New nec PA271W BK SV viewing old files, the shadows are blocked up.

[Bill Koenig]

I'm moving this thread from Computers & Peripherals.

Up until my purchase of the NEC PA271W BK SV I used a Sony GDM-F500R CRT. This was calibrated with CEDP and the DTP94 with the following settings, D65 Gamma 2.2 L 95cd/m2 Black 0.28 cd/m2

The NEC with the Spectraview II software with the following settings, D65 gamma 2.2 L110 cd/m2 contrast 350/1 this gives a black of 0.27 cd/m2
I've only looked at a couple files so far (recent edits) that looked good on the old monitor, but now have blocked up shadows on the NEC, also some of the greens are not right either.

I really wasn't expecting a prefect match, but I wasn't expecting blocked up shadows either, at least not this bad, in some cases the shadows are black without any detail at all. The same file on the old CRT (before the switch) the shadows were full of detail.


BTW,  There's also a big difference when I have a white background on the nec, it looks like fine glowing sand, and its somewhat annoying, never saw this on my old CRT, just what is it that I'm seeing here?

[Mark D Segal]

If you profiled it with the DTP-94 that may be the source of the problem.

[Bill Koenig]

Hi Mark,

I profiled my old Sony CRT with CEDP and DTP-94.
The NEC was profiled with the Spectraview II software and custom calorimeter.
My old Sony CRT was as good as it gets for a CRT at the time I bought it in 2000, and set me back over $1700.00, and at that time I used Monaco XR pro with the DTP-94. This did a great job and my prints always matched the screen.
When I switched to Win7 64 then I had to go with CEDP in order to keep my DTP-94. This also gave me great profiles and my prints always matched my screen, and colors, at least to my eye, looked spot on, shadow detail was never a problem with that monitor.

So now, with those same files, all of that great shadow detail is blocked up on my new PA271W and the greens aren't the same. Could the fact that this is a wide gamut monitor just be giving more colors, and I need to get used to the difference between the new and the old?
But shadow detail of the nec doesn't come close to what had with my old Sony CRT, and they were both color managed.
I must be doing something wrong as many reviews I've read said the PA271W had great shadow detail.
I've only had this new monitor less than a week, and I haven't even tried matching prints yet, there's no point to that until I get my shadow detail back to where it was with the old monitor.



 
  

[MHMG]

How does this target appear on your new NEC PA271W BK? It looks great on mine. You will need to open in a PSCS3 or newer PS version.  If you can discern the number values on the dark background with the number 1 being just barely visible and other numbers 2-9 ascending gradually in brightness, then plugged shadows cannot be blamed on the new set up. Rather it would suggest your old setup had shadow values that were too "open" and you darkened your shadow values accordingly in various image files to compensate. All of which reminds us about the importance of a well-standardized monitor calibration.

http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/cgi-bin/mrk/_4448ZGxkLzBeMTAwMDAwMDAwMTIzNDU2Nzg5LyoxMDM=



cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

[Bill Koenig]

Hi Mark,

Thanks for the reply. Last night I made a couple of new profiles, only this time I went with 140 cd/m2 and a contrast ratio of 300. I also made another at 120cd/m2 with the same contrast ratio, now with the same file everything looks just like it did on my old CTR monitor, even the greens looked correct, I decided to take another look at my first profile that didn't look right at all
(Photo edit target- 100cd/m2 CR of 500-1)
and to my surprise the greens look correct this time. I'm not sure what's going on here, its like there was some kind of error that some how corrected its self. 
It was getting late so I shut down for the night, but tonight I need to go back and look at a couple other files, also, I need to tale another look at my settings to see if I changed something, but one thing for sure, what I was getting out of the box was way off the mark.


Thanks for the link, I loaded my 140 target and I could see all of the numbers, even down to the "Number 1" that was just visible. Then I loaded the 120 target, I could just make out the "Number 1" this time, but it was night and the room was quite dark. All of my profiles were made in a dark room with no lighting on, I haven't tried the ambient measurement yet.
BTW my shadows have opened up now, and pretty much look correct, but I need to do more testing.

I've read (digital dog) that out of the box anything lower that 120cd/m2 isn't recommended until the back lite has had time brake its self in. I didn't see anything in the manual in regards to this, but then they recommend 140cd/m2 as a starting point.

In regards to the greens, the first image I looked at was taken in early spring, the marsh grass was less than a week old, and at that stage has a lighter more yellow look to it. When I viewed this image with my first profile the grass had a very cyan look to it and seemed over saturated, very unnatural. One of the reasons I loaded that image was to see how well it would render the color of this grass.
All seems well now, but I'm really bothered by my initial results, something wasn't correct, I wish I knew what it was.   

Mark, what settings are you using? Also, have you tried making a profile using the 52 step target? I tried that last night, but after 20 minuets I canceled it as seemed like it was locked up, maybe it just takes a very long time to make a 52 step target, probably over kill for what I'm doing anyway.
I do agree, the Spectraview software is a dream to use. 

Thanks for your comment about the new calorimeter, I didn't even know about this when I ordered my Spectraview kit. The B&H bundle was out of stock, so I just bought the monitor from them, and the Spectraview kit from Buy.com for $300, but I did get the new calorimeter.

Tonight I'll make my first test prints on my 3800.




 

[StigA]

If you can discern the number values on the dark background with the number 1 being just barely visible and other numbers 2-9 ascending gradually in brightness, then plugged shadows cannot be blamed on the new set up.

http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/cgi-bin/mrk/_4448ZGxkLzBeMTAwMDAwMDAwMTIzNDU2Nzg5LyoxMDM=

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

Great target, thanks..!

I have a similar problem with my MultiSync PA241W, as the OP has/had. It is bought in Europe so I use the Spectraview Profiler 4.1.28 and the new Nec puck MDSVSENSOR, so things should be good I guess.. but, I have problem with seeing a separation between the dark tones. In the linked target I just see No 3 in the dark areas, which seems less than ideal..? Or is it anything to worry about?

I set the calibration to 120 cd/m2, and have today start to use WP Native and Gamma 2,2, used to use the recommended L* setting for Gamma before, and 6300K which seems to be a close match for the prints to my Solux viewing light.

Any thoughts?