Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: LCD Monitor Recommendations  (Read 439009 times)
abaazov
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173



WWW
« Reply #80 on: April 18, 2006, 09:20:06 AM »
ReplyReply

FWIW, my syncmaster 243t has been incredible. i won't say it's perfect, but i do know for price/perfromance it can't be beat. calibration-friendly, easy-to-use, and it looks good too. most importantly, it helps me tremendously in getting the prints i want.

amnon
Logged
jlmwyo
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 78


« Reply #81 on: April 18, 2006, 03:55:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
FWIW, my syncmaster 243t has been incredible. i won't say it's perfect, but i do know for price/perfromance it can't be beat. calibration-friendly, easy-to-use, and it looks good too. most importantly, it helps me tremendously in getting the prints i want.

amnon
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=62935\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

What are you calibrating with?
Logged

Images of Wyoming

Link To My Gallery

abaazov
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173



WWW
« Reply #82 on: April 20, 2006, 10:12:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
What are you calibrating with?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=62985\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
monaco optix xr

amnon
Logged
infraredca
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


WWW
« Reply #83 on: April 23, 2006, 02:44:50 AM »
ReplyReply

In a darkened room I can see a difference between a black level of 0 and 2.
[/quote]


What value are you setting your white point too?
Logged
jlmwyo
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 78


« Reply #84 on: April 23, 2006, 04:31:20 PM »
ReplyReply

95cd
Logged

Images of Wyoming

Link To My Gallery

bwpuk
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 50


WWW
« Reply #85 on: April 26, 2006, 11:30:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Does anyone have any user experience of the Samsung 913N monitor. Any issues for colour calibration etc. Any information gratefully received !

Barrie
Logged

abaazov
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173



WWW
« Reply #86 on: April 26, 2006, 11:52:20 AM »
ReplyReply

i have used the 913v (i dont know what the difference is between the 913n and the 913v). i would say it is not a monitor to use for any serious image manipulation. i have had a hard time calibrating it (monaco xr). the image on the screen is almost always too bright, forget about black and white work, very difficult to get black gradation.
it is a good secondary monitor (it has been that for me for almost 3years with never any technical problem) but i do not use it anymore for photo work. i now use the samsung syncmaster 243t, the difference is night and day.

amnon
Logged
Nill Toulme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 741



WWW
« Reply #87 on: April 28, 2006, 01:46:10 PM »
ReplyReply

I took delivery last week on a new NEC 2090uxi.  So far I'm very happy with it.  It calibrates very easily to 100 cd/m using my Eye One Display 2.  And in an online chat I just did with NEC support, I was told that a new version of Spectraview II that will provide direct hardware calibration on all three of the new xx90 models is expected next month.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
« Last Edit: April 28, 2006, 01:48:12 PM by Nill Toulme » Logged
dbk123
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 25


« Reply #88 on: April 30, 2006, 07:11:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Nill,

Do you by chance know the size and resolution of the new NEC models?  I am hoping for a 24" panel with 1900x1200 resolution.

Thanks.

-Dave
Logged
Nill Toulme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 741



WWW
« Reply #89 on: April 30, 2006, 07:37:22 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't see one like that in their listings.  The color managed ones are the 1990, 2090 and 2190, all 3:4.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
Logged
burtonburton
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #90 on: May 01, 2006, 07:34:49 AM »
ReplyReply

I recently bought the NEC 1990sxi and I must say I am very happy with it. It is a pleasant tool to do picture editing work on. I do not have a calibration tool as yet, buy already the colors and greys look pretty accurate. The backlight of this copy is very even (however, the first copy I received was returned because of backlight bleeding...)
Logged
LyubinVadim
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #91 on: September 25, 2006, 07:04:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I am in the market for a good LCD monitor. I use a Macintosh G4 computer and would like your opinions on who makes an accurate LCD monitor. I've looked at  the Apple 20" monitors, but wonder are there others in the same price range that are better. The Apple has a contrast range of 1: 400 and I see others that have higher contrast ranges.  I would really appreciate your input. I would like to work in a price range of $800.00 US or less. I require color accuracy and readable type. I will be using this for my professional photography business.

Thank you
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

View Sonic LCD Monitor has really fine specs. I use it for almost everything. For me 19 inches and 2 ms of VX922 was a perfect offer, suitable enough to play my favorite games. I enjoy it. Although working with graphics I prefer to use my old good CRT monitor  because of more vivid and live colors. So it's a good choice on my mind.
...And a price is good for what you get. At least it seems to me so, maybe because I've got my monitor [a href=\"http://search.stores.ebay.com/Costupdate_viewsonic-lcd-monitor-projector-processor-box-crt-tv_W0QQfcdZ2QQfciZ4QQfclZ4QQfromZR10QQfsnZCostupdateQQfsooZ2QQfsopZ2QQftsZ2QQrefidZstoreQQsaselZ3743435QQsatitleZviewsonicQ20lcdQ20monitorQ20Q2dQ28projectorQ2cQ20processorQ20boxQ2cQ20crtQ2cQ20tvQ29QQsofpZ0]on costupdate store on eBay.[/url]
Logged
stephen23
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


« Reply #92 on: November 25, 2006, 01:06:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Hey everyone... I'm new to this forum, and recently got back into photography once I could afford the equipment again!

This has been a very useful thread to read, though it's also interesting to read it as one continuing conversation when in fact its been going on since 2004. Obviously the changes that people were talking about in the early posts, how LCD technology was going to make a major breakthrough in the next year or two, and it might not be worth spending the money on a very high end monitor haven't been as dramatic as were expected. Monitor prices have come down dramatically, of course, but it seems its the same companies (NEC, Apple, Lacie) being discussed all the way through.

