What monitors do the members prefer for editing pictures to be printed? All opinions will be appreciated.
Printable View
What monitors do the members prefer for editing pictures to be printed? All opinions will be appreciated.
More important than brand is that the monitor is accurately color calibrated, ideally with a spectrometer-based device (X-rite i1, Datacolor Spyder 4, etc.).
Any monitor with an IPS (in plane switching) panel would be a great start, in fact it's a must. IPS panels provide accurate colour reproduction at wider viewing angles.
I use a Dell u2410. 24" IPS monitor. It comes factory calibrated to adobe rgb and it's very close. I use a spyder express colour calibrator and the factory settings are almost identical. It's far cheaper than many monitors with the same specs, has been very reliable for me for a while now.
... And consistency. It might be right for an hour, then freak out or just be wrong in the corners. Not fun either way.
Not sure what you're saying there andnowimbroke... :confused:
Sorry. Mine was an addition to what neuro said. It just took a lot more time to peck out my words and then post. I had a monitor that would calibrate correctly, then start to drift off after using for awhile. Not talking about the normal warm up time. Some also have a bigger percentage difference around the monitor itself. Most calibration tools work off the center, but often times (on cheaper monitors) you'll have hot spots or color changes. So long as you know where they are at, you can zoom or adjust the view to get it in the calibrated area. It a hassle.
Ditto, but I've got the 27" version, 2560x1440 (which is unfortunately 16:9, i'd prefer 16:10). It's got a lot wider colour gamut than the 24", and a crapload more inputs (currently my PC runs off the DVI in, my work-laptop to the DisplayPort, a digital TV Tuner to the HDMI, the DVD player to the component, and i've still got a composite, vga, and another dvi left over before I have to start swapping plugs).Quote:
Originally Posted by btaylor
Pricing is weird, in the US the 24" is the sweet-spot, half the price of the 27" which is very close to the 30".
In Australia, the 27" is the sweet spot, not much more than the 24" and half the price of the 30".
So depending on where you are could depend on the best size for you.
3 years next-day on-site, 1-dead-pixel-gets-you-a-new-one warranty is also very nice.
In other brands there's not much choice of IPS (at least there wasn't when I looked about 12 months ago). Asus I think has a few, there's the Apple displays, and then things start to get very Pricey with the NEC and Eizo displays. No doubt that Eizo are better than the Dells, but unless you're planning to make (a lot) of money from your shots, i'd be leaving those pricetags to the pros...
Well then that makes plenty of sense :DQuote:
Originally Posted by andnowimbroke
I think it used to be the case that all panels were made by the same foreign manufacturer, and that the better companies (Apple, ect) had first dibs on the most consistent ones. Dell u-series is a great compromise for us regular folks and would recommend it. If you find it lacking at any point in time, it could be used as a second monitor and you'll not be out an arm and a leg. NEC can get a little higher in price but might also be a little better. Eizo is always high. Good but always high.
The last time I went shopping for a monitor I wound up with an Asus ProArt. I did spend a lot of time online checking the colour gamut specs for a wide variety of monitors as the one that came with my latest computer was really pathetic in that department. Blistering fast for gamers but not much use for graphics usage. The Asus was the lowest priced large monitor that covered virtually all of the Adobe RGB gamut. The factory supplied ICC profile was bang on out of the box. I did my own calibration and when reviewing the summary report the gamut was slightly larger than Adobe RGB (101%). Have done regular recalibrations every month since and have not noticed any shifting at all. (Every now and then I have gone back after doing the recalibration to the original calibration profile just to check). The resolution at 1920 x 1200 is not as high as the other monitors recommended above nor is the colour gamut as broad, but this is reflected in the price difference. If you just want a decent monitor for a reasonable outlay it is worth looking at. What colour space is your camera set for?
Edit: One point to keep in mind with the monitor when editing for prints is that the colour gamut will be larger than the printer can reproduce. If you don't already do so it is a very useful feature of PhotoShop, and other editing software, to allow using the printer ICC profiles for onscreen soft proofing and final editing before commiting to paper and ink. I know it has saved me from scrapping a goodly amount of photo paper.