Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Colour Management => Topic started by: tgipson on December 22, 2009, 11:07:20 am
-
After reading the related topics about monitors that have been posted it seems to me that there are three choices/price points for most folks looking at 24" wide gamut monitors:
1. Eizo CG24xW series for about $2200
2. NEC LCD2490WUXi2 for about $1150
3. Dell u2410 for about $550
As I print more, it is clear I need a new monitor (3 year old Dell 24") so the discussions carry significant practical import for me. I use the Color Munki profiling system to profile my papers, printer, and monitor but the monitor luminance is off consistently. By some reports there is a hit-or-miss with the Dell, but everyone seems to like the Eizo. I am skeptical of the Dell and get swooning spells thinking of getting the Eizo.
So given all the technical discussions and practical experience previously discussed and given that my priority is to get the best PRINT out of my workflow and not necessarily purchasing a monitor for the viewing pleasure of seeing my pictures in beautiful full spectral color:
1. is the monitor selection process basically in the end a situation that if it calibrates well enough to get the print you want, then it's good enough? or
2. is this the lens scenario, where you get what you pay for (i.e. final output print quality is directly proportional to monitor quality)?
I'm sorry if this is rhetorical but value any feedback as my thoughts are not really clear yet on this subject. I am focusing on the monitor piece of my workflow at present and am currently satisfied with the print quality of my 3800 and 4880 so I just need the monitor advice. Thanks again
-
my priority is to get the best PRINT out of my workflow and not necessarily purchasing a monitor for the viewing pleasure
Nothing about the monitor will directly affect the printed output. So given your priority, I would lean toward your #1. (Calibrates well = good enough. That said, a lot depends on your own personal tastes and what you do in your workflow. If you don't do a lot of processing of your images, you would not need much in the way of a monitor. But here is a short list of the things you might have to give up with a lower priced option:
- Shadow detail
- Uniformity of color across the screen
- An accurate soft-proof of what your printed image will look like.
- Freedom from banding
-
Nothing about the monitor will directly affect the printed output. So given your priority, I would lean toward your #1. (Calibrates well = good enough. That said, a lot depends on your own personal tastes and what you do in your workflow. If you don't do a lot of processing of your images, you would not need much in the way of a monitor. But here is a short list of the things you might have to give up with a lower priced option:
- Shadow detail
- Uniformity of color across the screen
- An accurate soft-proof of what your printed image will look like.
- Freedom from banding
All issues you mention are important enough to pay money for. I infer that would drop the Dell from consideration. Does the Eizo (at 2-3x the price of the NEC) or NEC avoid the compromises you mention?
-
I have worked with both the Eizo and the NEC, and either would give you the qualities in the list. Generally the difference with getting an Eizo is longevity. They are better made with better parts and carry a 5-year warranty. We have also seen that NEC is a very difficult company to deal with, so I'd be concerned about getting any issues resolved with them.
On the other hand, I fully understand your hesitation to put that much money out. Could you manage without two inches? The Eizo CG222W is a 22" (diagonal) wide screen, and is more in the price range of the NEC:
http://tinyurl.com/yb3tbg3 (http://tinyurl.com/yb3tbg3)
-
I have worked with both the Eizo and the NEC, and either would give you the qualities in the list. Generally the difference with getting an Eizo is longevity. They are better made with better parts and carry a 5-year warranty. We have also seen that NEC is a very difficult company to deal with, so I'd be concerned about getting any issues resolved with them.
On the other hand, I fully understand your hesitation to put that much money out. Could you manage without two inches? The Eizo CG222W is a 22" (diagonal) wide screen, and is more in the price range of the NEC:
http://tinyurl.com/yb3tbg3 (http://tinyurl.com/yb3tbg3)
Compromising some screen real estate for the quality you mention may be the place to compromise rather than on brand name.
-
The NEC 2490 is not spec'd as a wide-gamut display. In fact, I'm planning to add one for the purpose of sRGB work because wide-gamut displays are not great for such tasks. The NEC 2690 and some other models are wide-gamut. Just mentioning so that you don't miss-step.
Many folks have reported very good support from NEC in the U.S., with less than great support from Eizo in the U.S. Some have stated that NEC support in Europe is problematic. I mention this only as a note of caution when evaluating these companies based on service. If it's a factor for you, it may be beneficial to dig a bit deeper than casual anecdotes (including my own).
I have a NEC 2690 Wuxi2 and am satisfied with it so far. Service has been fine (I did need some minor support and it was quickly addressed). And I hear mostly great things about Eizo, and of course their displays tend to be excellent.
-
That's helpful information about the 24"NEC. I do realize that the sample size here on the message boards is small when trying to make a decision on service experience. But there is much overall more experience than I currently have and I am grateful to all for the feedback and helping form my final decision.
-
I have the NEC 2690 Wuxi2 w/included color calibration hardware & software package. About $1300 at discount. So far I'm happy with it. It's great to have the larger screen real estate when working with Lightroom (diagonal screen size is about 25.5"), and I really like the simplicity and flexibility of the color calibration software.
The package is very easy to use (too bad the documentation, as detailed as it is separately for the monitor and for software, is a bit confusing at first in that it doesn't explain how the software overrides some of the hardware settings you can make manually via the monitor buttons themselves). In the included software you choose preset monitor targets and/or create more of your own, calibrate each with the customized included hardware device, and save them. To invoke what you want to use at a computer session, you just run the software and then select which target you want. That target overrides the monitor profile, used by the OS (at least in Win 7's case) and apps like Lightroom and Picture Window Pro. To change the monitor display just open up a different saved target and the change is made on the fly w/o having to save a file or do anything else.
It has an approximate sRGB target (that you calibrate with the included device, as you would all the targets you want to use). For when I'll be saving photos for web use or for printing at a lab that wants sRGB files I use that. I use a different target for when I want to approximate the Adobe RGB color space (for example when I'll be printing on a high end inkjet that can actually print those colors/saturation that aren't in sRGB. It's easy to switch back and forth between those two or any number of other saved calibrated targets. The software shows you the color gamut of the calibrated target compared to sRGB and Adobe RGB (as well as some other options).
I use the monitor with DVI-D inputs (it doesn't have display port nor HDMI inputs).
For the money it seems to be a good value to me. I hear, as others on this forum have said, that the Eizo is the top of the heap, but the cost of their monitors plus calibration packages was more than I wanted to spend. When I added the cost of a good calibration package to the cost of the Dell 24", the difference in price of about $400 net (say 600 for the dell + maybe 300 = 900), to get a bigger and better monitor was an easy choice for me to make.
Dan
-
"what photodan said" + 1
-
"what photodan said" + 1
+2
-
That's helpful feedback about the NEC. The one continuing consideration of the Eizo is the 5 year warranty. but a lot more money as you say.
-
The one continuing consideration of the Eizo is the 5 year warranty. but a lot more money as you say.
In 5 years, I certainly hope we have better display options than the current CCFL technology.
-
In 5 years, I certainly hope we have better display options than the current CCFL technology.
Yes, and one would assume so.
Although for users that budget new purchases on a 5 year time frame, this is relevant. We have numerous customers who do so. New high end workstation with high end display every 4 to 5 years and they buy the best they can at the time.
Steve Hendrix
-
That's helpful feedback about the NEC. The one continuing consideration of the Eizo is the 5 year warranty. but a lot more money as you say.
I would also add the LaCie 324, 526, and 724 monitors to your consideration.
Rough prices:
324 - $890 (24")
526 - $1,290 (26")
724 - $1,850 (24")
Notable is the aggressive price on the 324 (24") and 526 (26"), and the 123% Adobe RGB space of the 724 (widest stated gamut of any standard monitor I know of). We have a 724 in our demo inventory and only with a quick look after calibration, it appeared to indeed have as wide a gamut as I have seen from any display. We hope to do some more testing with this monitor soon.
I feel monitors are an extremely important and under-valued purchase. Editing and tweaking images on the display can be an incredibly critical part of the workflow. If you produce final files on your display, the importance of having an accurate tonal and color representation cannot be overstated.
There are many fine choices to choose from today. I will only say that my perspective is to buy from manufacturers who have a vested interest in the high end, accurate display market. This is narrowed down to 2 choices, Eizo and LaCie, both of whom have a legacy of high end, accurate displays going back years and covering multiple product generations. This can be a factor in terms of support and product evolution, IMO and IME.
Steve Hendrix
-
That's helpful feedback about the NEC. The one continuing consideration of the Eizo is the 5 year warranty. but a lot more money as you say.
Well, the NEC warranty is 4 years parts, labor and backlight, so it's not much different.
-
Well, the NEC warranty is 4 years parts, labor and backlight, so it's not much different.
I talked to some radiologists I know and they replace their NEC monitors every 2-3 years. I don't actually know how relevant that is to the wide color gamut monitor discussion since I think their viewing environment is rarely in color. I also did not realize the NEC had a 4 year warranty. It appears to be the practical winner so far for me. I also rarely see the LaCie discussed in recent discussions. I will have to take that into consideration as an alternative to the NEC.
-
In 5 years, I certainly hope we have better display options than the current CCFL technology.
And as LED backlit monitors are becoming mainstream (http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20100104PD203.html), prices will come down. Also, LEDs have a very long life.
-
I may be out of my league here, but my prints are spot on my the Dell U2410. I'm using an Epson 3850 (that's the Asian model of the 3800) and a 7900 with custom paper profiles. My monitor is profiled with a spyder 3 express. For me, and my budget, it works well. I believe the new dell and the Eizo use the very same display type. I may have bought the Eizo if I could have found one here, but it would have stretch my budget.
Noah
-
There are many fine choices to choose from today. I will only say that my perspective is to buy from manufacturers who have a vested interest in the high end, accurate display market. This is narrowed down to 2 choices, Eizo and LaCie, both of whom have a legacy of high end, accurate displays going back years and covering multiple product generations. This can be a factor in terms of support and product evolution, IMO and IME.
Steve Hendrix
That is a good point, but as with audio, high end dealers and manufacturers often demand a steep price for a relatively minor improvement in quality. From your byline and the Capture Integration web site, I see that you are one of those high end outfits and it is not surprising that you recommend Eizo or LaCie.
-
I will only say that my perspective is to buy from manufacturers who have a vested interest in the high end, accurate display market. This is narrowed down to 2 choices, Eizo and LaCie, both of whom have a legacy of high end, accurate displays going back years and covering multiple product generations. This can be a factor in terms of support and product evolution, IMO and IME.
Steve Hendrix
It's pretty hard to exclude NEC from the list. They have a dedicated line of monitors with hardware calibration and software. They were the first to introduce a wide gamut LED backlit display, and I have received excellent responses to technical questions from their reps both on this board and by phone. Plus, by all spec, accounts and appearances, the NEC and Lacie 26" monitors are identical.
-
It's pretty hard to exclude NEC from the list. They have a dedicated line of monitors with hardware calibration and software. They were the first to introduce a wide gamut LED backlit display, and I have received excellent responses to technical questions from their reps both on this board and by phone. Plus, by all spec, accounts and appearances, the NEC and Lacie 26" monitors are identical.
I agree. In fact, I've been asking for years what the additional price of the other product brings to the party (and so far, it appears to be one year additional warranty).
As for LaCie, its the same panel but the question is, do they get the pick of the litter? My impression is they don't (much like the old Sony Artisan had the same tube as other in the product line but not those which produced the best quality control feedback on line).
-
That is a good point, but as with audio, high end dealers and manufacturers often demand a steep price for a relatively minor improvement in quality. From your byline and the Capture Integration web site, I see that you are one of those high end outfits and it is not surprising that you recommend Eizo or LaCie.
bjanes
You are correct that we do sell and support LaCie and Eizo monitors. We are knowledgeable about the systems, have excellent relationships with the vendors, and acknowledge their tier in the marketplace respective to competitors. They are also the preferred standard equipment for most of the clients we work with.
I think that what can be a minor improvement in quality to some can be a critical improvement in quality to others. We do not make any apology for selling products that are considered premium quality in their class. You are right though, they are not for everyone. They do stretch budgets, and the differences can be lost on some or not important enough to justify the additional outlay. As you can tell, we are not an e-commerce site or camera store. We are specialists in the products we sell and support, and the depth to which we support them. Many clients prefer the highest level of support when they are investing in products at this spectrum of the market and we provide that.
Steve Hendrix
-
It's pretty hard to exclude NEC from the list. They have a dedicated line of monitors with hardware calibration and software. They were the first to introduce a wide gamut LED backlit display, and I have received excellent responses to technical questions from their reps both on this board and by phone. Plus, by all spec, accounts and appearances, the NEC and Lacie 26" monitors are identical.
Yes, and by no means did I imply they should be excluded. I just saw LaCie as a very worthy choice that wasn't mentioned.
If you go back to the late 1990's/early to mid 2000's, most studios had either a Barco monitor or a 19"/22" LaCie Electron Blue CRT.
The Barco was $4,000 - $5,000, the LaCie $400 - $800. LaCie sold a ton of these monitors. They weren't quite as good as a Barco, but they were pretty close and certainly better than the average CRT. They were a great value and the Blue Eye for the money was an excellent monitor. Since then LaCie has produced quality displays, but somehow they've lost their market focus. I think it is partly due to many good choices out there, and this includes Eizo, NEC, even HP. But they make very good displays at good prices and with the 724 have a unique product with the 123% Adobe RGB gamut.
I'm glad you've had good experience with NEC support. I had a customer who had purchased a Sony Artisan and after the warranty was over and Sony discontinued the Artisan (and all high-end color accurate displays) this customer had a bad experience with Sony where she was hung out to dry. So I say this more as cautionary tale than anything else and as a justification for focusing on manufacturers who have a continued legacy of producing monitors aimed at this part of the market. We intend to sell premium, accurate displays for a long time and we value manufacturers who are committed to the same. Doesn't mean NEC or HP or whoever is not committed. But they are large companies for whom the high end accurate display market is a very small piece of their overall company strategy. I could be over cautious with this issue and, as you mentioned, you have had a good experience so far.
As far as the NEC and LaCie versions of the 26" monitor being identical, I do not believe they are identical, but it is difficult to determine how they are different. I am also under the impression the IPS panel is the same, although the last time I spoke with LaCie they denied this. Hard to say, even if it is, there are other components that may not be identical that can make a difference. They are likely very similar in any event.
Steve Hendrix
-
If you go back to the late 1990's/early to mid 2000's, most studios had either a Barco monitor or a 19"/22" LaCie Electron Blue CRT. The Barco was $4,000 - $5,000, the LaCie $400 - $800. LaCie sold a ton of these monitors. They weren't quite as good as a Barco, but they were pretty close and certainly better than the average CRT.
I'd be hard pressed to put the LaCie Electron Blue in the same camp (even the same state <g>) as a Barco. I've owned and used both, and PressViews (17 & 21's), Artisans etc. A 25 quadrant purity control using the mated colorimeter on the Barco was something few others could even dream about. I recall Bruce Fraser doing a review and using a $20K spectroradiometer finding the Barco had a tad less than a deltaE of 1 across the entire screen.And I recall a lot of dissatisfied users of later LaCie blue's due to really poor quality control issues. My point is, you simply can't lump the LaCie at its price point and performance level anywhere near a Barco Reference V let alone an Artisan.
The idea of painting a display system blue when years prior, the competition (Radius) went to lengths to provide a black smock for the user to wear provides a glimpse into the mind set of LaCie who doesn't really make anything but takes hardware as an OEM and then slaps a label on it.
The big question remains. What's the benefit of the Eizo over the NEC based on the pretty significant price difference other than an extra year warranty? Software usability and features of both being part of the competitive matrix.
-
I'd be hard pressed to put the LaCie Electron Blue in the same camp (even the same state <g>) as a Barco. I've owned and used both, and PressViews (17 & 21's), Artisans etc. A 25 quadrant purity control using the mated colorimeter on the Barco was something few others could even dream about. I recall Bruce Fraser doing a review and using a $20K spectroradiometer finding the Barco had a tad less than a deltaE of 1 across the entire screen.And I recall a lot of dissatisfied users of later LaCie blue's due to really poor quality control issues. My point is, you simply can't lump the LaCie at its price point and performance level anywhere near a Barco Reference V let alone an Artisan.
The idea of painting a display system blue when years prior, the competition (Radius) went to lengths to provide a black smock for the user to wear provides a glimpse into the mind set of LaCie who doesn't really make anything but takes hardware as an OEM and then slaps a label on it.
The big question remains. What's the benefit of the Eizo over the NEC based on the pretty significant price difference other than an extra year warranty? Software usability and features of both being part of the competitive matrix.
I agree and didn't mean that the Electron Blue was anywhere near comparable to the Barco but it did provide a very good monitor at a good value ($700). Our incidence of dissatisfied owners was low. The Barco was an awesome monitor that sold for $4K - $5K, while the Sony Artisan sold near $2K. I still have a few customers using Barcos.
Currently the difference between the NEC2690 and the LaCie 526LCD is about $50 (the LaCie is higher). The panel is the same. I don't know that any of the other components make much of a difference or not. I was told today by LaCie that there will be a software update for the 526 LCD at the end of this month, but I'm not aware what any benefits will be.
