Need a new Monitor, Wondering What's Out There In Accurate Displays???

[digitaldog]

Does the Eizo self calibrator need to be calibrated like the I1 pro2? I noticed after sending my i1 in for repair that they recommend having it calibrated once a year.

All devices will at some point in time need this but the question is when? Unless you are doing very specific or scientific work with multiple instruments that need to correlate, it's unlikely most will need to have the device certified anywhere close to the recommendations. Now if you calibrate and find something looks off, or you get a poor report from a good piece of software like PatchTool, or your trending shows severe errors, get the unit inspected and certified. Older Colorimeters did suffer from filter fading too. I certainly wouldn't recommend anyone expect Benny, a true pro have his devices sent in every year unless you have extra money to blow.

[ned]

it's an easy $350 (!!) for XRite to re-certify an i1.  For our needs, I can't see it needed.  In fact, I'd love to know, of the color professionals here on LuLa, how old is your i1Pro & when was the last time you sent it in for calibration.

My blue channel went out on my non dealer purchased 10 months old pro2. Normally this would have been covered under the 12 month warranty. Over $500 for a replacement.

[Geraldo Garcia]

You don't take very kindly to differences to your opinions. You should fix that. Bye. Gotta get back to work.

Well,

I am definitely a "pro". Not only I am really a renowned professional but, as it seems to matter to you, I am a Eizo user.
So... as a qualified "pro" I can tell you that you are completely out of reality. But you know that, right? I mean, you are just trolling, right? The other option would be worse regarding your intellect and cognitive capabilities, so I prefer to think that you are a troll. With that in mind I am not really writing this to you (as trolls will always be trolls), instead I am writing with all the new visitors of the forum in mind. People that may not know that:

1) Andrew Rodney, AKA the DigitalDOg, is a reference worldwide regarding color management and knows very well what he is talking about and is very generous sharing his knowledge with us.
 
2) Eizo monitors, although excellent and very well designed and assembled, have nothing unique or special in comparison to other "top" monitors. Actually most of the top units share the same panels (usually manufactured by LG or Samsung). The Eizo ColorEdge CG 247 for instance, uses the same panel (24"WS LG.Display AH-IPS LM240WU9) that the NEC PA242W or the BenQ PG2401PT or the Asus PA249Q. Sure a panel alone does not make a complete display, but the same happens with the other components as well. 

3) There is nothing wrong with the Eizo monitors, but stating that "pros use Eizo" makes as much sense as stating that "pros shoot with hasselblad". That is simply a narrow-minded statement made by someone that is brand addicted (or a troll... or a SALESPERSON ).

Regards.

[Benny Profane]

Well, cheerio then, Gerry, from troll land.

BTW, can't quite figure out exactly what defines you as a pro from that blog. Please elaborate.

[Stefan Ohlsson]

it's an easy $350 (!!) for XRite to re-certify an i1.  For our needs, I can't see it needed.  In fact, I'd love to know, of the color professionals here on LuLa, how old is your i1Pro & when was the last time you sent it in for calibration.

We have 3 i1Pro and one i1Pro2. We measure the same test target now and then and then do a comparison of the measured values. But just a few weeks ago we bought the basICColor MesCal13, which makes it very easy to control our spectrophotometers.

[Stefan Ohlsson]

Older Colorimeters did suffer from filter fading too. 

We have now and then invited photographers to come over and bring their colorimeters with them. We then measured the same monitor with Udact. With the older i1Displays and Spyders we saw that 1 out of 3 showed a result that were more than Delta E 5 from the expected values.

[digitaldog]

BTW, can't quite figure out exactly what defines you as a pro from that blog. Please elaborate.

One could ask the same question of you sir!

[Benny Profane]

Not you, cranky. I was asking Gerry.

[digitaldog]

Not you, cranky. I was asking Gerry.

Further illustration that you are unable and/or unwilling to prove your opinions, this time that you are a professional. Telling.

[Geraldo Garcia]

BTW, can't quite figure out exactly what defines you as a pro from that blog. Please elaborate.

Seriously? Well... I am on a very good mood, so lets see some possible answers:

A) Although that is my personal blog, not my company's website, there are some references (including pictures and videos) of the classes and workshops I teach, the seminars and debates I conducted, some mentions of clients and tons of didactic material produced by me. It´s all there, at least for those who can read what is written.

B) I am not here to indulge you.

C) (my favorite answer so far) Nothing! According to your logic my Eizo monitor does and that should suffice!

I can only speak for myself but, honestly, over the Internet the the level of contribution an the attitude tells us all we need to know and all we can truly know about a person.

Returning to the subject of the thread,

I agree on this 4K concern (below)…also others….readable text size for one.  also I use Capture One Pro on most of my RAW processing….Lightroom for everything else and have heard the 4K monitors can run more slowly on very large files which I have in abundance….….Eleanor

I would also dodge 4k displays at this time. I am really dependent of a dual monitor system and with two 4K displays one could be sure to have serious lag problem even with the fastest hardware. Sure, considering the speed on which hardware and software advance, that may no be an issue next year.

[Czornyj]

Returning to the subject of the thread,I would also dodge 4k displays at this time. I am really dependent of a dual monitor system and with two 4K displays one could be sure to have serious lag problem even with the fastest hardware. Sure, considering the speed on which hardware and software advance, that may no be an issue next year.

You don't need a dual monitor setup in case of 32" UHD - it gives you exactly the same horizontal resolution as 2x24" setup, and you additionally get 960px of vertical resolution. It's like working on 4x23" frameless setup

[Geraldo Garcia]

Hi Marcin,

You don't need a dual monitor setup in case of 32" UHD - it gives you exactly the same horizontal resolution as 2x24" setup, and you additionally get 960px of vertical resolution. It's like working on 4x23" frameless setup

It would be great for the standard use but my specific needs are a bit different. I need a second (or third) screen facing my clients displaying a "preview". I usually make a new window for the same file while working in photoshop and place it on the client's monitor with softproof turned on. Sure the second monitor does not need to be 4K, but even so it would increase even more the total screen area.
But, anyway, I believe the hardware/software will match this needs soon.

[Czornyj]

Hi Marcin,

It would be great for the standard use but my specific needs are a bit different. I need a second (or third) screen facing my clients displaying a "preview". I usually make a new window for the same file while working in photoshop and place it on the client's monitor with softproof turned on. Sure the second monitor does not need to be 4K, but even so it would increase even more the total screen area.
But, anyway, I believe the hardware/software will match this needs soon.

ok, I get it Geraldo, I usually work with a client by my side, so we can both see the same image - PA322UHD which is as big, as sharp, as wide gamut, and as impressive as it gets, which is optimal to soft proof large format prints

[jfgaylord]

You might consider a 27" or 30" Apple Cinema display, used for $450 - 600. Maybe not the best, but darn good and a good value IMO.

[eleanorbrown]

I have been using two Apple 30 inch displays for years...frequently profiled of course, and was wondering how they compare to the best of the NEC 27 and 30 inch spectra view displays??? Since I lost one of my apple displays to a lightening strike, I am considering getting the NEC. Eleanor

[digitaldog]

I have been using two Apple 30 inch displays for years...frequently profiled of course, and was wondering how they compare to the best of the NEC 27 and 30 inch spectra view displays???

They really don't compare!
1. Nearly all if not all current SpectraView displays are wide gamut, Apple's and most other’s are not (sRGB like gamut).
2.  SpectraView uses a high bit internal processing path (at least 10-bit) with internal 3D LUTs, Apple and many other's do not. These high bit LUTs allow precise adjustments to be made to the display’s Tone Response Curve without reducing the number of displayable colors or introducing color banding artifacts.
3.  Newer NEC SpectraView's use GBr LED which produce far more precise control of White Point, run cooler, use less energy, run far longer than CCFL.
4. SpectraView has 3-4 year on site warranty, Apple has 1 year.
5. SpectraView panels are hand selected from the manufacturer line (pick of the litter).
6. SpectraView has electric technologies like ColorComp, which adjusts and improves screen (brightness) uniformity using individually measured matrices for each display at the factory. All done high bit with compensation for operating time and temperature.  Apple does not.
7. SpectraView has electric technologies like GammaComp, to adjust the monitor's internal 10-bit gamma Look-Up-Table, allowing various custom display gamma or Tone-Response-Curves to be achieved. Apple and many other's don't have anything like this.
8. SpectraView is a smart display system that integrates custom software for calibration including multiple target calibration's which can be loaded to adjust the display while loading the associated ICC profile, Apple (and few other products aside from Eizo) cannot do this. To quote from the manual:
9. SpectraView communicates with the display monitors using Display Data Channel - Command Interface (DDC/CI) which is a two-way communications link between the video graphics adapter and display monitor using the normal video signal cable. No extra cables are necessary. All adjustments to the monitor settings are done automatically using this communications link. It is not necessary to manually configure the monitor as all of the necessary settings are made by the software. Apple has nothing like this, nor can 3rd party software you have to pay for extra do this.
10. SpectraView will bundle a custom mated Colorimeter with their software for calibration, Apple doesn't. The price you pay for software and colorimeter with the SpectraView, depending on what country you live in costs significantly less than buying the hardware and software for a non SpectraView. And that extra money will not provide a fraction of the capabilities outlined.
11. SpectraView PA series offer the ability to calibrate WITHOUT a Colorimeter with the FREE Multiprofiler software since each panel is measured with a very expensive spectroradiometer and that data is embedded in a chip in the panel. It can update the calibration as the unit ages to ensure calibration. Apple has nothing like this.
12. SpectraView can emulate with a single click other behaviors, again on the fly so it can simulate a non wide gamut display (sRGB) among other standardized behaviors (Broadcast Video DICOM, etc)
13. SpectraView has internal electronic control over contrast ratio, Apple and few others provide this. Real useful for soft proofing on media that has differing contrast ratio's (matt vs. glossy papers).
14. SpectraView has Network support (Windows only). Apple doesn't.
15. SpectraView has provisions to lock the display controls so no accidental alteration to behavior by mistake. Apple doesn't.
16. SpectraView displays allow the user to raise and lower the display for best viewing position AND it can be rotated 90 degrees for Portrait. Apple doesn't provide this.
17. Several SpectraView's support Picture in Picture (you can have two differing calibration's per picture). Apple has nothing like this.

[eleanorbrown]

Thanks Andrew for the extensive information!  Now another question...how does the NEC spectra view compare to the upcoming NEC 4K 32 inch?  (Ive never seen any 4K). Last thing I want or need is that huge 32 inch 4K but wondering if NEC might come out with a 27  or 30 inch 4K anytime soon? Any idea? Thanks, Eleanor

They really don't compare!
1. Nearly all if not all current SpectraView displays are wide gamut, Apple's and most other’s are not (sRGB like gamut).
2.  SpectraView uses a high bit internal processing path (at least 10-bit) with internal 3D LUTs, Apple and many other's do not. These high bit LUTs allow precise adjustments to be made to the display’s Tone Response Curve without reducing the number of displayable colors or introducing color banding artifacts.
3.  Newer NEC SpectraView's use GBr LED which produce far more precise control of White Point, run cooler, use less energy, run far longer than CCFL.
4. SpectraView has 3-4 year on site warranty, Apple has 1 year.
5. SpectraView panels are hand selected from the manufacturer line (pick of the litter).
6. SpectraView has electric technologies like ColorComp, which adjusts and improves screen (brightness) uniformity using individually measured matrices for each display at the factory. All done high bit with compensation for operating time and temperature.  Apple does not.
7. SpectraView has electric technologies like GammaComp, to adjust the monitor's internal 10-bit gamma Look-Up-Table, allowing various custom display gamma or Tone-Response-Curves to be achieved. Apple and many other's don't have anything like this.
8. SpectraView is a smart display system that integrates custom software for calibration including multiple target calibration's which can be loaded to adjust the display while loading the associated ICC profile, Apple (and few other products aside from Eizo) cannot do this. To quote from the manual:
9. SpectraView communicates with the display monitors using Display Data Channel - Command Interface (DDC/CI) which is a two-way communications link between the video graphics adapter and display monitor using the normal video signal cable. No extra cables are necessary. All adjustments to the monitor settings are done automatically using this communications link. It is not necessary to manually configure the monitor as all of the necessary settings are made by the software. Apple has nothing like this, nor can 3rd party software you have to pay for extra do this.
10. SpectraView will bundle a custom mated Colorimeter with their software for calibration, Apple doesn't. The price you pay for software and colorimeter with the SpectraView, depending on what country you live in costs significantly less than buying the hardware and software for a non SpectraView. And that extra money will not provide a fraction of the capabilities outlined.
11. SpectraView PA series offer the ability to calibrate WITHOUT a Colorimeter with the FREE Multiprofiler software since each panel is measured with a very expensive spectroradiometer and that data is embedded in a chip in the panel. It can update the calibration as the unit ages to ensure calibration. Apple has nothing like this.
12. SpectraView can emulate with a single click other behaviors, again on the fly so it can simulate a non wide gamut display (sRGB) among other standardized behaviors (Broadcast Video DICOM, etc)
13. SpectraView has internal electronic control over contrast ratio, Apple and few others provide this. Real useful for soft proofing on media that has differing contrast ratio's (matt vs. glossy papers).
14. SpectraView has Network support (Windows only). Apple doesn't.
15. SpectraView has provisions to lock the display controls so no accidental alteration to behavior by mistake. Apple doesn't.
16. SpectraView displays allow the user to raise and lower the display for best viewing position AND it can be rotated 90 degrees for Portrait. Apple doesn't provide this.
17. Several SpectraView's support Picture in Picture (you can have two differing calibration's per picture). Apple has nothing like this.

[Dan Wells]

As a couple of others have said, what really controls what monitors are available is the availability of panels. You can't get Adobe RGB out of a panel that isn't wide-gamut to begin with, and no amount of backlight and other tweaking is going to get IPS performance out of a TN panel, so photographer-friendly 4k displays can be predicted by looking at what panels they could be based on.

The most common 28" (I've never seen it called a 27") 4k panel is a lower-end panel, it's not wide-gamut, and I don't think it's even IPS (much of the market for cheaper 4k displays is gamers and movie enthusiasts, so IPS isn't necessarily even desirable). It shows up in a variety of monitors in the $500-$700 price range depending on brand... There may even be a couple of different low-end 28" panels around, but I've never sen a wide-gamut, IPS 28" 4k display (doesn't mean that none exist, or that someone won't eventually make such a thing).

 Looking at Newegg's present listing of 4k monitors, there are a whole bunch of under $700 28" options, then one oddball 24" Dell (which is wide gamut and IPS) for $800, then the 32" displays from about $2000 to $3500, at least most of which are wide gamut and IPS. Looking at B&H, there are a couple of other 24" 4k displays from NEC and EIZO, with specs suspiciously close to the Dell (although they may well have better backlights and/or allow more flexible calibration). What doesn't show up either place is a wide-gamut 4k display in the 27-28" range.

 If the rumors of Apple coming out with a 5k 27" iMac are true, then I'd actually expect a relatively high-quality (but probably not wide-gamut, because there's never been a wide-gamut iMac) 5k display in the 27-28" range from several makers before we see a 4k version, simply because everybody else will be able to buy the panel Apple's using (every iMac so far has been a standard panel). Dell is already pre-announcing such a display, although without panel specs.

[eleanorbrown]

Good information Dan.  What about the NEC 27 and 30 high end wide gamut spectraview displays and turning those into 4K?  Thanks. Eleanor

As a couple of others have said, what really controls what monitors are available is the availability of panels. You can't get Adobe RGB out of a panel that isn't wide-gamut to begin with, and no amount of backlight and other tweaking is going to get IPS performance out of a TN panel, so photographer-friendly 4k displays can be predicted by looking at what panels they could be based on.

The most common 28" (I've never seen it called a 27") 4k panel is a lower-end panel, it's not wide-gamut, and I don't think it's even IPS (much of the market for cheaper 4k displays is gamers and movie enthusiasts, so IPS isn't necessarily even desirable). It shows up in a variety of monitors in the $500-$700 price range depending on brand... There may even be a couple of different low-end 28" panels around, but I've never sen a wide-gamut, IPS 28" 4k display (doesn't mean that none exist, or that someone won't eventually make such a thing).

 Looking at Newegg's present listing of 4k monitors, there are a whole bunch of under $700 28" options, then one oddball 24" Dell (which is wide gamut and IPS) for $800, then the 32" displays from about $2000 to $3500, at least most of which are wide gamut and IPS. Looking at B&H, there are a couple of other 24" 4k displays from NEC and EIZO, with specs suspiciously close to the Dell (although they may well have better backlights and/or allow more flexible calibration). What doesn't show up either place is a wide-gamut 4k display in the 27-28" range.

 If the rumors of Apple coming out with a 5k 27" iMac are true, then I'd actually expect a relatively high-quality (but probably not wide-gamut, because there's never been a wide-gamut iMac) 5k display in the 27-28" range from several makers before we see a 4k version, simply because everybody else will be able to buy the panel Apple's using (every iMac so far has been a standard panel). Dell is already pre-announcing such a display, although without panel specs.