problem, since its THEIR operating system kernal that lacks the 10 bit compatibility, and they're the ones responsible for their own kernal. I'm pretty sure it's not even legal for another company to toy with the core components of OSX. Maybe a virtual driver or some whack system tweaks/workarounds might work, but really, Apple needs to pick up the slack with that if it's gonna happen for real. The Windows 7 operating system was made compatible by Microsoft, cause Windows 7 is Microsoft's, and they know this is a feature professionals want. Apple has to do it themselves... unless they want to remain an OS with a real reason for editing professionals who use Windows to bash Mac
I am very well aware of who Will H is as he posts in another forum I am active in. It's great when he steps in to clarify issues.
TFT Central Panel Parts claims the PA241 uses a LM240WU4-SLB1 panel and that it is 8bit + AFRC. They have been wrong before on panel models but not often. They also see European models which differ somewhat from North American units.
I'm not sure who is correct. I'd put money on the NEC rep but TFT Central was one of the first to break the news that the 23" and 21.5" e-IPS units were all 6bit + AFRC which none of the manufacturer reps had acknowledged up to that point.
I'm not sure who is correct. I'd put money on the NEC rep but TFT Central was one of the first to break the news that the 23" and 21.5" e-IPS units were all 6bit + AFRC which none of the manufacturer reps had acknowledged up to that point.
I’d put my money on Will. He’s far more than a manufacturer’s rep too (he writes the software for US SpectraView and is the product manager).
That is a very interesting Overview page. A 10bit non-writable LUT and if it is a true 8bit panel, in theory it makes it superior to the 2209WA and clearly superior to the U2311 and new U2312HM which have 8bit LUT's and 6bit + AFRC panels.
I'd wait until TFT Central, Flatpanels, or Prad.de have reviewed it. I'm hoping that we'll find the LED back light in this has a similar range of control to that of the Dell U2412HM (it dims lower than 100 cd/m2 white luminance). If so it will be an outstanding monitor for the price.
The only point I really don't like is that it is a 16:9 1920x1080 resolution.
Asus PA246Q
Yikes ! New to color management,and I just bought the Asus PA246Q. I came here to see if anyone had experience and/or opinions on a colorimeter for use with the Asus PA246Q.
Canon 50D/Rebel XTi / EF 24-70 F2.8 L / EF 70-200 F4 L / EF 300 F4 L IS / EF 1.4x II /580 EX II / Sigma 10mm f/2.8 EX DC Fisheye HSM http://chriscouse.smugmug.com/
One step closer and I'll shoot you with my Canon
Yikes ! New to color management,and I just bought the Asus PA246Q. I came here to see if anyone had experience and/or opinions on a colorimeter for use with the Asus PA246Q.
ColorMuki
Spyder3Pro or Elite (The versions only differ in Software)
Gretag Eye One
all will do
Personaly I use a Spyder2Express (old model, inexpensive) which does a good job and a Spyder3Elite which is somewhat more awesome (accuracy, more options in Software, multi monitor support).
“To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
― Edward Weston
The biggest point is that the Elite offers a dedicated module for setting monitor brightness. It will sample the rooms' ambient light and suggest a level to target but it also allows you to set a unique target value (white luminance cd/m2) and then walks you through steps to get to that value, sampling and re-sampling after adjustments until you reach your target. In all of this it does not rely on your eyeball except to note the reported values.
The Pro does not have this - it has a couple of steps where you approximate by "eye" your brightness and contrast and at the end of the calibration it will report an absolute value in terms of cd/m2 of white luminance. If the value is not to your satisfaction, you have to make your adjustments and then run through the entire calibration sequence again. Big time waster!
The Express has a basic "eyeball" method of adjusting brightness and contrast prior to the calibration being run but does not sample the white luminance nor does it report it anywhere in the process.
If you run or plan to run dual monitors and want them to be more or less identical, the Elite is your best choice of the three. Your time savings over a year should more than make up the cost difference.
Notice also that with the Express you are locked into 6500K white point (temperature). Many people prefer 5800K for matching to their ambient lighting.
Correct monitor brightness is critical to avoid issues where the adaptive perceptive values of the human eye will fool you into editing an image "too dark". This usually happens where the monitor is too bright in relation to the ambient lighting of the room and results in what is commonly known as the "dark prints" issue.
