Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Second display recommendation: size/brand  (Read 1538 times)
jonathan.lipkin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 148



« on: January 25, 2013, 08:55:47 PM »
ReplyReply

I am interested in getting a second display, mostly for PS to put my tools on, but I'm sure other uses will suggest themselves. I currently have two 26" monitors, but one is a hot swap from NEC and I have to return it soon.

Does the quality of the second display matter much, or can I just get a low-end NEC? BH is selling an accu-sync for $125, but the higher quality 19" monitors are significantly more.

How about size? 26" seems too big - I have to crane my neck too far to see any palettes way to the side of the second display. Is 19" big enough?
« Last Edit: January 25, 2013, 08:57:53 PM by jonathan.lipkin » Logged
Peter McLennan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1695


« Reply #1 on: January 25, 2013, 10:59:57 PM »
ReplyReply

I have to crane my neck too far to see any palettes way to the side of the second display. Is 19" big enough?

I use an ancient Dell Ultrasharp 19" for my palettes monitor.  Works fine.  You're right about "craning your neck".  It's a substantial head move from my 27"  image monitor to the Dell.   The only thing I needed to get used to was the differing screen resolutions.  I run 2560X1400 on the image monitor and 1280X1024 on the palettes monitor.

There are plenty of "good enough" monitors in the $100 range, IMHO.
Logged
D Fosse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 345



« Reply #2 on: January 26, 2013, 02:58:18 AM »
ReplyReply

mostly for PS to put my tools on

Put PS itself on the second monitor, and drag an image back to the first. All subsequent images will open there. Then you have the whole application out of the way.

If at some point you pick up Lightroom, however, a two monitor setup is only useful if the two monitors display identically (or close enough), since you'll have images on both.

Personally I think two 16:10 screens side by side borders on visually unmanageable. Flipping them into portrait is no better. Two 16:9 is entirely out of the question - too much eye and neck movement, killing concentration, in short counter-productive. I suspect the best all around compromise is one big 16:9.
Logged
darlingm
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 349


WWW
« Reply #3 on: January 26, 2013, 09:24:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Definitely depends on what you're needing to do with it.  I need to be able to convert proper color managed images into sRGB web images, and be able to print for photographers that don't use proper color management, and at least have the print somewhere in the realm of what they were expecting.  I run three monitors, one of which is just a regular consumer monitor that I don't calibrate or profile.  I've found it quite useful to be able to see colors as most people would see them digitally.  There's obviously a huge amount of variance here, so I'm not seeing them exactly like anyone else, but it's at least more in the realm than my wide gamut calibrated and profiled displays.
Logged

Mike • Westland Printworks
Fine Art Printing • Amazing Artwork Reproduction • Photography
http://www.westlandprintworks.com • (734) 255-9761
jonathan.lipkin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 148



« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2013, 09:56:09 PM »
ReplyReply

I need to be able to convert proper color managed images into sRGB web images, and be able to print for photographers that don't use proper color management, and at least have the print somewhere in the realm of what they were expecting.  I run three monitors, one of which is just a regular consumer monitor that I don't calibrate or profile.  I've found it quite useful to be able to see colors as most people would see them digitally.  There's obviously a huge amount of variance here, so I'm not seeing them exactly like anyone else, but it's at least more in the realm than my wide gamut calibrated and profiled displays.
Fascinating. Personally, I just need a place to put some palettes. When I use LR, I find a single monitor to be sufficient, D Fosse. I'm not doing the amount of retouching and for some reason, just never felt the need to have a second screen.

Thanks again for the advice.
Logged
D Fosse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 345



« Reply #5 on: January 27, 2013, 03:56:52 AM »
ReplyReply

I need to be able to convert proper color managed images into sRGB web images

What you need for that - if your main monitor is wide gamut - is Firefox with color management set to mode 1. It will then assign sRGB to all untagged material, including webpage elements and indeed the whole interface, and properly convert that to your monitor profile.

How people then set up their systems is their problem. You've delivered on your end. I don't see why a deliberately lousy monitor will help make things any clearer...
Logged
dmerger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 686


« Reply #6 on: January 27, 2013, 10:34:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Jonathan, I use a 27” NEC and a 23” Asus.  I use only my NEC with LR, since I didn’t like the way LR used two monitors. With PS, I open it on my Asus and then drag my photos to my NEC.  (Depending on your system, color management may be a little tricky with that set up.)  The only slight glitch with different size monitors is moving your mouse pointer between the two.  On mine, my mouse won’t move across from the bottom part of my NEC.  I’ve got used to it, but you need to be aware. 

I got my Asus recently from Newegg.  I just picked one of their most highly rated (by customers) monitors.  I think it was about $150, and does what you’d expect. (Oops, I remember that I actually bought my monitor from B&H, but chose it based on the Newegg rating.)
Logged

Dean Erger
jonathan.lipkin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 148



« Reply #7 on: January 27, 2013, 11:08:14 AM »
ReplyReply


I got my Asus recently from Newegg.  I just picked one of their most highly rated (by customers) monitors.  I think it was about $150, and does what you’d expect. (Oops, I remember that I actually bought my monitor from B&H, but chose it based on the Newegg rating.)


Thanks, just did the same.
Logged
darlingm
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 349


WWW
« Reply #8 on: January 27, 2013, 08:23:31 PM »
ReplyReply

What you need for that - if your main monitor is wide gamut - is Firefox with color management set to mode 1. It will then assign sRGB to all untagged material, including webpage elements and indeed the whole interface, and properly convert that to your monitor profile.

How people then set up their systems is their problem. You've delivered on your end. I don't see why a deliberately lousy monitor will help make things any clearer...

I agree that's a better setting.  Not sure why Firefox defaults to mode 2.  But, the need I mentioned is to be able to occasionally view files like those with traditional non-managed monitors do.  There's no way to do that precisely, of course, but viewing it on a traditional monitor will at least be closer than on my calibrated/profiled wide gamut monitor.  I need to be able to give an image to those clients that don't color manage, and I can at least prepare a file that will look better on the average monitor on my end.  I need to also be able to give clients images they can put on their website, and sadly almost no visitors have a color managed browser, so I look at it and say the web is so broken that it's better to create an image that will look decent to most, rather than an accurate and color managed image that won't look good to most visitors.

. . .The only slight glitch with different size monitors is moving your mouse pointer between the two.  On mine, my mouse won’t move across from the bottom part of my NEC. . .

Probably a slight difference in the vertical resolution, like 1920x1080 and 1680x1050.  FYI, when this happens, you can typically change how the monitors line up.  I think it's in versions previous, but in Windows 7 display screen resolution, you can drag the thumbnail for one of the monitors slightly to change whether they line up on the top or bottom.
Logged

Mike • Westland Printworks
Fine Art Printing • Amazing Artwork Reproduction • Photography
http://www.westlandprintworks.com • (734) 255-9761
dmerger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 686


« Reply #9 on: January 27, 2013, 10:35:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Probably a slight difference in the vertical resolution, like 1920x1080 and 1680x1050.  FYI, when this happens, you can typically change how the monitors line up.  I think it's in versions previous, but in Windows 7 display screen resolution, you can drag the thumbnail for one of the monitors slightly to change whether they line up on the top or bottom.

I my case 2560x1440 and 1920x1080.  I didn't know about lining up my monitors, but my NVIDIA Control Panel allows me to do so.  I now have my smaller monitor centered with respect to my larger monitor.  There is still a rather large area at the top and bottom of my NEC where I can't cross over, but I think I'll like it better than before.  Thanks for the very helpful tip.
Logged

Dean Erger
jerryrock
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568



WWW
« Reply #10 on: January 27, 2013, 11:18:31 PM »
ReplyReply

I use the 24" HP Dreamcolor monitor LP2480zx with a Wacom Cintiq 20WSX, both displaying a resolution of 1600 x 1000. Although this is not the highest resolution available for each monitor, it is a resolution they both have in common. I use a vertical monitor arrangement with the Cintiq positioned at a 45 degree angle to the desktop. I have found this to be the best all around workstation for my image editing and graphic design.
Logged

Gerald J Skrocki
skrockidesign.com
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad