Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Laptop Screen that rivals Eizo/NEC?  (Read 4781 times)

Brad P

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 269
Laptop Screen that rivals Eizo/NEC?
« on: June 08, 2024, 12:31:42 am »

Are the laptop manufactures of the best screens and color management workflow ASUS ProArt Studio 16, MSI Creator, and Apple MacBook Pro 16 in that order?  That’s what I’m coming to believe after a few days researching.
 
As background, I’m looking to bypass my PC for 90 percent of my workflow with my next laptop purchase.  Screen quality to me is by far the most important factor in my decision tree. 

I have a still excellent 31” older NEC display for final screen proofs and brand new Canon 44” wide format printer.  I’m looking to match that hardware in quality.  I’m leaning toward the Apple for quality reasons, but it apparently only produces 94% (?) Adobe RGB.  ASUS seems better from a screen point of view.  Their screen overall seems higher quality and it’s a touch screen (!).  On the downside, ASUS’s battery life is short, it runs hot, and it’s not an Apple.  I know little about MSI but I see their 17” Creator produces all of Adobe RGB (they say) and it has good reviews.

Separately, high nit value and little color distortion with increasing nits is also very important. I have yet to see someone come up with a framework for measuring that, so I’ll just mention that.

I’m PC/Apple ambidextrous so that doesn’t matter.

What do you think?
« Last Edit: June 08, 2024, 12:53:44 am by Brad P »
Logged

Czornyj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2050
    • zarzadzaniebarwa.pl
Re: Laptop Screen that rivals Eizo/NEC?
« Reply #1 on: June 08, 2024, 05:22:55 am »

Are the laptop manufactures of the best screens and color management workflow ASUS ProArt Studio 16, MSI Creator, and Apple MacBook Pro 16 in that order?  That’s what I’m coming to believe after a few days researching.
 
As background, I’m looking to bypass my PC for 90 percent of my workflow with my next laptop purchase.  Screen quality to me is by far the most important factor in my decision tree. 

I have a still excellent 31” older NEC display for final screen proofs and brand new Canon 44” wide format printer.  I’m looking to match that hardware in quality.  I’m leaning toward the Apple for quality reasons, but it apparently only produces 94% (?) Adobe RGB.  ASUS seems better from a screen point of view.  Their screen overall seems higher quality and it’s a touch screen (!).  On the downside, ASUS’s battery life is short, it runs hot, and it’s not an Apple.  I know little about MSI but I see their 17” Creator produces all of Adobe RGB (they say) and it has good reviews.

Separately, high nit value and little color distortion with increasing nits is also very important. I have yet to see someone come up with a framework for measuring that, so I’ll just mention that.

I’m PC/Apple ambidextrous so that doesn’t matter.

What do you think?

I also have NEC PA311D, Macbook Pro 16 M1 and 44" Canon - MBP 16 has jaw dropping quality, on pair with any other color critical display, and muuuuch better in HDR content.

The gamut difference is virtually irrelevant - it is almost indistinguishable in reality, and only in supersaturated colors that almost never occur in real life photos.
Logged
Marcin Kałuża | [URL=http://zarzadzaniebarwa

Brad P

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 269
Re: Laptop Screen that rivals Eizo/NEC?
« Reply #2 on: June 08, 2024, 03:38:03 pm »

Thanks for the input, Marcin. That gives me some confidence I’m on the right track.
Logged

Brad P

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 269
Re: Laptop Screen that rivals Eizo/NEC?
« Reply #3 on: July 21, 2024, 11:46:47 pm »

One thing about getting older.  I do things just as compulsively, but slower.  And I still haven’t bought a new laptop.

I’ve looked at the Apple in person and considered it, but I have a few misgivings. 

