Wide Gamut Monitors

[Kirk Gittings]

Maybe I'm clueless but...................................

At both universities I teach at I get to use top of the line Eizo's. I also have friends with virtually every high end wide gamut monitor out there. Great. But I never spend the bucks on a top of the line monitor because frankly I CAN'T SEE THE DIFFERENCE. I went from the old Lacie Blues to a Lacie 319 and just bought and received, setup and ran a couple of jobs on Dell Ultrasharps. Yes I can SEE the difference in resolution, but that makes NO difference in how I process images. Actual images on wide gamut monitors don't look any different IME vs. a midrange or even lower end graphics monitor. When printing I don't get any closer to a perfect soft proof with a high end wide gamut monitor. What value is the extra $s beyond bragging rights?
What am I missing?

[Peter De Smidt]

It depends a lot on your photography. If you use a lot of really saturated colors, then you'll see a difference. Otherwise, probably not.

[Amedeus]

Peter has it right ... if the color gamut of your image is smaller than the color gamut of your monitor(s), then it is really hard to see any difference at all.

It is easier to see the difference between a 6 bit panel and a 10 bit panel in my experience on a good b&w image than the color differences between monitors having same depth panels.

There's also a significant personal aspect of perceiving colors that muddies up the waters.

[limnidytis]

I believe the wide gamut monitors have higher quality panels. I have a Dell 22'' monitor and a NEC 3090 which I profile with ColorEyes software. The Dell is too red and can't be completely white balanced. Due to the interlinked nature of the 3 colors with flat panels, when I turn down the red pretty soon the green and blue are also reduced. The result is the monitor is always too red. I use it as a secondary monitor for menus, etc, but I could not use the monitor as a primary monitor if it was my only monitor.

[Jim Andrada]

Have you ever tried the high-end and "less high-end" monitors side by side? If you did you might be more likely to see the difference. I think the high-end monitors are more consistent, calibrate better, display colors more accurately and (maybe more important) consistently.

I have two Apple Cinema 30" monitors side by side and I can NEVER get them to look the same regardless of how often I calibrate. So I also use one for menus and the other for images.

[Kirk Gittings]

Have you ever tried the high-end and "less high-end" monitors side by side? If you did you might be more likely to see the difference. I think the high-end monitors are more consistent, calibrate better, display colors more accurately and (maybe more important) consistently.

I have two Apple Cinema 30" monitors side by side and I can NEVER get them to look the same regardless of how often I calibrate. So I also use one for menus and the other for images.

No I haven't-don't have that opportunity. But as much as I get published and have opportunities to view my files on clients computers. I do get considerable feedback on my color processing.

On your dual display......how do you know which one is "right"

[Kirk Gittings]

I believe the wide gamut monitors have higher quality panels. I have a Dell 22'' monitor and a NEC 3090 which I profile with ColorEyes software. The Dell is too red and can't be completely white balanced. Due to the interlinked nature of the 3 colors with flat panels, when I turn down the red pretty soon the green and blue are also reduced. The result is the monitor is always too red. I use it as a secondary monitor for menus, etc, but I could not use the monitor as a primary monitor if it was my only monitor.

It sounds like you are adjusting the color manually rather than using a calibration device?

[pherold]

And then there are other issues besides color that are factors in high end monitors: angle of view, longevity, uniformity across the screen. If you look at a lower monitor with a smooth gray background, or a near white background - is the color consistent throughout the whole display area? Some of these issues are not obvious when you're looking at typical photos.

[rdenney]

It sounds like you are adjusting the color manually rather than using a calibration device?

I'm using an X-Rite Eye1 Display Pro (that uses the same sensor as the ColorMunki), and my fancy IPS monitor also shows too much intensity in the red. It's okay at mid-gray and in many colors, but saturated red is going to be more saturated than on most monitors, and more red than any paper can print, even when I'm using soft-proofing. I've learned to subtract red saturation from what I see, and I attribute it to having too wide a gamut in the red direction for the calibrator to see or respond to. It's a lot better than it was with my old calibration system.

The problem with cheap monitors is the different colors I see top-to-bottom, or as I move my head.

Rick "thinking that most monitors not intentionally targeted for graphics professionals are really targeted for movie-watchers and gamers" Denney

[Jim Andrada]

Re: "How do you know which one is right?"

in my case it's pretty easy. One of them has a noticeable color cast, the other one doesn't. And the colors on the prints match better to the one that has no noticeable color cast. I know we always think of getting the print to match the display but I guess this is a case of going in the other direction.