PDA

View Full Version : Best monitor for photo editing and viewing - suggestions wanted



Dan Boardman
1-May-2012, 06:53
Need to upgrade my monitor and am looking for something in the say 300-500 price range for editing/viewing. Have been reading reviews and the HP ZR24W 24" Widescreen LCD Monitor seems to be a very good option in the price range. Suggestions are welcome.

Thanks much

Dan

Robert Hall
1-May-2012, 08:57
This is not in your price range, but I sure like the Apple Thunderbolt displays.

Preston
1-May-2012, 09:57
Dan,

This NEC MultiSync monitor is a bit out of your price range (NEC direct is $749), but I think you would like it better for imaging work. MultiSync P241w-bk (http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop%20-monitors/p241w-bk)

With a compatible colormeter, you can also purchase and use the NEC SpectraView calibration software with this monitor.

I have the P221W (22") and Spectraview. The monitor and software have been very reliable.

--P

adam satushek
1-May-2012, 10:00
Dan,

This NEC MultiSync monitor is a bit out of your price range (NEC direct is $749), but I think you would like it better for imaging work. MultiSync P241w-bk (http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop%20-monitors/p241w-bk)

With a compatible colormeter, you can also purchase and use the NEC SpectraView calibration software with this monitor.

I have the P221W (22") and Spectraview. The monitor and software have been very reliable.

--P

I second NEC's and thier Spectraview software. I have the now discontinued 2690WUXI2, but im sure thier smaller monitors do a good job too. Though you might have a hard time finding something in your range, NEC's are generally cheaper than LAcies and way cheaper than Eizos.

Good luck!

Dan Boardman
1-May-2012, 10:58
Dan,

This NEC MultiSync monitor is a bit out of your price range (NEC direct is $749), but I think you would like it better for imaging work. MultiSync P241w-bk (http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop%20-monitors/p241w-bk)

With a compatible colormeter, you can also purchase and use the NEC SpectraView calibration software with this monitor.

I have the P221W (22") and Spectraview. The monitor and software have been very reliable.

--P

I can get the P221W (22") NEC for just over $400 is the 24" version $350 BETTER?? OR I can get the PA231W-BK (23") monitor for about $550 which is about $150 more??

WOW choices - choices

Frank Petronio
1-May-2012, 11:14
I bought two of the 22 inch NECs and they seem like the most bang for the buck. Not perfect but good.

polyglot
1-May-2012, 18:44
Make sure you get an IPS or (at worst) PVA panel; under no circumstance should you buy a TN panel for photographic use. Use this database (http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/panelsearch.htm) to look up the panel type in any display you're considering.

I would suggest stretching your budget to about $600-700 and buying a second-hand 30" LCD, e.g. Apple Cinema or HP LP3065; you might swing one for $500 if you're patient. They're all S-IPS, of the highest visual quality, and you get much better resolution (2560x1600) than you'll see on any 24" monitor (1920x1080 to 1920x1200). It does require a dual-link DVI connection though, so you might need to upgrade your video card if it's a bit old and sad.

vinny
1-May-2012, 19:07
I recently bought one of the P221W (22") NEC's because I wanted to be cool like Frank. Nice monitor.

Ari
1-May-2012, 20:35
I use a $200 Dell 23" monitor; after calibration, it looks and works great, no problems.

Brent Long
1-May-2012, 21:03
As already mentioned, it must be an IPS monitor.

Check this straightforward article and you'll be good.

http://photo.net/learn/digital-photography-workflow/color-management/101-basics/

Dell has a good and cheap option. I'm using a very (too) old Dell IPS display and it calibrates very well. If you don't have a calibration solution you'll need to add some budget for that. DispCal is a good and free option as far as software, but you'll need to pair it with a colorimeter. It shouldn't be too much for a descent colorimeter, though. If you can swing the budget to one of the NECs with its software, that'd be a really good option.

Corran
2-May-2012, 13:11
I bought a Dell UltraSharp 22" IPS display for $250 new. It's an excellent monitor. The ONLY thing I could possibly complain about is a very slight difference in brightness in one corner. But I've never noticed it except when testing it. It's not like you edit your photos while in the corner anyway.

aluncrockford
2-May-2012, 13:29
I use a EIZO as my main monitor and they seem to be in agencies I work for ,

Ari
2-May-2012, 16:56
...under no circumstance should you buy a TN panel for photographic use.

Is there a real reason why?
I've defied your dire warning, and have been a happy, pro-TN-panel user for three years, with no adverse effects suffered yet :)
Images look great on the screen, and print predictably as well.

Brian Ellis
2-May-2012, 18:34
Like others here, I've been very happy with my NEC P221W. Easiest monitor to calibrate and most accurate monitor that I've owned. I don't remember, and don't care, whether it's an IPS monitor.

polyglot
2-May-2012, 18:40
Is there a real reason why?
I've defied your dire warning, and have been a happy, pro-TN-panel user for three years, with no adverse effects suffered yet :)
Images look great on the screen, and print predictably as well.

The reasons are that they have poor gamut (display a smaller colour space than any files you might want to work on) and the brightness and hue varies with viewing angle. So when you look at the image, it might be "right" but you move your head and it's not anymore, which means you can't confidently set your white/black points, let alone colour balance, uniquely and know that what you've done to the file is even remotely like what you thought you did to the file.

It matters a lot less for B&W, but shadow detail is highly variable with respect to viewing angle. For a demonstration, set LFPF to the orange/grey skin ("Blackend" in the little dropbox bottom-left of this thread) and bob your head up and down by about a foot. You'll see the relative brightness of all the grey rectangles changing in a most disturbing manner. If I sit here at work (Samsung 2443BW, a 24" TN) with my head in the centre of the screen, the grey rectangles (about Zone III-IV) at top of the screen are a whole stop darker than those at the bottom of the screen.

Ari
2-May-2012, 18:51
The reasons are that they have poor gamut (display a smaller colour space than any files you might want to work on) and the brightness and hue varies with viewing angle. So when you look at the image, it might be "right" but you move your head and it's not anymore, which means you can't confidently set your white/black points, let alone colour balance, uniquely and know that what you've done to the file is even remotely like what you thought you did to the file.

It matters a lot less for B&W, but shadow detail is highly variable with respect to viewing angle. For a demonstration, set LFPF to the orange/grey skin ("Blackend" in the little dropbox bottom-left of this thread) and bob your head up and down by about a foot. You'll see the relative brightness of all the grey rectangles changing in a most disturbing manner. If I sit here at work (Samsung 2443BW, a 24" TN) with my head in the centre of the screen, the grey rectangles (about Zone III-IV) at top of the screen are a whole stop darker than those at the bottom of the screen.

Point taken, thank you for the explanation.
I guess to keep the viewing angle consistent, I'll turn down the reggae :)

polyglot
3-May-2012, 21:53
Point taken, thank you for the explanation.
I guess to keep the viewing angle consistent, I'll turn down the reggae :)

What? No! Never turn down the reggae!