Any new thoughts on the Dell U2412M and other monitors that are new to the scene?
I noticed Samsung was touting it's "magic angle" screens so I started comparing those horizontal and vertical viewing angles. Is 160 degrees by 170 degrees considered magic angle if it's not mentioned? Or is there more inherent meaning to "magic angle" monitors?
What does WUXGA really mean when some might mention a monitor is full HD?
I need a monitor that will let me easily weed out oof photos. I recall seeing a photo on a computer using the Windows Fax & View program for quick editing:
on an Acer 2416W some sharp and salvageable photos were rendered as useless
on an Apple 23" Cinema Display A1082 I was so glad that I did not delete the photos based on WYSIWYG on the Acer
Likewise, on a Windows 7 computer, viewing photos through the Windows Fax & View program:
on a NEC Multisync PA2471W some sharp photos were rendered as useless and I knew they weren't that close to being worthless
So, I already see a difference in OS systems and programs and tend to believe I should go with a 1900 x 1200 resolution and instantly discard any monitors that are 1920 x 1080 or less. Is that the right thing to do?
The person with the NEC PA2471W swears by his and the built-in color calibrator. I'm not sure I can afford an NEC that is worth it. Are there any NECs to avoid? Which one is worth it? Is it necessary to get the color calibrator built in?
I would prefer to have a monitor with at least one USB port to use (since I got so used to the Apples 2USB+2firewire ports) or I'll have to do one of the following:
Any new thoughts on the Dell U2412M and other monitors that are new to the scene?
Its supposed to be pretty good, but its the budget version of the u2410. Either way, these monitors are known for splotchy color hues. Mine is OK, but it took 3 RMA's to hit a satisfactory model. The specs and interface options are amazing, so if you do go for one, as long as the color is decent, its a great monitor. Also the refresh rate is very fast and works well enough for movies and twitch-gaming too. Its a great all purpose/wide-gamut for editing monitor.
I noticed Samsung was touting it's "magic angle" screens so I started comparing those horizontal and vertical viewing angles. Is 160 degrees by 170 degrees considered magic angle if it's not mentioned? Or is there more inherent meaning to "magic angle" monitors?
Most likely the term magic angle is just a euphemism. Most IPS monitors have these viewing angles and its not hard at all to find them... so its nothing really special. The u2412 and u2410 both do.
What does WUXGA really mean when some might mention a monitor is full HD?
WUXGA is 1920x1200 resolution. That's larger than full HD which is 1920x1080.
I need a monitor that will let me easily weed out oof photos. I recall seeing a photo on a computer using the Windows Fax & View program for quick editing:
on an Acer 2416W some sharp and salvageable photos were rendered as useless
on an Apple 23" Cinema Display A1082 I was so glad that I did not delete the photos based on WYSIWYG on the Acer
Likewise, on a Windows 7 computer, viewing photos through the Windows Fax & View program:
on a NEC Multisync PA2471W some sharp photos were rendered as useless and I knew they weren't that close to being worthless
So, I already see a difference in OS systems and programs and tend to believe I should go with a 1900 x 1200 resolution and instantly discard any monitors that are 1920 x 1080 or less. Is that the right thing to do?
No. Any monitor of any resolution can be tack sharp at %100 picture resolution, as long as something is not wrong with it. The industry standard has been 72DPI for a long time, so if a monitor is working correctly, it wouldn't matter if you were previewing your photos at 1024x768, since most monitors have a standard 72DPI resolution. As long as you view the image at %100 it should be as sharp as any other, but just a smaller chunk is being displayed depending on the size of the monitor. Some monitors have a higher DPI, but that would make it even sharper at %100, so the logic kind of ends there since they don't go lower.
With those blurry previews, there are a few things I can think of off the top of my head that would make it blurry
1: The monitor was out of calibration. Some have an auto-calibrate to resolve messy/blurry looking display.
2: Whatever you're previewing images in has a low quality thumbnail. You need something that will preview without compressing the image quality of the preview. Some programs sacrifice display quality in order to speed up loading the preview. Windows fax and whatever isn't that great of a program for image editing unless you go %100 size. Don't use the slideshow feature either since that doesn't render the photo at %100 quality; it has to re-size it.
3: You're not viewing the image at %100, and depending on the size of the preview window, it could be rending the photo at a percentage that renders it soft or goofy looking. Viewing images at odd intervals like %33 will not properly display an image since it can't mathematically be displayed correctly. It has to cut out information here and there. Use a zoom % divisible by 2 like %50 or %60.
4: I think you need to use a free photo browser/organizer program purposed for editing your stuff, since the built in OS previews aren't that great to begin with. I think it's the software you're using to preview photos, not the monitors.
5: You happened to be using a really crappy monitor that was just not made well. But if the desktop is sharp, those photos should be sharp too.
The person with the NEC PA2471W swears by his and the built-in color calibrator. I'm not sure I can afford an NEC that is worth it. Are there any NECs to avoid? Which one is worth it? Is it necessary to get the color calibrator built in?
If it were absolutely necessary, a lot more people wouldn't be using external calibrators. You definitely don't have to have this for accurate calibration. Hell, I use an $80 Huey PRO and it works just fine on the monitor I'm using (Dell u2410) It DOESNT work well on my laptop though, so YMMV. The built in calibrators just make it easy as pie and weed out user error as much as possible. So unless you have a chronic problem with placing the calibrator on your face instead of the monitor, you should be fine. And turn off the lights.
I would prefer to have a monitor with at least one USB port to use (since I got so used to the Apples 2USB+2firewire ports) or I'll have to do one of the following:
reconfigure my work space
buy a new calibrator with a longer cord or
buy a monitor with a built-in calibrator
The latter 2 are like saying you need a new car cause the tires are bad... you're over thinking, I think.
You could instead get a USB extension cable for $1
Any new thoughts on the Dell U2412M and other monitors that are new to the scene?
I noticed Samsung was touting it's "magic angle" screens so I started comparing those horizontal and vertical viewing angles. Is 160 degrees by 170 degrees considered magic angle if it's not mentioned? Or is there more inherent meaning to "magic angle" monitors?
What does WUXGA really mean when some might mention a monitor is full HD?
I need a monitor that will let me easily weed out oof photos. I recall seeing a photo on a computer using the Windows Fax & View program for quick editing:
on an Acer 2416W some sharp and salvageable photos were rendered as useless
on an Apple 23" Cinema Display A1082 I was so glad that I did not delete the photos based on WYSIWYG on the Acer
Likewise, on a Windows 7 computer, viewing photos through the Windows Fax & View program:
on a NEC Multisync PA2471W some sharp photos were rendered as useless and I knew they weren't that close to being worthless
So, I already see a difference in OS systems and programs and tend to believe I should go with a 1900 x 1200 resolution and instantly discard any monitors that are 1920 x 1080 or less. Is that the right thing to do?
The person with the NEC PA2471W swears by his and the built-in color calibrator. I'm not sure I can afford an NEC that is worth it. Are there any NECs to avoid? Which one is worth it? Is it necessary to get the color calibrator built in?
I would prefer to have a monitor with at least one USB port to use (since I got so used to the Apples 2USB+2firewire ports) or I'll have to do one of the following:
reconfigure my work space
buy a new calibrator with a longer cord or
buy a monitor with a built-in calibrator
I have an NEC PA241W you're confusing the 24 and the 27: 247 as you wrote.
It is not a built in calibrator what it has is built in LUT's. The calibrator still has to be hung on the monitor, as soon as initiated it will do all the work and then write to the LUT. It has about 6 different calibrations you can do and change to as needed. Broadcast Video, RGB, etc. it does not come with it, though I think they had one package at one time that did. But it is a separate calibration-device and it is very nice. You do not have to turn the lights out. You leave the lights as is. It also has an ambient light monitor to detect and change backlighting as necessary.
The only thing mine renders out of focus is any photo I take out of focus. otherwise stellar monitor and have had no issues in the almost two years since new. It is not anywhere near top of the line in monitors but it was the best I could afford at the time.
Yes, you're right about me mixing up monitor numbers. Let me clarify:
I viewed photos on a NEC PA271W that looks like a built-in color calibrator device that needs to hang in front of the machine every so often.
Price wise, I can't afford that model and don't know if I can afford to (or not to) pull the trigger on the NEC P241W that comes with the drop-down built-in calibrator. I'm not sure if they have a cheaper model or if I should consider a less expensive one.
To Overfocused:
For some reason, I got the impression the spotty color issues were with the Dell U2410 and was hoping to hear that there weren't any issues with the Dell U2412M.
Other models that are standing out for some reason that have not been eliminated from buying are:
But maybe I'm eliminating models I shouldn't be... or don't even know about models I should definitely be considering.
I use a Huey calibrator that doesn't want to stick to the screen and I thought it should be calibrated with the lights on? Other than that, what is YMMV?
For some reason, I got the impression the spotty color issues were with the Dell U2410 and was hoping to hear that there weren't any issues with the Dell U2412M.
You're going to run into this with just about any monitor that uses an "IPS" tft LCD panel supplied from LG Display. LG Display supplies IPS panels to just about ALL the major monitor manufacturers. Panasonic may also make IPS panels but I believe they are only for their own consumption in their LCD HDTV line of products.
Unless you're buying a high end monitor from Eizo, Lacie, or NEC you're likely to run into color irregularities and back lighting that is not uniform. Most monitors under $500 USD with current LG IPS panels will display a red tint on the left and a green tint on the right which is only apparent on a white or gray background. With some, like the U2410, with its' wide gamut back light, it is much more apparent.
The other major OEM supplier of tft LCD panels is Samsung. Historically they were known for supplying "PVA" tft LCD panels. They also have 178 degree viewing angles like the IPS panels but were known for an optical effect called "black crush". With black crush viewing an image straight on will not show detail in a dark area but if you angle off to the side a little the detail will reveal.
Samsung now seems to be moving away from the PVA tft technology to S-PLS which is very similar to IPS.
Other models that are standing out for some reason that have not been eliminated from buying are:
Samsung SyncMaster S24A450BW <<< "TN" tft LCD panel 170 degree viewing angles .... NOT Ideal for image work
Samsung SyncMaster S24A850DW <<< "S-PLS" LCD panel 178 degree ... Very Good for image work
Samsung SyncMaster S24A450MW <<< ??, not S-PLS, probably "TN"
Samsung B2430HD <<< "TN"
But maybe I'm eliminating models I shouldn't be... or don't even know about models I should definitely be considering.
I use a Huey calibrator that doesn't want to stick to the screen and I thought it should be calibrated with the lights on? Other than that, what is YMMV?
YMMV Your Mileage May Vary
I'm enjoying my Dell U2412M. It does exhibit the red/green tint but it is very light.
If you want to stay on top of current monitors read the reviews on these sites....
TFT Central has some excellent photos of the monitor screens which will highlight the difference in viewing angles between a TN panel (see the BenQ XL2420T review) and an IPS panel (see the Dell U2412M review).
Thanks for helping in narrowing those Samsung choices down. So much research to do to get it right the first time... but I should probably just choose a monitor at some point to get back to working on photos again.
This morning my computer guy sent me his prices on the above models and is recommending I look at the Hewlett Packard HP ZR24W. Any thoughts on this monitor?
Ultimately I would like the monitor to match or exceed my old monitor which was an Apple Cinema Display A1082.
In your humble opinions, how do any of the monitors I've mentioned here or above compare?
So much research to do to get it right the first time... but I should probably just choose a monitor at some point to get back to working on photos again.
This morning my computer guy sent me his prices on the above models and is recommending I look at the Hewlett Packard HP ZR24W. Any thoughts on this monitor?
i aint no expert , but ...
i have this model , and i like it very much
ideal for photo-processing
not ideal for gaming or streaming video , its really good for images
Thanks for helping in narrowing those Samsung choices down. So much research to do to get it right the first time... but I should probably just choose a monitor at some point to get back to working on photos again.
This morning my computer guy sent me his prices on the above models and is recommending I look at the Hewlett Packard HP ZR24W. Any thoughts on this monitor?
Ultimately I would like the monitor to match or exceed my old monitor which was an Apple Cinema Display A1082.
In your humble opinions, how do any of the monitors I've mentioned here or above compare?
The newer version from HP, the ZR2440w, is superior to the ZR24w. The difference is that the ZR2440w uses an W-LED back light rather than the CCFL back light of the ZR24w. The benefit is that you have more control over the brightness with the ZR2440w and it can easily be taken below 80 cd/m2 for editing in a darker room. With the ZR24w it is difficult to get the brightness below 130 cd/m2 which can be too bright for a darker room.
