Monitor recomendations for viewing and editing

[photophreek]

I'm currently using a Dell 2410 and quite happy with the display.  The 2410 can certainly be callibrated as I use X-Rite's i1Display Pro to callibrate the monitor.  The Dell has a coating on the display which has garnered much negative feedback from reviewers.  I've had no issues with the coating at all.  The 2410 is a 100% wide gamut IPS display and 16:10 aspect similar to the Dell 3011.  I use LR 3 for PP and print to an Epson 2880.  NEC are fine monitors and at the time I purchased the Dell 24", the NEC was too rich for me.

[Jettatore]

But you can calibrate any monitor using something like an X-Rite's i1Display Pro or a Spider kit.  That on it's own doesn't mean much.  For example, my current monitors are 2 old, garbage $250 each (2005 prices), consumer end 22" widescreen monitors.  (Actually they aren't half bad for the cost, especially back when I bought em.)  And I could take a calibration kit something like that and it would tell the software to change the values of what it is displaying out to the monitor until the calibrator says it's as close as it can get to whatever profile I specify it to match.  But that really isn't all that accurate and considering as well the less than stringent quality of the monitors I have, it's ability to display color/values/contrast, true blacks/whites etc., in accordance with a specific printer's + papers limitations and even when using a software based calibration process to the best of the kits ability, you are still completely guessing as to what you see on the screen and what is going to come out on the other end.  Fine for most purposes, but not very useful for expensive prints, even worse when you have to print a lot of different images.

I guess my question for you photophreek, since you have a full kit to test.  Is when you hold up a print from your Epson next to the screen in a proper print previewing environment, how close are they (after everything has been calibrated as best as possible that is)?  I guess I'm just taking your word for it because it would be hard to photograph the comparison with monitors being back-lit, so your honesty/impartiality is appreciated here.

[RC]

Thank you everybody for all the great information!   I was surprised with all the responses already when I woke up this morning.  I continued to be impressed with the wealth of knowledge in the CR  community. 

Several things were mentioned that I wasn't even thinking of (calibration tools, coating, surface texture, etc.).

Well this certainly get the ball rolling.  Hopefully there will be some post Christmas deals.

[unfocused]

I have no opinion on specific monitors, but I will say this. Whatever you do, keep your old monitor and configure your machine to have two monitors. One of the best things I've ever done.

I love having all the panels on a separate screen, where I can leave them open (layers, masks, history, etc. etc) and still have lots of screen real estate for working on the image, publication or website (depending on what program I'm in.)

[4fasticCR]

I have no opinion on specific monitors, but I will say this. Whatever you do, keep your old monitor and configure your machine to have two monitors. One of the best things I've ever done.

I love having all the panels on a separate screen, where I can leave them open (layers, masks, history, etc. etc) and still have lots of screen real estate for working on the image, publication or website (depending on what program I'm in.)

This may be a bit off-topic but I'm having a hard time finding the information ...

I second the dual monitor idea, and I just decided to use a recent laptop instead of my desktop PC for "digital darkroom". So, the laptop is connected to a ASUS PA246Q monitor (similar to Dell U2410) and I try and calibrate using X-Rite i1 Display 2 ... But I have a hard time in calibrating both the laptop screen and the PA246Q. (At the moment the laptop colours are way off ...)

What I did:

1. Set laptop to primary screen and did the calibration
2. Set the PA246Q to primary screen and did the calibration

Anyone with some experience or links on this?

Cheers and thanks!

[NotABunny]

Nec / Eizo, 1920 * 1200, at least 24".

To avoid calibration issues, Nec has a SpectraViewII line (which includes software and a colorimeter).

I went for a non-SpectraView model and I had to buy a ColoMunki spectrophotometer to calibrate it; the problem is that this works only in software. Only Nec's calibration software can do calibration in hardware, which uses all 10 bits of precision.

The calibration of wide gamut displays requires a spectrophotometer or a dedicated colorimeter (as is the case of Nec SpectraView).

[spaceheat]

I am using a NEC PA241w with Spectraview at the moment. It replaced my Lacie CRT. Overall, I am fairly happy. Calibration is a breeze. My only gripe is the AntiGlare coating. It has a speckled appearance to it that is a bit distracting when trying to judge very smooth tonalities.

[goretexguy]

The HP ZR30w monitor, color calibrated. Gradients (sky, snow, skin) are great. Fantastic viewing angles. I've had it for a year and a half, and have loved every minute in front of it.

[photophreek]

Jettatore:

When I use the right ICC profile for the paper I'm printing on, let LR control the color management and the monitor has just been callibrated, the output is very very close to the monitor. 

I did have i1Display 3 and upgraded to i1 Display Pro, because i1Display 3 did not let me set the luminance.  Display 3 uses the factory luminance value which made the screen too bright.  As a result, my prints were darker than the monitor.  Once I start callibrating with Display Pro, I could set the luminance value to what I wanted and the prints and monitor were the same. 

[Jettatore]

If it works it works, can't argue with that.  Good to know, thank you.  Really wish I could see results first hand, as I was actually planning on getting a new color correct screen + printer later next year.  Last time I had a decent one, was an expensive Sony CRT and when that died, CRT's were not being made/good ones still cost a bunch and LCD's were no where near as good.

[pwp]

The Dell U-Series IPS panels are sensational value. We have got two Dell UltraSharp U2410, one Dell UltraSharp U2711 and one Dell UltraSharp U3011. They are all very stable after a five minute warm-up period, they calibrate beautifully and deliver extreme accuracy.

I can see in the printed material and web content of client output and the color/density etc all looks  the same as what I saw on my monitors when I delivered the job. When color is off, clients let you know, usually at fairly high volume.

Any perception that Dell U-Series monitors are not up to scratch is garbage. Cheap office grade Dell panels will disappoint photographers & graphic artists, but the U-Series Dells are from another planet.

In the past I have had Sony Artisan (CRT), Eizo etc and they have been very good, but the value of the Dells makes them impossible to ignore. The Dell UltraSharp U2711 in particular is stunning value.

Paul Wright

[Jettatore]

Any perception that Dell U-Series monitors are not up to scratch is garbage.

I think it's sort of the other way around.  If the new U-Series monitors are proving to be worth their value then by all means let them start to build up a good rep for that, and you guys have me paying attention to them now for sure.  But Dell Monitor's in general didn't have a good rep to start with, they were traditionally gaming/entertainment monitors built for size, wow and flash and never known for print/retouching studio quality color accuracy.  User reviews outside of this site are good overall but far from perfect (and I'm talking about the Usharps), seems some complaints about green/red tint issues as well as pink tint which is something that has plagued Dell and Apple for a long time which is a sort of issue that is known to get worse as the monitors that suffered from it aged, just look up "Apple monitor pink" on Google.  I'll be honest, I'm not fully convinced yet and while it doesn't matter for me personally because I have many months ahead before seriously considering a new monitor (I might even be going laptop only), I'd raise a flag of caution to anyone buying now if it's mission critical.  Time may very well change that.

If you don't believe me, just read Dell's own marketing:  "Be enthralled by the first Dell monitor that is color-calibrated at the factory for accurate, consistent and precise colors."

[stringfellow1946]

I use an EIZO GC234W, I’ve had it professionally calibrated along with the Papers I use, as I do a lot of printing only to A3+ with a Canon 9500. (For me personally photography at the end of the day is all about handling bits of paper, not looking at monitors, & I know for fact you sell 95% more images if they are already printed, rather than showing people images from a computer) The printed results are about 95% or better of what I see on the monitor. I print using PS5 BUT soft proof every thing first.  Also I only use genuine Canon inks.
 They have probably updated this model by now & there maybe better monitors out there now.


•   24” Widescreen supporting a native resolution of 1920x1200
•   Non-glossy, low reflective screen for professional users
•   Hardware-based calibration (requires a measuring instrument) for easy and accurate colour profiling and calibration
•   Shading hood (removable) minimises the effect of ambient light falling on the screen
•   3D LUT for Better Additive Colour Mixture
•   Brightness and Colour Compensation with EIZO's Digital Uniformity Equaliser
•   Three inputs – Display Port (supporting 10 bit) and dual DVI
•   98% coverage Adobe RGB Colour Space
•   New OSD
•   IPS panel - reduced colour shift on viewing angle
•   Eizo Flex Stand
•   Full 5 Year onsite (double swap) UK warranty
For the full specifications, please click this link: http://www.eizo.com/global/iblick/spec/?id=CG243W

[dr croubie]

Any perception that Dell U-Series monitors are not up to scratch is garbage.

I think it's sort of the other way around.

@ Both of you, I think you're both right. But they're different market segments.
Look at it this way.
I have a 7D, a 15-85, one L-lens. I'm making photos for my own enjoyment, but I want those phtos to be as good as possible, within the realms of of what I can justify as affordable, weighed against all other factors, like wages, rent, and food bills.
I do not have a 1D/s, 5D, 70-200 f/2.8L, 50/1.2, 85/1.2, MP-E 65, TS-E 24, or any of those other wonderful lenses I drool over too much. I'm not making billboards, nor books. I'm not selling to a customer who will pulp a run of 1000 books becaue the colours were "only 99% correct".

I am the definition of 'Prosumer'.

Basically, the Dell Ultrasharp are the 'Prosumer' monitors. I was thinking of an analogy with the niftyfifty, but maybe the Samyang 35/1.4 is more appropriate. Either way, under the right conditions, and using it properly, they're damn good lenses. They may not have that final 1 or 2% to be "the best", but then you're paying Zeiss money. For the price, even for double or triple the price, you can't do any better.

The $570 I paid for my 27" Dell is prosumer money. It's about as much as I paid for the rest of my new PC. The cheapest Eizo I've seen is €700, over $1000. For a comparable size/res, it's €1500, $2000, now we're at 4x what I paid.
I can't comment on the Apple monitors, nor colour shifts on my dell as it's less that 6 months old. But it's "good enough" for me, and always will be. There's no scenario I can imagine in which a $2000 eizo monitor would be justified for my usage. For some people they can accept no less, because affording tomorrow's dinner depends on it. That's the difference between Prosumer and Professional.
(Stringfellow above sounds like the definition of 'professional', or at least sounds like it talking about 'selling more')

In short, if your income depends on accuracy, get an Eizo. If you like playing around like me, get a Dell. Or for somewhere in between, get any IPS-panel and a calibration kit as long as you can install the software (afaik there's no calibration software for linux readily-available, hence I got the pre-calibrated dell).
(and no, i haven't thought about the HP or NEC IPS panels for this comaprison...)

[chriswatters]

Any perception that Dell U-Series monitors are not up to scratch is garbage. Cheap office grade Dell panels will disappoint photographers & graphic artists, but the U-Series Dells are from another planet.

Not all offices use the cheeper series of monitors. The office where I work as technical support uses U-Series monitors: specifically, the UltraSharp 2007FP. On a sample size of over 300 monitors, by the end of the 4-year lease over 10% of those monitors have been replaced because of defects. Typical defects are dead power supplies and image burn-in.

While these monitors have a higher defect rate than I am happy with, when they do work, I am happy with the image quality. I am also looking at getting a pair of new monitors for my personal computer, and Dell UltraSharps are on the short list. If you do get a Dell monitor, I would strongly recommend getting a warranty that covers the entire time that you plan to use that monitor.