[OT] Recomendation for LCD for Photo editing with Matrox P650?
Rick
> I am totally lost on finding an LCD which would be suitable for
> photo editing. I realize that a CRT might be better. However, my
> old Viewsonic PT775 is starting to go out and I have dreams of
> recapturing some desk space and losing the perch for cats. Gaming
> is not important. I am primarily interested in color accuracy.
>
> I have a Matrox P650 in an XP machine. Due to price, I am
> primarily looking at 17" monitors, but will consider one that is
> slightly larger if it is a good value.
>
> The reviews I have been looking at say that the color is actually
> better in analog than it is with digital. I believe that this is
> because of the lack of adjustments on the monitors when using
> DVI. However, I am guessing that these reviewers must not have
> been working with Matrox cards. It seems that Coloreal should
> adequately compensate for the lack of adjustments on the monitor
> in DVI. Is this true?
Lack of color gamut is a function of the backlight technology
used in LCD monitors, it's not a function of video controllers.
Unless you have the better part of $3000 to spend, you won't
get proper near-blacks and near-whites on an LCD. Period.
Rick
Arthur Hagen
> Lack of color gamut is a function of the backlight technology
> used in LCD monitors, it's not a function of video controllers.
> Unless you have the better part of $3000 to spend, you won't
> get proper near-blacks and near-whites on an LCD. Period.
Even then, you won't get a solution that can display _nearly_ as large part
of the colour spectrum as a CRT monitor. The LCDs simply don't have the
ability to display all the nuances.
Regards,
--
*Art
Rick
> person. The CRTs carried in stores around here are low grade,
> mostly the viewsonic A series. The LCDs are also a disgrace.
> There doesn't seem to be a store that caries the good stuff on
> the east side of San Francisco Bay.
>
> Rumor has it that better 17" LCDs do exist for about $600 to $750
> (US). For example, Tom's Hardware says of the Samsung SyncMaster
> 172X (approx. $600 US): "The screen can reproduce 99% of colors.
> Only black, true, pure black cannot be shown. 98% of the colors
> (DeltaE < 2) are correctly displayed, 93% (DeltaE < 1) are
> perfect." While this may not be as good as the very best CRT, it
> doesn't sound exactly horrendous. Unfortunately, I cannot find
> one anywhere around here. It would be nice to see what a few of
> my own pictures would look like.
Most images contain at least some blacks or near-blacks, so the
reviewer is simply playing a numbers game -- it's not the 99%
(or 98%, or 93%, or whatever) that's the problem, it's the other
few percent.
The bottom line is that decent CRTs such as the Sony F520 or
Mitsubishi 2070 have contrast ratios which exceed 750:1 or
800:1, while the best consumer-grade LCDs max out at around
600:1 (most range from 400:1 or 450:1). That equates to
around HALF to TWO-THIRDS the color gamut of even a
midrange CRT. It's the primary reason one doesn't see pro
photographers or photo labs using LCDs for image editing.
Rick
SteveG
http://www.sharpsystems.com/products/lcd_monitors/18-20_inch/
Can't find much info on them otherwise...
"Rick" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:bt1r1f$2cdsv$1...@ID-82690.news.uni-berlin.de...