The ZR2440w is VERY similar to the Dell U2412M. Same e-IPS panel, same W-LED back light, same standard sRGB gamut, similar matte finish on the screen.
The Apple Cinema Display A1082 is a legacy monitor that used a 23" S-IPS panel with a matte screen. This variant of IPS panel has some optical characteristics not found in today's H-IPS or e-IPS monitors. Some good and some bad. The monitor offered a more or less standard sRGB gamut.
As such, the HP ZR2440w and Dell U2412M will match or better the viewing performance of the Apple. I'd speculate that the coverage of the sRGB gamut is slightly larger in the current HP and Dell.
Btw... Prad.de rated the HP ZR2440w higher (Very Good) than the Dell U2412M (Good).
Comments
That doesn’t answer the question. How does one verify all components in the chain stay high bit through the entire path? Especially the one area I hear is the weak link (applications, specifically Photoshop).
I have some knowledgeable experts in the display industry saying as yet, that’s not necessarily the case. I’m not necessarily taking their word as fact but I’m not necessarily taking your word as fact either. So it begs the question, how does one know?
Author "Color Management for Photographers"
http://www.digitaldog.net/
http://www.amd.com/us/Documents/ramp.psd
Open this on a 10-bit enabled path and it won't band (of course after following their tutorial)
The OpenGL is what enables PS to render in 10 bit on screen. With the RGB values on the info plane it may still read things in 256 values per channel, but Adobe is working on all of that from what I've read.
Exactly (at least the blame I’ve heard was directed at Adobe and specifically OpenGL). I’ve asked an Adobe engineer.
Being on a Mac, I don’t know I have any way to open the document without banding despite having a high bit panel (PS271W). I’m not sure any of the necessary video cards are Mac compatible (I’m trying to wade my way through ATI’s web pages). And there is still some question if I’d need to upgrade to 10.7 or if 10.8.X will fly.
Author "Color Management for Photographers"
http://www.digitaldog.net/
From a technical view point if the OS doesn't support it, the video card won't work either... if there's another workaround in there somewhere I wouldn't know. Adobe can't make Apples' OS for Apple, Apple makes Apples' OS.
I'd say %99.9 no unless Apple updates the OS to work with it first.
Author "Color Management for Photographers"
http://www.digitaldog.net/
In the IT world, OS is the base of all operations. Keywords: operating system. Literally at a programming standpoint, Apple can't put up a valid argument that Adobe is the problem, since its THEIR operating system kernal that lacks the 10 bit compatibility, and they're the ones responsible for their own kernal. I'm pretty sure it's not even legal for another company to toy with the core components of OSX. Maybe a virtual driver or some whack system tweaks/workarounds might work, but really, Apple needs to pick up the slack with that if it's gonna happen for real. The Windows 7 operating system was made compatible by Microsoft, cause Windows 7 is Microsoft's, and they know this is a feature professionals want. Apple has to do it themselves... unless they want to remain an OS with a real reason for editing professionals who use Windows to bash Mac
I am very well aware of who Will H is as he posts in another forum I am active in. It's great when he steps in to clarify issues.
TFT Central Panel Parts claims the PA241 uses a LM240WU4-SLB1 panel and that it is 8bit + AFRC. They have been wrong before on panel models but not often. They also see European models which differ somewhat from North American units.
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/monitor_panel_parts.htm
I'm not sure who is correct. I'd put money on the NEC rep but TFT Central was one of the first to break the news that the 23" and 21.5" e-IPS units were all 6bit + AFRC which none of the manufacturer reps had acknowledged up to that point.
.
.
I’d put my money on Will. He’s far more than a manufacturer’s rep too (he writes the software for US SpectraView and is the product manager).
Author "Color Management for Photographers"
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Pete
How would the Asus PA238Q be, compared to the old Dell 2209WA?
http://www.asus.com/Display/LCD_Monitors/PA238Q/#specifications
<code></code>
Would it be a decent sub $300 photo monitor?
That is a very interesting Overview page. A 10bit non-writable LUT and if it is a true 8bit panel, in theory it makes it superior to the 2209WA and clearly superior to the U2311 and new U2312HM which have 8bit LUT's and 6bit + AFRC panels.
