Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Eizo or NEC  (Read 82725 times)
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9222



WWW
« Reply #20 on: March 20, 2008, 02:49:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
There's one very good reason to use third-party software, namely calibrating multi-head systems.

And a good reason not to use ColorEyes' excellent product, namely that they aren't talking to me, ever since I said their evaluation module was not necessarily significant.

Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=183050\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Nothing NEC has done stops you from doing this. One could suggest multiple NEC reference displays would be a far better solution (and cost effective when you look at the price difference in the two software products being discussed) than mix and match. But I can see why that's necessary and in fact, I have one NEC, one Apple Cinema, an iMac and a Laptop and I too have to use two solutions. But the facts are clear to my eye, of all the above units, the ONE I go to for the best color appearance is the NEC. Oh, I also have that old Artisan which I can't seem to part with, it too uses a proprietary solution, it doesn't match the NEC (it can't) and it works quite well. That's my last CRT and I suspect it will go away some time soon. The NEC and Artisan are working on the same system FWIW.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
jackbingham
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 206


WWW
« Reply #21 on: March 20, 2008, 02:52:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Actually no I did not agree it is better. I did not say one way or the other what i thought about it. I own one too. You need to stop twisting the point as you always do. The statement was made that Spectraview worked better than the eye One software. My point...............DUH, how could it not. And that's all there is to it.
Logged

Jack Bingham
Integrated Color Corp Makers of Coloreyes Display
Nill Toulme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 741



WWW
« Reply #22 on: March 20, 2008, 03:32:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
... Since no one but NEC can address the internal monitor lut it's a pretty sure bet they'll win every time. So let us not overly guild the lilly. They have prevented a fair comparison for what ever reason good or bad. There is really no way to know if any third party solution might be better.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=183014\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
What prevents a third party solution from addressing the NEC's internal LUTs?

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9222



WWW
« Reply #23 on: March 20, 2008, 03:43:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Actually no I did not agree it is better.


Oh I must have misunderstood this:
Quote
Of course NEC displays work best with Spectraview.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9222



WWW
« Reply #24 on: March 21, 2008, 06:11:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Oh I must have misunderstood this:
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Its an interesting trend, expressed in this post. We're talking about some display technology, in this case the NEC SpectraView and the words "ColorEyes" appears and along comes Jack (he must be searching).

The original post referencing this is:

Quote
PS: I guess I have the impression that the Color Eyes Display Pro software is more powerful and flexible than the SV but am hampered in comparing them by having the former and not the latter.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=182832\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I pointed out I didn't believe that was the case, then Jack comes along with such well behaved digs as:

Quote
Wow, you pull that out of an NEC marketing piece?

I will restate my concerns with proprietary monitor calibration just so we're all clear and Andrew doesn't spin this into money.

Cut the bull would ya.

Actually no I did not agree it is better.

Of course he did agree its better (after being caught, no word which is probably a good thing).

In times where we hear about transparency, it might not at all be obvious to all readers, but Jack (who's user profile and signature is copiously missing info) is in fact associated (owns? Is the president?) of Integrated Color, the MAKERS of ColorEyes:

[a href=\"http://www.integrated-color.com/contact/index.html]http://www.integrated-color.com/contact/index.html[/url]

Oh and Jack, I don't sell any hardware, I've never received a dime from NEC, my user profile is, as far as I'm aware, is pretty transparent although I'm sure you'll find a way to spin this into money....

Now, getting back to the topic.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2008, 06:13:01 PM by digitaldog » Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4915



« Reply #25 on: March 22, 2008, 08:02:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Gentleman (Jack and Andrew),

Please take your private dispute off line.

Thanks,

Michael
Logged
Bart Heirweg
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 24


WWW
« Reply #26 on: March 27, 2008, 03:48:34 AM »
ReplyReply

I have recently bought a Eizo CE210W and I am very happy with it. I had a proffessional calibrating the monitor and the guy was surprised about the results of the monitor. He had never seen an LCD screen with such a good black level and such accurate colors (even before calibration). He was also suprised of the way he was able to fine-tune the colors, allowing very small adjustment increments and therefore making it possible to get the calibration almost spot on.

He told me it was a very good purchase, so I guess the CG241 will be about the same, if not better.
Logged

Visit my website: www.bartheirweg.com
budjames
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 692


WWW
« Reply #27 on: March 27, 2008, 04:26:01 AM »
ReplyReply

I've been using the Eizo ColorEdge CE240W for about a year now attached to my MacPro 8-core (now running Leopard since introduction day). I keep it calibrated using ColorEdge's software and an EyeOne Display2 colorimeter.

I am very happy with the results. The display is very evenly lit and matches the output from my Epson R2400 using epson-supplied paper profiles very well. I also use ImagePrint 7 with their excellent profiles. The end results are stunning.

Now I'm waiting for either Apple to revamp their 30" Cinema display or for Eizo's new 30" ColorEdge display to drop in price (the better choice I think).

Cheers.

Bud James
Logged

Bud James
North Wales, PA
www.budjamesphotography.com
J mandell
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #28 on: April 06, 2008, 02:25:00 PM »
ReplyReply

I'll just observe that what matters to most of us is what's on the market now (or coming very soon), not what might be achieved if a third party software company had access to an NEC developers' kit.
I've been using the  NEC 2690 for two months now. I purchased it bare at first, with no calibration software, and started using it with my Spyder2Pro setup. I was very pleased with the results compared to my two year old Apple 23" display. Colors were more even in their saturation and lulminance, corner to corner. I was pretty pleased.
After reading threads like these for a while, however, I couldn't leave well enough alone, so I bought the Spectraview software and colorimeter (which at the time was on sale).
Well...
The difference is just startling. It's as if I clicked on a neutral gray card and a color cast came off the screen. The colors all just popped where they should pop and receded to neutral where they should be neutral. I've been calibrating digital displays for at least six or seven years now and haven't seen an improvement like this - it's a real breakthrough.
Most important, when I use the display in a color managed workflow that includes soft proofing, I am thrilled with the match between screen and paper. It can't be 100% of course, as transmitted light and reflected light are inherently different. But this is a leap ahead of the Apple/Spyder technology many of us have been using for a long time.
One feature I quite like is the ease of shifting among personally created calibration levels:  I like to use a reduced brightness level for "general" computing - internet browsing, wordprocessing, etc.  For Photoshop and related work, I shift up to a brighter level that I find a little more accurate for critical work at the extremems. Very nice.
Is the Eizo better? I don't know; it's probably as good from what I hear, but their products are much more expensive. On the other hand, if Andrew says the NEC is close enough, I'll take his word for it. I attended one of his "advanced" color management lectures back in the days of Photoshop 5 or 6 (can't remember which) and I know he's got no axe to grind. He's universally recognized as a neutral expert in color management, and he's recommending the less expensive device!
So if you get the NEC, buy the whole package (software and hardware) and relax for the next number of years, till the next breakthrough.
My two cents, as they say.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9222



WWW
« Reply #29 on: April 06, 2008, 02:42:08 PM »
ReplyReply

A lot of us (myself, Karl Lang, Chris Murphy to name a few) would tell you about Eizo if they would send them upon request. They appear to ignore the need to seed people test units. I suspect the photo space is pretty small and not really on their radar. They have bigger fish (the medical industry) to fry. IF the units warrant the additional price, I don't know that Eizo has done much to prove why.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
Ken Rahaim
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 28


WWW
« Reply #30 on: April 06, 2008, 02:42:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The difference is just startling. It's as if I clicked on a neutral gray card and a color cast came off the screen. The colors all just popped where they should pop and receded to neutral where they should be neutral. I've been calibrating digital displays for at least six or seven years now and haven't seen an improvement like this - it's a real breakthrough.
Most important, when I use the display in a color managed workflow that includes soft proofing, I am thrilled with the match between screen and paper. It can't be 100% of course, as transmitted light and reflected light are inherently different. But this is a leap ahead of the Apple/Spyder technology many of us have been using for a long time.

Well said. This pretty much sums up my experience and satisfaction with the 2690WUXi SV.


Quote
Now I'm waiting for either Apple to revamp their 30" Cinema display...

So what's up with Apple? The wide gamut LCDs have been out for well over a year now and their prices have dropped down out of the unobtanium range (certainly at least for pros). Aside from the LED laptop screen, Apple's flat panel product line now seems to be lagging noticeably.
Logged

Ken Rahaim
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4205



« Reply #31 on: April 06, 2008, 02:44:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Well said. This pretty much sums up my experience and satisfaction with the 2690WUXi SV.
So what's up with Apple? The wide gamut LCDs have been out for well over a year now and their prices have dropped down out of the unobtanium range (certainly at least for pros). Aside from the LED laptop screen, Apple's flat panel product line now seems to be lagging noticeably.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=187481\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Apple are going lower and lower in display quality.

As for Eizo,it's now pretty much pick and hope in their product line, some of the models are not that good, some are very good.

Regarding the calibrators for those wide-gamut displays, if using a colorimeter, I think I would prefer to use a bundled instrument -which might be 'tuned', rather than the stock Xrite model.

Edmund
« Last Edit: April 06, 2008, 03:01:09 PM by eronald » Logged
BobDavid
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1086


« Reply #32 on: April 06, 2008, 06:39:54 PM »
ReplyReply

I've been using an Eizo CG211 for a couple of months now. It's expensive. I expect it to last five years. The color and luminance are spot-on accurate. Soft proofing for "pleasing color" is always right on. For soft proofing "accurate color" such as fine art repro, it's about as good as it gets.  Instead of making three or four test prints, I now get by with one or two. I haven't seen a high-end NEC monitor up close, and I guess the 2690WUXi SV is about half of the price of the Eizo. But, if you are using a monitor every day, and it's the nerve center of all post-production decision-making, a thousand dollars isn't really much of a premium.
Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4205



« Reply #33 on: April 07, 2008, 12:15:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I've been using an Eizo CG211 for a couple of months now. It's expensive. I expect it to last five years. The color and luminance are spot-on accurate. Soft proofing for "pleasing color" is always right on. For soft proofing "accurate color" such as fine art repro, it's about as good as it gets.  Instead of making three or four test prints, I now get by with one or two. I haven't seen a high-end NEC monitor up close, and I guess the 2690WUXi SV is about half of the price of the Eizo. But, if you are using a monitor every day, and it's the nerve center of all post-production decision-making, a thousand dollars isn't really much of a premium.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=187517\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, the CG211 is about as good as you can get in the sRGB-gamut range. This is the top of Eizo's most mature product line.

Edmund.
Logged
Hermie
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 207


« Reply #34 on: April 07, 2008, 01:20:49 AM »
ReplyReply

> Regarding the calibrators for those wide-gamut displays, if using a colorimeter, I think I would prefer to use a bundled instrument -which might be 'tuned', rather than the stock Xrite model.

That's one approach. Correct me if I'm wrong, but these 'tuned' colorimeters are generally OEMed versions that include custom calibration/correction matrices.
EIZO (for their CG line AFAIK) and Quato include such custom calibration matrices for each supported (general purpose) measuring device in their software.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2008, 01:23:20 AM by Hermie » Logged
J mandell
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #35 on: April 08, 2008, 01:26:25 AM »
ReplyReply

EIZO (for their CG line AFAIK) and Quato include such custom calibration matrices for each supported (general purpose) measuring device in their software.


That's interesting, but it appears not all brands can be relied on in this regard. For example,  NEC's SpectraView software, which can be purchased separately from its hardware, and which will work fine with many colorimeters out there, specifically warns the user not to rely on the Spyder 2, one of the most popular pieces in the marketplace, when running SV on wide gamut displays.
So if you do use someone else's hardware, at least check with the display manufacturer first, and see if their support folks have any comments about it.
Or just buy the matching hardware and worry about something else.
Logged
Hermie
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 207


« Reply #36 on: April 08, 2008, 02:38:52 AM »
ReplyReply

> but it appears not all brands can be relied on in this regard.

Afaik *only* EIZO and Quato do this.
Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4205



« Reply #37 on: April 08, 2008, 03:08:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Or just buy the matching hardware and worry about something else.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=187853\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I agree, getting the bundle instrument is strongly recommended if you don't own a spectro (not a colorimeter)  already.

The argument militating for colorimeters and against spectros against spectros used to be the shadow noise, now the spikes of some monitor filters are also rumored to be a potential problem.

This is a bit exasperating just now as spectros are coming down in price -ColorMunki- and third party spectro-on-a-chip technology is apearing.

Anyway, I'd advise anybody here who is serious about color to get an i1Pro or ColorMunki spectro. Much more useful than a colorimeter, and still safer against obsolescence.


Edmund
« Last Edit: April 08, 2008, 03:20:22 AM by eronald » Logged
ericstaud
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 384


WWW
« Reply #38 on: April 10, 2008, 10:41:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Well,  I got the LCD2690WUXi-BK and it easily goes down to 100cdm.  The profile looks pretty good compared to my CG19 when profiled with with the i1 pro and Eye-One Match.  Both monitors have a little color banding in gray gradients with the i1 software.  Of course the Eizo looks much nicer with the Color Navigator software.  The gradients become much smoother and more neutral.  I don't have the NEC software, but I expect the same will be true with the 2690 when that software arrives.  I don't work at 100cdm but just wanted to see how low it would go.  The lowest luminance number I got was 50cdm.  The 100cdm profile does not appear to have any problems.  I am a bit surprised at all the reports of this monitor's minimum luminance being 130cdm.

Can anyone tell me how to adjust the Colorcomp level?  It goes from a setting of 1 up to 5 and I can't see what's changing.
Logged
AlanG
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 195



WWW
« Reply #39 on: April 19, 2008, 09:48:57 PM »
ReplyReply

I am new to this forum, but I have pretty extensive digital and color photography and printing experience.

I just got a NEC 2690 with Spectraview II a few days ago.  I'll echo the other reports.  It looks fantastic.  I tried profiling it at 50 cd/m2 and it seemed to be fine.  Although awful dim for my use. So I also don't know why the original poster thought it had to be above 130.  That is around the brightness I use.  Although I bet many of my clients have their monitors set much brighter.

One thing I really like about it is I can use it as an extended gamut monitor for my photo work, and then quickly switch it to sRGB mode for software that isn't color managed.  Right now I'm trying to use the monitor to see how much color I lose (if any) going from Adobe RGB to sRGB on various types of photos. A lot of my clients (even ad agencies) do not understand color management, so I prefer to keep it simple for them and provide sRGB files.

I do wonder how all of this extended gamut stuff will shake out. It seems we are very early in the process.  I can't say that wider than sRGB gamut (93% of Adobe RGB they say) was a major feature for me at this time.  But I am exploring its usefulness.
Logged

Alan Goldstein
Goldsteinphoto website

I have a new fine art project. Please take a look:
Fine art site

Galleries of images at Photoshelter:
Galleries
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad