Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Mr. Rib on October 25, 2011, 07:45:33 pm
-
(ok, I know this doesn't neccessarily belong to MF section, but I'd like to have the input from MFDB guys- I believe that's the group which pays attention to the colour consistency the most)
Hi,
I need some opinions on this monitor- how accurate is it after calibration? Do the LED backlit introduce color distortion (I know it has a very contrasty feeling to it, at least from what I can tell after 10 minutes spent in the ispot; I also heard that LED backlit is inconsistent in time)? I guess problems with callibrating a glossy display are a myth? The jeopardy of reflections is not a concern to me, the monitor would be used in an adequately lit workroom. Despite all the controversy, can it be used for pre-press (or should I say pre-print) work ?
Thanks!
-
Many Colorimeters will have issues with this backlight. And there’s nothing at all special about this or recent Apple displays in terms of being ideal for image processing. What instrument are you using?
-
Many Colorimeters will have issues with this backlight. And there’s nothing at all special about this or recent Apple displays in terms of being ideal for image processing. What instrument are you using?
+1. I've never been able to figure out how Apple displays obtained their high reputation among some users, other than the fact they look sleek. I use all Apple hardware, but with a calibrated Eizo monitor.
Do this test: Go into any Apple store or reseller and change the background color on the Apple monitors to a neutral solid color using the System Preferences utility > Desktop & Screensaver > Solid Colors. The last time I did this all the monitors I looked at had inconsistent luminance and color. Looked like a blotchiness / cloudiness across the entire panel with weird hue shifts thrown in. Not sure how you'd correct this. Note that ALL the Apple monitors regardless of size / model looked like this.
Depends how fussy you are and what you are willing to accept. Personally, I would also avoid glossy monitors for color-critical work.
-
+1. I've never been able to figure out how Apple displays obtained their high reputation among some users, other than the fact they look sleek.
Just to be clear, the first post plastic Cinema Displays were excellent displays for the time...I use then for a while. But, after that first series, the subsequent series of Cinema displays dropped considerably in terms of quality. Seriously, the current Cinema displays ain't great anymore. Compared to others, I would say they are "crap".
-
Just to be clear, the first post plastic Cinema Displays were excellent displays for the time...I use then for a while. But, after that first series, the subsequent series of Cinema displays dropped considerably in terms of quality. Seriously, the current Cinema displays ain't great anymore. Compared to others, I would say they are "crap".
+1
-
Thanks for contributing.
I hear both great and terrible things about this display, all coming from experienced users (my colleague photogs, designers and dtp / pre-press guys). I hear that LED backlit is more uniform than how 30" ACD is lit and the other way around, I hear some good and bad things about the display being glossy (altough I think the fact that it's glossy can be ignored- in fact glossiness of the screen makes it a bit more accurate because the light is not distorted as on 'uneven' surface of a anti-glare finish). I get a negative feedback for the screen here and positive feedback from macworld from guys who have been working in publishing for 20-30 years.. To be honest, I'm confused and I don't know what to think about it.
-
Buy NEC.
-
Compared to others, I would say they are "crap".
Buy NEC.
I agree.
I am still using 2 NEC Spectraview 3090's and in 3 years of owning them and having work in print every week they have never once let me down and it looks on screen what its does in print.
I am yet to need to upgrade to the PA series which I hear are a bit better. The LCD3090 and 2690 Spectraviews can be found, comparably, at very reasonable prices now.
The Spectraview system is incredible. Plug in the meter, open the software, attach the meter, go make a coffee, come bad to a calibrated screen.
-
Mr Rib,
Save your money and get 27" NEC PA series with the meter. Although the ratio may be weird for photo-user compare to 30" but it is only one minus point - I think...
-
Just to be clear, the first post plastic Cinema Displays were excellent displays for the time...I use then for a while. But, after that first series, the subsequent series of Cinema displays dropped considerably in terms of quality. Seriously, the current Cinema displays ain't great anymore. Compared to others, I would say they are "crap".
+10
Don't discount this statement. For games and general computer programs I'm sure the Cinema display is fine for most users. But now you're going into a color managed workflow and a precise use. In this regard "crap" is a conservative statement. You're getting advice from several here who have literally written the book on color management. If you think cruzing another forum to find other answers will serve you well, then by all means.. cruze.
And try to separate how people use these monitors. Desktop publishing requires a lot of real estate and a 30 inch monitor provides a lot of real estate. However, a color managed workflow requires very precise colors routed through the electronics in a very specific way. Frankly, you're not going to understand this until you spend a lot more time reading, investigating, asking questions, and spending a lot of hands on. Some of us here have done these things, and we're universally telling you to avoid the cinema displays in favor of something like the NEC Spectraviews. Either the older LCD or the new PA series wills serve you very well.
It's your choice, but remember choosing the best monitor for your needs isn't about taking a poll. It's about listening to the people performing the tasks you want to perform at the level you want to perform at. OR putting in the time to book learn the entire process.
IF you process images and want a color managed workflow, the NEC's are very hard to beat. And the Apple Cinema sucks big wind. I can't make it more clear.
I wish you the best.
-
Thank you all for contributing. Well, I guess there's no choice but to go the Eizo / NEC route.. you've convinced me. By the way- can anyone tell me why I hear a lot from you about NEC but not that much about EIZO? I'm talking generally, a lot of times when it comes to colour management people suggest NEC over EIZO at LuLa.. Is it because of availability in USA? Or is there any substantial difference in Spectraview / Coloredge lineup?
-
Thank you all for contributing. Well, I guess there's no choice but to go the Eizo / NEC route.. you've convinced me. By the way- can anyone tell me why I hear a lot from you about NEC but not that much about EIZO? I'm talking generally, a lot of times when it comes to colour management people suggest NEC over EIZO at LuLa.. Is it because of availability in USA? Or is there any substantial difference in Spectraview / Coloredge lineup?
You say, besides price?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/689880-REG/NEC_PA271W_BK_SV_MultiSync_PA271W_BK_SV_27_Widescreen.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/816468-REG/Eizo_CG275W_BK_ColorEdge_CG275W_27_Widescreen.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/758871-REG/NEC_PA301W_BK_SV_30_MultiSync_LCD_Monitor.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/706700-REG/Eizo_CG303W_BK_ColorEdge_CG303W_29_8_Widescreen.html
-
Yes, besides price - because I can get a new CG303W for $3100.
:)
-
Thank you all for contributing. Well, I guess there's no choice but to go the Eizo / NEC route.. you've convinced me. By the way- can anyone tell me why I hear a lot from you about NEC but not that much about EIZO? I'm talking generally, a lot of times when it comes to colour management people suggest NEC over EIZO at LuLa.. Is it because of availability in USA? Or is there any substantial difference in Spectraview / Coloredge lineup?
Because Nec is cheap ;)
Photographers hate to spend their money. Even if they bother with this trash. (Sync cables, fasteners, FW cables, monitors - cheap computers). As for the monitor, you really should give a lot more money. First, replace the camera twice, three times the computer, the monitor will remain on your desk. As for the NEC, Eizo once wrote firmware to Spectraview monitor . I do not know how it is now, but Eizo hardware is the best I've ever seen. The NEC has always had problems: it is the calibration matrix, matrices, matrix backlight. The Eizo's all very simple and most importantly works seamlessly.
Completely different quality. This is the Arca Swiss / Alpa among monitors. Once Barco was a determinant of quality in those days you could buy a Lacie monitors. NEC is just such a Lacie today.
-
Because Nec is cheap ;)
Less expensive, better bang for the buck. No question Eizo is a super high quality product. Its been a few years since I tested one (Hey Eizo, if you’re listening, I’m always open to more tests <g>). But my experience is that the large difference in price between their displays and NEC (I’m still comparing older non PA units) are not justified. So yes, NEC is cheaper and as yet, other than a logo, I can’t see the justification for the added money. But heck, if you have deep pockets and need a bigger tax write off, there is no question Eizo is a superb product line.
-
When you count your lost time , frustration... it turns out that it is worthwhile to pay more.
-
Thank you all for contributing. Well, I guess there's no choice but to go the Eizo / NEC route.. you've convinced me. By the way- can anyone tell me why I hear a lot from you about NEC but not that much about EIZO? I'm talking generally, a lot of times when it comes to colour management people suggest NEC over EIZO at LuLa.. Is it because of availability in USA? Or is there any substantial difference in Spectraview / Coloredge lineup?
I'm not convinced the Eizo's are technically better than the new NEC PA series.. or for that matter the LCD series. But what will really put things in perspective for you, is the Spectraview II software and puck. These tools are designed and built around the NEC models and they'll make your color management very easy. Be certain to order both of these items either as part of a package, or separately, whatever is the most cost effective. The SVII software can be purchased directly from the NEC website I think for $80.. sometimes getting your hands on the SVII puck can be a bit elusive, but keep at it until you find one. And if you want to open a bag of worms, start asking if there aren't better pucks than the SVII puck to use with the SVII software and NEC's. The short answer is yes. The longer answer is trying to figure out which one, as there's no shortage of opinions.. rather strong ones. I can almost guarantee you, get the SVII software and puck and you'll be in heaven, no need to look for anything better..
-
Ok, I'm dropping my Apple LED Display plans.
I have some experience with Eizo, also in case of NEC I don't think they are that cheaper than Eizo, at least here in eastern Europe. Two Eizo models interest me the most- CG275W and CG303W. I'm wondering how the autocalibration feature of CG275W works- is it any good and can I rely solely on it or should I be getting a decent calibrator separately? CG275W seems to be a good alternative to CG303W, especially cost-wise. Any feedback on that particular monitor? As I understand, NEC alternative to CG275W would be a MultiSync PA271W w/Spectraview II ?
-
Shame the cost difference is less in the EU. At B&H the Eizo CG275W is $3300 and the NEC PA271W w/Spectraview II is $1649.
Does the duty/taxes eat up the difference if ordered through B&H?
A popular shipping forwarding service for those living in Thailand is www.shipito.com. I wrote a short review about them here. (http://www.bangkokimages.com/Articles/Equipment/entryid/718/www-Shipito-com-A-Shipment-Forwarding-Service.aspx)Once the package is received at the shipito warehouse they'll follow your requests to remove receipts, tags, etc.. and then you fill out your own customs label on-line which they then professionally print and attach. In over 100+ such shipments I've never had a shipment questioned. I love their service, find them very fast and professional, and they've yet to make a single mistake. I ship completed workstations to Thailand via this company often.
-
I simply got a great deal for CG303W, but normally CG275W is almost as much as I can get CG303W for- and in Europe it's not that CG's are cheaper- it's NECs which are more expensive :( Anyway, after browsing for a few hours you can find yourself a fair deal on Eizo / NEC monitor in Europe.
On more thing that bothers me- I own a 4.1 Mac (which I'm planning to hack and upgrade to 5.1) and an ATI Radeon 4870 which is capable of 10-bit output via mini displayport. From what I heard and read, 10-bit output on Mac OS X is still impossible due to drivers not up to the task (yes, Windows is ahead of Apple in this department as well, strange times we live in).
I just read an article at LuLa: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/accessories/10bit.shtml What's finally here? What is the author talking about? Unless the author changed system to Win on his Mac (with hacked drivers because at that time there were no drivers to support 10 bits) he wouldn't be able to see 10 bits... not only that- if one wants to use 10 bits in PS, you have to buy an I/O box device like Matrox MX02 since there is no support in Photoshop for real-time 10-bit colour. So.. what's up with 10 bits? Is there a way to get it on Mac / in Photoshop without costly I/O boxes and tricks?
If I'm not mistaken, the whole article at LuLa is a total misinformation / a joke or author didn't mention some crucial facts how he obtained 10-bit output. Of course he could omitt mentioning the I/O box (hey, it's only $1,5k after all;) ) but seeing how the author comments on a mouse jump issue and a cable adapter I think he would definitely mention it..plus what's the use of 10-bit if you can't use it in Photoshop? So.. did he just fell bewitched by '10 bits on paper' and what he actually was seeing was still 8 bit colour ? I wonder :)
-
I just read an article at LuLa: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/accessories/10bit.shtml What's finally here? What is the author talking about? Unless the author changed system to Win on his Mac (with hacked drivers because at that time there were no drivers to support 10 bits) he wouldn't be able to see 10 bits... not only that- if one wants to use 10 bits in PS, you have to buy an I/O box device like Matrox MX02 since there is no support in Photoshop for real-time 10-bit colour. So.. what's up with 10 bits? Is there a way to get it on Mac / in Photoshop without costly I/O boxes and tricks?
If I'm not mistaken, the whole article at LuLa is a total misinformation / a joke or author didn't mention some crucial facts how he obtained 10-bit output. Of course he could omitt mentioning the I/O box (hey, it's only $1,5k after all;) ) but seeing how the author comments on a mouse jump issue and a cable adapter I think he would definitely mention it..plus what's the use of 10-bit if you can't use it in Photoshop? So.. did he just fell bewitched by '10 bits on paper' and what he actually was seeing was still 8 bit colour ? I wonder :)
I wouldn't be too hard on any article about 10 bit color. There are a lot of unknowns, inconsistencies, and misnomers. All came by with the best of intentions. We'd be lost without them.
Photoshop can use 10 bit color. But only with certified cards. Take some time to learn this stuff before growing too critical.
-
Well, I obviously consider myself a novice in this matter and actually rather than being appalled/irritated and critial, I find this article funny- actually it's proable that the author didn't get the 10-bit output after all, at least in Photoshop. If I sounded like an **s - sorry for that.
As I understand OS Lion didn't address the 10-bit color issue..well, we can only wait I guess and have faith that Apple market target change from prosumer to consumer didn't make them ignorant to our needs / demands. I'm sooo sure it didn't ::)
-
From what I heard and read, 10-bit output on Mac OS X is still impossible due to drivers not up to the task (yes, Windows is ahead of Apple in this department as well, strange times we live in).
I just read an article at LuLa: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/accessories/10bit.shtml What's finally here?
Nope, that article is incorrect, there is still no full support for 10-bit (high bit) path, we’re waiting on Apple.
-
That's a real bummer.. you get a great monitor, you have a good enough graphic card to display 10-bit and you can't use it because of sloppines / sluggishness of a bunch of developers.. but as I understand it's not solely Apple issue, Adobe didn't address the problem either.
-
but as I understand it's not solely Apple issue, Adobe didn't address the problem either.
Well according to Adobe engineers at least CS5 most certainly is and of course, our friends on Windows can utilize the full path. So no, its really not Adobe at this point but Apple. And its been on users radar long before Lion (requests for support) so presumably its not on Apple’s radar.
-
Oh, I didn't know CS5 has the 10-bit support. That's good news.Maybe because the threads I've been reading regarding 10-bit issue were a bit old I missed that.
Sigh.. I'll think twice next time when I'm buying a Mac. The reason why I bought a Mac was Mac OS, now once I get a Coloredge I'll be running Windows on my Mac Pro. Sweet irony.. bittersweet
-
Buy NEC.
+2.
and right now NEC has the offer of a free hood when buying the Spectraview models:
http://freehoodpromo.necdisplay.com/
totally avoid Apple monitors.
-
Yeah I'm off the Apple route. Too bad I didn't investigate deep enough to know that Mac OS doesn't have 10-bit colour support. I think I'd stick with a Windows based computer for my recent computer update and save a lot of money.. And since I'm speaking about routes- Apple is off the prosumer route, so I wouldn't be surprised if they don't address the issue at all.
-
Wonder if it could be ascertained whether one display is better over another in real world editing situations with regards to seeing all the nuances of an image by conducting a test editing an actual Raw image file on the higher quality display and transferring the Raw image and its xmp side car over to the other lesser quality display and check for differences.
Both displays would have to be calibrated/profiled and the Raw test image would be edited and viewed within the same Raw converter displayed through each display. The unedited Raw test image would have a wide range of colors and lights and darks and start off looking somewhat dull and flat. It's got to be a fixable image, but different enough from the final edit to actually see any benefits editing on a higher quality display.
Maybe do a screen shot and post the differences. Don't know if it would reveal anything though. Just curious.
How would someone know whether they're editing within a 10 bit pipeline? What's it look like and how does it manifest in the preview while editing?
-
Yeah I'm off the Apple route. Too bad I didn't investigate deep enough to know that Mac OS doesn't have 10-bit colour support. I think I'd stick with a Windows based computer for my recent computer update and save a lot of money.. And since I'm speaking about routes- Apple is off the prosumer route, so I wouldn't be surprised if they don't address the issue at all.
I wouldn't switch platforms based only on 10 bit color. There are other good reasons to use either platform, but I don't think 10 bit color at this stage in the game is one of them.
-
Well, the reasons stack up.. Other reason is that there is no SATA III (not even in newest Mac Pros) which would allow to use very fast solid state drives.. +600 mb/s read and write speed are available via SATA III only. Newest SSD drives from OCZ or OWC go up to 600 mb/s and these SSDs are quite affordable. Maybe not a perfect solution for a RAID array, but definitely the best solution for a scratch disk / application disk.
Well, thunderbolt is capable of 500 mb/s but that's 500 mb/s per thunderbolt port, while SATA III miniSAS port has 4 connectible devices per port 6 Gb/s each (1 SATA II port is 3 Gb/s). Thus, thunderbolt is not as good connection option as miniSAS SATA III. Not to mention the impossibility of getting rid of mouse acceleration aka 'mouse precision' which for people doing CG / design / photo with a mouse, not only a Wacom, IS very annoying. Of course it's something you can get used to...you can also get a SATA Controller for $300-$800, then- special disk adapters to allow connection of the harddrives to the SATA controller rather than the motherboard, etc etc etc... but all in all one can easily say Apple is well off the prosumer route- these things should be offered by a machine you're buying, not for your extra work / your extra money / your exploits and hacks. Apple IS off the pro-route, that's a fact. You still benefit from nice design and Mac OS which I think is still a bit ahead of Microsoft (although the edge Apple had has been shrinking from generation to generation of operating systems).
By the way, I've seen 10-bit colour and the difference IS noticable. It's not just a market feat. Also for graphic designers / illustrators - gradients look MUCH smoother. And guys working with color grading can benefit from ProRes 422 (or higher) 10-bit color encoding and have full control when working. Eizo CG / Nec 271 ref is a nice alternative for the ultra-expensive LCDs destined for video editing, a compromise but still definitely something you can work with on the hi-end.
-
By the way, I've seen 10-bit colour and the difference IS noticable. It's not just a market feat. Also for graphic designers / illustrators - gradients look MUCH smoother. And guys working with color grading can benefit from ProRes 422 (or higher) 10-bit color encoding and have full control when working. Eizo CG / Nec 271 ref is a nice alternative for the ultra-expensive LCDs destined for video editing, a compromise but still definitely something you can work with on the hi-end.
Just the typical response I'm talking about. You say the difference IS noticeable but you seem to lack descriptive words that match the scale of the importance and enthusiasm claimed of such an expensive high end workflow.
Smooth gradients? That's all you can come up with?
I have smooth gradients editing Raw images on my calibrated $300 Dell 2209WA LCD and 8 bit nVidea graphics included with my 2010 Mac Mini bought for $550.
Why is everyone have such a loss for words when they talk about this subject?
Like I said I'ld still like to see a Raw image edit test described above to actually see the benefits of high end technology such as this.
-
Why is everyone have such a loss for words when they talk about this subject?
Because the human visual system cannot differentiate between 8-bit and 10-bit color?
-
Smooth gradients?
Mostly, depends on the type of LCD you are using and the type of work you do. On a wider gamut display, its more likely you’ll need this capability than a lower gamut display. A higher bit path provides a smaller dE between subtle colors.
-
Because the human visual system cannot differentiate between 8-bit and 10-bit color?
Not true. Our eye sometimes (in case of certain colours) can't differentiate between even much shallower bit depth than 8-bit and in case of some colours differentiate with much much bigger bit depth. Our eye is NOT a linear system. Our eye's sensitivity varies from colour to colour... not only that- each one of us is more sensitive to different colours. Providing 10-bits gives us many many colours which we can't tell one from another and thus are not important / could be discarded, but will provide a sophisticated enough gamut where our eye is much more sensitive. Eye is NOT a linear system. These are the basics of DTP...
and 10-bit feat is not a marketing bullshit. By the way- you don't need a machine worth gazillions to run 10-bits - a $1000 PC would be enough, the only costly component is a 10-bit monitor. I'm not sure what is the cheapest 10-bit NEC but it definitely isn't unobtainable.
...I have smooth gradients editing Raw images on my calibrated $300 Dell 2209WA LCD and 8 bit nVidea graphics included with my 2010 Mac Mini bought for $550.
Why is everyone have such a loss for words when they talk about this subject?
...
Well, it all depends what you're shooting with. Take a photo with a good digiback (we are in a medium format / digibacks section right?). The same photo viewed on a 10-bit monitor running at 8-bit and the same 10-bit monitor running in 10-bit will look differently. Mainly colour transitions- they will be more sophisticated in some areas.. in fact the whole image is more sophisticated, but our eye will catch only certain areas. If you'd shoot some very saturated vibrant colours you'd probably not notice anything. But for instance a landscape- yes, there are more colours noticable. You don't believe me? Go make the test.
-
We might not have much choice in the future if the rumors of Apple retiring the MacPro turn out to be true. That would leave us with MacBook Pro, MacBook Air and iMacs.
I run a MacPro with Eizo ColorEdge CE240W as my main photo processor (Lightroom 3.5 and Photoshop CS5). I use my MacBook Air for light duty field backup and cataloging of images, but it lacks the horsepower of my MacPro.
It seems that Apple is focusing on consumer products these days or, in other words, they are going where the money is.
Cheers.
Bud
-
Eye is NOT a linear system. These are the basics of DTP...and 10-bit feat is not a marketing bullshit. By the way- you don't need a machine worth gazillions to run 10-bits - a $1000 PC would be enough, the only costly component is a 10-bit monitor. I'm not sure what is the cheapest 10-bit NEC but it definitely isn't unobtainable.
Mainly colour transitions- they will be more sophisticated in some areas.. in fact the whole image is more sophisticated, but our eye will catch only certain areas.
You seem to know a lot about the science of color theory and human vision. In fact I'ld say you present yourself as being "sophisticated" in your knowledge on the subject from all the words you use to express your enthusiasm...
But then all you can come up with in describing what you're seeing is the word "SOPHISTICATED?!" That's it? What does that look like? Can you only see this viewing the image at 100% view?
Other zoom levels in some software truncate the previews like in ACR. I'm sure you know how hard it is to edit a high rez file having to view it at 100%. It's like trying to figure out if you're looking at an elephant or a wall of leather. It fills the screen. I face this editing 3000x2000 DSLR PEF's on a 22in. screen. I can't imagine what a much higher rez medium format digital back image is going to look like at 100%. You're going to need 5 monitors just to tile it so you can get a gist of the overall look.
I'm not concerned about the price of this technology. I only care about how it would improve image editing and that requires a much more "sophisticated" visual description. I don't have access to any 10 bit monitor or video pipeline so I can't test for myself.
But I think I got the gist of its importance from Andrew's comment about its use for wide gamut displays. That I do understand. The amount of saturation and luminance levels engineered into these types of displays is definitely going to need extra bits to tweak and push tonal levels into the extremes and pull as much nuance out of the capture as possible.
Marketing bullshit? Didn't say it was. I'm just looking for answers that aren't bullshit. That's all.
-
Mostly, depends on the type of LCD you are using and the type of work you do. On a wider gamut display, its more likely you’ll need this capability than a lower gamut display. A higher bit path provides a smaller dE between subtle colors.
Let's say we're using equal quality 8 and 10 bit video cards in like systems, and running them into a top quality 10 bit capable monitor like the NEC PA271w.. Same computer, same level of video cards from the same company, same exact monitor. What differences are we likely to see and will it be file/source dependent, or will it be something we can expect to see in all files?
I've only had a few chances to view 10 bit monitors running 10 bits, and only one side by side, and I had to zoom in to 100%+ to 'think' I was seeing differences. And the differences I did see I wondered if the profile could have caused them. I do realize there's a lot to training the eye to see certain differences, is this such a thing?
-
It seems that Apple is focusing on consumer products these days or, in other words, they are going where the money is.
I disagree. IMO, the cost Intel are asking for the processors in the Mac Pro are unrealistic and makes the Mac Pro a very niche product that many don't need and probably why it must be difficult for Apple to continue offering it. The last great Mac Pro was the 2008 model with more recent models lacking important features (USB3, SATA3, Thunderbolt) but still costing the earth.
The latest iMac models, while not perfect are very capable machines, especially where photographers are concerned. With the addition on a secondary NEC or Eizo display I really don't see a need for the Pro any longer at these highly elevated prices. The idea of the tower computer is the upgrade ability but the Pro has never been great for that considering Apple usually drops support for older models every other refresh.
When I feel a need to upgrade my Mac Pro, I'll be taking a long hard look at the iMac with the best external display on offer at that time. IMO the display is more important than the computer when looking at Apples desktop and mobile offerings these days.
-
..snip..
But then all you can come up with in describing what you're seeing is the word "SOPHISTICATED?!" That's it? What does that look like? Can you only see this viewing the image at 100% view?
..snip..
Marketing bullshit? Didn't say it was. I'm just looking for answers that aren't bullshit. That's all.
What I "came up with" is that you get more colours in the gamut areas where your eye is capable of distinguishing more colours than what 8-bit palette is offering. Other than that, you are getting a lot of colours which could be discarded, but it's all up to one's eye where exactly these areas are, although there are some rules which apply to all of us and some colours could be universally discarded because noone can see the difference between them and their 'neighbours' in gamut. A hi-end video equipment and photo equipment can provide you with a 10-bit output so the information is there. Now again, what makes my answer a bullshit? You want a real life example? Then go and do the test, because even if I tell you where I see the differences comparing the same photo at 8-bit and 10-bit system, you may see the differences in somewhat other areas.
Oh and I didn't say that 10-bit is the holy grail of PP, but I do think that it is a step forward and since good monitors have this capability and my computer also meets the requirements, why shouldn't I be using it? It's as simple as that, there's not much enthusiasm in it. My enthusiasm however is there when it comes to gamut of these hi-end displays like NEC reference and EIZO CG, it makes a LOT of difference comparing to DELL / other monitors of this level. 10 bits are an extra, which I'd like to use as well.
-
Mr Rib,
Could I ask you for what kind of job you will use this monitor?
-
No, you may not. Special version for you design freak- I'm too old to be working, I'm a retired dentist, I always wanted to be a painter but my parents wanted me to be a dentist and now I want to fill the hole and emptiness of my clueless life with a hugeass monitor and 200 mpix digiback. Something near your assumptions I guess?
-
Let's say we're using equal quality 8 and 10 bit video cards in like systems, and running them into a top quality 10 bit capable monitor like the NEC PA271w.. Same computer, same level of video cards from the same company, same exact monitor. What differences are we likely to see and will it be file/source dependent, or will it be something we can expect to see in all files?
Unless the entire path, from application through the video system and display is high bit, when you send wide gamut RGB data the colorimetric distance between any two colors is much larger. Just like we need higher bit depth for wider gamut working spaces (the old 16 million dots on a half inflated balloon that grows double in size analogy). If on an sRGB like display, you have two adjacent color patches where one is 200,240,230 and the other is 201,240,230, the colorimetric distance (the deltaE) is higher on the wide gamut display. On the sRGB display, say its .8, it could be a dE of 2 on the wide gamut display.
-
No, you may not. Special version for you design freak- I'm too old to be working, I'm a retired dentist, I always wanted to be a painter but my parents wanted me to be a dentist and now I want to fill the hole and emptiness of my clueless life with a hugeass monitor and 200 mpix digiback. Something near your assumptions I guess?
Too bad, because you'd learn a lot from me. So really I do not care who you are, whether you are rich or poor, able or less able. Likewise, your age does not matter to me. Provided that you keep up with me and will want to learn something :D
-
That's an interesting statement, coming from someone who judged me without any basis and even could tell if I'm old or young (it seems that somehow, for your own strange reasons you do care?) . And no, I'd definitely would not like to learn anything from you, seeing how biased you are. Most of the time you keep blindly attacking Hasselblad, so why would anyone pay any attention to what you're saying about equpiment? You are too biased in this area so you probably are as biased in other. edit- I thought of a great solution to this- simply ignore my threads and everyone will be happy.
-
That's an interesting statement, coming from someone who judged me without any basis and even could tell if I'm old or young (it seems that somehow, for your own strange reasons you do care?) . And no, I'd definitely would not like to learn anything from you, seeing how biased you are. Most of the time you keep blindly attacking Hasselblad, so why would anyone pay any attention to what you're saying about equpiment? You are too biased in this area so you probably are as biased in other. edit- I thought of a great solution to this- simply ignore my threads and everyone will be happy.
