Reading mode: Light Dark

Wide gamut monitor questions, Adobe RGB, printing, profiling

Go to last post
G

gthervey

Leading Member
Messages
629
Reaction score
0
Location
VA, US
I am looking into getting a wide gamut monitor. I consider myself fairly knowledgeable regarding color management issues, but the discussions regarding wide gamut monitors has me confused.

I currently use a color-managed system. I shoot Nikon DSLRs in the Adobe RGB color space. My primary editor is Nikon Capture NX2, but I use Photoshop CS3 as well. I profile my monitors with a Spyder 3 Elite system.

My current primary monitor is an old LCD panel that came with a Gateway PC that I got years ago. I am running Windows Vista Home Premium (it came with the computer; what can I say?). (Actually, I run a dual monitor system off one nVidia card; my second monitor is a cheap LCD panel.)

I want to replace my primary monitor with a one that will give me better color reproduction and control. The Dell 2209WA gets really good reviews, and it is very affordable, but it only seems to cover the sRBG color space. The wide gamut monitors seem to cover part or most of the Abdobe RGB space, but they are much more expensive and, based on the reviews, seem to be harder to calibrate/profile, and many seem to have problems (the pink/green color cast issue, for example).

So, my first question is: what is the real advantage of a wide gamut monitor? I realize that, since I shoot in Adobe RGB, it would make sense to edit the image in that color space (or ProPhoto, which I use most of the time). With a wide gamut monitor, I realize that I would actually be able to see the effect of the edits in that space without the limitations that I now experience with my old sRGB monitor.

But, the end product of my work will be either a print from my Canon i9900 ink jet printer, a print from a printing house (like MPix), or a web posting, all of which are limited to the sRGB space. Since I will have to convert my Abobe RGB files "down" to the sRGB space for output, what then is the real advantage of post processing on a wide gamut monitor?

A few other questions:

Are wide gamut monitors really harder to calibrate/profile?

Can they actually be calibrated, as opposed to simply profiled? (My understanding has been that LCD monitors are not truly calibrated but that they are really only profiled.)

I still plan to use a dual monitor system, and I will use my old sRGB LCD panel as the second monitor. Although I primarily use the second monitor to hold tools, etc., I would still prefer that it be profiled. My Spyder3 Elite allows me to use separate profiles for my existing two sRGB monitors. Can I create one wide gamut profile for a wide gamut monitor and one sRGB profile for the old monitor?

Am I going to need a new video card? If so, what do I want to look for in terms of specs and features?

I have already read the info and reviews on the PRAD site, the Anantech site, and the helpful information previously posted by NewsyL here http://forums.dpreview.com/...forums/read.asp?forum=1004&message=32608747 so I don’t need those references again.

Any additional help would be appreciated.

--
Geoffrey T. Hervey
The more I learn, the less I know.
 
"Since I will have to convert my Abobe RGB files "down" to the sRGB space for output, what then is the real advantage of post processing on a wide gamut monitor?"

I've been asking myself that same question. I am certainly no color expert but I'm told the advantages of wider-than-sRGB-gamuts primarily apply to professional printing applications that can actually get some benefit from that because their entire production process is wide-gamut aware.

As a hobbyist photographer who shoots primarily for Web presentation, the proliferation of wide-gamut monitors seems more of a pain than a technology advancement. I would prefer an sRGB-gamut monitor if that means what I see in Photoshop and Internet Explorer are the same and when others see my photos on their monitors the colors are very close to what I see on mine. I'm terrified of spending $$$ for a wide-gamut monitor only to see possibly uncorrectable characteristic "sunburns" for skin tones.

AFAIK the only sRGB IPS monitors currently available in the U.S. are the Dell 2209WA and the NEC2490WUXI2, so if you are looking for wide gamut you have quite a bit more choice, although I don't understand why that is. I would expect most monitors to be standard gamut with a few wide gamut models available for printing-industry professionals.
 
Brent Allen Thale said:
AFAIK the only sRGB IPS monitors currently available in the U.S. are the Dell 2209WA and the NEC2490WUXI2, so if you are looking for wide gamut you have quite a bit more choice, although I don't understand why that is. I would expect most monitors to be standard gamut with a few wide gamut models available for printing-industry professionals.
Click to expand...
Actually, I believe the new NEC LCD2490WUXi2 will qualify as a wide gamut with 100% sRGB and 90%+ of the AdobeRGB color space. I have not yet seen a specific confirmation of this spec - waiting for a detailed test report from Prad.de or elsewhere.

I'm sureit will have a specific sRGB mode but can't say how "calibratable" this will be - likely the in monitor RGB sliders will disabled in this mode so any tweaking to its gamut will be via adjustments to the LUT of the video card.

I would not fear wide gamut. Just know what to expect. Your Windoze desktop will be overly saturated in the reds and greens because it is not color managed. So if you have a nice family picture you like to use as a background, be prepared for rosy cheeks and really green grass, or something like that.

If you have your Color Management set up right, pointing to the correct profiles, viewing images off of photo web sites should be fine if using a color managed browser such as FireFox (hoping v3.5.x.x fixes their ICC v4 bug real soon). FireFox 3.0.x.x has not problem with either ICC v2 or ICC v4 profiles.

Viewing your images off your hard drive will also appear normal if viewing with color managed software and again using the correct profile.

Wide gamut monitors are no more difficult to calibrate than sRGB monitors using a current hardware calibrator.

The one point that has proven a problem is that people try to calibrate a wide gamut monitor with their old Spyder2 units. They need to upgrade to a Spyder3 to get a sensor that is wide gamut compatible. Another point is that the economy version of the Spyder3 has crippled software (I'm not sure if this is the case with the i1D2 Lite) and does not permit calibrating to a custom white (or black) luminance value. As white luminance is the key to setting brightness levels and hence, successful print matching, my personal opinion is to get the more expensive full featured version of the calibrator and have a system that calibrates for RGB, Temperature, Gamma, AND Brightness, all in one pass.

.
--


Newsy http://newsy.smugmug.com

.
 
NewsyL,

I have been following your posts, and you clearly know a lot about this issue (if not, you put on a good show...).

I still am not sure that I understand the benefit of using a wide gamut monitor so that I can work in a bigger space if I ultimately am going to have to convert down to sRGB to print. My belief is that, even though I will eventually convert, the edits will map to sRGB better if I work in Adobe RGB or even ProPhoto than if I never leave sRGB. Since I have never really seen or worked with a wide gamut monitor, however, I really dont know how that plays out in practice.

Can you run through the reasons for using a wide gamut monitor for a DSLR shooter who shoots in Adobe but prints to sRGB?

--
Geoffrey T. Hervey
The more I learn, the less I know.
 
"Actually, I believe the new NEC LCD2490WUXi2 will qualify as a wide gamut with 100% sRGB and 90%+ of the AdobeRGB color space. I have not yet seen a specific confirmation of this spec - waiting for a detailed test report from Prad.de or elsewhere."

I hope that's not true because that's the model I was leaning towards. The sites quoted below, including the hopefully authoritative NEC site, list the new model as continuing as sRGB gamut. So far the only criticisms I've seen are high price and perceived brightness fluctuations when viewing at an angle.

NEC Site:

"Touting many advanced color performance technologies, the 24” NEC MultiSync LCD2490WUXi2 equips you with all of the features and benefits ideal for high-end graphics applications. Color gamut ideal for sRGB applications."

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=39226
24.1": NEC MultiSync LCD2490WUXi2-BK, 1920x1200 (16:10)

Panel: soft anti-glare H-IPS w/ A-TW-Pol, 72% NTSC, 16.7M colors...2490WUXi2 revision does NOT have A-TW polarizer; this polarizer is no longer manufactured!
 
Brent Allen Thale said:
"Actually, I believe the new NEC LCD2490WUXi2 will qualify as a wide gamut with 100% sRGB and 90%+ of the AdobeRGB color space. I have not yet seen a specific confirmation of this spec - waiting for a detailed test report from Prad.de or elsewhere."

I hope that's not true because that's the model I was leaning towards. The sites quoted below, including the hopefully authoritative NEC site, list the new model as continuing as sRGB gamut. So far the only criticisms I've seen are high price and perceived brightness fluctuations when viewing at an angle.
Click to expand...
Pure speculation on my part at this time. Based upon panel suppliers and industry trends. Hence I wait for a detailed review.

.

