An interesting thread over at DPReview asserting that the new 20" and 24" displays are markedly inferior those in their white predecessors. What a shame.
Uhm, was the last gen 20" ips? I don't think he says that it's much more inferior, he says it's hard to calibrate in a light room because the glass makes it hard, which isn't that weird.An interesting thread over at DPReview asserting that the new 20" and 24" displays are markedly inferior those in their white predecessors. What a shame.
I don't think he says that it's much more inferior
...
Then he goes on by saying that the 24" is better but not as good as a 23" ACD.
uwe_r@DPReview said:20" model
For professional (pre-press, wider gamut colour space photo editing, fine art printing, video editing for reverse telecine, etc.) graphics use the 20" is clearly out without using an external display
24" model
Better, but not great and clearly worse than the previous 24" model
Since the 20" are TN you will still have it.Is the general consensus, however, that the 24" iMac is better for photo editing than the 20" or will the typical hobbiest not even notice it?
The one thing that annoys me is the current color shift on my laptop when looking from different angles.
An interesting thread over at DPReview asserting that the new 20" and 24" displays are markedly inferior those in their white predecessors. What a shame.
Is the general consensus, however, that the 24" iMac is better for photo editing than the 20" or will the typical hobbiest not even notice it?
The one thing that annoys me is the current color shift on my laptop when looking from different angles.
This has everything to do with the fact that the iMac's glass screen is not close to the actual LED screen - there's a gap.
The calibrator cannot get an accurate read due to this distance.