Leonard Evens
5-May-2012, 14:28
If you are going to spend money on a monitor, look for two capabilities which are important: 1. It should be possible to profile/calibrate the monitor without too much trouble 2. Color response should not be highly dependent on the viewing angle, LCD monitors can vary in this regard a lot from small changes in the vert8ical viewing angle.

Bill, 70's military B&W
31-Mar-2013, 09:39
Help, the choices are infinity squared. I'm going to buy a reconditioned Mac Pro desktop, and am going to need a monitor. I've read this thread and have a couple of questions.
Reconditioned Mac Thunderbolt 27" $829, vs Nec P221W 22" with Spectraview package $725.
I already have a monitor color calibration device that hangs over the screen, I can not remember the name, it is a very recent purchase.
My concern is color calibration of the Thunderbolt, how is it done? Is it compatible with other brand calibration devices, the NEC is not, you have to have the Spectraview to enjoy the full value of the monitor.
The Thunderbolt is bigger, has a good sound system already built into it.
I'd appreciate any comments, other factors I need to consider. I plan on buying a Mac Pro that is released 2012, so I ASSUME??? that it will be Thunderblot compatible.
A friend is strongly suggesting a dual monitor setup, I do not want to be out close to $2,000 just for monitors, so is 1 large expensive monitor better than 2 less expensive ones? I hope to keep my monitor budget under $1,000.
Any suggestions would really be appreciated, I plan to buy the system really soon,
Bill

Bodyslam
31-Mar-2013, 13:59
To the best of my knowledge, no Mac Pro has yet been sold with Thunderbolt connectivity. Rumors about the next version of the Mac Pro are a cottage industry in themselves, but for your refurbed 2012 model, that makes no difference. And there are no easy or inexpensive ways to add the capability.

I would forget Thunderbolt if you're going ahead with the computer you have in mind.

Kirk Gittings
31-Mar-2013, 14:06
I have heard good things (value and performance) about this monitor-no personal experience.

http://www.amazon.com/PA248Q-24-Inch-Super-IPS-Professional-Graphics/dp/B008DWH00K/ref=sr_1_7?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1364763847&sr=1-7&keywords=asus+monitors

Bill, 70's military B&W
31-Mar-2013, 18:39
Bodyslam,
I am reading and learning, it was not easy to uncover that Mac Pro does not support Thunderbolt. Found that bit on info on a video card site. For a Mac Pro I'd need to use an Apple Cinema, reconditioned for $829.
The NEC 2012 requires Spectraview, that brings the price up to around $725 for a 22" monitor, do not know if I can find a used one.
My friend is suggesting a 2 monitor set up, we looked on line today and a strong possibility is 2 ASUS PA 248Q 24" monitors,new for $280 each.
Does anyone have any comments about that possibility?
Thanks,
Bill

Bill, 70's military B&W
31-Mar-2013, 18:44
Kirk, I can't believe it, I was just answering the thread one at a time and I just asked for comments about the ASUS PA 246Q, using it in a double monitor set up.
Someone else suggested the ASUS PA 248Q. I'd like to know how well they do on color reproduction for photography and printing on an Epson 3880. How easy/well they calibrate.
Thanks for your suggestion.
Bill

kgm
2-Apr-2013, 12:56
I got the ASUS PA248Q monitor earlier this year along with a new computer. I've been very pleased with it. I calibrate with an X-Rite i1 setup, which is very simple to use. I find that scanning is the major hurdle for good color reproduction, and if I do that right, the ASUS monitor gives a good sense of the final color. I use an Epson 3800 (as well as a 4000, but only for black and white), and the ASUS gives me a good preview of what the Epson will produce. I had used various monitors in the past, mostly Dell, and the ASUS is a big improvement in terms of color representation.

Bill, 70's military B&W
2-Apr-2013, 18:13
I am looking at the PA248Q and the PA246Q, i really do not know what the additional $160 is for. I have found them for $280 and $440.
Many have recom the NEC P221W, but they always say you 'must' get the Spectraview to go with the monitor. I wonder how the P221W would calibrate using something like a color monkey. Someone said the NEC would make a profile but would not change the hardware like Spectraview would. I do not understand the difference, isn't it all turning up R-G-B or Brightness or Contrast? I have never calibrated a monitor, except by 'that looks good to me'.

Bill, 70's military B&W
2-Apr-2013, 20:10
I just discovered that NEC has on their website, refurbished monitors for very good prices.
P221W BK-R (WHAT IS THE BK-R???) FOR $199

An interesting one was:
https://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop-monitors/ea232wmi-bk-r
NEC EA 232WMI-BK-R 23" Widescreen monitor with IPS panel for $219 and you get 10% off of that.
Any thoughts?
Bill

Preston
2-Apr-2013, 20:12
Someone said the NEC would make a profile but would not change the hardware like Spectraview would. I do not understand the difference, isn't it all turning up R-G-B or Brightness or Contrast?

Bill,

I found a definition of 'hardware calibration' on the Eizo website: "Hardware calibration is the method of adjusting color directly by adjusting the settings inside the monitor. With hardware calibration, the target color is not reproduced through the graphic card output where all or a certain combination of white point, gamma, and brightness are reduced. A monitor that is equipped with a look-up table (LUT) of 10- bits or larger for each color is required for hardware calibration.

Basically, the white point, gamma, contrast range, color primaries, and luminance are set within the monitor based upon the settings one prescribes in the software. Also, the values for each color are stored in the monitor's LUT, along with the other values, which the software uses to create the profile. Basically, using your monitor's hardware-based calibration bypasses the video card.

One could, of course, use the monitor's OSD controls to set these values and/or set them in the graphics driver, and that's the way it was done before all the nice calibration systems were developed, but these systems do a much better job for color-critical work.

There's a nice tutorial on calibration at Cambridge In Color (http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/monitor-calibration.htm) that's worth a look-see.

Edit: Bill, the "BK" stands for Black. The monitor is black with a black stand. I think the "R" stands for "Refurbished". I'm not familiar with the EA 232WMI-BK-R monitor.

--P

Bill, 70's military B&W
6-Apr-2013, 20:58
Preston,
Thanks for the info, I just ordered 2 refurbished NEC EA 232 WMI IPS monitors. I do not see on the published specs that it has a LUT or what number it would be.
They also had the P221 but the resolution was lower and it had a PVA screen.
Got them off NEC's website about $200 each, including the 10% off.

Someone suggested getting 2 different monitors because you can never get the 2 to match. Get a large very good quality monitor for the main screen, and use a cheaper one for putting the controls for PS or LR on.

I read the Cambridge in Color link you sent, it was very informative, a lot of it is still over my head at this time, but it's getting better.
The monitors have been shipped but I do not have them yet. Does anyone have any comments about the EA 232??? Being refurbished is there anything I should be looking for? I've read that some of these units have problems with light bleed thru at the corners, and there is always the possibility of a dead pixel.
Do I just return them if I see any evidence of either?

Thanks, Bill

sanking
7-Apr-2013, 13:53
I am currently using a 24" Dell U 2410 with my Mac Mini and find the image looks more natural than on my 24" iMac. The 2410 has a bunch of out ports, there are adjustments for contrast, brightness on the side of the monitor, and it calibrates nicely with Spyder.

Originally my plan was to buy NEC for the Mac MIni, but a friend convinced me that the Dell 2410 was in the same league in terms of quality, and less expensive.

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?cs=19&c=us&l=en&sku=320-8277

Sandy

Leszek Vogt
7-Apr-2013, 14:37
I've looked all over Amazon page to find response milliseconds on the Asus....and it does not exist. It must be pretty high:D. One of the reasons I like newegg, you can find the tech specs. Anyway, maybe it's there ?

Les

8x10 user
7-Apr-2013, 15:54
In many regards the best Color Reference monitor ever made was the LaCie 730; it has by far the largest color gamut of any color reference monitor and it is 30" in size. Instead of white LEDS the 730 used separate high purity red green and blue LEDS to increase the color gamut. However these things were close to 5k new, are now discontinued, and appear to almost never enter the open market.

The LaCie is built using the same hardware as Samsung's discontinued XL series, however I have used the Samsung and it is crap. Lacie was forced to retire the line when Samsung pulled out of the color reference monitor. I don't know what LaCie did with samsungs hardware, but they really made it shine.

Bill, 70's military B&W
7-Apr-2013, 17:36
Sandy, I must be running with the wrong crowd, my friend/mentor convinced me that Dell does not last as long, inferior materials/workmanship. I went with NEC based on their long reputation. I read on this Forum how folks loved the NEC P 221, the specs on the NEC EA 232 are better and it has an IPS screen. I hope these turn out to be a good choice, my friend keeps telling me that I'm splitting hairs and growing some grey ones worrying about all these details.

Too many choices,
Bill

patrickjames
7-Apr-2013, 20:55
What specs are you talking about? Obviously not the ones that count. Those two monitors are not in the same league. The cheaper one is a 6-bit screen with a dither. IPS screens are nice, but only the good ones. The 221 has a good PVA screen which is far better than the cheap IPS screen of the 232. The 231 also has a wide gamut backlight which covers Adobe RGB instead of sRGB. Keep in mind most screens are made for gamers (who want fast pixel response and high contrast) because there are a lot more of them than people who are interested in, and will pay for, color quality.

The new Dell U2413 is similar to the 2410 that Sandy has but has the new RGB LED backlight instead of the CCFL of the 2410. Looks like a great monitor made to compete with the likes of Eizo. It is probably the best bang for the buck these days. I have seen it on sale for as low as $450. http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-9567

You probably should have heeded the advice you received above and not listened to your friend. I would recommend you return the NECs and get something better.

Bill, 70's military B&W
8-Apr-2013, 19:13
Pat, thanks, I'm reading about the U2413, I found it for $450 also. I have not received the NEC monitors yet, so it would not be very difficult to return them, just postage I guess.
You could have just helped me avoid making a bad decision. I really appreciate it. These are the first monitors I've ever bought, very complex subject! I just bought a Mac Pro and want to have a really nice system.
Everyone was talking about IPS as being the best, so I jumped on it.
I wonder if anyone else has any comments or recommendations.
I'm going out of town until Sunday, the monitors will be here by then. They will probably go back. Refurbished monitors, what reason should I use for returning them? Can I just say I changed my mind, and pay return postage?
Bill

patrickjames
8-Apr-2013, 19:50
If you get the Dell or another wide gamut monitor, maybe a cheap sRGB monitor might be great for a second monitor. That would probably help you as well since you aren't experienced with color management. There is a 23" BenQ monitor I saw a while back that is a VA panel and true 8-bit that only costs like $130. The advantage of the VA type panel is deep blacks. If you run two monitors, keep the secondary monitor a little dimmer than the main monitor. Our eyes set white balance by the brightest white in our field of vision. FYI.

I think it is a shame that there isn't really a resource for photographers that ranks monitors. Information is really hodge podge on the internet. A lot of it is just being passed around by people who really don't know what they are talking about. People glom on to specs that really don't mean anything.

Bill, I should really apologize to you as well since I saw this thread but didn't respond, which would have saved you some dough and some headaches.

Bill, 70's military B&W
9-Apr-2013, 12:51
Pat, I looked and the U2413 for $450 is expired
There are deals on the U2713, higher resolution, but is it the same quality as the 2413?
I'm running right now to the airport

The NEC monitors arrived today, someone from IT at work bought them from me, for same price, so now loss or hassle there.
Talk to you next week.
Bill

patrickjames
9-Apr-2013, 15:09
This is the 27" that you want. There are two versions, H and HM. You want the H

http://www.dell.com/ed/business/p/dell-u2713h/pd

welly
9-Apr-2013, 20:36
If money wasn't an object (it is), one of the Eizo ColorEdge or FlexScan monitors would be the ones to go for. Outstanding and the best monitors I've ever had the pleasure to work with. Unfortunately not mine.

Bill, 70's military B&W
11-Apr-2013, 16:01
2 issues about the Dell U2413, first the price is back to $550, do not know when it will go on sale again. I've got a Mac Pro (desktop) being delivered this week. I need a monitor, hoping for 2 24" for a dual set up. Dell U2413 and the U2713 require a specific color correction puck at about $270 That brings the price up to about $1370 for 2 24" monitors.

At that price I know there are a lot of other options. I could get a refurbished 27" Apple Cinema from Apple for around $870 and just go with a 1 monitor set up. A new one is $999.

I'm asking for any other suggestions. I do not know anything about Eizo, warranty, support, etc...
My buddy keeps saying I could get a spectacular NEC for that price.

Any help would be appreciated.

8x10 user
11-Apr-2013, 20:26
I think the dell uses white LED's to produce nearly all of the ADOBE RGB color space... LaCie was very clear about the use of RGB leds and I think dell would mention RGB leds in the sale page. RGB leds does increase gamut but using RGB instead of white leds is less efficient as the light gets filtered twice.

The LaCie is 123% adobe RGB while the dell is 99%.



The new Dell U2413 is similar to the 2410 that Sandy has but has the new RGB LED backlight instead of the CCFL of the 2410. Looks like a great monitor made to compete with the likes of Eizo. It is probably the best bang for the buck these days. I have seen it on sale for as low as $450. http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-9567

Preston
11-Apr-2013, 20:26
Bill,

I still contend that an NEC wide-gamut monitor that supports hardware calibration with SpectraView and the NEC-branded colorimeter is the best bang for the buck. My P221W has 10,500 hours on it and it still calibrates perfectly every time. No dead pixels, no flickering, nothing: it just works.

