Eizo monitors are they worth it?

[tived]

Hi guys,

I know we have been through this before, but I am at the crest of a new opportunity where color correction is of important.

I recently bought two 24" Dells 2405's which when calibrated are very nice but they are not great and I got what I paid for.

Now this is a new ballgame and there is a few dollars involved and I would like to make the right choice.

So, for those of you with the Eizo screens which one did you buy and does it meet your expectations...should I have a poll here ?
what are the pro's and con's

and there is also a group that didn't buy one or another but similar product, but what did you buy and why.

we will be color correcting and retouching

thanks you for taking your time

Henrik

[Nill Toulme]

...and there is also a group that didn't buy one or another but similar product, but what did you buy and why.
...[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I got the NEC 2090uxi to replace my venerable Trinitron 21" CRT because, at ~US$1k, it seemed to me to be the most cost-effective solution for the budget-minded photographer wanting to do serious color work on a 1600x1200 display.  So far, I couldn't be happier with it.

Nill
~~
[a href=\"http://www.toulme.net]www.toulme.net[/url]

[Jack Flesher]

I don't know if they're worth it, but I saw the $1700 240 at my local dealer and really liked it.  I hear it really holds its profile well and is easy to profile at most any white point.  I'm thinking hard and will probably get one.

There is a review of the 240 over on DOP: http://www.outbackphoto.com/computers_and_...240W/essay.html

[David White]

I went with the NEC 2190uxi after investigating the LCD market.  I was interested in the Eizo CE240W because of the wider aspect ratio but backed off after reading about the people that were returning them or otherwise unhappy because of screen problems.

In addition to the 2190, I think that all the monitors in the 90 series have a 12-bit LUT which along with calibration using SpectraViewII provides superb color and completley neutral greys across the screen.

[jamie_m_]

Hi guys,

I know we have been through this before, but I am at the crest of a new opportunity where color correction is of important.

I recently bought two 24" Dells 2405's which when calibrated are very nice but they are not great and I got what I paid for.

Now this is a new ballgame and there is a few dollars involved and I would like to make the right choice.

So, for those of you with the Eizo screens which one did you buy and does it meet your expectations...should I have a poll here ?
what are the pro's and con's

and there is also a group that didn't buy one or another but similar product, but what did you buy and why.

we will be color correcting and retouching

thanks you for taking your time

Henrik
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73528\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I upgraded from a Lacie Photon20visionII (20 inch 1600x1200 cost about £1000 when I bought it a few years ago) to an Eizo CE240W (24 inch widescreen 1900x1200 cost about £1000 a few weeks ago)

It really is easy to profile with Eye One

I dont notice any brightness changes from edge to egde

I'm happy that I got it

[tived]

thanks guys for the input,

the top of the line certainly is very expensive, and i am wondering if you really can see much difference. I currently calibrate my 2 dells and though they are not perfect by any means the reflect what I see in my print (could that I also print badly ;-) < grin>
However, i do notice a shift on the dells when looking at shadow details on the sides (say, make a square in the screen using the hight and imagine it in the middle of the screen) what is outside this square seem to shift in color a bit and it is really hard to see things in the shadows.
However, the Eizo top model is five times more expensive!!! which in the end of the day is OK, if it means that I can create better work from the better monitor. Will it be better in color, 1/4 and 3/4 tones. Will I be able to better color correct images??? will it give me less strain on my eyes, if so then the price is cheap and i shall morgage my first born.

the 240 looks nice, but it too is hit by many complaints just like the dell, and the dell is 1/3 of the price + the calibrator (in my case a iOne 2) hmm.

I guess it gives you the braggin rights and you can say to your clients that, hey do you have highend Eizo screen with 14bit, AdobeRGB1998 color space...etc...what NO! well, what are you complaining about ;-) ,grin. please note sarcasme!

the search goes on, please if you have more info or any links please let me know, thanks

Henrik

[tived]

Hi guys

after having read thing one here again http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....613&hl=prosense the part from Dr. Karl Lang, then it does not seem to make much sense to spend big on a wide gamut screen atm.

scratching my head? what to do...hmm

thanks

Henrik

[tived]

Hi again guys,

sorry to beat the topic, but since Dr Karl Lang aka "neoprinter" wrote his reply here in december 2005, has there been any development in the techonlogy to justify (make it more legit) the use of the highend screens like the Eizo CG220 or Nec wide-gamut.

If one were to buy one, then what graphics card would help it along to max out its capabilities, I guess the question is what is required to make the most out of these monitors (given that they will actually help you see things better on screen)

thanks

Henrik

[Mark D Segal]

I agnozied about this for several months. Then I ended-up buying a LaCie 321. I was informed by people who know more about this than I do that the extra thousand dollars between the nearest competing Eizo and the Lacie would not give me a thousand dollars worth of better image quality from the point of view of good colour management between monitor and printer. My experience with the LaCie 321 is on the whole positive. I have it calibrated and profiled with ColorEyes Display. It is extremely accurate for colour. Contrary to professional advice, however, I found I had to manually reduce the brightness and contrast using the monitor's front panel controls in order to improve the luminosity consistency between monitor and print (on Epson Enhanced Matte paper). I believe many other people also find the "brilliance"of LCD displays to be a problem in this respect. I'm not sure whether this phenominon would change much for an extra 1000 dollars or more. Any views?

[Nill Toulme]

Getting the brightness dialed down far enough can indeed be a problem on less expensive LCD monitors like the Dells etc.  For a higher end LCD that's actually targeted at critical color work it shouldn't be a problem.  My NEC 2090uxi (which I recommend highly) is calibrated to 100 cd/m² with no difficulty whatsoever.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[digitaldog]

I don't know if they're worth it, but I saw the $1700 240 at my local dealer and really liked it.  I hear it really holds its profile well and is easy to profile at most any white point. 

Well considering that it's a CCFL (Fluorescent) back lit display and you have no control over that native white point like all other CCFL's, I don't see how that's possible. You can muck around with a LUT to the graphic card but that's not very effective.

Now if you have say $5K to drop, there's the NEC wide gamut LED which does have direct control over the white point since you have three LEDs that can be altered as we did in the old days with CRTs.

[Mark D Segal]

Getting the brightness dialed down far enough can indeed be a problem on less expensive LCD monitors like the Dells etc.  For a higher end LCD that's actually targeted at critical color work it shouldn't be a problem.  My NEC 2090uxi (which I recommend highly) is calibrated to 100 cd/m² with no difficulty whatsoever.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73999\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Nill, this indeed is what Integrated Color Corp recommends I do with my Lacie 321. Once on gets into the class of monitors we are discussing here colour interpretation and luminosity control becomes satisfactory - in a way one used to be able to get from less expensive CRTs.

[tived]

Hi Mark,

thanks for replying,

are you saying that with the high-end screens they are more adjustable?

i was told to leave the LCD's to their factory default settings and then calibrate from there, only changing the brightness on the screen and do nothing to my graphics card. So far it "seems" to have worked, but then again these current screens are Dell's   ...using iOne II to calibrate on my PeeCee.

thanks

Henrik

[LasseDPF]

Hi,

I bought the Eizo CG21 a couple of years ago, and I am very happy with the quality and the service/warranty.

About a year ago I had some trouble with the display, and called in to get support. Within a couple of days I had a brand new display shipped to me along with prepayed return shipping of the old display.

Of course the colors and accuracy is also very good.  Thins actually do look the same on print and on screen :-) Which I can not say about some less expensive monitors I have tried - even when calibrated..

Lasse

[Mark D Segal]

Hi Mark,

thanks for replying,

are you saying that with the high-end screens they are more adjustable?

i was told to leave the LCD's to their factory default settings and then calibrate from there, only changing the brightness on the screen and do nothing to my graphics card. So far it "seems" to have worked, but then again these current screens are Dell's   ...using iOne II to calibrate on my PeeCee.

thanks

Henrik
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74062\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Henrik, there is so much on the market one shouldn't over-generalize. I am only using one product so I know what this product does. However, I read from the experience of some people using various "lower-end" LCD monitors that they cannot sufficiently tone down the brightness to get a reliable monitor-to-print luminosity equivalence, whereas my Lacie 321 can just about do it. I say "just about" because I don't think my luminosity matching is yet as good as it was on my old Dell P992 CRT - I wish it had lasted forever - but alas............

I was also told to leave the LCD display settings at their factory default, because with the video card I am using, my ColorEyes Display uses DDC to internally make all the calibration and profiling adjustments needed, except for three parameters one sets in their options dialogue boxes, one of them being luminosity, which I let the software determine (using L*) or set myself. About 120 was recommended. I was told to leave the monitor front panel display settings alone after doing this calibration. I was also told not to bother with the video card AT ALL, because the software takes care of the video card.

As I said previously, it works great for colour reliability, but I still found it advantageous to externally tone down the brightness and contrast on the front panel - perhaps the program set the L* too high relative to the particular chartacteristics of Epson Enhanced Matte paper. I have no idea whether spending yet another 1000 more on the monitor would have improved on what I have, but I was advised by several knowledgeable people that it is not likely. I have also heard good things about one of the new line of Dell LCDs (I forget the model number).

[Nill Toulme]

...As I said previously, it works great for colour reliability, but I still found it advantageous to externally tone down the brightness and contrast on the front panel - perhaps the program set the L* too high relative to the particular chartacteristics of Epson Enhanced Matte paper. ...
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Try setting it to a specific luminance target like 100 or 110 cd/m² instead of L*.  If all is working right you shouldn't be having to make front panel adjustments.

Nill
~~
[a href=\"http://www.toulme.net]www.toulme.net[/url]

[Mark D Segal]

Nill - you are most probably correct. And that is what Integrated Color recommended I do - just means hauling out the puck and re-doing it again, testing it again and seeing with iterations what luminance input works better than what I now have........OK - one should do what should be done the "right way" and your call to order has challenged me to give it a whirl. The worst than can happen is that I spend some time on a few iterations before deciding what to keep.  

[tived]

thanks Mark,

I think you are right in that there is not a one-fits-all solution, I sort of knew after have turned on the Dells, that I should have settled for a single smaller Eizo with better pixels but out of the two I havd one calibrates OK, and seems to be quite ok. but I am entering a different ball game and therefore the need for a more reliable and correct screen for color adjustments - one thing is to do it for yourself, another when you are doing it for others, then it needs to be spot on.

Nill,

I had a good read about your NEC and it sounds like a really nice and everything people have been saying.

...just not able to make up my mind,...but I am also waiting to get paid so I can splash out so that can still be a month or so...so still time to change my mind again and again....

How is your computer going, still happy?

Henrik

[Nill Toulme]

Mark, monitor calibration is not a "set it and forget it" process anyway — typical recommendation is to redo it every two weeks or so.

Henrik, yes, still very pleased with the system.  I'm just now moving into the heavy season though so it's yet to get the real workout.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[Mark D Segal]

Mark, monitor calibration is not a "set it and forget it" process anyway — typical recommendation is to redo it every two weeks or so.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74113\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Nill, I think that advice was particularly important for CRT monitors which have the potential for much greater drift compared with LCDs. I believe for good quality LCDs it is not harmful to allow much longer intervals.