Yes.
http://www.clarkvision.com/photoinfo/choosing_an_LCD_monitor/Do you have some links so that I can educate myself?
I think I would disagree with this slightly. My experience is limited to what I've found with the two monitors I've had for the last few years (an SVA - similar to MVA and a TN) and what I've read on the net. What I've read matches my experience with these two monitors though. Images on the TN look terrible in comparison to the SVA, blown highlights, no shadow detail, visible banding etc.
... You say the silliest things. My screens are calibrated for print. WYSIWYG. It is that simple.
That makes sense. Like I said, my experience of TN screens is limited to my own and that's not particularly good. I wasn't aware the latest TN technology was that much better.And I slightly disagree, if you are seriously into photography you can manage with a TN panel, latest generations have very good contrast handling and 8 bit color rendering. When I'm editing my position behind the screen is rather static, I'm not bouncing up and down behind my screen nor am I frantic turning my head from left to right. I manage more then adequate (according to others) in rendering realistic looking pictures. It all comes down to frame of reference and at the same time 99,9% of the people are watching on non calibrated over saturated TN panels or CRT displays.
If you are a professional however it wouldn't hurt, I agree, but frame of reference will still be different , you will not see the same picture I see.
greetz,
Helena
PS.
I see the world through my eyes, not as a photographer pur sang
Simple certainly describes it ...
Color deficiency is responsible ... not the panel. And you sound pretty desperate when you must resort to that kind of argument instead of finding a resource out there that agrees with your position ... of course, there isn't one.
8 bit is still simulated by dithering ... that has been mentioned many times and the fundamental technology has not changed. It has gotten better, but is still not good.
Does not matter ... there is no position in which the colors remain accurate from the top to the bottom of the screen, or from the left to the right ... it is not a matter of shifting your head, although that makies the problem much worse.
This is true ... and so you have hit upon the one true argument for TN panels .... most people use them and so no one really knows what the image should look like.
Of course ... you are using a TN panel
It's been obvious for a long time that Lloydy's TN panels don't let him down because they don't let his non-discriminating, inexperienced customers down. If he had some local competition that used better panels, everything calibrated they would probably notice the difference and his drop in sales might be enough to cause him to reevaluate, capitulate and get with the program. Until this happens his TN panels just deliver, barely. I hope that he keeps using his TN panels. The blown highlights and other defects that they engender give his photos a quaint charm and signature that speaks "Lloydy".
... Why ? Because you say so ?
Sorry, make the excuses, but your last two edit showings were criticised by several for their deficiencies in many areas, not just colour.
Yes
.... but since you will not find a single credible source that says otherwise, I feel quite justified in passing that information along.That's an interesting comment when one considers that the simplest of Google searches will turn up information on how poorly TN panels perform and will clarify all the reasons for it.
Really? I got the sense that the man tan was a color issue.
Actually, if you look back, you will note that I fairly quickly admitted that I had bungled the Cyan balance, which raised the warmth much too high.
You are a piece of work. Use the google button on your computer if you can find it and look up the TN panel issues yourself ... (hint: don't spend much time looking for the google button) ...
although I have to admit that I compare my work on a A MVA panel (and if it's really important I do some power lifting and get my old iiyama CRT from under the dust) but truly, the differences are not easy to spot other then teh warmth of the colors but that is my personal opinion.Of course ... you are using a TN panel
--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
http://letkeman.net/Photos
And then correct it if you don't like what you see ... that's cheatingYou know what I meant
Kim, all that technical knowledge, all those technical references, all that gear, all that superior talk, yet colors on majority of photos processed by you seem to me and number of others un-natural at best.Yes
That's an interesting comment when one considers that the simplest of Google searches will turn up information on how poorly TN panels perform and will clarify all the reasons for it.
TN was invented for cheap panels for laptops andfast response gaming panels. They have gotten much better over the years (they were truly obnoxious at first) but there are limitations that cannot be overcome. No matter how much you may wish it.
Really? I got the sense that the man tan was a color issue.
Actually, if you look back, you will note that I fairly quickly admitted that I had bungled the Cyan balance, which raised the warmth much too high.
But I also posted an annotated version of the original to which no one , including you, responded. So criticism is easy sport for you and a few others, but dodging the hard questions still remains the common method on this forum, led by people specifically like you ...
You are a piece of work. Use the google button on your computer if you can find it and look up the TN panel issues yourself ... (hint: don't spend much time looking for the google button) ...
Your personal quest to make yourself look technically credible is not going to come to fruition if you take a stand against me on every issue and then argue purely from emotion ... it just makes you look a bit simple ...
At this moment, my gallery contains 7899 images. This does not include the images I uploaded to private folders just for linking here, but let's go with this number as the sum total of my body of work.
I have no idea what your parenthetical remarks might mean ... if they are about you, then I have a few comments for you:
1. Quantity of images in your galleries has nothing to do wit my question (never mind the fact that we all know quantity does not automatically bring quality).