If you're interested in the Eizo, take a look at http://www.chromix.com/. They are an authorized Eizo dealer. I've purchased items from them in the past and find them very easy to work with. Eizo monitors are expensive, but I have heard really good things about them. I'm not sure what their warranty is, though, but I'm certain the folks at Chromix will provide any info you need.

--P

patrickjames
11-Apr-2013, 20:40
I think the dell uses white LED's to produce nearly all of the ADOBE RGB color space... LaCie was very clear about the use of RGB leds and I think dell would mention RGB leds in the sale page. RGB leds does increase gamut but using RGB instead of white leds is less efficient as the light gets filtered twice.

The LaCie is 123% adobe RGB while the dell is 99%.

The Dell uses a GB-LED backlight, not RGB as I stated. It is a definite step forward, although not at advanced as the LaCie. On the other hand, you can get quite a few Dells for the price of the LaCie....

barnninny
11-Apr-2013, 23:45
This all seems like a good reason to shoot black-and-white.

Preston
12-Apr-2013, 07:36
This all seems like a good reason to shoot black-and-white.

Why? If one uses B&W film and then scans it, the monitor needs to be able to produce an accurate and smooth gray scale. This means that the monitor should be able to accurately reproduce the primary colors (RGB), and have an accurate black point and white point. If a monitor cannot do this, the output to another device, say to a printer, will likely not be acceptable.

--P

paulr
12-Apr-2013, 08:11
I have got a great deal (around $300) on a previous model NEC 26". Found it on Craigslist; the seller said he got a hundred inquiries about the Apple cinema display he was selling but hardly any on the NEC. Sounds like the general public doesn't know how good these are, so good deals might not be hard to find.

I'm completely spoiled by the full adobe RGB gamut and the hardware calibration. The Spectraview software is first rate and makes calibration effortless.

In reviews I've read, people are having a harder time justifying the price premium of Eizo color edge. The flex scan models are more affordable, but I don't think they're as good as the NEC.

FWIW, with the exception of some images, I find monitor calibration more critical with black and white than with color.

8x10 user
12-Apr-2013, 16:15
If you are shooting only black and white then any color reference monitor should do. The gamut wont really come into play and chances are that you will calibrate your contrast ratio to at or below 1:500, in fact the dell might be better for black and white since it will offer 1024 rather then 256 shades of grey. For color, moving from 8 to 10 bits should be less noticeable then a 25% larger gamut. If your using a high gamut printer then the a wide gamut monitor should help with soft proofing.

I haven't had experience with color reference monitors. Just the Wide gamut LaCie and its 20" samsung counter part. The laCie is much better then the samsung even though they use the same screen. LaCie's software is much better and it gives me a darker more neutral black. I am actually pretty disappointed with the now discontinued samsung XL series. The LaCie puck is nicer and the software allows you to use it to calibrate and profile all of your other monitors. I lost the software but LaCies technical support is awesome and set me up a download for it right away. The LaCie is able to self calibrate and uses many more "patches" to fine tune the monitor.

I have not used Dells calibration software but it might be likely that one would get better results using it with a third party software option. The dell sure sounds like a good value.

Bill, 70's military B&W
12-Apr-2013, 17:26
Looking online found other options
NEC has refurbished models

I could go with 2 23" PA231W 75% aRGB for $449 ea
Possibly the way to go???

A 24". PA241W. 98%.aRGB runs $789

For a little more 27". PA271W 97% aRGB runs $939
A single 27" is another way to go

That is in the range of Apple Cinema
27" refurb about $880 2010 model
New $999
Not initially crazy about glossy screen but they say you get used to it
Everyone seems to like the Cinema, but how ie it for LR PS

Dell is still a contender

I know nothing about the exotic brands
Figuring to stick with the more common names

Considering all options.......Help appreciated/needed

Peter De Smidt
12-Apr-2013, 17:36
If it was me, I'd get the Asus Kirk recommended from a reputable source, such as Amazon. I'd try it out, calibrate it, and use it for a few days. Odds are, it'd be fine. If so, done, if not, then I'd return it and check out the Dell, probably the PA241w or the bigger one recently suggested. If those don't work out, I go next with the NEC, one of the ones with it's own hardware calibrator. I'm not a big fan of the Apple screens. They're ok, but usually there are better screens for the money out there.

DennisD
12-Apr-2013, 18:20
Go with a manufacturer that specializes in displays and complementary hardware / software such as NEC's Display Systems Division.

We've been using the NEC and Spectraview products for years in my business and couldn't be more pleased. I also use two PA241 dsplays for my personal work and the screens are like the day they were purchased despite thousands of hours clocked. The PA241 or PA221 models are excellent values (compared to some of the very nice but more expensive Eizo units) and well suited to the accomplished digital user. Calibration with Spectraview is excellent, fast and simple. The monitor and Spectraview packaged together provide the best value and savings. (BTW - I don.t have any connection with NEC except as a satisfied user.)

We've had poor experience with Dell monitors. We've found them to be unstable and / or troublesome, not to mention the snotty Dell technical support that seemed to prevail several years ago. I don't believe that Dell and many others have the same quality standards for monitors as the more specialized producers such as NEC, LaCie or Eizo.

Perhaps brands NEC, LaCie or Eizo might be more expensive, but when all is said and done, they are better investments.

Bill, 70's military B&W
13-Apr-2013, 09:33
Thanks to everyone. I really appreciate all the input.
Dennis's letter pushed me over the top and today I ordered
2 24" NEC PA 241 W
Refurbished for $780 with10% off $710X2
Also picked up SpectraviewII calibration kit

I am confident that I made a good decision based on all the input from this forum.
Again thanks to all
Bill

Preston
13-Apr-2013, 21:30
Bill,

I know you'll be happy with the NEC's and SpectraView. I suggest that you go to NEC's SpectraView Downloads (http://www.necdisplay.com/support-and-services/spectra-view-II/Downloads) page and get the latest version of SpectraView and install it. The version on the CD is likely an older version, since NEC updates it frequently.

--P

Bill, 70's military B&W
14-Apr-2013, 11:28
I Am reading and Discovered that the NEC PA241W gives its best performance when connected using "Display Port"
The desktop Mac Pro I am buying has a video card that has dual DVI ports but no Display Port.
It is a nice card, from what I read, but seems to be mainly for gaming.
I am not a gamer. Can't find anything about photography.

NVIDIA GTX 285 1 GB RAM built for Mac

I want the wide color range that these NEC monitors can deliver.
Using Spectraview and the NEC puck what can I expect using the 2 DVI ports to connect the 2 monitors.
The Mac Pro is a 2012 model and does not have Thunderbolt connections.
No Mac Pro does???
Any thoughts, to be honest I'm way above budget.
Thanks,
Bill

Peter De Smidt
14-Apr-2013, 12:58
You _might_ be able to get a higher bit image via a Display Port, but only assuming that your application, OS, video card and monitor all allow that.

Bill, 70's military B&W
14-Apr-2013, 13:20
Hi Pete
Monitors are NEC PA241w
2012 Mac Pro desktop
I will be using latest PS and LR
No problem so far

It is just the video card I have a question about.

A possibility is that when Mac upgrades their next version of MAC PRO that it will incorporate Thunderbolt.
Then I may be able to upgrade my video card and have Thunderbolt capability
The NEC's I have do not have that capability but I hope that there will be a cable that will connect Display Port input to Thunderbolt output.

Actually what I'd like the most is to discover that the dual DVI input/output I have will be ENOUGH!!!

I guess my basic question is will the DVI connection provide the 98% aRGB that I am after? Some reviews I have read say they are happy with the DVI, but they are not talking photography. Gamers rule what is written .
Thanks
Bill

Peter De Smidt
14-Apr-2013, 14:26
I'm not following. What does Thunderbolt have to do with it? Aren't we talking Display Port? Note that the overwhelming number of screens used for image editing haven't been higher bit, and those "regular" screens worked just fine. It is very easy to get caught up in the chase for "the best". Some people enjoy that chase and have the money to pursue it, and that's great. Others, though, just want to make a good choice that'll let them get on with what they want to do. I fall more into the latter category. If I were you, I'd simply use what you're getting, some great monitors and calibration items. Down the road if you need a new system, you can always check into displayport/high bit pipeline.

Bill, 70's military B&W
14-Apr-2013, 15:12
I guess when I read that PA241W only displays its best performance when connected via Display Port.
I DO NOT know what I will get when I hook it up using 2 DVI connections.
I want to take advantage of the technology I have already paid for.
I want to make sure I am not running this sports car on regular.

If the DVI hook up is good enough to give the wide color gamet, then that is more than good enough for me.

I do not enjoy this part
I want to get it right and move on

A large problem is that I have never bought a monitor or built a system before.

This forum has been an unbelievable help
Again thanks
Bill

Uri A
14-Apr-2013, 15:24
Check this straightforward article and you'll be good.

http://photo.net/learn/digital-photography-workflow/color-management/101-basics/



No offense to you personally Brent, but I am speechless (almost) about this article. Who would agree with this statement: "Always export your images in SRGB if you intend to ... print them in an external lab"?

Corran
14-Apr-2013, 16:28
What's wrong with that?
More specifically, you should export in whatever color space your lab uses. I know many of the bigger labs that cater to everyone (not the boutique places) use sRGB standard. I know some boutiques use Adobe RGB. They also, in my opinion, charge you more simply for the pleasure of saying you used the "upscale" lab in many situations.

Peter De Smidt
14-Apr-2013, 16:57
If the DVI hook up is good enough to give the wide color gamet, then that is more than good enough for me.
Bill

It's not really about gamut. Your monitor will meet it's specs with either and 8-bit-per channel workflow or a 10-bit-per-channel one. In other words, if your display is rated for 100% of Abobe RGB, then that's what you'll get, unless the display is defective. Normal monitors are 8-bit-per-channel which'll give you about 16 million colors. A 10-bit-per-channel system will give you more colors, but the new colors will be within the same color space. It's like a football field. You can mark it off in yards, for example, or you can mark it off in feet. Neither measurement will make the field any bigger, but the one with more steps will give smaller changes between adjacent steps.

Kirk Gittings
14-Apr-2013, 17:07
Also..........I have battled with these issues since I first started doing anything digital. IMO for example trying to get a monitor image that perfectly matches a print so you don't have to make test prints is like chasing your tail. At some point you accept the fact that color calibration, profiling, softproofing etc. is never going to be perfect (and even if it is the person you send the file to has crappy profiling) and you do the best you can and send the file or start making test prints and waste some paper and ink.

IMHO for most everyone I know, teach, sleep with, shoot with, drink with or what ever with-at some point it is a far better investment to simply put gas in the car and go make images and buy a stack of paper and have at it! You can calibrate till you fry your brain cells and never make any images!

Uri A
14-Apr-2013, 17:19
Hi Bryan!

Why, oh WHY did I open my big keyboard??!? I really don't want to start an argument or a flame war, so let me say that if it works for you and you are happy with your prints - GREAT! Also: I am not a colour or calibration or monitor expert (and neither, it seems, are most of the people I have paid $$$ to, who DO claim to be experts).

The only reason I replied to this thread is that the OP and others were agonizing about the best panel technology, video cards, connectors, viewing angles, spending $$$$$$ on monitors, etc, and the article being referenced claims that you MUST export in sRGB to get a good print from your lab. Well ...... that is WRONG!

If you are shooting LF film, you are hopefully concerned with extracting the maximum possible detail and nuance from an image. I won't argue about whether sRGB is "good" or "bad" (it's great for online/websites, etc), but it IS the smallest, most basic, least nuanced colour space in use today. So an article that tells you to buy and calibrate the bejesus out of the most advanced and expensive monitor technology and then tells you that you MUST use the LEAST advanced and subtle colour space to export your prints is incoherent at best.

My 5c.

Peter De Smidt
14-Apr-2013, 17:25
Also..........I have battled with these issues since I first started doing anything digital. IMO for example trying to get a monitor image that perfectly matches a print so you don't have to make test prints is like chasing your tail. At some point you accept the fact that color calibration, profiling, softproofing etc. is never going to be perfect (and even if it is the person you send the file to has crappy profiling) and you do the best you can and send the file or start making test prints and waste some paper and ink.

IMHO for most everyone I know, teach, sleep with, shoot with, drink with or what ever with-at some point it is a far better investment to simply put gas in the car and go make images and buy a stack of paper and have at it! You can calibrate till you fry your brain cells and never make any images!

Kirk is spot on!

patrickjames
14-Apr-2013, 17:26
In a closed loop you can get incredibly close, but like Kirk says, as soon as it leaves your loop, everything will probably go to hell!

Bill, just use the DVIs. The advantage of display port is that it allows a 10 bit signal. Last time I checked there were only two graphics cards that would output a 10 bit signal and I don't remember if either were compatible with a Mac.

In other words, don't worry about it. Take your time to calibrate and profile the monitors, which should be automatic for you since you went with the whole enchilada from NEC. Sit back and enjoy the rest.

Corran
14-Apr-2013, 17:26
Uri - You're also talking about paper, which has it's own limitations in terms of color gamut. It doesn't really matter how high-fidelity your monitor is and how awesome the colors are if you can't put it on the paper.

Personally, I've never felt limited whatsoever in color gamut with sRGB. I think it has more than enough color fidelity to deal with any DSLR file, which have terrible color reproduction in the red channel anyway, but my color scans from chromes and negs also look great and have no discernible lack of nuance.

I think saying one person's technique is WRONG is just as short-sighted as saying yours is RIGHT. If the lab is using sRGB, I'd like to know why you think that it's wrong to use sRGB in your editing. I think that's the clincher for the argument. He really should've written "export in whatever color space your lab uses" and then there would be no issue, right?

No arguments or flame wars here, we are simply discussing!

Uri A
14-Apr-2013, 17:29
trying to get a monitor image that perfectly matches a print so you don't have to make test prints is like chasing your tail. At some point you accept the fact that color calibration, profiling, softproofing etc. is never going to be perfect

True, true, true .... in my 15 years shooting commercially, here is my experience:

Export file on 6-year old uncalibrated iMac to high-street lab:

Me: Hm. Looks a little darker and more magenta than it did on screen.
Printer: Yeah.. let's fix that and print it again.

Give file to super-duper mega pro lab, crammed with Eizos, Epsons, expertly calibrated $10,000 RIPs:

Me: Hm. Looks a little darker and more magenta than it did on screen.
Printer: Yeah.. let's fix that and print it again.

Uri A
14-Apr-2013, 17:35
Uri - You're also talking about paper, which has it's own limitations in terms of color gamut. It doesn't really matter how high-fidelity your monitor is and how awesome the colors are if you can't put it on the paper.

Personally, I've never felt limited whatsoever in color gamut with sRGB. I think it has more than enough color fidelity to deal with any DSLR file, which have terrible color reproduction in the red channel anyway, but my color scans from chromes and negs also look great and have no discernible lack of nuance.

I think saying one person's technique is WRONG is just as short-sighted as saying yours is RIGHT. If the lab is using sRGB, I'd like to know why you think that it's wrong to use sRGB in your editing. I think that's the clincher for the argument. He really should've written "export in whatever color space your lab uses" and then there would be no issue, right?

No arguments or flame wars here, we are simply discussing!

Right you are.

I did say if you get good results with sRGB - more power to you, but I do stand by the claim that there is an incoherence between buying the finest monitors and calibration and then using sRGB to print on paper. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link and sRGB is 20 year old monitor and home printer technology.

I would say that sRGB is the colour space that is least suited to matching screen to paper and that for that very reason I have never come across a lab (other than high-street Frontier minilabs) that uses it.

Corran
14-Apr-2013, 17:46
I'm not an expert on what every lab is using, but all of the mid-tier labs that I've used that cater to the average mom-and-pop photography business (like me!) and of course amateurs have used sRGB. The one time I used a local lab which was run by an older gentleman who frankly knew less about computers than I likely did when I was 10 years old, the computer prompted him to change my image to Adobe RGB, which I told him yes, do, since his printer was set up to that color space, and not a single thing changed in terms of color to my eye. The print looked great, just like I had seen it on my monitor. So I'm not sure what the big hooplah is about.

Now the likes of West Coast Imaging and such, I don't know what they use. I don't use boutiques like that, nor have I ever felt the need to. The only color issues I've had is cheap prints from the local bulk-item chain here. Their prints are ever so slightly warmer, while black-and-white images have a slight bluish-purple hue, very similar to what my Ilford MGIV paper toned in selenium look like (!). For cheap prints they work fine and I slightly edit my original before sending it to account for the shift.

Uri A
14-Apr-2013, 18:47
Great :)

Bill, 70's military B&W
14-Apr-2013, 19:44
Again, thanks to everyone, here as an explaination is my situation.

I ordered the Mac desktop off eBay and the beast has not arrived yet.
The 2 monitors hopefully will be there late this week.
I have NEVER color calibrated a monitor other than tweaking the R G B, contrast and brightness knobs.
Also I have not seen a good quality monitor except at the Apple store. Those Cinemas look great. Although I do not like the gloss.
Never saw ASUS, high end Dell, only NEC I've been around was office quality.

So I realize a lot of my questions were very basic, but I am not shy about asking.
I'm sure I will be asking a lot more when I am setting all this up

I also bought a 3880 and I've never printed before either.

Anyone want to come and live with me for a month or so.
Free room and board!
Bill

paulr
14-Apr-2013, 19:47
So I'm not sure what the big hooplah is about.

Here's a bit of my experience. It's not enough to draw a hard conclusion from but it may be relevant. Several years ago I did my first color show. I didn't have the means to print it, so I hired my friend who runs a an art printing service. At the time, we both used calibrated, high end, but low color gamut (sRGB) monitors. Mine was a LaCie electron blue, his a Sony.

Of my 20 images, about 12 of them printed without any issues. I did the color corrections and tonal adjustments on my machine, delivered the files, and my friend nailed the print on the first or second try. About a half dozen of the prints needed a few tries to get right. But there were two prints that gave us headaches. The printed output didn't come close to what either of us saw on screen. My friend had to mess with the curves for a whole afternoon to get the prints to match, and the resulting file he printed on looked like an acid trip on screen. These images had to be printed blind, by trial and error (just like in the darkroom). It wasn't cheap.

I can only assume the problem prints resulted from out of gamut colors on our monitors. I don't know for sure, but gammut issues certainly could be expected to cause problems like these.

Bill, 70's military B&W
15-Apr-2013, 06:03
When I am setting up the monitors does anyone have any suggestions?
I will go to NEC website and download the latest updated software.
I assume The monitor software will be asking me my preferences but truth is I don't know enough to have any.
Any suggestions?
I'm asking before I even have the gear.

Thanks,
Bill

Peter De Smidt
15-Apr-2013, 06:32
I would use 6500K, Gamma 2.2.

Preston
15-Apr-2013, 06:39
Bill,

Take a look at this article from Image Science. It gives detailed instructions for installing and using SpectraView:

http://www.imagescience.com.au/kb/questions/142/How+To+Calibrate+An+NEC+Monitor+With+SpectraView+II


This article from the same site gives some guidance for setting up your hardware calibration targets in SpectraView:

http://www.imagescience.com.au/kb/questions/147/Hardware+Calibration+Targets

Added: Note that the targets are good staring points. You will likely need to modify them to suit your exact needs

I found both of these to be very helpful when I first started out with SpectraView.

--P

paulr
15-Apr-2013, 07:25
I would use 6500K, Gamma 2.2.

These are my main settings too.

Spectraview lets you create several presets, so you can experiment with a few different color temperatures, or have different setting for different purposes.

Prepress people and professional printers generally use a warmer color temperature, exactly matched to the lights in their viewing booth. This is the most accurate, but I find it hard to get used to. It also creates a setting that's dim and murky looking ... not great for web browsing or watching a movie. If you can adapt to it, though, you'll have the most scientific setup possible.

patrickjames
15-Apr-2013, 11:59
I much prefer 5000K but not all monitors can be set for that without compromises. If you are trying to match prints you may run into discrepancies at 6500. Remember that your eye adapts to whatever is in front of it. 5000K may look warm at first, especially if you are used to one of the godawful blue consumer monitors, but you will soon get used to it and you will be better off in the long run. I haven't set my eyes on the NEC's that you bought Bill, but I would be surprised if you were unable get a good result out of a 5000 setting.

