Wide gamut monitors - are they worth it? Dell U2717H v UP2716D

[Abrak]

Yes I know this is a pretty subjective question. I currently have 2 x wide gamut Dell display monitors (2711) that are rapidly coming to the end of their useful life. I do print (where wide gamut has its uses) but not a lot and I go to a professional printer for serious stuff. I mostly just publish stuff on the internet.

So do I really need a wide gamut monitor or would a color accurate sRGB monitor be pretty much as good (there is a US$200 difference in my country). Do the Dell UP series have 'other advantages'? Like for instance 'being more accurate' or 'needing less frequent calibration'?

 

[Simon Garrett]

Yes I know this is a pretty subjective question. I currently have 2 x wide gamut Dell display monitors (2711) that are rapidly coming to the end of their useful life. I do print (where wide gamut has its uses) but not a lot and I go to a professional printer for serious stuff. I mostly just publish stuff on the internet.

So do I really need a wide gamut monitor or would a color accurate sRGB monitor be pretty much as good (there is a US$200 difference in my country). Do the Dell UP series have 'other advantages'? Like for instance 'being more accurate' or 'needing less frequent calibration'?

 

[Pictus]

Abrak,
Excluding the bigger gamut, the advantage is that they have programmable
internal LUT(12/14bits), ordinary monitors the calibration is at the GPU LUT(8-bits).
But to calibrate the monitor LUT you MUST use an i1Display Pro + Dell DUCCS.

How to Properly Calibrate Dell Ultrasharp with PremierColor.

They are also 10-bit(per channel) monitors, if you have the proper requirements
may use Photoshop in 30-bit mode.

The standard gamut 4K Dell P2415Q and P2715Q are also 10-bit capable.

Change one monitor to sRGB mode and you will know if wide gamut is needed...
This post may also helps...

 

[bmoag]

With both wide gamut monitors and high resolution monitors (4k and up) only the person looking at the monitor can see the advantages of the wider gamut, higher resolution or both. As you are aware images will otherwise be conveyed and reproduced in more restricted gamuts and at lower resolutions.

I have both a lower resolution wide gamut monitor and the common 4k sRGB challenged monitor. I prefer the higher resolution for image viewing and processing but your mileage may vary. Processing images with either monitor in a wide color space and bit depth tends to generate indistinguishable prints.

 

[digidog]

Yes I know this is a pretty subjective question. I currently have 2 x wide gamut Dell display monitors (2711) that are rapidly coming to the end of their useful life. I do print (where wide gamut has its uses) but not a lot and I go to a professional printer for serious stuff. I mostly just publish stuff on the internet.

So do I really need a wide gamut monitor or would a color accurate sRGB monitor be pretty much as good (there is a US$200 difference in my country). Do the Dell UP series have 'other advantages'? Like for instance 'being more accurate' or 'needing less frequent calibration'?

 

[digidog]

Yes I know this is a pretty subjective question. I currently have 2 x wide gamut Dell display monitors (2711) that are rapidly coming to the end of their useful life. I do print (where wide gamut has its uses) but not a lot and I go to a professional printer for serious stuff. I mostly just publish stuff on the internet.

So do I really need a wide gamut monitor or would a color accurate sRGB monitor be pretty much as good (there is a US$200 difference in my country). Do the Dell UP series have 'other advantages'? Like for instance 'being more accurate' or 'needing less frequent calibration'?

--
http://www.salintara.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/robcoll/

Advantages of wide gamut monitors:

• More vibrant colours than standard gamut, and which better reflect the capability of photo printers (although some lab printers have a gamut no wider than sRGB).

Danger Will Robinson

Every printer I've ever plotted a color gamut is wider than sRGB color gamut but those labs demand the data in sRGB because providing a sound color managed workflow isn't on their radar. Some printers exceed Adobe RGB (1998) somewhere in their color spaces; by a great deal.

Red plot is sRGB. All these printers exceed sRGB color gamut somewhere in color space.

Disadvantages of wide gamut monitors:

• To get the advantage above, you have to calibrate/profile with a hardware colorimiter (i1, colormunki, spyder... you can't profile by eye)

But the same is true for sRGB displays.

• You need to use a colour-managed workflow. Pretty trivial really, but you need to know enough to do it.

As for all images and displays.

• Many programs are not colour managed, and colours from those programs will be very over-saturated on wide gamut monitors.

Which are problems for any RGB color space IF one cares about how the previews are presented to them.

That much is obvious, and I'm sure you know it, but the value on those pros and cons is very subjective, as you suggest.

I don't know about the specific Dell monitors you mention. In general, as wide gamut monitors are intended more for "serious" amateur and professional use, perhaps they are generally higher quality?

Well newer iPads and iPhones and newer MacBook Pro's now provide wide gamut displays and some of those customers don't know they are even serious amateurs

I'm not sure about that, but certainly some of the higher-priced wide gamut monitors (Eizo etc) provide very consistent and uniform colour.

Uniform color over the display is darn useful.

Accuracy doesn't really matter if you're going to calibrate/profile, you just need consistency.

Better, both (once we define color accuracy).

--
Andrew Rodney
Author: Color Management for Photographers
The Digital Dog

Home

 

[Abrak]

Yes I know this is a pretty subjective question. I currently have 2 x wide gamut Dell display monitors (2711) that are rapidly coming to the end of their useful life. I do print (where wide gamut has its uses) but not a lot and I go to a professional printer for serious stuff. I mostly just publish stuff on the internet.

So do I really need a wide gamut monitor or would a color accurate sRGB monitor be pretty much as good (there is a US$200 difference in my country). Do the Dell UP series have 'other advantages'? Like for instance 'being more accurate' or 'needing less frequent calibration'?

--
http://www.salintara.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/robcoll/

IF you work with image data who's gamut is wider than sRGB (and for print, you do) AND you wish to see that on-screen then the answer is yes, you want a good wide gamut display that may also emulate sRGB for viewing images without color management (which is a crap-shoot anyway).

If you look at where displays, both desktop and mobile have moved in the last year, it's going wider gamut. Apple's iPad Pro and iPhone, new laptops are using a color gamut a tad larger than Adobe RGB (1998).

Also, this idea of an accurate sRGB display is mostly marketing hype. Maybe, maybe not. Many displays have an sRGB color gamut but there's more to producing sRGB than just the color gamut! Same with Adobe RGB (1998). Even if you took a display out of the box and indeed, it actually colorimetrically produced sRGB, once it changes over time, or you make any change to the display via OSD, it's not sRGB anymore. Might be close. Might not.

IF everyone out there was using a display that really and actually produced sRGB, we'd have little need to calibrate and profile them. So it's really not the case.

--
Andrew Rodney
Author: Color Management for Photographers
The Digital Dog
http://www.digitaldog.net

Thanks for this and other replies:

1) How relevant is it really that ipad pro, iphone and some laptops have wider gamut - isnt that mostly hype? I mean its obviously good they can see 100% sRGB but beyond that the 'internet colorspace' would appear to be sRGB and isnt likely to change.

2) The last paragraph which includes 'an accurate sRGB display is mostly marketing hype' probably is at the heart of the matter as to what I really want to know. My feeling is what I am looking for is a 'consistent and accurate' color monitor BUT I dont particular mind it being 'just' sRGB 'color gamut' because that is essentially the gamut of the majority of my end product.

Dell claims its Dell U2717D (sorry not H) is sRGB but accurate (Delta<2, whatever that means), it is a US$500+ monitor so hopefully that isnt all hype. (I do calibrate my monitors with some basic and easy to use hardware). The UP2716D is a wider gamut monitor that also claims accuracy.

So really I guess, I am asking - if what I want is a 'consistent and accurate' sRGB monitor, would you start with a premium wider gamut monitor or a premium sRGB monitor - (with particular mention of the two Dell monitors.) (It is also worth mentioning (and probably pretty obvious) that I want to keep color calibration pretty simple.)