First, the screen is calibrated and maybe even manufactured toward replicating Display P3, not Adobe RGB.  That means it’s oriented from sRGB more toward the reds than greens and blues.  I photograph greens and blues far more than reds and that’s meaningful to me.  Real light falls weird often.  Every day in fact.  If you’re reproducing it accurately in the real world you need a large palate of weird greens and blues.  So that’s a strike for me.  Quantitatively, I hope someone more experienced in color science can help me evaluate how strongly I should feel about this, but for now, I feel moderate/strong against Apple for this for the next 8 years that I expect this device to last.

Second, for the next 8 years that I expect this device to last, I need tons of RAM.  I do huge photo stacking jobs and use tons of layers and need LOTS of RAM and graphic card capabilities.  The Adobe RGB laptops (listed above) seem to cap out RAM at 64 well below Apple’s too expensive maxed out 128 RAM version.  Grrr.

Third, upgradability.  Over my 40 years of living with a colorized computer I admit that I have upgraded only every other one of the dozens or so that I’ve owned.  I love Apples, but dammit, you can’t upgrade them at all since the circa 2003 Apple Pro.  And buying one of the prefab laptops gives some upgradability room, but not so much really if you look at the specs.  Especially RAM.  Grr.

Anyways, as you can see, I’ve made no progress (yet).  If anyone knows of a $5K or so laptop that works here, let me know please.  Otherwise, I’m going to have to explore those build your own laptop links.  I built my PC about 5 years ago and it’s good for another three at least.
Logged

Czornyj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2050
    • zarzadzaniebarwa.pl
Re: Laptop Screen that rivals Eizo/NEC?
« Reply #4 on: July 22, 2024, 07:55:12 am »

One thing about getting older.  I do things just as compulsively, but slower.  And I still haven’t bought a new laptop.

I’ve looked at the Apple in person and considered it, but I have a few misgivings. 

First, the screen is calibrated and maybe even manufactured toward replicating Display P3, not Adobe RGB.  That means it’s oriented from sRGB more toward the reds than greens and blues.  I photograph greens and blues far more than reds and that’s meaningful to me.  Real light falls weird often.  Every day in fact.  If you’re reproducing it accurately in the real world you need a large palate of weird greens and blues.  So that’s a strike for me.  Quantitatively, I hope someone more experienced in color science can help me evaluate how strongly I should feel about this, but for now, I feel moderate/strong against Apple for this for the next 8 years that I expect this device to last.

Second, for the next 8 years that I expect this device to last, I need tons of RAM.  I do huge photo stacking jobs and use tons of layers and need LOTS of RAM and graphic card capabilities.  The Adobe RGB laptops (listed above) seem to cap out RAM at 64 well below Apple’s too expensive maxed out 128 RAM version.  Grrr.

Third, upgradability.  Over my 40 years of living with a colorized computer I admit that I have upgraded only every other one of the dozens or so that I’ve owned.  I love Apples, but dammit, you can’t upgrade them at all since the circa 2003 Apple Pro.  And buying one of the prefab laptops gives some upgradability room, but not so much really if you look at the specs.  Especially RAM.  Grr.

Anyways, as you can see, I’ve made no progress (yet).  If anyone knows of a $5K or so laptop that works here, let me know please.  Otherwise, I’m going to have to explore those build your own laptop links.  I built my PC about 5 years ago and it’s good for another three at least.

The difference between Adobe RGB and DCI-P3 in supersaturated greens is only ~6 ∆E2000, so it's practically meaningless - such laser-like colors virtually never occur in reality, and even if they do visual difference is barely visible.

While it's true you can't uprade RAM that is soldierd to CPU it's superfast and resposive, and 64gigs is sufficient even for crazy large files. As for SSD, I use TB4 40Gbps NVMe enclosures with that cost ~50$ and is very fast.

There's nothing as good as Retina XDR IMHO, and the Macbook Pro is noiseless, powerful (even on battery), fast and superresponsive - I doubt there's something better for photo editing work (and new M4 will be even much faster):
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/mac-vs-pc-for-content-creation-2024/#How_Do_Mac_and_PC_Compare_for_Content_Creation_in_2024
Logged
Marcin Kałuża | [URL=http://zarzadzaniebarwa
Pages: [1]   Go Up