Kirk Gittings
15-Apr-2013, 12:10
I much prefer 5000K but not all monitors can be set for that without compromises. If you are trying to match prints you may run into discrepancies at 6500. Remember that your eye adapts to whatever is in front of it. 5000K may look warm at first, especially if you are used to one of the godawful blue consumer monitors, but you will soon get used to it and you will be better off in the long run. I haven't set my eyes on the NEC's that you bought Bill, but I would be surprised if you were unable get a good result out of a 5000 setting.

Why?

8x10 user
15-Apr-2013, 12:52
I much prefer 5000K but not all monitors can be set for that without compromises. If you are trying to match prints you may run into discrepancies at 6500. Remember that your eye adapts to whatever is in front of it. 5000K may look warm at first, especially if you are used to one of the godawful blue consumer monitors, but you will soon get used to it and you will be better off in the long run. I haven't set my eyes on the NEC's that you bought Bill, but I would be surprised if you were unable get a good result out of a 5000 setting.

yes 5000K 2.2 gamma is the gold standard "D5000". All print and film viewing devices use this standard. If you want to go all out then you can get 5000k lights for your room and paint it with 18% neutral grey.

Peter De Smidt
15-Apr-2013, 12:59
On the other hand, Bruce Frasier, a dyed-in-the-wool CMYK print guy, recommended 6500K. If you're printing for a 5000K light booth, then you might prefer using that setting, but otherwise it's a bit dull. But try both ways, and see what you like.

paulr
15-Apr-2013, 13:05
...But try both ways, and see what you like.

Yes. It's helpful to think of your monitor as a tool that helps you get the best match in a print. This may or may not mean the most absolute accuracy. If your viewing habits and your lighting make it easier for you to get good results with 6500K, then no one can argue. I've chosen 6500K also. I just find it too disruptive to switch back and forth between 5000K/low brightness for printing and a brighter, bluer setting for other work.

8x10 user
15-Apr-2013, 13:14
I would think that photoshop or what ever program that is being used would read the monitor profile incorporate that information into the color management in a way where both should print the same.

Determining if the print should be calibrated for 5000k or 6500k lights should be a second part of the print calibration process and separate from the monitor process?

I would think that if you are printing for 6500k that having 6500k all around would make it easier on the user as he wouldnt need a moment to adjust to the new color temp.

I do suppose 5000k is more of a standard for those who do print or chrome matching. If your going straight through from chrome to print you might find a perfect match to be a little dull depending on what film you use. This is where photoshop our digital darkroom comes into play.

For the sake of honesty, I do not own my own printer and have not had direct hands on experience with the print side of things. My information is based from theoretical ideas, stuff I've read, and my own limited experiences in the capture side of things.

patrickjames
15-Apr-2013, 13:54
Kirk if you take a step back and think about it for a second it is clear. 5000K is a pretty neutral setting for our eyes (caveats of course) relative to our surroundings and I think it is the best place to start. If you are printing your images, they will almost never be seen under a 6500 light, so why adjust the color according to a screen at that temperature? The difference between 6500 and 3200 is quite large. Granted our eyes adjust to these differences given a few seconds or so, but decisions are made along the way that can compound errors in color, or at least errors relative to intent. This causes a lot of problems when people try to match prints to their screen. A lack of understanding of what is going on contributes to the inability as well. Color needs to be thought of in terms of volume but that is another discussion.

My assumption Kirk for the recommendation is that the operator has a closed loop. If you are dealing with other people (commercially) it is easier to adjust to them than to ask them to adjust to you. Most people handle their profiling well enough these days and 6500 is relatively standard. It isn't like it used to be. I am sure you remember those days.

Kirk Gittings
15-Apr-2013, 14:04
Thanks I get it. My clients you would think would pay attention to profiling their monitors but most don't believe it or not. Also I don't print color-ever.

Tyler Boley
15-Apr-2013, 14:35
I've been going in circles about this for years, for critical color print matching, swinging between 5000 and 6500 and everything in between. Much depends on the environmental light the print is under being compared to the monitor. I suppose if it's a very tightly controlled viewing situation this can be well nailed down, mine is not tightly controlled, maybe semi ...
Right now 5000 is matching my color output here, and that's with using soft proof and checking paper white.
I hope it goes without saying that you really need to just see it on paper at some point for critical decisions. Got issues? Make a print.
Regarding the original question, there are many criteria for evaluating monitor quality, and none can satisfy everyone. Many consumer ratings or reviews will not have the demands of most users here in mind. Be sure and take your advice from those involved in graphics work, primarily for print.
Tyler

Yardley
15-Apr-2013, 15:55
Been reading .. no posts for a time.

In the lithography world, the viewing station at the end of a press is equipped with 5,000 deg K lamps. My Macbeth light box has 5k deg K lamps.

ISO 3664-2009 calls for 5k deg K.
http://www.just-normlicht.de/us/productgroup.html?maingroup=1

The guy who does my gallery printing (photo pigment) has a 5k deg K booth in his studio. I don't know how critical this is + or - 500 deg K

Peter De Smidt
15-Apr-2013, 16:50
Excerpt from Real World Color Management by Bruce Fraser, Chris Murphy and Fred Bunting:

Target White Point
The white point of the monitor plays an important role for your eye. As described in Chapter 1, your eye judges all colors relative to some neutral baseline that it considers white. The three of us unanimously recommend that you calibrate your monitor to 6500K even though many people think of 5000K as the standard viewing white point in graphic arts. Here's why.

The eye has a tremendous ability to adapt to different white-point environments. However, the eye works best when it's operating in a white point closest to that environment most familiar to it through millions of years of evolution--namely daylight. So the discussion quickly reduces to which of the two most commonly used daylight standards, D50(5000 K correlated color temperature) or D65 (6500K correlated color temperature), is best. ... If you have a D50 viewing booth, this might seem to tip the scales toward setting your monitor to 5000 K so that your monitor and print viewing environment have identical white points. But long experience has told us that this doesn't work the way the theory would seem to predict--see "Monitor-to-print comparisons," in Chapter 9, Evaluating and Editing Profiles.

A second factor is that many uncalibrated CRTs, especially older models, are pretty darned blue, with a color temperature closer to 9300K, though the better current CRTs have a native white point closer to 6500 K. In either case, to move the white point to 5000 K, we have to limit the output of the display's blue channel, lowering the overall brightness and dynamic range. This is why many people (including us)( often find a 5000 K monitor to be a bit too dim, dingy, and ... well ... too darned yellow.

So instead, it's worth remembering the sentence that started off this explanation. The eye has a tremendous ability to adapt to different white-point environments. The eye takes a little bit of time to adjust to a change in brightness, but it has little trouble looking at a color image in a 6500K monitor and then moving to view the same image printed out and mounted in a viewing booth. It's the relationships within the image or page that you're evaluating. As long as you give the eye a good adaption environment, and both environments are of approximately equivalent brightness, then you should have no problems.

If your software has more than just two choices for white point, you have another option--you can perform iterative calibrations to find the white point setting that best approximates a sheet of paper in your viewing booth. Some people in extremely color critical environments, with control overall all of their equipment, including the paper being used, have found this to be useful. We, however, prefer to deal with the color o paper white int he printer profile, and concentrate on matching the brightness of the monitor and the viewing booth.

paulr
15-Apr-2013, 16:54
Interesting, Peter. I'd never read that. Always assumed I just had bad habits.

8x10 user
15-Apr-2013, 18:22
It seems you can convert 5000k viewers to 6500k with a new bulb from Just.

barnninny
15-Apr-2013, 19:17
For something that started off as a buying advice request, this has turned into a really informative thread.

patrickjames
15-Apr-2013, 20:36
Excerpt from Real World Color Management by Bruce Fraser, Chris Murphy and Fred Bunting:
.

Um, when was that book written? Why would you reference something that old?

It is a brave new world in the last 10 years. Ten years ago things were relatively primitive. During the process of getting a CRT to 5000K it would get real dim which was a function of the technology (on most CRTs) and would also jack up the color balance. Many CRTs would look yellow. Some would even look green. Some LCD's can't be set to 5000 without compromises in color as well (due to their technology). This makes perfect sense if you understand how the backlights work. LED backlights are a step backward from most CCFLs, but the newer LED backlights are coming into their own. That was discussed earlier in this thread. A good monitor at 5000K will show pure color without any biases. It is a beautiful thing.



Kirk, I was scratching my head when you asked that question because I know that you don't print color, and I know you know what you are doing, which is why I added that second paragraph. :) I have stories, as I am sure you do, of clients that have no clue.....The next time I am in Santa Fe I would love to share them with you over a beverage or two.

Tyler Boley
15-Apr-2013, 20:42
well when I met the dear departed Mr. Fraser, the first thing he said was that if you wanted to monitor to match your prints.. you need to lower your expectations...
I'd certainly respect his input more than most now out there claiming guru status, he was the real deal with little apparent political agenda. YOu should certainly take his advice over mine.
That said I'll take issue with him, all my back and forth has out me back to 5000, and that is using soft proof and paper white. My eye is not making those claimed adaptions looking back and forth that easily when I have a print next to my monitor, and we are trying to edit very specific pastel hues on the monitor to match a resulting print. I just went back and forth on a project with a lot of pastel cyan water. Very slight moves from too green to too blue were easily noticeable on both display and print, this is not the first time I've had subtle color concerns, and making minute moves and a bunch of test prints gets frustrating. If the display more accurately predicts the print, those edits go much smoother.
My viewing light right at the display for the proof, and general light out in the room are 5000. I think the lighting has a lot to do with what color temp your monitor should be..
It's these subtle things that are difficult, the more general look of a print and monitor are easier to deal with, but like he said.. keep expectations reasonable.

Peter De Smidt
15-Apr-2013, 21:01
I agree wholeheartedly that one should check these things out for oneself. Like many, I've tried 5000k and 6500K, and many in between. I can see my viewing booth from here. Looks a bit yellow compared to my screen. (I use Solux bulbs.) But those bulbs are what i use to display prints with, if I light the prints specifically. I also check out prints by daylight, which, in my case here, is usually bluer than 5000K, especially when viewed by indirect light, which is what my prints receive from our windows.

Yardley
15-Apr-2013, 21:02
It's been a while since I read material on the subject of color memory. But, I recall that color memory is about 1/2 hour. Meaning that, if you're in a building with green tinted glass windows, it takes 1/2 hour after leaving that greenish light environment for the magenta enhancement to correct in your brain. No citations, as I can't remember where I read this.

Bill, 70's military B&W
20-Apr-2013, 19:29
Color management!!! I remember Mpix suggesting that you set up your monitor using 5500K.
Desk with monitors will be in a room just in front of/up against a large window which has working plantation shutters. How should I light the room? There is just a simple incandescent ceiling light so far.

With the NEC MONITORS how many profiles can I set up?

The computer STILL has not arrived and neither have the monitors. I leave town for a week on Monday, so i'm going to be slow setting them up.
Thanks, Bill

Preston
20-Apr-2013, 20:03
Bill, I'd suggest 6500K 2.2 gamma. Honestly, I think this will give the best results. If you use MPix for printing your images, the 5500K will be fine for files you send to them.

With SpectraView you can set up as many 'Profile (calibration) Targets' as you want. After you create the target, select it in SpectraView and then calibrate using that target. There are even built-in ones that you try, but they may not be suitable for editing/printing images.

One other thing: Be sure your video driver (either a discrete video card or on-board graphics) is set to it's default values before you calibrate.

I'm not a huge expert on room lighting, so I'll leave that for others to address for you.

--P

Bill, 70's military B&W
20-Apr-2013, 20:58
Preston,
Thanks and I'll keep all that in mind. I didn't know I could change the settings on a video card.
Bill

Preston
20-Apr-2013, 21:14
I didn't know I could change the settings on a video card

You can do this through the video card's driver control panel. Since I don't know which video card you'll be using, I can't offer anything more specific.

--P

Bill, 70's military B&W
24-Apr-2013, 04:37
NVIDIA GTX 285 is the card that is in the Mac Pro
I think that card was very popular with gamers last year.
Machine is a 2012 model
It has 2 DVI outputs
Do not know anything about their capability with photography.

Bill, 70's military B&W
24-Apr-2013, 05:11
Monitors arrived Monday just as I was leaving in a business trip
One is beautiful, one came all busted up
So back it went to NEC

8x10 user
12-Jan-2015, 11:45
Hey Lenny... I was just wondering. What type of cleaner do you use with your monitors? Do you think that a cleaner could have contributed to your de-lamination problem?

8x10 user
12-Jan-2015, 11:53
I use a Lacie 730 calibrated to 5000k, next to a 5000k GTI viewer, in a room with 5000k lights. I would say that an actual color reference monitor is better for editing and viewing. Calibrating your LUT from a large pallet of hardware colors is better then just profiling. Not all color reference monitors are the same. My Lacie 730 is much better then my Samsung XL20 even though they are both based on Samsung display technology.

Lenny Eiger
13-Jan-2015, 09:47
Hey Lenny... I was just wondering. What type of cleaner do you use with your monitors? Do you think that a cleaner could have contributed to your de-lamination problem?

I have only used the cleaner supplied with the monitor, probably two or three times over the couple of years I've had it. There's nothing about the environment that is in any way extreme. I live in Northern California, the temperature doesn't get that cold or that hot... it's just a defect.

Lenny