By the way I also understand that 'having a consistent and accurate' sRGB monitor for web publishing achieves very little on the basis that whatever viewing device is used at the other end is something of a 'crap shoot' but it still seems to me like a good starting point.

--
http://www.salintara.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/robcoll/

 

[digidog]

Yes I know this is a pretty subjective question. I currently have 2 x wide gamut Dell display monitors (2711) that are rapidly coming to the end of their useful life. I do print (where wide gamut has its uses) but not a lot and I go to a professional printer for serious stuff. I mostly just publish stuff on the internet.

So do I really need a wide gamut monitor or would a color accurate sRGB monitor be pretty much as good (there is a US$200 difference in my country). Do the Dell UP series have 'other advantages'? Like for instance 'being more accurate' or 'needing less frequent calibration'?

 

[Abrak]

Yes I know this is a pretty subjective question. I currently have 2 x wide gamut Dell display monitors (2711) that are rapidly coming to the end of their useful life. I do print (where wide gamut has its uses) but not a lot and I go to a professional printer for serious stuff. I mostly just publish stuff on the internet.

So do I really need a wide gamut monitor or would a color accurate sRGB monitor be pretty much as good (there is a US$200 difference in my country). Do the Dell UP series have 'other advantages'? Like for instance 'being more accurate' or 'needing less frequent calibration'?

 

[Chris Noble]

Yes I know this is a pretty subjective question. I currently have 2 x wide gamut Dell display monitors (2711) that are rapidly coming to the end of their useful life.

What is causing that?

 

[digidog]

Yes I know this is a pretty subjective question. I currently have 2 x wide gamut Dell display monitors (2711) that are rapidly coming to the end of their useful life. I do print (where wide gamut has its uses) but not a lot and I go to a professional printer for serious stuff. I mostly just publish stuff on the internet.

So do I really need a wide gamut monitor or would a color accurate sRGB monitor be pretty much as good (there is a US$200 difference in my country). Do the Dell UP series have 'other advantages'? Like for instance 'being more accurate' or 'needing less frequent calibration'?

 

[Abrak]

Yes I know this is a pretty subjective question. I currently have 2 x wide gamut Dell display monitors (2711) that are rapidly coming to the end of their useful life.

What is causing that?

Well one of the two monitors is especially problematic.

1) It doesnt really 'hold' its calibration and the colors become noticeably 'warm' within a few days. Having two monitors small changes are pretty noticeable and it really is irritating to have the same photo look different on side by side screens.

2) It also has a discoloration (that almost looks like a watermark) in the top right of the screen - sometimes very noticeable, sometimes less so. The screen is 6 years old and has served me pretty well, so I cant complain but I doubt it is worth getting it fixed.

 

[Abrak]

I'm not sure what your goals are. But again, IF you're working with images who's gamut exceeds sRGB and you wish to see those colors, and they fall within Adobe RGB (1998) gamut, an Adobe RGB (1998) color gamut display would allow you to see those colors. And you should be able to emulate an sRGB gamut too, depending on the display.

I don't know if that is important to you or not. It is very important to me; I don't use sRGB for anything other than output to the web and mobile devices where it's the most appropriate color space today, for that task. This IS changing.

 

[digidog]

I'm not sure what your goals are. But again, IF you're working with images who's gamut exceeds sRGB and you wish to see those colors, and they fall within Adobe RGB (1998) gamut, an Adobe RGB (1998) color gamut display would allow you to see those colors. And you should be able to emulate an sRGB gamut too, depending on the display.

I don't know if that is important to you or not. It is very important to me; I don't use sRGB for anything other than output to the web and mobile devices where it's the most appropriate color space today, for that task. This IS changing.

 

[Chris Noble]

Yes I know this is a pretty subjective question. I currently have 2 x wide gamut Dell display monitors (2711) that are rapidly coming to the end of their useful life.

What is causing that?

Well one of the two monitors is especially problematic.

1) It doesnt really 'hold' its calibration and the colors become noticeably 'warm' within a few days. Having two monitors small changes are pretty noticeable and it really is irritating to have the same photo look different on side by side screens.

