Best monitor for photo editing and viewing - suggestions wanted

[Corran]

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]

I use a EIZO as my main monitor and they seem to be in agencies I work for ,

[Ari]

...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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.