--


Newsy http://newsy.smugmug.com

.
 
gthervey said:
NewsyL,

Can you run through the reasons for using a wide gamut monitor for a DSLR shooter who shoots in Adobe but prints to sRGB?
Click to expand...
Well... this is where I stumble and fall. I don't use it myself and I don't consider myself well versed on the printing side other than that I'm aware of the need for paper profiles. I've read that there are possibly printers for the home market that can print into the AdobeRGB spectrum but I don't know for sure.

If I used AdobeRGB, I'm sure I would want to be able to see the effects of my post processing workflow before saving the image to a file with an embedded AdobeRGB profile and/or sRGB profile.

Other than for your viewing on your own system, there may be some desire to having a legacy copy should the day come that future technologies will enable economical (ha ha) printing at home in AdobeRGB or cause a shift in the commercial side so more printers will accept files in the AdobeRGB color space.

I'm sure there are people who use AdobeRGB who can rationalize this better.

.

--


Newsy http://newsy.smugmug.com

.
 
gthervey said:
I still am not sure that I understand the benefit of using a wide gamut monitor so that I can work in a bigger space if I ultimately am going to have to convert down to sRGB to print.
Click to expand...
Quite a few printers have a gamut beyond sRGB. For example, the mid range Epsons such as the R800/R1800/R1900 (and the more expensive ones) do, and I assume, the equivalent Canons and HPs. Some print companies can take images profiled in Adobe RGB, I believe, and print wider than sRGB.
--
Simon
 
gthervey said:
So, my first question is: what is the real advantage of a wide gamut monitor? I realize that, since I shoot in Adobe RGB, it would make sense to edit the image in that color space (or ProPhoto, which I use most of the time). With a wide gamut monitor, I realize that I would actually be able to see the effect of the edits in that space without the limitations that I now experience with my old sRGB monitor.

But, the end product of my work will be either a print from my Canon i9900 ink jet printer, a print from a printing house (like MPix), or a web posting, all of which are limited to the sRGB space. Since I will have to convert my Abobe RGB files "down" to the sRGB space for output, what then is the real advantage of post processing on a wide gamut monitor?
Click to expand...
Inkjet Printers are not limited to sRGB. Although their color space is limited they have true advantages when it comes to their native ink colors, CMYK. Especially photo inkjet printers like yours are able to reproduce colors that are outside of the sRGB colorspace. AdobeRGB has been developed to address this problem. It does encompass most of the printer color spaces.

In order to get the best results out of your printer you'll need a good icc profile for your paper/ink combination. Printing using icc profiles usually involves turning of any color management in the printer driver, so the printer is working in it's native color space, which is not sRGB!

In this printing process you want to soft proof what your result will be before you actually do a print and this is when a wide-gamut monitor has a true advantage. As it is not limited to sRGB it will most likely be able to give you a true preview of what you'll get.
 
Even if you do not print your images, surely there is an advantage to having access to a wider gamut of colours while post-processing and surely this would remain valid even if you convert the image to sRGB as one of your final steps?

Joel
 
javsa said:
Even if you do not print your images, surely there is an advantage to having access to a wider gamut of colours while post-processing and surely this would remain valid even if you convert the image to sRGB as one of your final steps?

Joel
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you are getting at. Having more colors for post processing is primarily a question of your image colors and the working space you've choosen. Depending on the color capabilities of your monitor you might be able to actually see more or less of it.

If you convert your image to sRGB then your advantage is gone. You are throwing away the colors that you managed to retain. Your final color space conversion should always depend on your intended output. For web use sRGB, for printing use the printer color space, for archiving use your working color space ... and so forth.
 
frteskesc said:
Inkjet Printers are not limited to sRGB. Although their color space is limited they have true advantages when it comes to their native ink colors, CMYK. Especially photo inkjet printers like yours are able to reproduce colors that are outside of the sRGB colorspace. AdobeRGB has been developed to address this problem. It does encompass most of the printer color spaces.

In order to get the best results out of your printer you'll need a good icc profile for your paper/ink combination.
Click to expand...
Interesting comment regarding the capabilities of inkjet printers to take advantage of a bigger color space. I have always been under the impression that they throw away any color info outside of the sRGB space. I will have to look into that further. Do you have any references for that, by any chance? I would like to read up on that.

Regarding ICC profiles, you are right. I actually have a handful of custom profiles for different papers. I bought them from Cathy's Profiles, which I highly recommend. http://www.cathysprofiles.com/

--
Geoffrey T. Hervey
The more I learn, the less I know.
 
"I would not fear wide gamut. Just know what to expect. Your Windoze desktop will be overly saturated in the reds and greens because it is not color managed. So if you have a nice family picture you like to use as a background, be prepared for rosy cheeks and really green grass, or something like that."

I don't understand how an enthusiast-level user would consider that to be acceptable. If I was spending $500+ for a "good" monitor, I would expect it to be able to display my desktop and browser graphics at least as well as a $199 Wal-Mart special.

It seems the main problem here is that buying monitors over the Internet sight unseen is inherently a flawed process, especially considering the lack of true standards and the reportedly abysmal quality control of many manufacturers. If I could only see the monitors I could determine quickly what level of quality I would be willing to pay for. Unfortunately I've been to Best Buy and Fry's here in the San Francisco Bay Area, and they only have low-end monitors except for the Apple Cinema Displays which are another can of worms for PC users.
 
frteskesc said:
gthervey said:
Do you have any references for that, by any chance? I would like to read up on that.
Click to expand...
I don't have a lot but maybe this could be a good starting point for you:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sRGB-AdobeRGB1998.htm

It pretty well compares the to working spaces and also shows their impact on printing.
Click to expand...
Very informative link. This discussion even includes my printer (Canon i9900). Thanks very much!

--
Geoffrey T. Hervey
The more I learn, the less I know.
 
Brent Allen Thale said:
"I would not fear wide gamut. Just know what to expect. Your Windoze desktop will be overly saturated in the reds and greens because it is not color managed. So if you have a nice family picture you like to use as a background, be prepared for rosy cheeks and really green grass, or something like that."

I don't understand how an enthusiast-level user would consider that to be acceptable. If I was spending $500+ for a "good" monitor, I would expect it to be able to display my desktop and browser graphics at least as well as a $199 Wal-Mart special.
Click to expand...
Then complain to Microsoft because it has nothing to do with the monitor. It has everything to do with the fact that Microsoft elected not color manage the desktop.
Brent Allen Thale said:
It seems the main problem here is that buying monitors over the Internet sight unseen is inherently a flawed process, especially considering the lack of true standards and the reportedly abysmal quality control of many manufacturers. If I could only see the monitors I could determine quickly what level of quality I would be willing to pay for. Unfortunately I've been to Best Buy and Fry's here in the San Francisco Bay Area, and they only have low-end monitors except for the Apple Cinema Displays which are another can of worms for PC users.
Click to expand...
LOL well... there are a lot of people who go into those stores and still come home with a monitor that is not ideal for image editing even after looking at it for as long as they like comparing it to other monitors in the store. They really don't know what they are supposed to be looking for and/or what is important in the spec. For example... people buying a LCD monitor because it has a 30,000:1 contrast ratio and the other only had a 20,000:1 ratio but they don't realize these are dynamic contrast ratios available only in one viewing mode which is not the mode the monitor is going to be in if they want to adjust RGB for calibration. Most good image editing monitor don't exceed a 1000:1 static contrast ratio when correctly calibrated.

--


Newsy http://newsy.smugmug.com

.
 
The Epson 3800 will print with the aRGB as opposed to the narrower sRGB. This is what I use and I LOVE the results. Nikon D700 in raw, PS CS4 set to work in aRGB, printer set to print in aRGB. They all need to be using the same color gamut. Some pro service bureaus use aRGB, the mass producing outfits use sRGB.
--
Steve Bingham
http://www.dustylens.com
http://www.ghost-town-photography.com
 
gthervey said:
I currently use a color-managed system. I shoot Nikon DSLRs in the Adobe RGB color space. My primary editor is Nikon Capture NX2, but I use Photoshop CS3 as well. I profile my monitors with a Spyder 3 Elite system.
Click to expand...
Regardless of your monitor, you can make a significant upgrade to the quality of your photos by shooting in RAW rather then jpg. If your shooting in RAW, then the sRGB or aRGB setting doesn't matter, RAW encompasses all the data your camera can gather.

And if you have Photoshop, there is no need to use Nikon's RAW converter. Adobe provides more processing capability.

Beyond that, I still don't know if a wide gamut monitor is useful. It seems to have some benefit to printing, if I'm reading the content of this thread correctly. I've also read that they can cause problems viewing some photos on the web correctly though.

I'd like to get a better handle on this myself eventually.
 
gthervey said:
I am looking into getting a wide gamut monitor. I consider myself fairly knowledgeable regarding color management issues, but the discussions regarding wide gamut monitors has me confused.

I currently use a color-managed system. I shoot Nikon DSLRs in the Adobe RGB color space. My primary editor is Nikon Capture NX2, but I use Photoshop CS3 as well. I profile my monitors with a Spyder 3 Elite system.

My current primary monitor is an old LCD panel that came with a Gateway PC that I got years ago. I am running Windows Vista Home Premium (it came with the computer; what can I say?). (Actually, I run a dual monitor system off one nVidia card; my second monitor is a cheap LCD panel.)

I want to replace my primary monitor with a one that will give me better color reproduction and control. The Dell 2209WA gets really good reviews, and it is very affordable, but it only seems to cover the sRBG color space. The wide gamut monitors seem to cover part or most of the Abdobe RGB space, but they are much more expensive and, based on the reviews, seem to be harder to calibrate/profile, and many seem to have problems (the pink/green color cast issue, for example).

So, my first question is: what is the real advantage of a wide gamut monitor? I realize that, since I shoot in Adobe RGB, it would make sense to edit the image in that color space (or ProPhoto, which I use most of the time). With a wide gamut monitor, I realize that I would actually be able to see the effect of the edits in that space without the limitations that I now experience with my old sRGB monitor.

But, the end product of my work will be either a print from my Canon i9900 ink jet printer, a print from a printing house (like MPix), or a web posting, all of which are limited to the sRGB space. Since I will have to convert my Abobe RGB files "down" to the sRGB space for output, what then is the real advantage of post processing on a wide gamut monitor?

A few other questions:

Are wide gamut monitors really harder to calibrate/profile?

Can they actually be calibrated, as opposed to simply profiled? (My understanding has been that LCD monitors are not truly calibrated but that they are really only profiled.)

I still plan to use a dual monitor system, and I will use my old sRGB LCD panel as the second monitor. Although I primarily use the second monitor to hold tools, etc., I would still prefer that it be profiled. My Spyder3 Elite allows me to use separate profiles for my existing two sRGB monitors. Can I create one wide gamut profile for a wide gamut monitor and one sRGB profile for the old monitor?

Am I going to need a new video card? If so, what do I want to look for in terms of specs and features?

I have already read the info and reviews on the PRAD site, the Anantech site, and the helpful information previously posted by NewsyL here http://forums.dpreview.com/...forums/read.asp?forum=1004&message=32608747 so I don’t need those references again.

Any additional help would be appreciated.

--
Geoffrey T. Hervey
The more I learn, the less I know.
Click to expand...
having a d700 and using a wide gamut monitor along with just using NX2 and also with the canon printer i followed jason odells book regarding working in prophoto using his download link and installing then picking in NX2 as working profile.

i shoot in adobe rgb and print on canon pro 9000 mark2 i do use canon software for my printing easy photo print pro, i do have cs5 and the plugin for printing for cs5 but i hardly ever even open cs5.

while my workflow is wide gamut and has been for 4 years now i do browse in IE9 and previous versions and deal with some "sony" like colors on web pages but have always thought it was a worth while trade off.

--

D700 paired with 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200vr f2.8 and now an SB900 for something else to learn...
 
I produce work for web, book and magazines. I use a NEC2490/2 which is as others have noted sRGB. I take photos with a dslr in sRGB mode. No publisher has said to me yet that the colour in my material is wrong or needs to be adjusted.

I started with a Sony monitor and went to a NEC2690 display - the NEC2690 has a wide colour gamut. I had constant colour problems - colour management hell - with the 2690 - which is a lovely display in all other respects. It has an sRGB emulation mode but this did not solve the colour management problems that came up and I got tired of having to fix colour problems.

With the NEC2490/2 I have no colour problems at all. I don't even have to think about colour issues. It is beyond me why display manufacturers seem to be opting for wide gamut displays alone. If I could find a good native sRGB 26/27/30" display I'd buy it but there aren't any as far as I know. I may even buy another 2490/2 while they are still available and just store it.

For me, wide colour gamut displays are a distraction not a help.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top