I'd wait until TFT Central, Flatpanels, or Prad.de have reviewed it. I'm hoping that we'll find the LED back light in this has a similar range of control to that of the Dell U2412HM (it dims lower than 100 cd/m2 white luminance). If so it will be an outstanding monitor for the price.
The only point I really don't like is that it is a 16:9 1920x1080 resolution.
I found this review but imho it is simply a product overview and does not have enough technical info.
http://tech2.in.com/reviews/monitors/asus-pa238q-monitor/240692
Hardforums has a thread on it.
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1607389&highlight=pa238q
http://www.kitguru.net/peripherals/monitors/zardon/asus-pa238q-led-monitor-review/
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ixbt.com%2Fmonitor%2Fasus-pa238q.shtml
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otFs9zt9mUY
hmmmm.... back light uniformity issues!
I see newegg.ca has had it for $279 and NCIX has it for $291.50 CAD.
Don't really know just yet - want more info on the LED back light range and uniformity.
.
Yikes ! New to color management,and I just bought the Asus PA246Q. I came here to see if anyone had experience and/or opinions on a colorimeter for use with the Asus PA246Q.
http://chriscouse.smugmug.com/
One step closer and I'll shoot you with my Canon
ColorMuki
Spyder3Pro or Elite (The versions only differ in Software)
Gretag Eye One
all will do
Personaly I use a Spyder2Express (old model, inexpensive) which does a good job and a Spyder3Elite which is somewhat more awesome (accuracy, more options in Software, multi monitor support).
― Edward Weston
I have a Spyder2 Express, which I am looking at replacing. What feature does the Spyder3Pro have that the Spyder3Express does not have?
http://spyder.datacolor.com/s3compare.php
The biggest point is that the Elite offers a dedicated module for setting monitor brightness. It will sample the rooms' ambient light and suggest a level to target but it also allows you to set a unique target value (white luminance cd/m2) and then walks you through steps to get to that value, sampling and re-sampling after adjustments until you reach your target. In all of this it does not rely on your eyeball except to note the reported values.
The Pro does not have this - it has a couple of steps where you approximate by "eye" your brightness and contrast and at the end of the calibration it will report an absolute value in terms of cd/m2 of white luminance. If the value is not to your satisfaction, you have to make your adjustments and then run through the entire calibration sequence again. Big time waster!
The Express has a basic "eyeball" method of adjusting brightness and contrast prior to the calibration being run but does not sample the white luminance nor does it report it anywhere in the process.
If you run or plan to run dual monitors and want them to be more or less identical, the Elite is your best choice of the three. Your time savings over a year should more than make up the cost difference.
Notice also that with the Express you are locked into 6500K white point (temperature). Many people prefer 5800K for matching to their ambient lighting.
Correct monitor brightness is critical to avoid issues where the adaptive perceptive values of the human eye will fool you into editing an image "too dark". This usually happens where the monitor is too bright in relation to the ambient lighting of the room and results in what is commonly known as the "dark prints" issue.
.
.
Any new thoughts on the Dell U2412M and other monitors that are new to the scene?
I noticed Samsung was touting it's "magic angle" screens so I started comparing those horizontal and vertical viewing angles. Is 160 degrees by 170 degrees considered magic angle if it's not mentioned? Or is there more inherent meaning to "magic angle" monitors?
What does WUXGA really mean when some might mention a monitor is full HD?
I need a monitor that will let me easily weed out oof photos. I recall seeing a photo on a computer using the Windows Fax & View program for quick editing:
- on an Acer 2416W some sharp and salvageable photos were rendered as useless
- on an Apple 23" Cinema Display A1082 I was so glad that I did not delete the photos based on WYSIWYG on the Acer
Likewise, on a Windows 7 computer, viewing photos through the Windows Fax & View program:- on a NEC Multisync PA2471W some sharp photos were rendered as useless and I knew they weren't that close to being worthless
So, I already see a difference in OS systems and programs and tend to believe I should go with a 1900 x 1200 resolution and instantly discard any monitors that are 1920 x 1080 or less. Is that the right thing to do?The person with the NEC PA2471W swears by his and the built-in color calibrator. I'm not sure I can afford an NEC that is worth it. Are there any NECs to avoid? Which one is worth it? Is it necessary to get the color calibrator built in?