2) It also has a discoloration (that almost looks like a watermark) in the top right of the screen - sometimes very noticeable, sometimes less so. The screen is 6 years old and has served me pretty well, so I cant complain but I doubt it is worth getting it fixed.

Interesting. I think the CCFL backlights age faster than the LEDs.

 

[CAcreeks]

From a non-theoretical standpoint, how can we tell what a wide gamut monitor offers? I have visited Best Buy show rooms, and in demos I cannot tell the difference between Macbooks that purport to offer DCI-P3 color space, and older ones that do not. When I look at the latest (U)HDTV models with DCI-P3, I see that cyans look more saturated, but reds and oranges do not, which is where that color space has advantages over Adobe RGB and sRGB.

If I took looked at an online Macbeth color chart with appropriately assigned colors, would the cyan square look better on a wide gamut monitor, because Macbeth cyan is out of gamut for sRGB? Better how? Would it look more saturated?

Over HDMI I displayed the Macbeth chart on our LG HDTV, and it is way oversaturated. Does that mean our HDTV is wide gamut?

Abrak wrote goals:
1) My number one goal is that with a two monitor set up, the screens on the two monitors 'match each other'. I find nothing more irritating than my photos looking different on two side by side screens of exactly the same model. While I would like perfectly calibrated colors, that is definitely secondary.

Agreed. On my two Dell U2412M monitors manufactured in 2013, I run Windows on the left and Linux on the right. In Firefox, the Macbeth chart looks exactly the same on both monitors, and close to the physical Macbeth chart borrowed from our video guy. I do not own color calibration hardware, but every now and then I press factory reset.. I'm very happy with these monitors.

P.S. about printing:. With GIMP soft proof, I get a good idea how an inkjet print will look. I don't print very often, but when I do, it's with Dos Equis ink. Sorry, I mean that the print image has the "wrong" brightness and sharpness for online display.

 

[digidog]

From a non-theoretical standpoint, how can we tell what a wide gamut monitor offers? I have visited Best Buy show rooms, and in demos I cannot tell the difference between Macbooks that purport to offer DCI-P3 color space, and older ones that do not.

Use an image like this on each:

http://www.digitaldog.net/files/2014PrinterTestFileFlat.tif.zip

When I look at the latest (U)HDTV models with DCI-P3, I see that cyans look more saturated, but reds and oranges do not, which is where that color space has advantages over Adobe RGB and sRGB.

The green primary is where the color gamut is much larger. But cyan/blue and extending off red into some yellows a tad too. Best to plot in 3D as seen here:


Semi transparent gamut is Adobe RGB (1998).

If I took looked at an online Macbeth color chart with appropriately assigned colors, would the cyan square look better on a wide gamut monitor, because Macbeth cyan is out of gamut for sRGB? Better how? Would it look more saturated?

Only a bit. Not the best way to test the two kinds of displays.

Over HDMI I displayed the Macbeth chart on our LG HDTV, and it is way oversaturated. Does that mean our HDTV is wide gamut?

Sound like this wasn't color managed?

Abrak wrote goals:
1) My number one goal is that with a two monitor set up, the screens on the two monitors 'match each other'. I find nothing more irritating than my photos looking different on two side by side screens of exactly the same model. While I would like perfectly calibrated colors, that is definitely secondary.

Agreed. On my two Dell U2412M monitors manufactured in 2013, I run Windows on the left and Linux on the right. In Firefox, the Macbeth chart looks exactly the same on both monitors, and close to the physical Macbeth chart borrowed from our video guy. I do not own color calibration hardware, but every now and then I press factory reset.. I'm very happy with these monitors.

The MacBeth is not the kind of image you should be using.

P.S. about printing:. With GIMP soft proof, I get a good idea how an inkjet print will look. I don't print very often, but when I do, it's with Dos Equis ink. Sorry, I mean that the print image has the "wrong" brightness and sharpness for online display.

--
Andrew Rodney
Author: Color Management for Photographers
The Digital Dog
http://www.digitaldog.net