Do you really still nourish resentment against me for this post? Chill out :)
The fact that not everyone is able to match me, it's not my fault that I'm a genius. As for the Hasselblad, I scoffed a few times with the marketing activities - which are at a very low level (sometimes even funny). I wrote the truth, I wrote about a bad trade-in program that does not work. Hasselblad today introduced a new program - "promotion" - the exchange rate lowered by up to six thousand, compared to the old program. I was wrong? I dare to doubt. Just sad that it came to this so late. Your choice. I am always willing to help you, make sure the outside of this forum, such knowledge is very valuable. Very cold is now in Poland?
-
MO, the cost Intel are asking for the processors in the Mac Pro are unrealistic and makes the Mac Pro a very niche product that many don't need and probably why it must be difficult for Apple to continue offering it. The last great Mac Pro was the 2008 model with more recent models lacking important features (USB3, SATA3, Thunderbolt) but still costing the earth.
The latest iMac models, while not perfect are very capable machines, especially where photographers are concerned. With the addition on a secondary NEC or Eizo display I really don't see a need for the Pro any longer at these highly elevated prices. The idea of the tower computer is the upgrade ability but the Pro has never been great for that considering Apple usually drops support for older models every other refresh.
When I feel a need to upgrade my Mac Pro, I'll be taking a long hard look at the iMac with the best external display on offer at that time. IMO the display is more important than the computer when looking at Apples desktop and mobile offerings these days.
The service manager at the local Apple store agreed with you, and said the Mac Pro is overkill for just running Photoshop. He also recommended an iMac. The iMac has Thunderbolt. He recommended an iMac with the base level processor. For the price difference between the iMac and Mac Pro, I can buy the iMac and a new NEC monitor.
(1) NEC PA271W versus NEC MultiSync PA301W-BK. I assume both models are equally recommended, and the only difference is the slightly larger size in the case of the PA301?
The B&H web site states that the PA271 is an "LCD Flat Panel." Is that an IPS LCD? However, the PA301 is an "IPS (CCFL Backlight)." Do these two use the same technology or not? If there is a difference, which do you experts recommend?
(2) I currently have an older NEC 3090WQXi. Am I correct in my assumption that this older model probably uses a bulb of some sort, whereas the PA301 is a newer IPS LCD. Similar technology, albeit better, than the Apple display?
(3) Do any of you have any opinions about which software to run to also operate windows if I go that route? VM Fusion versus Parallels?
-
(1) NEC PA271W versus NEC MultiSync PA301W-BK. I assume both models are equally recommended, and the only difference is the slightly larger size in the case of the PA301?
The B&H web site states that the PA271 is an "LCD Flat Panel." Is that an IPS LCD? However, the PA301 is an "IPS (CCFL Backlight)." Do these two use the same technology or not? If there is a difference, which do you experts recommend?
(2) I currently have an older NEC 3090WQXi. Am I correct in my assumption that this older model probably uses a bulb of some sort, whereas the PA301 is a newer IPS LCD. Similar technology, albeit better, than the Apple display?
(3) Do any of you have any opinions about which software to run to also operate windows if I go that route? VM Fusion versus Parallels?
1) Yes, the PA301W, of which I have two, has a slightly higher variance in brightness than the 27". I love my PA301Ws, but totally understand why others buy 2xPA271W for basically the same money as 1xPA301W.
2) The PA301W and the 3090WQXI both use a CCFL bulb. This means that you need to have it powered on for at least 30 minutes to warm up and stabilize before calibrating/using. Thankfully, NEC has some nice features in the advanced menu, just as with your current display, for setting wake up times. I have mine turn on automatically before I typically begin work by 30 minutes. To get to the advanced menu, with the display off and while holding down the menu button, power on the display. You will now have about 4x more settings you can configure. The only thing you don't seem to be able to configure is making the advanced menu the default.
The Apple LED Cinema Display is approximately crud vs the PA301W. Here is my short comparison: http://blog.vectorcomputing.net/2012/05/10/monitor-comparison/
3) I use VMware Fusion and have been quite happy with it. I have tried Parallels and it is also nice. For me, as I also use VMware on Linux, the non-issue of VM portability/compatibility makes my choice easy. Similarly for VirtualBox. Paying a small amount to avoid any hassles is worth it for me.