I would prefer to have a monitor with at least one USB port to use (since I got so used to the Apples 2USB+2firewire ports) or I'll have to do one of the following:
Its supposed to be pretty good, but its the budget version of the u2410. Either way, these monitors are known for splotchy color hues. Mine is OK, but it took 3 RMA's to hit a satisfactory model. The specs and interface options are amazing, so if you do go for one, as long as the color is decent, its a great monitor. Also the refresh rate is very fast and works well enough for movies and twitch-gaming too. Its a great all purpose/wide-gamut for editing monitor.
Most likely the term magic angle is just a euphemism. Most IPS monitors have these viewing angles and its not hard at all to find them... so its nothing really special. The u2412 and u2410 both do.
WUXGA is 1920x1200 resolution. That's larger than full HD which is 1920x1080.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphic_display_resolutions
No. Any monitor of any resolution can be tack sharp at %100 picture resolution, as long as something is not wrong with it. The industry standard has been 72DPI for a long time, so if a monitor is working correctly, it wouldn't matter if you were previewing your photos at 1024x768, since most monitors have a standard 72DPI resolution. As long as you view the image at %100 it should be as sharp as any other, but just a smaller chunk is being displayed depending on the size of the monitor. Some monitors have a higher DPI, but that would make it even sharper at %100, so the logic kind of ends there since they don't go lower.
With those blurry previews, there are a few things I can think of off the top of my head that would make it blurry
1: The monitor was out of calibration. Some have an auto-calibrate to resolve messy/blurry looking display.
2: Whatever you're previewing images in has a low quality thumbnail. You need something that will preview without compressing the image quality of the preview. Some programs sacrifice display quality in order to speed up loading the preview. Windows fax and whatever isn't that great of a program for image editing unless you go %100 size. Don't use the slideshow feature either since that doesn't render the photo at %100 quality; it has to re-size it.
3: You're not viewing the image at %100, and depending on the size of the preview window, it could be rending the photo at a percentage that renders it soft or goofy looking. Viewing images at odd intervals like %33 will not properly display an image since it can't mathematically be displayed correctly. It has to cut out information here and there. Use a zoom % divisible by 2 like %50 or %60.
4: I think you need to use a free photo browser/organizer program purposed for editing your stuff, since the built in OS previews aren't that great to begin with. I think it's the software you're using to preview photos, not the monitors.
5: You happened to be using a really crappy monitor that was just not made well. But if the desktop is sharp, those photos should be sharp too.
If it were absolutely necessary, a lot more people wouldn't be using external calibrators. You definitely don't have to have this for accurate calibration. Hell, I use an $80 Huey PRO and it works just fine on the monitor I'm using (Dell u2410) It DOESNT work well on my laptop though, so YMMV. The built in calibrators just make it easy as pie and weed out user error as much as possible. So unless you have a chronic problem with placing the calibrator on your face instead of the monitor, you should be fine. And turn off the lights.
The latter 2 are like saying you need a new car cause the tires are bad... you're over thinking, I think.
You could instead get a USB extension cable for $1
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1M-3FT-NEW-USB-2-0-A-Male-to-A-Female-Extension-CABLE-/160779386512?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item256f32be90
Or one from the USA for $2-3 if you don't wanna wait for it to arrive from China. Its still from China, but just waiting in the US instead. Lol.
I have an NEC PA241W you're confusing the 24 and the 27: 247 as you wrote.
It is not a built in calibrator what it has is built in LUT's. The calibrator still has to be hung on the monitor, as soon as initiated it will do all the work and then write to the LUT. It has about 6 different calibrations you can do and change to as needed. Broadcast Video, RGB, etc. it does not come with it, though I think they had one package at one time that did. But it is a separate calibration-device and it is very nice. You do not have to turn the lights out. You leave the lights as is. It also has an ambient light monitor to detect and change backlighting as necessary.
The only thing mine renders out of focus is any photo I take out of focus. otherwise stellar monitor and have had no issues in the almost two years since new. It is not anywhere near top of the line in monitors but it was the best I could afford at the time.
Yes, you're right about me mixing up monitor numbers. Let me clarify:
- I viewed photos on a NEC PA271W that looks like a built-in color calibrator device that needs to hang in front of the machine every so often.
