Monitor recommendation for editing?

[StevnJ9971]

Hey all,

I was wondering if anyone had a recommendation for a decent monitor (around 22"-24") that accurately represents color for editing. Right now I'm using a 13" Macbook and an LG 24" monitor, but the monitor really oversaturates reds, so it just doesn't work.

Please keep in mind that I do calibrate both my Macbook and editing monitor, so I'm really just looking for a good quality monitor that doesn't oversaturate anything and can be accurate once calibrated.

I've heard that Dell makes some pretty good ones, and of course the Apple Cinema Displays are great, but is there anything in the $200-300 range?

Thanks in advance

 

[gatepc]

SImply put NO there is nothing your going to find for any less then 800 dollars thats going to be any better then you have now. The reason the cinema display cost so much is because it uses a display technology called IPS which is the ONLY display technology that will represent all the colors in an image and the Only one that does it accurately. These types of panels are about 3-4times more expensive then the more commonly used low end panels which use TN which is un acceptable for color accuracy these types of panels only display about half 16million colors and "fake" the rest of the colors. I won't get too technical but simply put if you want a good panel be ready to shell out at least 800 dollars. Don't waste your time buying a panel unless you are 100% sure that it is a IPS S-IPS or another variant of IPS.

 

[OreoCookie]

I've heard that Dell makes some pretty good ones, and of course the Apple Cinema Displays are great, but is there anything in the $200-300 range?

No.
Reason is that you would want a screen with a non-TN panel. Cheap lcds almost exclusively have a TN panel. Non-TN panel lcds are more expensive than that, you would have to spend at least $500 to get a decent monitor. Plus hardware calibration tool (another $70+).

Why are you saying your monitor oversaturates? Compared to what? If it is hardware calibrated, you should get an accurate representation of the picture. If you compare it to your MacBook's screen (or any laptop screen), it will have a much, much larger gamut (range of displayable colors). You can actually see the gamut in ColorSync Utility if you have hardware calibrated them. That's also the `problem' with glossy displays: they simply have less stuff in between the actual panel and the eye. The reduced pop of matte screens comes from compensator foils that absorb some of the light, thereby reducing brightness and contrast.

 

[Phrasikleia]

The Dell 2209WA was a good thing while it lasted. It was the only 22" IPS display that sold for about $300--an absolute anomaly. Apparently it sold too well, and now there are no more to be found. I would like to get a second one, but they're hard to find. eBay seems to be the only source right now.

 

[Ruahrc]

Right, I think the only real "upgrade" you could do to your monitor would be to upgrade to an IPS panel. The Dell 2209WA is/was the lowest priced IPS available. I have not been following closely the availability of the monitor anymore but word has it that they are simply massively backordered and thus after a bit of waiting it is possible to get them. Dell is just waiting on LG to produce more panels. Again though, this is only what I have anecdotally heard. Do a little looking and see what you can find about its availability.

However, even recent TN panels should have a sufficient color gamut (covering most or all of the sRGB colorspace) and thus if you're properly calibrating your images it might be just that your images are overly saturated and need to be toned down a little? Are you getting mismatch between photos on screen and in print? The IPS panel is nicer but really only because it handles gradations better and does not have the viewing angle dependence like TN panels do. The color gamut is going to be basically the same between the two.

Ruahrc

 

[toxic]

^ color gamut is not the same between IPS/PVA and TN. TN is about 70-75% of Adobe RGB, PVA/IPS typically covers 90-100%+. though of course that doesn't matter if the OP works exclusively in sRGB...

OP: maybe you can find some used PVA panels? or maybe read up on this e-IPS I just discovered... apparently the Dell 2209WA is e-IPS.

and I would avoid glossy panels, if those exist for non-TN.

 

[JFreak]

Don't waste your time buying a panel unless you are 100% sure that it is a IPS S-IPS or another variant of IPS.

+1

 

[OreoCookie]

^ color gamut is not the same between IPS/PVA and TN. TN is about 70-75% of Adobe RGB, PVA/IPS typically covers 90-100%+. though of course that doesn't matter if the OP works exclusively in sRGB...

There are TN panels that cover ~100 % of Adobe RGB, but that doesn't change the fact that the hues of the colors depend very much on the viewing angle. I find this angle-dependence particularly serious for skin tones: I try to avoid fixing skin tones on my ProBook's internal screen just for that reason.

 

[Ruahrc]

^ color gamut is not the same between IPS/PVA and TN. TN is about 70-75% of Adobe RGB, PVA/IPS typically covers 90-100%+. though of course that doesn't matter if the OP works exclusively in sRGB...

OP: maybe you can find some used PVA panels? or maybe read up on this e-IPS I just discovered... apparently the Dell 2209WA is e-IPS.

and I would avoid glossy panels, if those exist for non-TN.

Color gamut does not depend on the panel type at all. It depends on the backlight, because all the panel is doing is filtering out the backlight to get the desired color. It happens that on many high end IPS panels they include a high quality wide-gamut backlight but there are also IPS panels that have so called "standard" gamut (~sRGB) for example the Dell 2209WA and the gamut of those panels will match the gamut of modern TN panels.

If photography comprises a large part of the work you do on the computer, it is IMO well worth the money to invest in an IPS panel. Heck after using IPS I don't think I could ever go back to TN, although I have found the MBP 13" screen to be quite good. Large screen sizes don't work well with TN though because due to their large size you can't avoid viewing angle issues.

Ruahrc

 

[toxic]

Color gamut does not depend on the panel type at all. It depends on the backlight, because all the panel is doing is filtering out the backlight to get the desired color. It happens that on many high end IPS panels they include a high quality wide-gamut backlight but there are also IPS panels that have so called "standard" gamut (~sRGB) for example the Dell 2209WA and the gamut of those panels will match the gamut of modern TN panels.

hm. thanks for the clarification.

 

[JFreak]

Color gamut does not depend on the panel type at all. It depends on the backlight, because all the panel is doing is filtering out the backlight to get the desired color. It happens that on many high end IPS panels they include a high quality wide-gamut backlight but there are also IPS panels that have so called "standard" gamut (~sRGB) for example the Dell 2209WA and the gamut of those panels will match the gamut of modern TN panels.

If photography comprises a large part of the work you do on the computer, it is IMO well worth the money to invest in an IPS panel. Heck after using IPS I don't think I could ever go back to TN, although I have found the MBP 13" screen to be quite good. Large screen sizes don't work well with TN though because due to their large size you can't avoid viewing angle issues.

Ruahrc

This has nothing to do with the fact that IPS panels work with 8 bit colors (per channel that is), whereas TN panels work with 6 bits and dither the rest. There's the inaccuracy and the sole reason why IPS panels are superior in photo editing.

Sure, backlight affects to the system, but as long as it outputs "pure white", iow proper white point when the panel is transparent, it's all okay and the color gamut depends solely on the panel. Things are bad if the panel has to compensate for the backlight colour inaccuracy, so "good enough" backlight is pretty much assumpted.

 

[Phrasikleia]

This has nothing to do with the fact that IPS panels work with 8 bit colors (per channel that is), whereas TN panels work with 6 bits and dither the rest. There's the inaccuracy and the sole reason why IPS panels are superior in photo editing.

Sure, backlight affects to the system, but as long as it outputs "pure white", iow proper white point when the panel is transparent, it's all okay and the color gamut depends solely on the panel. Things are bad if the panel has to compensate for the backlight colour inaccuracy, so "good enough" backlight is pretty much assumpted.

"Assumpted"??

So what you're saying is that the backlight is a minor consideration and that most IPS panels, regardless of backlight, will display a color gamut superior to those displayed by TN panels?

 

[macgrl]

SImply put NO there is nothing your going to find for any less then 800 dollars thats going to be any better then you have now. The reason the cinema display cost so much is because it uses a display technology called IPS which is the ONLY display technology that will represent all the colors in an image and the Only one that does it accurately. These types of panels are about 3-4times more expensive then the more commonly used low end panels which use TN which is un acceptable for color accuracy these types of panels only display about half 16million colors and "fake" the rest of the colors. I won't get too technical but simply put if you want a good panel be ready to shell out at least 800 dollars. Don't waste your time buying a panel unless you are 100% sure that it is a IPS S-IPS or another variant of IPS.

Would an apple external display meet this criteria?

 

[jerryrock]

Backlight is key to wide gamut color reproduction. Monitors backlit by RGB LEDs have the widest, most accurate color of the bunch. I have been using the HP DreamColor 24" monitor (LP2480zx) for about 8 months now and it far exceeds anything I have ever used before. It is capable of displaying and calibrating 7 distinct color spaces including 100% Adobe RGB and sRGB and can switch between the 2 at the push of a button. Accurate color representation should be of ultimate importance to any serious photographer. We pay thousands of dollars for our camera gear and computers, yet want to buy the cheapest monitor we can find. This is often the weakest link in the color management chain.

http://h71028.www7.hp.com/Hpsub/cache/596803-0-0-225-121.html

 

[TheStrudel]

About the cheapest monitor even approaching that price range which will be adequate for this kind of work is the Dell Ultrasharp 2408 (PVA panel). It's not amazing, but it's only $400.

Jerryrock, would you mind posting some more about your experience with the Dreamcolor? Been wondering how well it works on a Mac, and I'm considering getting one at some point in the future.

 

[OreoCookie]

Sure, backlight affects to the system, but as long as it outputs "pure white", iow proper white point when the panel is transparent, it's all okay and the color gamut depends solely on the panel.

That's incorrect: the backlight does have an effect on the gamut. White ≠*white. If the emitted light from the backlight covers a broader spectrum with higher intensity, the panel has a broader spectrum to work with. LED backlights, for instance, often lead to a larger gamut.

 

[Ruahrc]

This has nothing to do with the fact that IPS panels work with 8 bit colors (per channel that is), whereas TN panels work with 6 bits and dither the rest. There's the inaccuracy and the sole reason why IPS panels are superior in photo editing.

Sure, backlight affects to the system, but as long as it outputs "pure white", iow proper white point when the panel is transparent, it's all okay and the color gamut depends solely on the panel. Things are bad if the panel has to compensate for the backlight colour inaccuracy, so "good enough" backlight is pretty much assumpted.

This is completely untrue. I hate to cite Wikipedia but it provides a concise description of the concept.

Liquid crystal display (LCD) screens filter the light emitted by a backlight. The gamut of an LCD screen is therefore limited to the emitted spectrum of the backlight. Typical LCD screens use cold-cathode fluorescent bulbs (CCFL's) for backlights. LCD Screens with certain LED or wide-gamut CCFL backlights yield a more comprehensive gamut than CRTs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamut#Comparison_of_various_systems

8 bits of 6 bits is one reason why IPS is preferrable for photo editing, but it has nothing to do with gamut. IMO another (huge) advantage is the fact that IPS panels have a far superior viewing angle stability vs. TN panels. Sitting my laptop next to my external (IPS) display I can get the pictures to match exactly but if I tilt the LCD screen back and forth it will be brighter/darker. With a large TN panel you cannot practically sit far enough away from the screen and not see these viewing angle differences even without moving your head (the bottom of the screen will look different from the top) This is IMO the main reason to get IPS over TN. 6-bits vs. 8-bits will only show up in areas of mild color gradation and even then it is pretty subtle, but the superior viewing angle is what is going to give you a consistent picture every time and your pictures aren't going to be brighter/darker depending on the day you edit photos because you happened to be sitting up straighter, etc.

Ruahrc