Anyway, I'm looking at monitors to add to my mac laptop and eventually buy a desktop system. I do a lot of work with very large images, and was looking at picking up the Mac 23" CD, but after reading the last few posts on here, it seems like there may be some issues with getting accurate color on it. I'm going to look into the NEC displays, since everyone seems very excited about those, but I'm wondering why the Eizo displays don't seem to get much mention here. The searches I've done for high end color monitors all seem to point to Eizo, and while they are expensive, their low and mid range screens don't seem out of line with the mac CD's.

With that in mind, I'm taking a look at the Eizo S2110 - 21" Widescreen display... its a bit smaller than I'd like, but I'm wondering if the color accuracy is superior enough to make it worth it (eessentially the same price as the Apple 23"). I'm interested in getting feedback on this... to make it clear, here are my priorities:

Price - $1000 or less.
Color accuracy
Screen size (widescreen 1680 x 1050 minimum)

Maybe I am just overreading some of the posts here, and in the larger context of monitors the apple 23"'s are still a cut above, but some of those posts make it sound like any real photographer wouldn't touch one. I don't profess to be at a professional level, but I expect I will get more serious about it over the next couple years, and I'd prefer to buy something that I'm not going to be unhappy with when I am trying to do very accurate color reproduction.

Also... one last question... what are the recommendations on buying a calibrator? Is there a brand that works particular well with mac's, or are they pretty much all the same in that respect?

Thanks!
Logged
Nill Toulme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 741



WWW
« Reply #93 on: November 25, 2006, 01:56:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Well if you can live with standard aspect ratio 1600x1200 instead of widescreen, the NEC 2090uxi fits your bill perfectly.  It's what I have, and I could hardly be happier with it.

And to update the old info upthread, NEC does have 24" and 26" widescreen versions slated to come out next month, but I think they'll be about 50% above your price point.

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

Posts: 690


WWW
« Reply #94 on: November 25, 2006, 05:33:16 PM »
ReplyReply

I've been using a Formac 2010 Gallery display (1600 x 1200) for the past few years. It's awesome, however, I just ordered the Dell Ultrasharp 2407WFP.  I just could not justify spending $1,600+ on an Eizo CE240W for photography hobby.

The Quadra FX1400 video card in my Dell Precision 470 dual Xeon processor workstation has dual DVI outputs and will drive both monitors to their native resolutions.

It should be fun having the extra screen "real estate" to use.

If the Ultrasharp works out, I'll probably buy a 2nd one for my Dell workstation and use the Formac attached to my Dell Latitude laptop docking station.

Cheers.

Bud James
North Wales, PA
Logged

Bud James
North Wales, PA
www.budjamesphotography.com
stephen23
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


« Reply #95 on: November 25, 2006, 06:07:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks...

Nill, I looked at the NEC's and everyone seems to love them, but a widescreen format is closer to the files created by my camera (Nikon D80 with a sweet 18 - 200 lens) and would let me take the best advantage of the screen real estate that I do have. In fact, that's one of the reasons I was looking at the 23" apple... its native format is almost exactly half of the cameras files, which would let me fill the screen with an image and see it almost pixel for pixel (well 1 pixel - .5 pixels). So... no widescreen isn't a dealbreaker, but I'd prefer to have a pretty good widescreen 23" to an excellent 21" standard format. Color accuracy is a big deal, but fundamentally, you're always going to be tweaking the prints.

As far as the Dell monitors go... never again. Last year I had a heavy duty G5 desktop set up that I was using to edit a film, and thinking that the Dell widescreens seemed like such a good deal (with the coupons available, etc), I bought one. I hooked it up and was appalled... there was backlight bleed around the entire outer edge. Not a small amount either... it was out of control. Thinking that I must have gotten a bad one, I packed it up and shipped it back for a replacement, and three days (luckily, I am Austin, or it would have taken even longer) later went through exactly the same thing again. I sent it back and got a refund and walked into the local Best Buy later that day and picked up a Samsung monitor at nearly half the price that was far superior. I really don't know how anyone can recommend Dell with a straight face, given my experience.

Anyway, now I need a higher level of color accuracy, or I'd just go pick up another Samsung.

Stephen
Logged
zpike
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #96 on: November 25, 2006, 06:12:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Samsung 214T. Better screen to print matching than my old Sony G520. Price is right too!
Logged
Nill Toulme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 741



WWW
« Reply #97 on: November 25, 2006, 09:31:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
...but a widescreen format is closer to the files created by my camera (Nikon D80 with a sweet 18 - 200 lens) and would let me take the best advantage of the screen real estate that I do have. In fact, that's one of the reasons I was looking at the 23" apple... its native format is almost exactly half of the cameras files, which would let me fill the screen with an image and see it almost pixel for pixel (well 1 pixel - .5 pixels). So... no widescreen isn't a dealbreaker, but I'd prefer to have a pretty good widescreen 23" to an excellent 21" standard format. ...
Well OK, but be careful about letting the tail wag the dog.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
Logged
georgek
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 110


WWW
« Reply #98 on: November 26, 2006, 07:11:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Nill,

We've got the same monitor and I was wondering what method you use to calibrate it. I use the hardware calibration and despite all my efforts the min black is around 50-55cd/m2 and max white around 150-160cd/m2. Is that OK or should I go back to software calibration?

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

Regards
George
Logged

Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #99 on: November 26, 2006, 07:32:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I use the hardware calibration and despite all my efforts the min black is around 50-55cd/m2 and max white around 150-160cd/m2. Is that OK or should I go back to software calibration?

Either your hardware is broken, or you are doing something seriously wrong. What calibration hardware/software are you using, and have you gotten rid of Adobe Gamma?
Logged

Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad