Matching NEC 2690 and Epson 3800 Output

[digitaldog]

In the best case scenario would it be better to have an LCD that calibrates down to 95-110 rather than 120-150 if print matching is important?

Its not better or worse. Again, you set luminance based on the ambient light around the display and how you'll view the prints. You want the display to be the lightest object in view so, if the ambient light is higher, you need a higher luminance. CRT's can't produce high luminance so we had to work in dark caves. Now we don't (although darker is always better). So instead of say 16-25 lux (very dim) for a CRT producing roughly 90 cd/m2, we can work in an office environment of much higher luminance since the LCD's can produce much higher values than that CRT.

Should I assume that the the Eizo 24" CG241W would work better for print matching that the NEC 2690?  Would the Eizo also keep a larger Gamut of colors than the NEC at the lower luminance settings?

There's probably no difference in what the minimal luminance of both devices, new out of the box can reasonably hit. And the older the display, the 'easier' its going to be to hit a lower value.

120 cd/m2 is just at the lower limit of what the (brand new) display can adjust itself to using the backlight alone. If you can go higher, to say 150 or so, it means the display can compensate for when the brightness drifts up instead of down (for example when you first turn it on). But you CAN calibrate to 120 cd/m2. Its just not a big deal to up that to 150, not live in as dark a cave and up the box to match if necessary.

[Photolandscape]

Andrew,

In the best case scenario would it be better to have an LCD that calibrates down to 95-110 rather than 120-150 if print matching is important?

My CG19 Eizo seems to have no problem working at the lower numbers.

Should I assume that the the Eizo 24" CG241W would work better for print matching that the NEC 2690?  Would the Eizo also keep a larger Gamut of colors than the NEC at the lower luminance settings?

It seems strange to me that the Nec 2690 is geared to imaging professionals but cannot be calibrated down to industry standard luminance levels.

Are people compromising in the purchase of a 2690 for a good price because it's "good enough"?

My instinct tells me to just spend the extra money on the CG241W, work at 110 lumens, and forget about it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=173353\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Andrew et al.,

Unless I am missing something, I have had no trouble calibrating the 2690 with luminance settings of 110, or even down to 95. You mentioned that the monitor would need time to burn in in order to do this, but I am not sure what you mean? It seems to be able to handle 110 or even 100 or 95 reliably. My monitor is relatively new--61 hours of use.

One other thing, what did you think of my posting last night earlier in this thread where I talk about adjusting the contrast with the buttons on the monitor itself, from 50 to about 30-31? Is that not a good idea? So far, it seems to be giving me a better match to the print output on my Epson 3800 with Epson's PLPP profile. As long as that seems to work, is there any reason not to do it? Or would I be better off going with the settings from the calibration of the monitor, getting the image where I want it, and then doing a "print adjustment layer"? If it works, fine, but it seems to run counter to the whole process in a way.

TX, SP

[ericstaud]

Thanks Andrew,

I'm no expert, but had thought that using a higher setting like 150 cd/m2 would give the monitor a higher apparent contrast than working at a lower setting like 110 cd/m2.  The result would be flat looking prints.  I had made up in my head that the commonly accepted values of 90-120 cd/m2 were as much about controlling the perception of contrast in the images as it was to match the lighting in the room.

Just this week I'm retouching a bunch of images on black plexi.  With the room lights on and the monitor set to 150 cd/m2 I find it difficult to see into the black values.  With the room lights fairly dim and the monitor set to 110 cd/m2 it is much easier to control the black values in the images.

[Nill Toulme]

I must say I don't understand the concept of adjusting the print viewing lighting to match the monitor.  It seems to me that in many if not most cases, prints are going to be viewed in a variety of lighting over which the photographer/printmaker will have no control.

And I've had no trouble calibrating my NEC 2090uxi to 95 cd/m² since the day it came out of the box.  In fact, I'm thinking of dropping it to 90.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[jackbingham]

Having tested stacks of different monitors there are clear differences in the lower luminance targets they can hit with accuracy and stability. Many eizo's are inherently darker because of the uniformity function they apply across the screen. From our tests the 2690 performs better at higher luminances, meaning hitting a specific white point and gray balance from white to black improves the brighter you are above 120. Again this is not true of all lcds but specifically the 2690.
As for viewing conditions we need to understand that we are forced to work with a sliding scale here. New monitors will inherently be brighter. Having two monitors of substantially different luminances will only screw this up. You need to pick a monitor as your standard and use a light source that you can adjust so that you can match the monitor luminance and viewing luminance. After that the best thing to do is get comfortable. Comparing old tools with new conditions just muddies the waters. Sticking with the new condition will allow you to adapt.

[Nill Toulme]

... Many eizo's are inherently darker because of the uniformity function they apply across the screen. ...

Is that similar at all to NEC's "ColorComp" function?  (I think I'm remembering the name right.)  Note that function comes turned off by default.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[jackbingham]

honestly I'm not familiar with their colorcomp function. Eizo however applies an eveness adjustment by default which has the additional effect of making the max luminance of the monitor considerably darker than it would otherwise be.

[Nill Toulme]

It sounds similar.  As I recall, overall brightness went down a bit when I enabled ColorComp on my NEC.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[Schewe]

Its just not a big deal to up that to 150, not live in as dark a cave and up the box to match if necessary.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=173360\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

What Andrew says is critical to understand...with CRTs you had both brightness and gain as controls to adjust the black level of the display. With LCDs, you ONLY have luminance output. Adjusting for black is a matter of adjusting the display environment. There are ISO standards (it's copyrighted so I can't just post them here) but you need to adjust the ambient lighting of the environment in order to create an optimal viewing environment. It's less important to pick an actual luminance output to the display than it is to adjust the surrounding lighting to make sure you are seeing the range of tones on the display correctly.

I'm running a NEC 2690 at 200 cd/m²...yet the black level is determined by the ambient lighting-which because the display is running so high is much, much brighter (I haven't done an actual reading so I don't know how bright it is at the moment).

One way to check this is to do a step wedge that goes from 0, 0, 0, to 15, 15, 15, in 1-2 units/swatch. (I say 1-2 because depending on how you profile, you may not be able to see a 1 unit change). Open the image in Photoshop and go to the full screen black and tab to hide Photoshop. You should be able to see almost nothing. Then, using the display profile you've made at the luminance target you've made, look at the image. You should NOT be able to see any difference between the surrounding black screen and the 0, 0, 0, swatches. If the 0, 0, 0, is lighter than the black surround, then you're driving the luminance too high. Either lower the display output or raise the ambient lighting. Note, you should NEVER have direct spectral light fall on the display...if need be, add a shroud around the display to shield it. Also note that the surrounding color should be neutral and ideally, the ambient lighting should be in the range of matching D50-D65. I use GE Chroma 50 fluorescent aimed up into the ceiling to bounce D50 lighting at a low'ish level in my imaging area.

The display is set to 90º to my GTI lightbox...when I put an image up on the display to softproof (and use a full screen black with no Photoshop UI visible) and put a print on the lightbox, I can see a very close match...when I turn soft proofing off, I actually don't see a close match because the dynamic range of the display (the NEC) is WAY beyond what the print can show. But that's ok...it's when softproofing that I really care.