The beginning of this thread was focused on wide gamut monitors that range from $600 - $2,200 and the original poster was looking for the best value. I feel the LaCie is certainly justified in being considered with the proposed group. Or not. But if someone will consider an NEC 2690 for $1,200, then it seems reasonable to consider a LaCie 526LCD for $1,300 and an extra year warranty.
Steve Hendrix
-
I think this discussion thread should be somehow highlighted and saved. Great discussion for those of us moving into more serious equipment to help clarify the options. Based on the discussions I am leaning toward the NEC and investigating the LaCie.
Thanks again to all for the clarification!!
-
I am considering purchasing an Eizo 24" and this thread has been very interesting.
That said, most of the talk on this subject tends to revolve around the hardware and not the software that profiles it.
I have been using basICColor Display to profile a Dell 2709W and have never had problems with it - though most of my work involves the inclusion of a Gretag CC in the shot and this makes it easier for clients/designers down the line to achieve the colour they want at the print stage.
I would dearly love to see a comparison test involving top class monitors pitted against less salubrious monitors (such as my Dell) *but* with the cheaper monitors profiled using *top class* software - which I believe basICColor Display to be.
D.
-
I know that many of you were waiting breathlessly to see what was my final decision since I started this thread.
Well I was on my way to buy the NEC and then Santa Claus showed up. So B&H is one Eizo 24" short now.
I must say up front that I would not have spent the extra money had Santa not shown up, but I must say that my jaw dropped to the floor when I fired up the Eizo next to my older Dell 24". The quality of the image was just staggering in terms of dynamic range and clarity. To have a much broader spectrum monitor made it abundantly clear why I was having trouble matching my monitor to my prints. WOW!!
Thanks again to all for the input. Perhaps when this one dies in 5+ (hopefully) years we'll be able to view and print in 3D!!
-
What about NEC's new monitor http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Product...42-e6251364bf7c (http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Product/?product=5a6621b9-e9c4-4f02-8542-e6251364bf7c)
?
Anyone get one yet?
-
What about NEC's new monitor http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Product...42-e6251364bf7c (http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Product/?product=5a6621b9-e9c4-4f02-8542-e6251364bf7c)
?
Anyone get one yet?
yeah i would like to hear feedback on this monitor as well
-
What about NEC's new monitor http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Product...42-e6251364bf7c (http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Product/?product=5a6621b9-e9c4-4f02-8542-e6251364bf7c)
?
Anyone get one yet?
Yes but I don’t yet have permission to talk about it and have to really start hammering on it. But there is some really interesting new technology here that could make it a game changer.
-
Yes but I don’t yet have permission to talk about it and have to really start hammering on it. But there is some really interesting new technology here that could make it a game changer.
any more info about this?
-
any more info about this?
Not yet sorry.
-
Yes but I don’t yet have permission to talk about it and have to really start hammering on it. But there is some really interesting new technology here that could make it a game changer.
I am confused; this item is released and shipping, correct? How come you cant talk about it?
-
I am confused; this item is released and shipping, correct? How come you cant talk about it?
I don’t believe its been released.
-
What about NEC's new monitor http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Product...42-e6251364bf7c (http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Product/?product=5a6621b9-e9c4-4f02-8542-e6251364bf7c)
?
Anyone get one yet?
"Superior screen performance (1000:1 contrast ratio, 1920 x 1200 native resolution, 360cd/m2 brightness)". Those contrast/brightness specs raise a red flag for me. I don't want my display anywhere near that level of brightness, which makes me wonder how good it is when you turn the luminance down to more useful levels.
No mention of 10-bit/12-bit color in the specs, I wonder if that's just an oversight. IMHO this is a must-have feature for any wide-gamut display coming on the market now.
-
"Superior screen performance (1000:1 contrast ratio, 1920 x 1200 native resolution, 360cd/m2 brightness)". Those contrast/brightness specs raise a red flag for me. I don't want my display anywhere near that level of brightness, which makes me wonder how good it is when you turn the luminance down to more useful levels.
No mention of 10-bit/12-bit color in the specs, I wonder if that's just an oversight. IMHO this is a must-have feature for any wide-gamut display coming on the market now.
Actually, it is mentioned - according to specs PA241W has 10bit signal input, 14bit 3D LUT with 16bit processing, and 10bit output.
As for the luminance, you don't have to worry
-
Looks like a real winner to me.
-
I don’t believe its been released.
ok, my bad, I saw it listed online but then I looked further and they are not available yet.
-
"Superior screen performance (1000:1 contrast ratio, 1920 x 1200 native resolution, 360cd/m2 brightness)". Those contrast/brightness specs raise a red flag for me. I don't want my display anywhere near that level of brightness, which makes me wonder how good it is when you turn the luminance down to more useful levels.
No mention of 10-bit/12-bit color in the specs, I wonder if that's just an oversight. IMHO this is a must-have feature for any wide-gamut display coming on the market now.
That’s the marketing departments speaking to those that don’t deal with imaging and soft proofing. None the less, you are not forced to use either max setting here, so nothing to be concerned with.
-
Actually, it is mentioned - according to specs PA241W has 10bit signal input, 14bit 3D LUT with 16bit processing, and 10bit output.
Even after reading your post and going back to the NEC page I still don't see any mention of 10bit, although they do mention the 14-bit LUT. Either I'm blind, or we're not looking at the same web page.
-
Even after reading your post and going back to the NEC page I still don't see any mention of 10bit, although they do mention the 14-bit LUT. Either I'm blind, or we're not looking at the same web page.
http://www.nec-display-solutions.co.uk/p/u...=LCD&e=e1s1 (http://www.nec-display-solutions.co.uk/p/uk/en/products/details/specification/dp/Products/LCD/Current/LCD-PA241W/LCD-PA241W.xhtml?mg=Professional&cat=LCD&e=e1s1)
-
I don’t believe its been released.
According to a local store (CDW, Vernon Hills, IL), they expect to receive the PA241W-BK on the 29th of March. I will check back then and post an update and hopefully others will do so also.
Bill
-
According to a local store (CDW, Vernon Hills, IL), they expect to receive the PA241W-BK on the 29th of March. I will check back then and post an update and hopefully others will do so also.
Bill
anymore news regarding this monitor?
-
anymore news regarding this monitor?
I think its listed at BH for $999 but not shipping for 6 weeks:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/6764...Widescreen.html (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/676418-REG/NEC_PA241W_BK_MultiSync_PA241W_BK_24_Widescreen.html)
-
Yes but I don’t yet have permission to talk about it and have to really start hammering on it. But there is some really interesting new technology here that could make it a game changer.
It's been released, and I am considering this or the Eizo CG223W. I would welcome feedback regarding either of these monitors. I have a Monaco Optix XR which I understand may work better with the Eizo CG223W. Any thoughts on that? Is investing in Specta View II package if I go with NEC PA241W, necessary or significantly better than continuing to use the Optix XR? I am not clear on exactly how compatible if at all third party pucks are with each of these monitors.
-
Is investing in Specta View II package if I go with NEC PA241W, necessary or significantly better than continuing to use the Optix XR? I am not clear on exactly how compatible if at all third party pucks are with each of these monitors.
I'd say yes for a number of reasons, the main advantage being the display calibration being handled in the panel with their software and the custom filters in their colorimeter over the XR which expects an sRGB like behavior.
-
Is investing in Specta View II package if I go with NEC PA241W, necessary or significantly better than continuing to use the Optix XR? I am not clear on exactly how compatible if at all third party pucks are with each of these monitors.
I'd say yes for a number of reasons, the main advantage being the display calibration being handled in the panel with their software and the custom filters in their colorimeter over the XR which expects an sRGB like behavior.
-
Thanks Andrew for your response. I don't want to rush you, but certainly many people are curious to hear first hand observations regarding the PA241W. Do you have any preliminary or additional thoughts based on your experience with the NEC PA241W?
-
Thanks Andrew for your response. I don't want to rush you, but certainly many people are curious to hear first hand observations regarding the PA241W. Do you have any preliminary or additional thoughts based on your experience with the NEC PA241W?
There really isn't more I can say because 1, I have a preproduction unit and 2, I don't have final software (or any SpectraView II software for this unit). 3rd, to really do it justice, one would have to spend some time measuring the device over time and plotting the delta's to produce a sound report as to how effective the self calibration process works.
-
I am not a color mangement guru, I just want to buy a good monitor for processing digital files and doing a little bit of printing, If I buy this NEC PA241 W ( http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/6764...Widescreen.html (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/676418-REG/NEC_PA241W_BK_MultiSync_PA241W_BK_24_Widescreen.html) ), can I continue to calibrate with my monaco optix device and software? Would I have to buy this spectraview software?
-
I am not a color mangement guru, I just want to buy a good monitor for processing digital files and doing a little bit of printing, If I buy this NEC PA241 W ( http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/6764...Widescreen.html (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/676418-REG/NEC_PA241W_BK_MultiSync_PA241W_BK_24_Widescreen.html) ), can I continue to calibrate with my monaco optix device and software? Would I have to buy this spectraview software?
You want to use their (NEC’s) software. It should continue to support the fine Optix instrument you own.
-
You want to use their (NEC’s) software. It should continue to support the fine Optix instrument you own.
cool but let me get this straight; i use my optix instrument but not the monaco optix software that came with it? I use the NEC software that comes with the display?
-
cool but let me get this straight; i use my optix instrument but not the monaco optix software that came with it? I use the NEC software that comes with the display?
Yes. At least in the current version I have, it supports that instrument.
-
The Spectraview software supports all flavors of Eye-One (Pro (Rev A and D), Display One, and Display Two), the Spyder 2 and 3, Optix XR/DTP94/ColorEye, ColorMunki, and the NEC-branded version of the i1-2 Display that is tuned to work with the 2690 and 3090 panels.
Of the sensors on the list, the Spyder 3 and i1-Pro are going to be the best choices for the PA241W. The dedicated NEC puck may work as well, although we have only characterized a single sample, so can say nothing about the unit-to-unit variability standard i2 Display pucks exhibit. The Spyder 2 is comparatively inaccurate and produces large errors with wide-gamut displays. The Optix XR has real problems with wide gamut displays. Both measured white point and color chromaticity values are way off. The i1-2 is better in this regard, but still inaccurate for LED backlights. It also has high average unit-to-unit variation, so whether any particular unit is accurate is questionable. Recent Spyder 3 pucks (2009 and newer vintage) are OK for unit-to-unit variance (3x higher than the DTP94, half that of the i2 Display) and can at least get in the ballpark for wide gamut, LED backlit panels. Older vintages of the Spyder 3 varied wildly unit-to-unit, so measurement quality was a roll of the dice.
On the spectro front, the i1-Pro is accurate and repeatable except in the shadows. For luminance values below 0.5cd/m2 the measured values get swamped by sensor noise. You'll likely see compressed shadow details and some color casts to the lowest levels. Other than that, the results are fine. We have only characterized a single sample of the ColorMunki; based on the results, it is not high on the list of measurement devices you want to use.
The NEC-branded i2 Display sensor looks promising in terms of accuracy with NEC's wide gamut panels. Again, based on our measurements of 17 different i2 Display pucks, there is a wide variation in accuracy. Whether the NEC-tuned puck is a good overall solution or the sample we characterized was a particularly accurate one, I can't say. Quato sells a tuned version of the DTP94 that, from their data, appears to provide both the superior accuracy of the DTP94 in standard gamut ranges and reasonably good accuracy for wider gamuts. We have not measured one of these pucks, so no direct experience.
A drawback to NEC panels in general is that they use a proprietary communication protocol rather than following the DDC standard. This means that you are stuck with NEC's calibration and profiling software for controlling the monitor hardware. NEC' s head is buried in the same sand as the digital camera manufacturers who refuse to support open standards for RAW file encoding. The hardware is good, but the software is not up to the level available from third party vendors. We saw better results in terms of neutrality, smoothness, and lack of banding by first running NEC's software to calibrate the display and then building a profile using ColorEyes than by using only NEC's software.
-
A drawback to NEC panels in general is that they use a proprietary communication protocol rather than following the DDC standard. This means that you are stuck with NEC's calibration and profiling software for controlling the monitor hardware. NEC' s head is buried in the same sand as the digital camera manufacturers who refuse to support open standards for RAW file encoding.
I see your point here but think its a poor analogy. First off, their software is dirt cheap and in fact, bundled with an instrument is a pretty good deal. We could say the same about Barco, Pressview, Artisan in terms of a proprietary software driving a smart monitor. And DDC is often iffy in terms of working as well as everyone would like. But in terms of comparing it to raw proprietary files, I think that’s a stretch. Worst case sceneries, and one I’ve had the misfortune to experience is having raw files (or PhotoCD image packs) and no software to get to my data. I’m far more screwed in this case compared to having a display system which I might work with for 3-5 years and must use vendors calibration software. I can live with that. Having years of captures that are now only useful as drink coasters is a far worse situation IMHO.