B&W, wide gamut, sRGB, "black crush", Spectraview, 10 bit LUT, info overload,...

[optofonik]

I've been pleased enough with my recent photos and want to display them in the real world as opposed to online and after a month of researching I'm ready to ask some questions.

I'm looking at getting a third monitor to display whatever image I'm working on. A "proofing monitor" would be the term I guess.  I want to be able to accurately work with B&W images as well as color but B&W is a priority. My computer is a couple of years old, an AMD Phenom 4x CPU running XP, two FireGL v3350, with CaptureOne for RAW development and CS4 for editing. The FireGL doesn't have DisplayPort and can't support a 10bit to the monitor (although the ATI literature indicates 10 bit support).

I'm interested in several wide gamut NEC monitors with varying percentages of aRGB and sRGB coverage that are calibrated with the Spectraview HW/SW combo to their respective monitor's internal 10- 14 bit LUT. It seems to me that profiling a monitor with a colorometer custom calibrated to the respective monitor's hardware is the way to go but how does the DVI output of my non-10 bt video card get interpreted by NEC's internal 10 bit LUT?

I don't want to change my video card, OS, CPU, software, etc. just yet. So, does getting a wide gamut Spectraview II monitor with a high aRGB coverage do anything for me within the context of my current system or should I consider an sRGB monitor? In addition, should I be looking at a PVA or IPS monitor for B&W? I've research and read that that there are "deep blacks" in PVA but a "lack of shadow detail" especially when viewing "head on" or "dead center". When reading about IPS there seems to be issues with blacks not being rendered true but "shadow detail" is better. There will come a time for upgrades so I don't mind a bit of future proofing as long as it doesn't effect tonal depth & color accuracy in the mean time.

I've been researching this stuff for a month and don't feel any closer than I did before. I feel like I know even less. I understand the importance of color management and it seems that a color managed monitor should get me accurate result from a reputable lab if I don't choose to print at home.  At home I have an Epson R800 and have started to consider an Epson 3880 with a Colormunki Photo for paper profiling. Profiling a printer, however, seems to be a huge can of worms that can be be avoided by using a lab as long as my monitor is accurately calibrated.

Thanks in advance for any insight.

Mick

[KenS]

I don't have any answers for you but I am responding because I just started down the same path and have many of the same questions and came across a few hopefully useful links.

1. See the section titled: "10-bit IPS Panels - A Discussion"  (do you - or I for that matter really need 10 bit/channel wide gamut?)
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/news_archive/19.htm#10-bit_ips

2. There's some good info in this article:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/nec_pa271w.htm

Contrast link 1 to the following link (Diglloyd -proponent of wide gamut says: "Gamut you can’t see kills your work and your prints"... I wish I knew if this is 'correct'.  For my scanned Velvia and TMax negs/proofsheets I've got a reference, however for my new Canon 5D II shots I don't... all I have is a RAW file, and jpgs)
3. http://diglloyd.com/articles/Recommended/display.html

I am hopeful others with more experience will chime in.  My interest in this thread comes about because I've been scanning 6x7 Velvia Transparencies and Kodak 100 TMax film for many years, using a Sony Artisan Monitor with great success [i.e. monitor display matches prints].  I got the Artisan ~5 years ago because I read it did a great job with B/W (half my work).  I print on an Epson 7800.  However, my computer (very old Dell) is dying and I need to upgrade. Don't know what to do about my Sony Artisan (it is no longer supported, no Windows  drivers, built in profiler puck won't work with Windows 7, etc) so even though it still works great with my XP computer I am VERY UNCERTAIN if I should get a new monitor when I get a new computer... and what to get!

Anyway, I don't mean to hijack your post but rather stimulate some responses that will help us out
Ken

[optofonik]

Without a 10 bit pipeline front to back it appears that little is gained from a 10 bit panel, however, hardware calibration via a high bit LUT seems to be superior to calibration via the GPUs' LUT. If anyone can verify this it would be appreciated. I'm still unclear about PVS vs IPS for tonal range, "black crush" and shadow detail (all related I would assume).

Thanks

Mick

[martinreed22]

... however, hardware calibration via a high bit LUT seems to be superior to calibration via the GPUs' LUT.

Confirmed

martin

[optofonik]

So, I'm close to the right track then. I'm considering the P221 SV as an inexpensive stopgap until NEC comes out with a LED backlight that may or may not address the Black depth of ISP and the "black crush" of PVA. One of the reviews I read stated that the 221 had "deep blacks" but a "lack of shadow detail" - seems like doublespeak being used by a reviewer beholden to advertising who really wanted to turn a con: "lack of shadow detail", into a pro: "deep blacks".

Is anyone successfully using a PVA monitor for B&W work?

[optofonik]

Took delivery of the NEC P221W SV today. Pluged it into my second video car and gave it a brief look see viewing recent pix and windows default viewer. Saturation city. Dramatic, yes, but I'll look forward to calibrating it after I mount it. Went with PVA because of my preference for B&W.

Thanks for the insight everyone.