Price wise, I can't afford that model and don't know if I can afford to (or not to) pull the trigger on the NEC P241W that comes with the drop-down built-in calibrator. I'm not sure if they have a cheaper model or if I should consider a less expensive one.To Overfocused:
For some reason, I got the impression the spotty color issues were with the Dell U2410 and was hoping to hear that there weren't any issues with the Dell U2412M.
Other models that are standing out for some reason that have not been eliminated from buying are:
Samsung SyncMaster S24A450BW
Samsung SyncMaster S24A850DW
Samsung SyncMaster S24A450MW
Samsung B2430HD
But maybe I'm eliminating models I shouldn't be... or don't even know about models I should definitely be considering.
I use a Huey calibrator that doesn't want to stick to the screen and I thought it should be calibrated with the lights on? Other than that, what is YMMV?
You're going to run into this with just about any monitor that uses an "IPS" tft LCD panel supplied from LG Display. LG Display supplies IPS panels to just about ALL the major monitor manufacturers. Panasonic may also make IPS panels but I believe they are only for their own consumption in their LCD HDTV line of products.
Unless you're buying a high end monitor from Eizo, Lacie, or NEC you're likely to run into color irregularities and back lighting that is not uniform. Most monitors under $500 USD with current LG IPS panels will display a red tint on the left and a green tint on the right which is only apparent on a white or gray background. With some, like the U2410, with its' wide gamut back light, it is much more apparent.
The other major OEM supplier of tft LCD panels is Samsung. Historically they were known for supplying "PVA" tft LCD panels. They also have 178 degree viewing angles like the IPS panels but were known for an optical effect called "black crush". With black crush viewing an image straight on will not show detail in a dark area but if you angle off to the side a little the detail will reveal.
Samsung now seems to be moving away from the PVA tft technology to S-PLS which is very similar to IPS.
Samsung SyncMaster S24A450BW <<< "TN" tft LCD panel 170 degree viewing angles .... NOT Ideal for image work
Samsung SyncMaster S24A850DW <<< "S-PLS" LCD panel 178 degree ... Very Good for image work
Samsung SyncMaster S24A450MW <<< ??, not S-PLS, probably "TN"
Samsung B2430HD <<< "TN"
YMMV Your Mileage May Vary
I'm enjoying my Dell U2412M. It does exhibit the red/green tint but it is very light.
If you want to stay on top of current monitors read the reviews on these sites....
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews.htm
http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/reviews.html
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/content/reviews/displays/
TFT Central has some excellent photos of the monitor screens which will highlight the difference in viewing angles between a TN panel (see the BenQ XL2420T review) and an IPS panel (see the Dell U2412M review).
TFT Central also has a good article on tft LCD panel types:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/panel_technologies.htm
.
.
This morning my computer guy sent me his prices on the above models and is recommending I look at the Hewlett Packard HP ZR24W. Any thoughts on this monitor?
Ultimately I would like the monitor to match or exceed my old monitor which was an Apple Cinema Display A1082.
In your humble opinions, how do any of the monitors I've mentioned here or above compare?
i have this model , and i like it very much
ideal for photo-processing
not ideal for gaming or streaming video , its really good for images
recommended by me
/ɯoɔ˙ƃnɯƃnɯs˙ʇlɟsɐq//:dʇʇɥ
The newer version from HP, the ZR2440w, is superior to the ZR24w. The difference is that the ZR2440w uses an W-LED back light rather than the CCFL back light of the ZR24w. The benefit is that you have more control over the brightness with the ZR2440w and it can easily be taken below 80 cd/m2 for editing in a darker room. With the ZR24w it is difficult to get the brightness below 130 cd/m2 which can be too bright for a darker room.
The ZR2440w is VERY similar to the Dell U2412M. Same e-IPS panel, same W-LED back light, same standard sRGB gamut, similar matte finish on the screen.
The Apple Cinema Display A1082 is a legacy monitor that used a 23" S-IPS panel with a matte screen. This variant of IPS panel has some optical characteristics not found in today's H-IPS or e-IPS monitors. Some good and some bad. The monitor offered a more or less standard sRGB gamut.
As such, the HP ZR2440w and Dell U2412M will match or better the viewing performance of the Apple. I'd speculate that the coverage of the sRGB gamut is slightly larger in the current HP and Dell.
Btw... Prad.de rated the HP ZR2440w higher (Very Good) than the Dell U2412M (Good).
http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/reviews.html
.
.