Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: dell 2405  (Read 50540 times)
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8883


« Reply #40 on: August 01, 2005, 07:50:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
it could be good for PS nuts, too. Just not for people who are particular about equivalent color representation on the display and on print.
Do I sense here that you really want to keep this monitor, Jani  ? If you are at all serious about making prints you know you will have to calibrate the monitor and probably get custom profiles for your printer. I wonder which LCD models use the other 24" Samsung panel with 300 cd/m2 brightness, the LTM240W1?
Logged
tived
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 691


WWW
« Reply #41 on: August 03, 2005, 07:52:20 AM »
ReplyReply

best compromise...is there such a thing?

If you have your workflow calibrated then you should have the best compromise.
So, input devices, viewing devices and output devices and you are set.

Henrik
Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #42 on: August 14, 2005, 01:54:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
no the monitor is too bright, that is the prints are not at all what i see on the monitor (after calibration of course, i use monaco xrite). it is not that the image that i see on the monitor is necessarily too bright, it is just that the print is not at all as bright as the image on the monitor. i dont think it's the calibration device, i have used it before to calibrate other screens with a higher level of success. i dont know what the problem is with this dell, i just can't calibrate it even close enough. very very annoying.
I see what you saying.

The problem is the brightness of the dell. Your eyes get used to looking at it and then when you go to look at a print it appears much darker than expected. Prints are typically darker than what's on screen anyway but using softproof in PS helps compensate for that when comparing a print to what's on screen. If the monitor is too bright however, the softproofed image will not match the print (it'll be too bright). A veiwing booth with an adjustable dimmer might help compensate for the brightness of the Dell by shining more light on the print (if it can get bright enough - I don't have one so I could be mistaken). However, for the cost of one of those you could just buy a new monitor for color-work or return the Dell and get a very nice Eizo.

The only way you'll get around the brightness issue with that monitor is to darken it via the LUTs but that has it's downsides as mentioned.
Logged
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #43 on: August 15, 2005, 01:58:50 AM »
ReplyReply

The better measuring devices have the ability to measure ambient light's luminance and color temp, although not necessarily at the same time as monitor calibration. As Ray said, the best viewing condition is sunlight unless you happen to have a dimmable print viewing booth that you can adjust to exactly match your monitor luminance. Otherwise you just have to be prepared to accept the fact that you can't do sided-by-side monitor/print comparisons.
Logged

Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8883


« Reply #44 on: August 11, 2005, 07:43:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Just browsing Rob Galbraith's site and I notice in this thread that everyone seems very pleased with his Dell 2405 and is able to calibrate it perfectly. Seems to be the best thing since the invention of sliced bread.

Are these people at Galbraith's site just easily pleased, or what?  Huh
Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #45 on: August 12, 2005, 09:48:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
However, such screens are not ideal as computer monitors, unless they have a 'low brightness' mode.

The question is, is the low brightness mode ideal for calibration?
As Jani said, as long as the adjustment effects the brightness of the light and not the LUTs. However, switching between bright and not-so-bright™ modes would require re-calibration each time you switched since you could not possably go back to the  exact same brightness you were at when you first calibrated.
Logged
mct
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #46 on: August 13, 2005, 07:53:01 PM »
ReplyReply

I've been reading this thread with some interest, as like Ray I am need of an update to my hardware setup, and I thought I would start with looking at LCD screens.

The big question with the Dell 24" is whether the brightness control on the monitor is just playing with the numbers coming in, or whether it's actually putting less juice into the backlighting.

If the latter is the case, and providing it doesn't sacrifice 'evenness' in the backlighting, and calibration still works OK, then why shouln't this monitor be quite satisfactory?

-Milt
Logged
abaazov
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173



WWW
« Reply #47 on: August 14, 2005, 10:17:27 PM »
ReplyReply

although you dont need dac or dcc to calibrate a monitor, i am guessing they make monitor calibration easier and/or better. i downloaded the newest drivers for the ati card, which offer dac support, and calibrated again. after about five calibrations, while the printed image is not what i see on the monitor, it is closer than what i had before and the monitor is not as bright. unfortunately the calibration is still far from perfect. i am about ready to give up. oh pixelman where are you now?
Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #48 on: August 15, 2005, 09:02:16 PM »
ReplyReply

abaazov,

You may have mentioned this before but I don't remenber. Do you have any other monitors than the Dell?
Logged
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #49 on: August 15, 2005, 09:42:09 PM »
ReplyReply

2750K means that your ambient light has a strong red/orange cast compared to your monitor, and you should definitely not use that light to do monitor-print comparisons. in order for such comparisons to be meaningful, luminance and color temp need to be as close as possible. Buy a halogen lamp or something.
Logged

Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #50 on: August 16, 2005, 09:39:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Increasing ambient light will solve his problem, at least up to the point where screen and print match reasonably well. Beyond that it will make the screen look washed out, but also not as bright.

And your impression is not correct anyway, note the following:

Quote
this seems to be especially true when i print on premium luster and colorlife photo paper (epson). on those two papers the print is remarkably similar to what i see on screen when i view them in daylight.
Logged

jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1604



WWW
« Reply #51 on: July 28, 2005, 09:37:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
yes ray i have calibrated it using the dvi input, and yes it is really a very good monitor. it might be just a little too bright, but it is otherwise a great performer. i used monaco optix xr. for photoshop i think it is excellent, and as for the price, i believe you can even get it cheaper than 1000$ us now....i have even seen it for around 800$!!
but i have a technical question that maybe you can answer. when i calibrate the monitor using the dvi input, i dont have any contrast control for calibration. can you explain to me why that is?

amnon
According to my technical sources (people, not web pages*), this is because you control the contrast through the DVI interface.

If you have an ATI card, the catalyst control panel's advanced mode provides you with a slider to adjust both brightness and contrast, use those. nVIDIA's drivers should provide similar features.

I ordered the same model on June 24th, and my sample arrived yesterday. It's huge, but consider that praise.

Now to borrow that calibration gadget to improve on the image! :cool:


* ... but if you must a link to some blabbering on the issue ...
Logged

Jan
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8883


« Reply #52 on: July 31, 2005, 07:44:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Quote
I'm not only inclined to agree with Daniel's assessment that this monitor is unsuitable for color critical use, I also think that it needs special circumstances to be a good monitor. All of this could probably be avoided if Dell had only allowed for a lower background lighting level, but perhaps that exposes other weaknesses in the panel.

Jani,
It seems there's a push towards greater brightness and contrast ratio in LCD displays to make them more suitable as TVs. I guess the Dell 2405 would be an attractive proposition for those who want their monitor to double as a TV set and who are not into critical color/graphics applications.

It's interesting that many big screen CRT monitors (20-22") such as LaCie Electron22blue now feature a 'high brightness' option to make them more suitable for watching video. Don't know if LCD technology inherently makes such an arrangement impossible, but as LCD displays compete in the TV market such an option would be very desirable.
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8883


« Reply #53 on: July 31, 2005, 11:23:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Just for clarification if needed: The monitor is not displaying a 10-bit/channel image. It's just using the 10-bits of data to allow for some digital adjustments without sacrificing image quality. The final image is converted to a 8-bit/channel image before it's displayed.
Okay! Gottcha! But the bottom line is, if the Dell 2405 had 10 bit processing with all else the same, you'd be able to get better calibration. Yes?
Logged
abaazov
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173



WWW
« Reply #54 on: August 02, 2005, 10:01:30 PM »
ReplyReply

what is the best compromise, if there is such a thing, with a calibrated monitor that is still too bright? is there some way to "fix" the problem without getting rid of the monitor? do i have to do a printer calibration? are there any other options?
Logged
jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1604



WWW
« Reply #55 on: August 04, 2005, 04:43:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The Blue-Eye is nothing more than the original Eye-One (not the Eye-One 2) and according to DryCreek the Eye-One 2 will turn out better calibration results.
Are you sure that you're not confusing this with the old Blue-Eye?

There is a Blue-Eye 2 now, and the test is of the "Blue-Eye 1.0.3".

The Blue-Eye Pro is relatively new (January this year), and seems to be based off either the Blue-Eye 2 or something else.
Logged

Jan
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8883


« Reply #56 on: August 12, 2005, 03:32:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
On a side note, I noticed there are alot of comments by people impressed by the monitors brightness. This just proved my theory of how people are drawn to shiny things.
Well, it's true. People are dawn to shiny things. That's why chromium plated bumper bars and tail fins are (were) so popular on American automobiles.

But the fact is, if you're watching TV in a normally lit room, in daytime, you need a high brightness, high contrast ratio, TV set.

The move is now on to create acceptable LCD TV sets with sufficient brightness to be impressive even in daylight from a distance..

However, such screens are not ideal as computer monitors, unless they have a 'low brightness' mode.

The question is, is the low brightness mode ideal for calibration?
Logged
abaazov
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173



WWW
« Reply #57 on: August 12, 2005, 10:17:34 AM »
ReplyReply

ok, but it wont do anything to help me with the calibration problem, i.e. after calibrating the monitor the prints are too bright. or will it?
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8883


« Reply #58 on: August 15, 2005, 02:37:56 AM »
ReplyReply

You've probably tried this already, but in case you haven't, is it possible to tilt your screen in such a way that the image darkens?
Logged
abaazov
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173



WWW
« Reply #59 on: August 15, 2005, 09:17:24 PM »
ReplyReply

yes daniel i do, the dell is connected to the dvi and i have a samsung 913v connected to the vga. while the dell is brighter than the samsung (both calibrated) the color rendition is still truer on the dell. i think ray and jonathan hit the nail on the head: as well as i can calibrate it, the images that are printed out are best viewed in daylight, where the colors jump out more, and the print doesnt look so dark. this seems to be especially true when i print on premium luster and colorlife photo paper (epson). on those two papers the print is remarkably similar to what i see on screen when i view them in daylight. however with the enhanced matte and the velvet fine art even in daylight there is still not as much "life" in the pictures as there seems to be on the screen. as for my printing procedure i believe i am doing everything right. th eonly thing i dont do yet is softproofing, and i am now going to read more about it and how to do it and practice that a bit. i need a break from calibrating this monitor...hopefully softproofing is easier to learn and apply!!
thanks again guys...
amnon
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad