Which will give me better accuracy

[HiSpec]

I am currently in the process of putting a new computer (PC)together. I have decided to set aside a good portion of the budget towards a monitor. Right now I have narrowed it down to these three options:

1) 2 x Dell UltraSharp U231H 23-inch H-IPS monitor + Spyder 3 Calibration tool = ~$900

OR

2) 1 x Apple LED Cinema Display 27" S-IPS monitor = ~$1100

Which option would give me the best accurate color representation? I recall some of the Beyonders here are using of the two monitors I mentioned above. Any suggestions is greatly appreciated!

[Go4Long]

go with the dells. especially since it leaves the space in your budget to get the spyder 3...I use the Spyder 3 Studio set up and it works really well for me, monitor and print calibration all in one kit...

[Mitsu3000gt]

Another vote for the Dells. Probably the best bang for the buck IPS monitors out there. I've been using the 2407 WFP for years now and it's been awesome. Not a single bad pixel or anything and it sees a ton of use.

I've calibrated it with both a $100 Huey and a more expensive Eye One calibrator and they do just as good of a job. Unless you also need to match it to printers or whatever, you might be able to save some money on the calibrators.

I use the Eye One specifically for home theater calibrating and the colorometer in it is known to be better (read: more reliable unit-to-unit) than the one Spyder uses. IMO the Eye One LT is the best bang for the buck calibrator based on everything I've read. It's just for displays though, not printers as well.

My next monitor will be a 27 or 30" for sure. 24" is much too small for photo editing IMO. I don't like having to scroll around very much when working on images.

[AccentAE86]

Here is something that will crush the other two. The NEC 2490. It is DESIGNED from the get-go as a colour accurate imaging monitor. It is NOT a general purpose monitor that is decent for photo editing like your two listed picks. It *IS* a professional imaging monitor.

The problem with the Dells, Apples, HP, Samsung, LG, etc... is their profiling system. Using a spyder, eyeone or huey (and it's included software) does nothing more than create a SOFTWARE monitor PROFILE that alters your video signal to compensate for your monitor's shortcomings. This causes a truncation in colour data.

The best (and professional) method is to perform HARDWARE CALIBRATION. The way this differs from SOFTWARE PROFILING is that the colourimeter (spyder, iOne, huey, DTP94, spectrolino, etc...) reads the monitor output, then the calibration software then actually talks to your monitor via DDC (Display Data Channel) and the MONITOR INTERNALLY makes adjustments until it is as perfect as it can get it. Now your video card will send it's pure, unaltered signal with no loss of colour data.

This is the difference between hardware calibration and software profiling. People incorrectly abuse the word "calibration" when they actually mean software profiling.

Now here is the best part. For the last few years, NEC has now made professional imaging monitors at a price point that is REASONABLE. PRO performance at near consumer prices!

You can get the NEC 2490 that comes WITH a display colorimeter (an eyeone) AND the calibration software (called Spectraview II) for C$1150! That is barely more than an Apple display, but it kicks it's sorry, overpriced ass.

http://www.directdial.com/LCD2490W2-BK-SV.html

[Go4Long]

yes, the 2490 is the cat's ass in terms of calibration...bang for your buck the dell is awesome, but the NEC is the best, just over twice the price. Realistically though, the likelihood of you being able to see a difference between the two when calibrated is very slim.

Strange...when it comes to cameras the canon guys are preaching budget gear, when it comes to monitors, they recommend a monitor worth 5 times as much as the camera they were recommending. :dunno: somehow that seems like messed up priorities to me.

[AccentAE86]

Originally posted by Go4Long

Strange...when it comes to cameras the canon guys are preaching budget gear, when it comes to monitors, they recommend a monitor worth 5 times as much as the camera they were recommending. :dunno:

The monitor is the LAST THING you should cheap out on!!!! ABSOLUTELY THE LAST THING. It is ONLY interface you have with your photos! It's like spending money on a kickass suspension and engine mods, and leaving $150 in the budget for tires. It's your only interface to the road.

I see quite a difference with a good Dell IPS monitor and an NEC 90 series. Mostly I saw how bloody deficient my Dell ultrasharp was in the red channel, and I was processing my photos with too much red as a result. It also displayed at a brightness WAY too high for photo editing, causing a blackpoint that was too high, which caused me to process photos with too much density.

