Best Monitor For Photo Editing 2012?

Started Jan 1, 2012 | Discussions
bronxbombers
Forum ProPosts: 18,226
Like?
Re: OLED
In reply to NewsyL, Jan 7, 2012

wow, so suddenly OLED is upon us after all, we though it would have been hear already and then it seemed to get stuck at 13" or smaller and now 55"!! sure price is crazy this year but I remembering my friend and I salivating at the mall at the unreachable glory of 52" CCFL LCD sets and two years later we both had one!
heck he has one in every room now

NewsyL wrote:

technic wrote:

I'm hoping for somewhat affordable OLED monitor technology later this year, at least five new OLED TV's have been announced or rumoured for 2012. Most of these are probably based on OLED backlight only (with LCD shutter), but even that seems to be a big step up in quality. They should be able to manufacture these for a decent price once production is geared up, as the OLED panels are basically 'printed'. Let's see if there are some nice surprises at CES

Interesting OLED announcement from LG.

RGB+White, 4mm thick

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57350931-221/could-lgs-new-55-inch-oled-be-the-best-tv-ever/

.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bronxbombers
Forum ProPosts: 18,226
Like?
Re: OLED
In reply to technic, Jan 7, 2012

technic wrote:

just in case you missed it: three other companies are rumoured to introduce 55" OLED TV's this year, including Apple. I'm guessing these 55 inch screens use the same or similar panel, OLED backlight with LCD colour filters. Possibly some smaller sizes and (expensive) full OLED displays on the way as well.

The new 4K generation also looks very attractive, but they need to shrink the size and price first to get me on board
http://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1325146105

With the rumours about superres Apple notebooks and iPad3 this summer, it can't be long before we have desktop monitors with 4K resolution. I don't doubt they will think of something to spoil the party though, like high price or bad backlight ;-(

a 27" OLED would be like a large print only with much wider color gamut and shockingly higher DR and close resolution

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
BBGunWB
Regular MemberPosts: 405
Like?
Re: Best Monitor For Photo Editing 2012?
In reply to CBEV Media, Jan 7, 2012

I can tell you you made the right decision in not getting the U2711. I just put in for my RMA number with Dell because of the coating. At 1:1 zoom, you can't tell if the noise you're seeing is from the AG coating or from the image. On top of that, it is varying thickness so some areas of the monitor are subtly but noticeably different in brightness from others when looking at a white or near white screen or large area of image.

If you don't have a reflection problem, get an Apple 27" cinema display or thunderbolt display (thunderbolt just has USB/Firewire connections built in). IPS screen, full glossy for best contrast. Just need a displayport or DVI-to-displayport converter to run it on a PC.

I don't have a lot of control over my lighting situation, so I am thinking of getting the Samsung S27A850, as mentioned. Live in the US, so Iwill be getting it from Amazon to take advantage of their return policies instead of Samsungs in case I get dust or horrible backlight bleed. Some bleed is OK for me as long as the image is otherwise clean.

Yes, 16x9 monitors are "vertically challenged" - but with 1440 vertical pixels... who cares?

BB

-- hide signature --

picasaweb.google.com/BBGunWB

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
technic
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,774Gear list
Like?
Re: OLED
In reply to bronxbombers, Jan 7, 2012

it isn't suddenly, it is gradual: full OLED monitors are still rare and very expensive. The new 55" TV's are probably LCD screens with OLED backlight. But this should cure some of the major problems of current WLED screens like limited colour range, uneven illumination, backlight bleeding. And there are other advantages like lower power consumption, even thinner displays and probably affordable price level compared to full OLED.

The new monitors may be the result of the new Dupont OLED technology that allows printing of large displays at a (relatively?) low price. Maybe in 1-2 years large full OLED screens are affordable too, there seems to be a huge push behind the technology now.

 technic's gear list:technic's gear list
Canon EOS 450D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
CBEV Media
Junior MemberPosts: 29
Like?
Re: Best Monitor For Photo Editing 2012?
In reply to BBGunWB, Jan 10, 2012

BBGunWB,
I am thankful for your advice on the Dell U2711 re the coating.

I would really love one of those Apple cinema displays, it looks perfect, but @ around £900 in the UK it's a fair bit more than I'd like to spend on a monitor which I'll have to replace again in a few years.

Will keep an eye out for new monitors this year.

Thanks for your feedback on this everyone.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
technic
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,774Gear list
Like?
Re: OLED
In reply to technic, Jan 10, 2012

P.S., some news from CES:

the new Samsung 55"OLED TV seems to be using real OLED technology, instead of only an OLED backlight in the LG model. All of these new OLED screens seem to be VERY impressive, and a big step up from current LCD technology. Unfortunately, looks like we have to wait 1-2 years before the price comes down to more affordable levels (rumoured price for 55 inch OLED TV's is $8000-10.000 - but I guess part of the high price is caused by the special features that are added in these TV sets).

Can't wait until we get this type of LED screens in PC monitors and laptops; maybe in 2 years or so? For sure, I'm not going to invest in high end (expensive) IPS monitors now

The new 4K (8.3 Mpixel) 20"display from Panasonic also looks impressive; talk about pixel peeping! Many users will need glasses to really see all those pixels. And just 3.5 mm thick, it is almost getting in print territory

 technic's gear list:technic's gear list
Canon EOS 450D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
skyrimz
New MemberPosts: 15
Like?
Re: Best Monitor For Photo Editing 2012?
In reply to CBEV Media, Jan 11, 2012

CRT is better for photo editing. But it is hard to be found these days.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bronxbombers
Forum ProPosts: 18,226
Like?
Re: OLED
In reply to technic, Jan 11, 2012

technic wrote:

P.S., some news from CES:

the new Samsung 55"OLED TV seems to be using real OLED technology, instead of only an OLED backlight in the LG model.

oh wow the LG was only using OLED for the backlight?? How can they even call that an OLED set then? That is NOT an OLED set at all. It's just a regular LCD only it uses OLED instead of RGB LED or W LED or CCFL for the backlight. An OLED backlighting LCD is 100% different from an OLED set! The two could not be more different.

but if samsung has jumped the real deal from 14" to 55" then THAT is impressive

The new 4K (8.3 Mpixel) 20"display from Panasonic also looks impressive; talk about pixel peeping! Many users will need glasses to really see all those pixels. And just 3.5 mm thick, it is almost getting in print territory

yeah wow i'd love a 24" OLED 4k monitor! That would really do images justice and get you nearly as sharp as many prints with a wider gamut and way higher CR ratio. I bet 10 bits becomes more important on OLED since they have bright whites with virtually true pitch black blacks, huge DR. And you could view e-published books and mags on that probably nearly as crisply as printed books and maybe even more clearly than most printed mags.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
technic
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,774Gear list
Like?
Re: OLED
In reply to bronxbombers, Jan 11, 2012

bronxbombers wrote:

oh wow the LG was only using OLED for the backlight?? How can they even call that an OLED set then? That is NOT an OLED set at all. It's just a regular LCD only it uses OLED instead of RGB LED or W LED or CCFL for the backlight. An OLED backlighting LCD is 100% different from an OLED set! The two could not be more different.

they are different, but the LG approach is quite clever IMHO. What they do is similar to the RGBLED backlights from professional photo monitors from a few years ago, only FAR better in almost every way. They can make a perfect backlight with this (very even, big colorspace compared to current WLED, very low power, very thin display) and it probably has less aging problems (longer lifetime) than full OLED.

The first reports suggest that the LG display is very impressive, despite using OLED backlight and not full OLED.

but if samsung has jumped the real deal from 14" to 55" then THAT is impressive

it is clear that the technology is ready for larger scale production. Two others (Apple and one of the Japanese display companes) are also bringing OLED TV's end of this year. 55 inch (big TV screens) is probably where most of the money is at the moment, but I'm sure in a few years there will be other sizes, and more affordable. No one has set a final retail price yet, but several manufacturers competing for this new market should help to drive price down and quality up.

The new 4K (8.3 Mpixel) 20"display from Panasonic also looks impressive; talk about pixel peeping! Many users will need glasses to really see all those pixels. And just 3.5 mm thick, it is almost getting in print territory

yeah wow i'd love a 24" OLED 4k monitor! That would really do images justice and get you nearly as sharp as many prints with a wider gamut and way higher CR ratio. I bet 10 bits becomes more important on OLED since they have bright whites with virtually true pitch black blacks, huge DR. And you could view e-published books and mags on that probably nearly as crisply as printed books and maybe even more clearly than most printed mags.

yes, in a few years we could have tablets just 5mm thick or so, with better resolution and color than prints and books. This is great for photographers, e.g. for photobooks. I make some money from book sales, but you lose so much of the picture quality when the image is printed, compared to the original (or you have to use extremely expensive printing, which is not an option for small publications). Sometimes all the atmosphere of the picture is lost in print; I'm looking forward to being able to use this technology in a few years to present my pictures/stories

Before that, we will probably see those 250 dpi OLEDs in LCD's and viewfinders on our cameras.

 technic's gear list:technic's gear list
Canon EOS 450D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Pictus
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,661
Like?
Re: OLED
In reply to bronxbombers, Jan 11, 2012

bronxbombers wrote:

I bet 10 bits becomes more important on OLED since they have bright whites with virtually true pitch black blacks, huge DR.

I am 100% sure about that.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RonFlash
Senior MemberPosts: 1,486
Like?
Re: Pixel density
In reply to Pultzar, Jan 12, 2012

Which 27" monitors support this 2560x1440 resolution you mention? I am not saying there aren't such monitors.

My concern for me is, nearly all 27" monitors on neweggg say 1920 x 1080 recommended resolution.

I plan on getting a Samsung 27" monitor this summer.

I did find one, the Samsung S27A850D, but it is quite expensive. And there are issues with some models.

Pultzar wrote:

The 27" 2560x1440 display has 1.44X as many pixels per square inch as a 1920x1200 24" display.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
NewsyL
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,457
Like?
Re: Pixel density
In reply to RonFlash, Jan 12, 2012

RonFlash wrote:

Which 27" monitors support this 2560x1440 resolution you mention? I am not saying there aren't such monitors.

My concern for me is, nearly all 27" monitors on neweggg say 1920 x 1080 recommended resolution.

I plan on getting a Samsung 27" monitor this summer.

These are all 2560x1440:

Apple Cinema Display 27"
Apple Thunderbolt 27"
Dell U2711 (wide gamut)
Hazro HZ27WA
Hazro HZ27WC
HP ZR2740w
NEC PA271w (wide gamut)
Samsung S27A850DW (has a S-PLS LCD panel)

Review Sites:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews.htm
http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/reviews.html
http://www.flatpanelshd.com/reviews.php

A very good photography products reseller - their 2560x1440 selection:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Monitor+Resolution_2560+x+1440&ci=6559&N=4294542210+4289236231

.
--

Newsy http://newsy.smugmug.com

.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RonFlash
Senior MemberPosts: 1,486
Like?
Re: Pixel density
In reply to NewsyL, Jan 12, 2012

I use BH Photo all the time. Thanks.

I can see these newer high resolution monitors are way over priced in todays technology. When you can get 46" TV's cheaper than those monitors, it just doesn't add up to me.

So I guess when my time comes to buy the 27" varation, I'll go with the 27" 1920x1080 models, and use my old display as a 2nd display.

Thanks again for the tiem you took to do those searches. I appreciate it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ethan Hansen
Senior MemberPosts: 1,186
Like?
Re: Best Monitor For Photo Editing 2012?
In reply to CBEV Media, Jan 12, 2012

We have a bunch of monitors for in-house and on-location editing. For critical work, a calibration package that offers full DDC control over the monitor settings, including grayscale and gamma tuning, is essential. Here's a quick list in decreasing order of image editing quality:

Quato Intelliproof ($1500 - $2500 for 24-27" monitors + $150 for calibration software). Can't find much to fault in the 24" LED display unless you want to work at luminance values under 130cd/m2 or edit video. Wide gamut, superb uniformity, good viewing angles. Difficult to obtain in the US.

Eizo ColorEdge ($2000 for 243W): Also an excellent panel. Good performance down to 120 cd/m2, but works best at 135+. Requires DisplayPort to obtain full color depth. 27" monitor comes with an integrated colorimeter that is neither worth paying for nor performs as well as the best standalone products. Can be calibrated by both Eizo's ColorNavigator software and 3rd party apps including ColorEyes and BasICColor. The CG241W costs ~$1600 and is almost as good if you do not have DisplayPort.

HP DreamColor LP2480zx ($2300). If you get a good one, image quality is excellent and the RGB LED backlighting promises long life and delivers superb color gamut. It took returning 3 panels to finally get one without across-screen color casts. Eizo and Quato offer better image quality for less.

NEC PA-series ($900 for 24", $1300 for 27"). Excellent monitors, good uniformity, images do not have quite the shadow resolution and lack of artifacts that the above monitors deliver. Given the price differential, however, neither Eizo nor Quato offer 2-3x the performance. In terms of bang-for-the-buck, NEC has a pair of winners. Requires either NEC's own software or BasICColor Display to calibrate. If using BasICColor, say you are not located in the US when installing the software if you want to control NEC panels (also unlocks other nifty features).

Dell U2410 ($500, or less on sale): A very good wide-gamut panel. Not up to the standards of the above monitors, but certainly adequate for use on-location (breaking a $500 screen is not the end of the world) or if you don't make your income from what your monitor shows. These screens really excel in brightly lit environments, but the downside is that shadow details and uniformity suffer at luminance settings below 140 cd/m2. Calibration is also an issue. None of the available packages can communicate over DDC reliably with the U2410. Finally, this panel is being replaced by the cheaper (in all senses of the word) U2412M.

Asus PA246Q ($500): Another good P-IPS wide-gamut panel. Across screen color and luminance uniformity can be variable; may require returning a panel to get a good one. ColorEyes Display does control the monitor using DDC which makes a huge difference in shadow uniformity. Once CED supports the i1Display Pro, this will be a very viable combination.

NEC EA232WMi ($270): Standard gamut, W-LED backlight. We use these (and the older EA231WMi) as palette monitors. I find the 1080 pixel height too small for photo editing, but as a secondary monitor it works. The new 232 version offers improved shadow resolution and less across-screen luminance variation than its predecessor. Calibrating the sucker accurately requires either an i1Display Pro or BasICColor Discus. The cost for the calibration system is roughly the same as the monitor (i1) or 5x the cost for the Discus.

Dell U2412M ($340). Also standard gamut, W-LED. Has the advantage of 16:10 aspect ratio over the NEC EA232WMi, giving you 1200 vertical pixels to work with. The extra 120 pixels may not seem that much, but they come in handy for editing. Viewing angles and both luminance and color uniformity slightly inferior to the NEC EA232WMi. The only improvement I can note over the U2410 is in the anti-glare coating, and you'll only see that if far too much light is falling on the screen in the first place. The extra $150 for the U2410 or Asus PA246Q is money well spent.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
NewsyL
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,457
Like?
Re: Pixel density
In reply to RonFlash, Jan 12, 2012

RonFlash wrote:

I use BH Photo all the time. Thanks.

I can see these newer high resolution monitors are way over priced in todays technology. When you can get 46" TV's cheaper than those monitors, it just doesn't add up to me.

So I guess when my time comes to buy the 27" varation, I'll go with the 27" 1920x1080 models, and use my old display as a 2nd display.

Except that almost all of the 1920x1080 27" monitors I am aware of, use an LCD matrix that is NOT ideal for photo viewing and editing - the " TN " tft LCD panel. Furthermore most have a 6bit panel that use a form of Frame Rate Control to simulate the 16.7 million color depth of an 8bit panel - these may cause some banding issue in fine color gradients. If it's the newer 6bit + AFRC then this is better but still it is a TN panel.

You want to find a monitor with an IPS type tft LCD panel or perhaps the new Samsung S-PLS tft LCD panels. It is a viewing angle issue where the color/gamma shifts when viewed at angles other than directly on centre.

TN panel .... http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/benq_xl2410t/viewing_angles.jpg

IPS panel .... http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/dell_u2412m/viewing_angles.jpg

.

I'm going to point you to an old old post I wrote re basic what to look for when buying an LCD for photo use. It still is a useful overview.

Part 1 ... http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&message=36665092

Part 2 ... http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&message=36665450

.

As to pricing of HDTV's.... unfortunately, in addition to having to sit 6 feet away from them to avoid seeing their huge pixels on those 1920x1080 panels, most under $1000 HDTV screens are not able to be easily calibrated to photo standards and will not show an image with accurate colors. Many of the LCD's use a form of MVA panel that also has viewing angle issues.

.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
chevysales
Senior MemberPosts: 2,704Gear list
Like?
Re: Best Monitor For Photo Editing 2012?
In reply to Ethan Hansen, Jan 13, 2012

great info in this thread... the usual suspects but what catches my eyes are Ethan's recommended values of 135/140 first time I have read that and will give it a try as I can brighten or darken my working area and will love to see difference in colors if any.

my thoughts were matching prints and maybe washed out whites a bit?

will try and see. as spyder 3 elite recommends the 140 at 6500 when i have patio door levelors open and 5800 at 120 when i am usual night working setup and its also when i usually print.

-- hide signature --

D700 paired with 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200vr f2.8 along with an SB900 to brighten things up a bit....

 chevysales's gear list:chevysales's gear list
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Apple iPhone 5s
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bronxbombers
Forum ProPosts: 18,226
Like?
Re: Pixel density
In reply to RonFlash, Jan 13, 2012

don't forget though that most tv have terrible color engines and bad uniformity, hugely so compared to stuff like NEC PA271

RonFlash wrote:

I use BH Photo all the time. Thanks.

I can see these newer high resolution monitors are way over priced in todays technology. When you can get 46" TV's cheaper than those monitors, it just doesn't add up to me.

So I guess when my time comes to buy the 27" varation, I'll go with the 27" 1920x1080 models, and use my old display as a 2nd display.

Thanks again for the tiem you took to do those searches. I appreciate it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bronxbombers
Forum ProPosts: 18,226
Like?
Re: Best Monitor For Photo Editing 2012?
In reply to chevysales, Jan 13, 2012

no need to go so blindlingly bright as 135/140 with some monitors though

my nec pa does fine 80-120 cd/m^2, you get deeper blacks by not going brighter than you need to for current room conditions too

chevysales wrote:

great info in this thread... the usual suspects but what catches my eyes are Ethan's recommended values of 135/140 first time I have read that and will give it a try as I can brighten or darken my working area and will love to see difference in colors if any.

my thoughts were matching prints and maybe washed out whites a bit?

will try and see. as spyder 3 elite recommends the 140 at 6500 when i have patio door levelors open and 5800 at 120 when i am usual night working setup and its also when i usually print.

-- hide signature --

D700 paired with 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200vr f2.8 along with an SB900 to brighten things up a bit....

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
chevysales
Senior MemberPosts: 2,704Gear list
Like?
Re: Best Monitor For Photo Editing 2012?
In reply to bronxbombers, Jan 13, 2012

bronxbombers wrote:
no need to go so blindlingly bright as 135/140 with some monitors though

my nec pa does fine 80-120 cd/m^2, you get deeper blacks by not going brighter than you need to for current room conditions too

chevysales wrote:

great info in this thread... the usual suspects but what catches my eyes are Ethan's recommended values of 135/140 first time I have read that and will give it a try as I can brighten or darken my working area and will love to see difference in colors if any.

my thoughts were matching prints and maybe washed out whites a bit?

will try and see. as spyder 3 elite recommends the 140 at 6500 when i have patio door levelors open and 5800 at 120 when i am usual night working setup and its also when i usually print.

-- hide signature --

D700 paired with 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200vr f2.8 along with an SB900 to brighten things up a bit....

thanx i actually went last nite from 5800 to 6500 leaving it at 120 and that in itself seems blinding...interesting enough my print came out too dark so back to 5800 i go.

but i will play around with the some settings just to see what Ethan is speaking of but it is the first time i have read this recommendation.

he was speaking of on site work so maybe thats out in a brighter world
--

D700 paired with 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200vr f2.8 along with an SB900 to brighten things up a bit....

 chevysales's gear list:chevysales's gear list
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Apple iPhone 5s
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tropicalsun
Regular MemberPosts: 372
Like?
Re: Pixel density
In reply to RonFlash, Jan 14, 2012

RonFlash wrote:

Which 27" monitors support this 2560x1440 resolution you mention? I am not saying there aren't such monitors.

See this thread:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1004&message=40032073&q=27+lcd&qf=m

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads