$500 or less color accurate monitor for photoshop acuracy?

[FantasyZoneGaming]

lol i went on eizo's site and that crap is for the pro's. like in the thousands of dollars range.
i want somthing much better than the imac displays that i see in my collage class because i've seen how horrible they are. i want MUCH better. somthing that can get near a 120 luninance. im also thinking on getting a cheap $70 or $150 color munki for profiling, but thats in the futcher after i get off the tv im using via hdmi! haha!

im looking at a groop discussion. but also looking for an answer to myself = all price ranges apreciated.

[Revenant_Knight]

引用自 Jamebonds1：

That is not true. If manufacturers lie to me, i would sued them. But drop it calling manufacturers a lie, it prove number of contrast in specs on newegg. I have ASUS monitor with contrast 20,000:1, do it look like ASUS people lie to us? No.

...wow....WOW... Really? I don't know where to start here. In fact, I'm not going to. Wow.

[mark]

I've personally used the ASUS PA246Q(also its PA248Q LED refresh) and the HP zr2440w. All of these are under the $500 price point and 1920x1200 (which you're going to want the 16:10 for the extra space). These monitors are excellent, fit what you need, and worth looking into the reviews for them (well, maybe not the 248Q, as it does compromise for a cheaper price).

[em_t_hed]

you'd be better off to do your research elsewhere then here. i have yet to see any evidence of 'color accuracy' being any kind of priority in a gaming world.

no offense intended to the people of this forum.

color accuracy also depneds on your final output. i mean you can probably get a monitor, monitor calibrator, and then if you end up printing, have problems on the print end because printers have problems reproducing colors anyways. one color i can think of is orange being a difficult color.

you should be looking for a monitor using display port connections over hdmi. 10 bit. wide color gamut (which will inculde gamuts like sRGB, Adobe RGB, ProPhoto RGB, NTSC, etc)

I've calibrated several monitors (hardware calibration, with spectrometer, not the by the eye thing that comes with macs) and most only display sRGB. To break out of this you're gonna have to be willing to spend some bucks.

[Jamebonds1]

引用自 em_t_hed：

you'd be better off to do your research elsewhere then here. i have yet to see any evidence of 'color accuracy' being any kind of priority in a gaming world.

no offense intended to the people of this forum.

color accuracy also depneds on your final output. i mean you can probably get a monitor, monitor calibrator, and then if you end up printing, have problems on the print end because printers have problems reproducing colors anyways. one color i can think of is orange being a difficult color.

you should be looking for a monitor using display port connections over hdmi. 10 bit. wide color gamut (which will inculde gamuts like sRGB, Adobe RGB, ProPhoto RGB, NTSC, etc)

I've calibrated several monitors (hardware calibration, with spectrometer, not the by the eye thing that comes with macs) and most only display sRGB. To break out of this you're gonna have to be willing to spend some bucks.

I hate to put up like that to you but DVI is still work great for Adobe Photoshop. Also DisplayPort is still new, so it is expensive. OP can choose either HDMI, DVI or DisplayPort. Not that matter. The main problem is sun and brigth light room, don't you agree? That's the problem that OP have to setting up somewhere place to view and edit picture better.

Also this can be good choose for PhotoShop.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236302

[Demented]

The high refresh rate and low price of TN screens are nice for gaming, but they also have the worst color accuracy and viewing angles. Incidentally, if you know what's good for you, you'll turn off dynamic contrast as soon as you get the chance.

引用自 marK：

I've personally used the ASUS PA246Q(also its PA248Q LED refresh) and the HP zr2440w. All of these are under the $500 price point and 1920x1200 (which you're going to want the 16:10 for the extra space). These monitors are excellent, fit what you need, and worth looking into the reviews for them (well, maybe not the 248Q, as it does compromise for a cheaper price).

http://reviews.cnet.com/lcd-monitors/asus-pa246q/4505-3174_7-34505604.html

Is that reddish hue they mention an actual problem, or is it just because the reviewer was staring at a bright white screen for too long?

[Jamebonds1]

引用自 Demented：

The high refresh rate and low price of TN screens are nice for gaming, but they also have the worst color accuracy and viewing angles. Incidentally, if you know what's good for you, you'll turn off dynamic contrast as soon as you get the chance.

引用自 marK：

I've personally used the ASUS PA246Q(also its PA248Q LED refresh) and the HP zr2440w. All of these are under the $500 price point and 1920x1200 (which you're going to want the 16:10 for the extra space). These monitors are excellent, fit what you need, and worth looking into the reviews for them (well, maybe not the 248Q, as it does compromise for a cheaper price).

http://reviews.cnet.com/lcd-monitors/asus-pa246q/4505-3174_7-34505604.html

Is that reddish hue they mention an actual problem, or is it just because the reviewer was staring at a bright white screen for too long?

You don't have to post like that to marK you know, it could trigger a flame wars. If dislike their thing, leave as it is. Anyway Asus PA246Q is a IPS which are a good for photoshop, video edit and CAD. Plus it is 50,000 contrast ratio. IPS monitor are great photo edit and correct color with highest contrast ratio, but it is expesive.

High refresh rate and TN are worst for color accuracy and viewing angles, is not true. It depend on contrast ratio and different type of LCD. Like i have TFT with 20,000 contrast ratio, and i have no trouble at viewing different angles and easily to see the color. I remember i was struggle to watch move on my old LCD with 700:1 contrast ratio. Very dark and so-wrong color on movie. Also it is important to getting monitor at under 5 ms if doing video edit.

Also you should know that some reviewer are useless just to make us people having fear.

[em_t_hed]

引用自 Jamebonds1：

引用自 em_t_hed：

you'd be better off to do your research elsewhere then here. i have yet to see any evidence of 'color accuracy' being any kind of priority in a gaming world.

no offense intended to the people of this forum.

color accuracy also depneds on your final output. i mean you can probably get a monitor, monitor calibrator, and then if you end up printing, have problems on the print end because printers have problems reproducing colors anyways. one color i can think of is orange being a difficult color.

you should be looking for a monitor using display port connections over hdmi. 10 bit. wide color gamut (which will inculde gamuts like sRGB, Adobe RGB, ProPhoto RGB, NTSC, etc)

I've calibrated several monitors (hardware calibration, with spectrometer, not the by the eye thing that comes with macs) and most only display sRGB. To break out of this you're gonna have to be willing to spend some bucks.

I hate to put up like that to you but DVI is still work great for Adobe Photoshop. Also DisplayPort is still new, so it is expensive. OP can choose either HDMI, DVI or DisplayPort. Not that matter. The main problem is sun and brigth light room, don't you agree? That's the problem that OP have to setting up somewhere place to view and edit picture better.

Also this can be good choose for PhotoShop.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236302

you're assuming too much... i never said DVI wasn't great for photoshop. the OP was asking about color accuracy. DVI can only through put sRGB. therefore color accuracy can only get as accurate as the sRGB color space. and often times in calibration you might get a color space that is as large, no larger than, but not necessarily accurate to sRGB. it's just how monitors are and will be.

(this means you'll have to forego the recommended settings given to you by the light measurement and 'find' the white point temp of your monitor or go with the recommended settings and have a slightly inaccurate color reproduction on your monitor)

you completely misunderstand my post. color accuracy is more then just the screen and the program in use. its about the video card capabilities, cable to monitor, and the end result of being printed or shown on the internet or mobile devices.

the reason i said 'display port' is because it can through put the mentioned color gamuts. Much larger than sRGB itself. More colors means more accurate. Much like more pixels means more accurate. A 10 bit display, meaning more bit depth per pixel allowing for higher fidelity color choices.

stop assuming and trying to put words into my post that were never said. you're making an ass of yourself. i hate to break it to you, but yes it does matter what connection is used from video card to monitor.

[Granada]

引用自 Jamebonds1：

High refresh rate and TN are worst for color accuracy and viewing angles, is not true. It depend on contrast ratio and different type of LCD. Like i have TFT with 20,000 contrast ratio, and i have no trouble at viewing different angles and easily to see the color. I remember i was struggle to watch move on my old LCD with 700:1 contrast ratio. Very dark and so-wrong color on movie. Also it is important to getting monitor at under 5 ms if doing video edit.

Also you should know that some reviewer are useless just to make us people having fear.

One day I'll work out what it is you wanna saying... hahaha! ;)

[em_t_hed]

this is what a hardware calibration might look like.
calibrated to my current viewing conditions.

2.2 gamma
5000K white point temp
90 luminance/brightness

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8057/8170167656_5ff523d5be_b.jpg

[l@rry]

Sorry to jump in but this contrast ratio stuff if a load of bull, it's advertising.
Your 20000000 (keep adding 0's):1 ratio is whats known as a dynamic ratio.

"The dynamic contrast is a measurement of the brightest white the HDTV can produce as compared to the blackest black — not necessarily at the same time or in the same scene. For example, some LCD HDTVs use technology that brightens the overall picture in well-lit scenes to achieve very bright whites, and dims the overall picture in low-lit scenes to achieve truer, darker blacks. A measurement of the whitest white in the brightly lit scene compared to the darkest dark in the low-lit scene results in the dynamic contrast ratio specification."

(none of which helps when working with static images)

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-an-hdtvs-dynamic-and-static-contrast-ratio.htm

As for good monitors:

Apple Screens are normally used by pro's because graphics designers are normally working with Macs anyway and they do produce decent colours when calibrated. Otherwise Dell ultrasharps are a popular choice. However most new monitors will give decent colour if you send the time setting them up.

For acurate colours you are going to need to invest in a calibrator or a bit of time/printer. Just print out a colour test sheet, put it up to the screen and tweat till they match.

Even with the most expensive screens the colours will be off when you take it out of the box. I use a PANTONE huey display colour calibrator which works well and only set me back £60.

[NickJ]

Two things:

1. If you want a flatscreen then IPS technology in the panel is the best for color reproduction

2. Bottom line, you have to go into a store and actually look at the screen you want to buy. Reviews are good, but put your eyes on it before you purchase. In general Samsung and Dell monitors with IPS panels have been very good to me.

[em_t_hed]

引用自 nikolokolus：

Two things:

1. If you want a flatscreen then IPS technology in the panel is the best for color reproduction

2. Bottom line, you have to go into a store and actually look at the screen you want to buy. Reviews are good, but put your eyes on it before you purchase. In general Samsung and Dell monitors with IPS panels have been very good to me.

Going into a store doesn't necessarily work... Everytime I walk into an Apple store, i spend a few minutes using apples software calibration and guess what, none of their display monitors are calibrated!!!

The bottom line is, you have to know what you're looking for specifically in a monitor and check each monitor's specs. After that you can always hardware calibrate the thing if you have the equipment.

specs similar to:

98% of the Adobe RGB space
110% of the NTSC space

As far as color accuracy because the wider the gamut the monitor can produce, the more 'resolution' you'll have for color accuracy. Meaning a finer gradation from color to color. Less color banding!

Going into a store and looking at the monitor isn't going to show you what i just explained unless you have specific images to display on said monitor with specific color gamuts encoded into the images.

What the OP is asking, isn't a subjective thing and can't be answered in the fashion of subjective opinion. Or be remedied by subjectiveness as in 'go into the store and see the monitor for yourself.'

Each monitor has it's own specific accuracy level that is independent from any other monitor of it's model. No matter the quality of production, each monitor is unique. This is the reason for hardware calibration units! Meaning you can't take a monitor and calibrate it, then go to another monitor of the same model and use the previous monitor's calibration settings. Televisions are the same way. It's absolutely ludicruous to go into a television fourm and see people who have actually hardware calibrated there HD televisions and post the settings for others to use. I've seen it several times and these people have absolutely no clue as to the reasons for the hardware calibration or why it needs to be done to each individual television.

[em_t_hed]

This video is an excellent example of banding issues. Whether it's due to color space or not, I don't know because i don't have a wide gamut display. It's also an excellent example of why contrast ratio is important in screen/tvs too with all the sources of light on screen against the dark shadows.

The opening sequence flying through the clouds, around the corners of the screen you'll see what looks like image posterization all within a similar color. Appears to be color banding. It also happens when the fireballs are falling from the sky up against the background clouds. The lighting effect against the clouds is causing a banding issue.

Could be due to a larger color gamut being reduced to the gamut of the internet.

The thing is, certain browsers have support for large gamuts like Adobe RGB. Firefox being one. But if a person's display isn't capable of seeing the Adobe RGB space, color banding will be viewable no matter if viewed in Firefox or downloaded and viewed through some media player.

1. A person either purchases a display capable of a larger more accurate gamut.
2. The people rendering the video dither the quality to 'hide' the banding.

Choice 2 isn't actually a fix, but a work around.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39j5v8jlndM

By dithering i mean, adding maybe around a 12% color noise effect to the entire video. This will reduce the amount of banding detected to the eye.

[FantasyZoneGaming]

http://ecomm.dell.com/dellstore/basket.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs&oid=a1c93eac-d3b3-44d7-a8d1-6b116f5386f7

know how long the sale goes on for?