Everything looked great... as long as I was looking on my monitor, and other people's crappy monitors. Then I looked at my portfolio on a pro monitor and it was an eye opening experience. (The pictures looked like shit)

[Mitsu3000gt]

What is the point to spending all that money on such perfect calibration when a good Dell IPS monitor + $100 calibration devices can yield prints that look exactly how they are supposed to, and exactly how they do on the monitor? At least to me, that is all I really care about. Either on screen or in print are the only ways people can really view a photo, and if it looks perfect in both realms already, I don't see the point to the really expensive calibrators/monitors. Am I missing something?

[AccentAE86]

What's wrong with telling the OP that he can have the most accurate setup possible for just $40 more than one of his choices? Most people don't know the difference between calibration and profiling. Now he knows, so now he can make a better informed decision. It's like people are against educating and two sided discussions or something.

[Mitsu3000gt]

At least for me, I was simply curious, I wasn't trying to discount either option. If I was missing out on something I wanted to know about it haha. I would happily buy the best available, even if I couldn't tell a difference, if it was only a few dollars more than something I was already considering.

Does NEC make those in 27 or 30" options?

[AccentAE86]

NEC makes 26" and 30" options in the 90-series professional line. I use the 26" and a 19" non-wide dual setup.

The biggest difference you can see is in the blacks. Because it can turn down the hardware brightness to 110cd/m^2 the blacks become deeper and more true. Most monitors do not allow hardware brightness adjustment when connected via DVI.

[Mitsu3000gt]

So when the Dells advertise 1.07 billion colors (vs the NEC 16.7 million) is that just marketing fluff like what is done with contrast ratios?

I was looking at this one:

http://accessories.dell.com/sna/products/Displays/productdetail.aspx?c=ca&l=en&s=dhs&cs=cadhs1&sku=224-9949&~ck=dellSearch&baynote_bnrank=0&baynote_irrank=1

And I guess the NEC price competition is this:

http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Product/?product=8899a96d-28dc-484f-a4de-14309a636738

[AccentAE86]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
So when the Dells advertise 1.07 billion colors (vs the NEC 16.7 million) is that just marketing fluff like what is done with contrast ratios?

I was looking at this one:

http://accessories.dell.com/sna/products/Displays/productdetail.aspx?c=ca&l=en&s=dhs&cs=cadhs1&sku=224-9949&~ck=dellSearch&baynote_bnrank=0&baynote_irrank=1

And I guess the NEC price competition is this:

http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Product/?product=8899a96d-28dc-484f-a4de-14309a636738

It's bullshit. The Dell U3011 and NEC 3090WQXi both use the exact same panel, which is a LG LM300WQ5 H-IPS panel. Yet NEC rates the 3090 as 16.7million but Dell says its 1.07 billion. Basically, the word is that Dell simulates more colours through software dithering, as does HP and other manufacturers.

The important features in a colour accurate setup is not the panel used though, it's everything around it that drives and controls it. Like how the Lotus Elise shared the same engine as the Toyota Celica. But one would never say the Celica is just as good. Same goes with LCD monitors. The panels might be the same but it's only a small part of the equation.

[EvolizePhoto]

Thanks for this thread. I cannot wait to buy one.

[HiSpec]

Originally posted by AccentAE86


It's bullshit. The Dell U3011 and NEC 3090WQXi both use the exact same panel, which is a LG LM300WQ5 H-IPS panel. Yet NEC rates the 3090 as 16.7million but Dell says its 1.07 billion. Basically, the word is that Dell simulates more colours through software dithering, as does HP and other manufacturers.




I know I could've googled this, but what's the difference between H-IPS found in Dell/NEC as compare to ACD's S-IPS?

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by AccentAE86


It's bullshit. The Dell U3011 and NEC 3090WQXi both use the exact same panel, which is a LG LM300WQ5 H-IPS panel. Yet NEC rates the 3090 as 16.7million but Dell says its 1.07 billion. Basically, the word is that Dell simulates more colours through software dithering, as does HP and other manufacturers.

The important features in a colour accurate setup is not the panel used though, it's everything around it that drives and controls it. Like how the Lotus Elise shared the same engine as the Toyota Celica. But one would never say the Celica is just as good. Same goes with LCD monitors. The panels might be the same but it's only a small part of the equation.

Good info, thanks. NEC 90 series seems to be the way to go if the price isn't too much higher than the Dells (for me, anyways).

If I already have an Eye One LT, can one get the Spectra view software separately? Or do you need to buy the bundle that has the eye one + spectra view? I see that adds to the cost significantly.

[AccentAE86]

Originally posted by HiSpec



I know I could've googled this, but what's the difference between H-IPS found in Dell/NEC as compare to ACD's S-IPS?

Not much difference to our naked eyes. H-IPS tend to have less black space between pixels though. Some say that S-IPS looks flashier or something. But colour accurate monitors are typically pretty dim, dull and drab looking. Not really any differences to get excited over.


Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt


Good info, thanks. NEC 90 series seems to be the way to go if the price isn't too much higher than the Dells (for me, anyways).

If I already have an Eye One LT, can one get the Spectra view software separately? Or do you need to buy the bundle that has the eye one + spectra view? I see that adds to the cost significantly.


You can definitely just buy the Spectraview software. I bought it direct from NEC for US$99 some years ago. But back then, only Americans could buy it, so I had a friend buy it and ship it to me. I don't know if this is still the case. I use it with my DTP94 and it works great.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Can I get spectraview and use my current Eye One LT to calibrate my Dell monitor? Or does this only work with NEC hardware? It would be nice if I didn't have to re-calibrate the Dell every 2 weeks if this software makes changes at the hardware level.

[AccentAE86]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
Can I get spectraview and use my current Eye One LT to calibrate my Dell monitor? Or does this only work with NEC hardware? It would be nice if I didn't have to re-calibrate the Dell every 2 weeks if this software makes changes at the hardware level.

Spectraview is NEC only. If I could get Dells calibrated at the hardware level, I'd totally consider them too. But so far, there are only three options for FULL hardware calibration: NEC, LaCie, and Eizo, and they all have their own proprietary software to communicate by DDC.

[quazimoto]

You know Ironically I didn't notice a single difference between prints I had edited on one of my apple LCD's using an Eye 1 then I did using a wide gamut Eizo. I've begun to wonder how much of it is fluff.

[HiSpec]

Originally posted by AccentAE86


Not much difference to our naked eyes. H-IPS tend to have less black space between pixels though. Some say that S-IPS looks flashier or something. But colour accurate monitors are typically pretty dim, dull and drab looking. Not really any differences to get excited over.



Thanks 86!!

OMG! There are so much new information introduced to me... I thought it'll just be a simple pick 1) or 2) answer from everyone. So basically if I am willing to go with just one monitor it will ideally be the NEC. But if I must have 2 monitors, it'll be the two Dell monitors. Mitsu is correct, I would probably go for the 30" Dell IPS, but that's beyond my budget.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by AccentAE86


Spectraview is NEC only. If I could get Dells calibrated at the hardware level, I'd totally consider them too. But so far, there are only three options for FULL hardware calibration: NEC, LaCie, and Eizo, and they all have their own proprietary software to communicate by DDC.

Oh ok. I see now. Thanks. I don't think my 2407 is going to die anytime soon, but I am excited to get something larger.



Originally posted by HiSpec


Thanks 86!!

OMG! There are so much new information introduced to me... I thought it'll just be a simple pick 1) or 2) answer from everyone. So basically if I am willing to go with just one monitor it will ideally be the NEC. But if I must have 2 monitors, it'll be the two Dell monitors. Mitsu is correct, I would probably go for the 30" Dell IPS, but that's beyond my budget.

If you're happy with a 26" you can get a NEC for the same money as the Dell 30". These guys have it for $1184 but I don't think it comes with the Spectra calibration stuff:

http://www.directcanada.com/products/?sku=13080MN2617&vpn=LCD2690WUXI2-BK&manufacture=NEC%20DISPLAY%20SOLUTIONS

Going from the NEC 26 to the NEC 30" is nearly double the price it looks like.

Anyways I still love my Dell but I do have to calibrate it every 2 weeks. it was also only $650 for a 24" S-IPS, so I could be running two of them for the price of the NEC. I don't like dual monitors though (except at work).

[Go4Long]

see, here's the argument I was trying to make earlier, but apparently my point was missed by accent...

Reallistically a Dell monitor is not going to hold back MOST of the people out there...it's going to be color accurate down to the most miniscule of margins to the point that honestly, no one would be able to tell the difference, and honestly, if from a calibrated monitor, to a printer looks the same, then obviously your calibration has been succesful down to the amount measurable.

My argument on the 20D point was simply this, I think that a dell monitor is way less likely to hold you back than a 10 year old camera as long as the monitor is calibrated. I just find it amusing that the same guy swearing by the virtue of a $200 camera is swearing that the only way to go is with a $1100 monitor.

It's the same argument in terms of cost/reward...but the same person is now taking the other side. it just doesn't ad up.

I'm not saying the NEC products aren't better, because they are better. I am saying that the amount that they are better doesn't justify paying enough to get 3 of the dells and a calibration tool.

[quazimoto]

As I stated I have printed side by side prints edited on two very different monitors. You can physically see on the two monitors how the prints look different. HOWEVER when printed they are virtually the same.

I was able to see a noticeable difference particularly in the blue colors between both monitors. When printed though you can't notice much of a difference if at all.

You will notice a different as light always looks different than Ink. Making Ink look like light is a whole other story. Even on metallic prints done on a light jet the difference is very minimal.

[AccentAE86]

Originally posted by Go4Long
see, here's the argument I was trying to make earlier, but apparently my point was missed by accent...

Reallistically a Dell monitor is not going to hold back MOST of the people out there...it's going to be color accurate down to the most miniscule of margins to the point that honestly, no one would be able to tell the difference, and honestly, if from a calibrated monitor, to a printer looks the same, then obviously your calibration has been succesful down to the amount measurable.

My argument on the 20D point was simply this, I think that a dell monitor is way less likely to hold you back than a 10 year old camera as long as the monitor is calibrated. I just find it amusing that the same guy swearing by the virtue of a $200 camera is swearing that the only way to go is with a $1100 monitor.

It's the same argument in terms of cost/reward...but the same person is now taking the other side. it just doesn't ad up.

I'm not saying the NEC products aren't better, because they are better. I am saying that the amount that they are better doesn't justify paying enough to get 3 of the dells and a calibration tool.

Wow.

This debate has absolutely NOTHING to do with the other thread.
My responses have EVERYTHING to do with INFORMING THE OP.

The whole purpose is to bring different answers to the table so the OP can make a decision based on knowing multiple sides of the argument.

Maybe the HiSpec can chime in here... are you glad that you now know more about the varying degrees of accuracy that are available to you? Or do you feel like you would have been better off not knowing?

I was merely pointing out that he could have a fully PROFESSIONAL solution CHEAPER than one of his options! (The Apple display doesn't come with a display profiling tool, while the NEC DOES) His question was "Which will give me better ACCURACY?" It was NOT "Which display is gonna give me the best bang for the buck?" Had he asked for bang for the buck, then yeah, the Dells and HP are the way to go. Had he ONLY listed cheaper options around a few hundred bucks, then I wouldn't have brought up the NEC 2490.

I personally DO find critical monitor accuracy to be very important. Maybe you don't, and you know what? THAT'S FINE. I'm glad you disagree so we can have a nice debate. If we can discuss and debate varying opinions, the OP WINS. If we argue and fight, then it's just more drama added to the photog forum and everybody gets pissed off.

Really don't understand why multi-sided discussions don't seem to go smoothly here. :dunno:

I just wanna come here, discuss stuff, share stuff, learn some stuff, and have a good time. And maybe later we can all raise a glass together. :D

[Go4Long]

and I'm just debating.
Yes, the NEC is the best option without spending a crazy amount of money. but of the two options he listed, the two dells is the better option.

[Mitsu3000gt]

The problem with debate on forums is that it always sounds like arguing, even though it's (usually) not, because things like tone of 'voice' are very hard to effectively portray. At least thats how I see it.

HiSPec - Would you rather have one big monitor or two smaller ones? Personally I'd rather have one big one if my focus was photo editing. Also would you rather sacrifice a little size and have the best available, even if its possible that you won't be able to tell a difference? To me it seems like that is the choice you need to make.



PS: Any mods care to chime in as to why Evolize and quazi were recently banned? I couldn't find any offending recent posts (that I know of anyways).

[Go4Long]

I would say this answers the ban question:
http://forums.beyond.ca/showthread.php?s=&postid=3537308#post3537308

I agree on the bigger monitor thing, but lightroom(which I use for all my photo editing, I VERY rarely open photoshop) has some really cool dual monitor setting where you can have the library on one side and the develop pane on the other, which is pretty awesome.

[blitz]

Originally posted by Go4Long
I would say this answers the ban question:
http://forums.beyond.ca/showthread.php?s=&postid=3537308#post3537308

I agree on the bigger monitor thing, but lightroom(which I use for all my photo editing, I VERY rarely open photoshop) has some really cool dual monitor setting where you can have the library on one side and the develop pane on the other, which is pretty awesome.

That is awesome. I have to dig out my old 17" monitor to use as a library screen.

[smc]

I would like to add that have two different bands of monitor connected to the photo editing computer can help. That way you can check how the photo looks on two different monitors. This has saved me a couple of times when my main monitor's color profile wasn't working properly.

[HiSpec]

Originally posted by AccentAE86

Maybe the HiSpec can chime in here...

I'd have to say BOTH!!! Because like I mentioned earlier, I was hoping for a really simple "go with option X, for this simple Y reason". However, what I received was information BEYOND what I expected to get. But yet at the same time I am much more well educated with different methods of monitor calibration/profiling, and what other options are available to me.

And I really should apologize to everyone on here that had given their suggestions and opinions. I really had no intention to turn this thread into a heated debate of any sort. I should've clearly worded my question to be, "Between these two options, which one would give me the best accuracy?"

Regardless of whether it was from personal or profession experience, all your feedbacks has made me well aware what I am getting for my money.


Originally posted by Go4Long


I agree on the bigger monitor thing, but lightroom(which I use for all my photo editing, I VERY rarely open photoshop) has some really cool dual monitor setting where you can have the library on one side and the develop pane on the other, which is pretty awesome.

Whoa!! Really? LR have features for dual monitors?

Also, for people who use LR extensively... does LR utilitize CPU that have hyperthreading functionality?

[Mitsu3000gt]

No need to apologize for asking a question. In fact, had you limited your question to just the two monitors in your OP, you would have still probably got the same answers.

Debate is good because when people read it, it helps them make an informed decision with all viewpoints to consider.

In this section especially, people are fairly opinionated so there will always be a fair amount of discussion in the "what to buy" threads. It's all good - I don't think anyone actually gets angry haha...I feel sorry for them if they do.

[HiSpec]

Here's another question, which will yield a better result?

1) A good quality monitor (eg Dell's U2311H) w/o any calibration?

OR

2) A CALIBRATED off-the-shelf monitor?

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by HiSpec
Here's another question, which will yield a better result?

1) A good quality monitor (eg Dell's U2311H) w/o any calibration?

OR

2) A CALIBRATED off-the-shelf monitor?

I would think a Dell (Or similar IPS panel monitor) will still give you better colors than a calibrated TN or VN panel. TN and VN panels are also difficult to calibrate in the first place. They also are not good for color accuracy, they excel at low response times instead. My dad has a Dell 26" with a VN panel, and it is extremely difficult to calibrate - out of box settings look better than anything the calibration tools end up doing.

So, I think it has a lot more to do with the panel type itself rather than if the monitor says Dell, NEC, Samsung, or whatever on it.

[msommers]

I have a Samsung TN that I've calibrated although I really have nothing to compare it to. I did have Steve do a couple prints and the colours turned out fine.

I think my brightness is at 40% though.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by msommers
I have a Samsung TN that I've calibrated although I really have nothing to compare it to. I did have Steve do a couple prints and the colours turned out fine.

I think my brightness is at 40% though.

My guess is that, like with most monitors, 99% of people will never tell a significant real world difference between a calibrated "regular" monitor and the print. It's not like your blues become yellows and your greens become purple when your monitor isn't calibrated haha, it's just that it's probably 85-90% accurate instead of 99% accurate if you had a top-line NEC or something. It's like buying a TV, once you have it at home with nothing to compare it to, any huge flatscreen is going to look awesome. If you put a better one directly beside it though, you may notice minute differences.

[Go4Long]

^that
except maybe that guy that can eye ball the torque of a lug nut...that guys got some skills ;)

[blitz]

I have one of the Dell IPS screens and it's uncalibrated. Works for me just fine as it came out of the box. I'm going to calibrate it one of these days, just haven't gotten around to buying a calibration system.

Difference for me is that 90% of my digital stuff is B&W and when I do conversion in Silver Efex pro I can check all 10 "zones" (pure white to pure black) and rely on that to makes sure I'm balanced.

[ZeroGravity]

Slightly off topic here, but another factor to think about when picking between single or dual (or more) monitor setup is that if you will ever consider using something like a Wacom tablet.

With something like a Wacom tablet, it maps all your screen "real estate" to the tablet. So if you have multiple screens, I find that editing with the tablet will be a bit harder. I suppose one can zoom in a bit more to editing with the pen.

I wish I can justify better monitor personally. But I'm just using a 23" LED TN panel with a Huey Pro. So I cannot suggest either Dell IPS or NEC or Apple displays...

having said that... the 27" Dell U2711 is on sale as part of Dell's VIP sale today for 799. And there is a 5% discount coupon to make it 759.