NEC EA294WMi bk or DELL U2713HM

Discussion in 'Digital Darkroom' started by nicolae_ladislau_prilipceanu, Dec 26, 2014.

  1. Hello,
    It' s that type of a thread again? When somebody asks you, kind people, to give your personal opinion on what purchase somebody has to make? Yes!
    I am interested in the two monitors (just one actually, but can' t decide which) .
    The price range is in their price range.
    Anyone had the chance to compare the both? Or at least glance on both and give an opinion?
    I have the X- Rite i1 Display Pro calibrator, so calibrating either one of them, won' t be an issue.
    Thank you and all the best!
     
  2. An odd pair. The NEC is one of these new super-widescreens at 2560 x 1080, and I think you should consider the usefulness of that carefully. I'd rather look at the EA274 with a 16:10 aspect ratio at 2560 x 1440. An alternative is the Eizo EV2736 at about the same price.
    Personally I'd never recommend Dell. At first they seem like like huge bang for the buck, but there's no free lunch. Their quality control is, well, non-existent, and you can easily end up with a rather expensive doorstop. The price comes at a price.
    And my general advice for monitor purchase:
    • Stretch your budget as much as you can. The display is the most critical piece of hardware you have, and it will directly impact your work like nothing else.
    • If you're on a tight budget, go down in size, not quality. Screen size is the single biggest cost factor.
    • Two manufacturers are known to produce consistently high quality - NEC and Eizo. They ultimately give you the most value for your money. All the others tend to compromise basic quality for on-paper (and rather meaningless) specifications.
     
  3. Hello,
    Thank you very much for your time!
    The EA274 is about 200$ above the NEC spotted by me.
    My question regarding the resolution is, does it really count in editing photos?
    I never edited photos on a ultra sharp display, so I can' t really tell the difference.
    Regarding the EA294WMi, I' ve noticed on a site it has Picture in Picture, changing its aspect ratio, making a 2.5 display system.
    And the Eizo, yes I know they are the cream of the cream, but they have a price that makes me eat cream soup for a while (at least here in my country, they are rather expensive) .
    The NEC I' ve set my mind on is ~ 681$ , the suggested Eizo 1032$ . I don' t intend spending that much on a single unit alone. I' ve spent roughly this sum with the monitor calibrator.
    About the DELL, I' ve also found mixed `feelings` in the internet reviews.
    I can' t really grasp which is better (as far as Gamut and SRGB coverage goes) ?
    Thank you again!
     
  4. Consider that you may get more useful screen real estate out of a 24" model than the 2560 x 1080 NEC, at a considerably lower price. And vertically you get the same from an Eizo ColorEdge CS230, including Colornavigator calibration software (which, BTW, supports your i1 Display Pro sensor). This should be well within your budget according to prices listed at B&H ($655). That's bang for the buck if you ask me.
    If you need more space horizontally, for Photoshop panels or a web browser, you can use any old monitor for now.
    All the models discussed up to now are standard gamut. If you want wide gamut there is one that currently stands out as an incredibly good deal, and that's the Eizo CS240 at $826, again with Colornavigator included.
    The NEC P/PAs and Eizo Coloredges have a secret weapon, which is the integrated calibration software. This takes the display system up to a whole new level because you have much more direct control over the calibration parameters, and that makes it much easier to match screen to printed output. Hardware calibration directly to the monitor's internal circuitry also greatly reduces the risk of banding and other artifacts.
    In the US any NEC P/PA can be upgraded by purchasing Spectraview II software separately. In Europe there's a firmware lock on the standard PA's, so you have to buy the Spectraview edition of the monitor right away. With Eizo there are no restrictions, but you get a better deal getting it bundled.
    And again I'd like to repeat the three general points above. Go as high as you possibly can. You won't regret it later, even if it may take your bank account a month or two to recover.
     
  5. The aspect ratio of the NEC different I don't know about that. I personally have no use for such. However, I like the capability to calibrate the NEC monitor hardware wise with spectraview.
     
  6. Hello,
    Thank you very much for your time!
    The CS230 is ~820$ here.
    The CS240 is ~ 1032$ here.
    In America they are worth the buck, but here in Europe they are rather expensive.
    The reason why I went for NEC was that it was close to the price I wanted to spend (it has a 150$ rebate) .
    I don' t particularly care in having as many inches on my desk, cause it occupies space.
    Main usage of the display would be Photoshop, and sometimes movies. Games, rarely to never.
    TFT central recommended me the DELL, and the NEC I found it by searching in the price range (and other specs) of the DELL.
    What I could dig up about each display:
    EA294WMi: 99% sRGB coverage, 76% NTSC and 82% Adobe RGB acc. to macworld
    DELL U2713HM: 100% sRGB coverage (probably 99%) , 103% NTSC (CIE 1931), 99% Adobe RGB acc. to tftcentral
    Eizo CS240: 99% sRGB coverage, can' t find anyother specs.
    Although I do resonate with the old saying of paying more for quality, I don' t have from where to pay more. Thus, regardless the CS240 would be superior to the ones I' ve presented it doesn' t meet the budget criteria, which is the most important in every decision (thinking mostly that this for me is a hobby; no, not spending money, but photography) .
    So yes, I am opened for suggestions if there are better monitors, with less inches, but for the same price range.
    All the best!
     
  7. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    I love Dell monitors. In 2004/5 I bought the top of the line 24" and then handed it down to a friend when I upgraded to 27". Today I have two 27" u2711 and I love them. I'm not sure if the current Dell offerings are on par with the u2711 though, seems they've taken a step down in bit depth and gamut? Andrew usually loves to cite me about now and offer info. And don't be shy about buying used. I helped two other movie still photographers source off of CL the Dell u2410's for hooking up to their Macbook Pro and they love them and thank me regularly. Five out of five, no issues with Dell in my experience
     
  8. The CS230 is ~820$ here.
    The CS240 is ~ 1032$ here.​
    Those prices are surprising. Here in Norway, a very high-cost country by any standard, they are the equivalent of $750 and $900 respectively.
    Anyway - what about the NEC EA244? That's a pretty solid monitor, and rumor has it that it's now supported by at least the US Spectraview II software (but probably not the European Spectraview Profiler software). But the way things look, the US version of the software is starting to become available in Europe as well.
    I stand by my assessment of Dell. Although you can pull a lucky number and get a good one, I've seen a number of real turkeys. And the problem with that is that Dell won't replace them, they're just "within specification", whatever that is in Dell's world.
     
  9. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    I stand by my assessment of Dell. Although you can pull a lucky number and get a good one, I've seen a number of real turkeys. And the problem with that is that Dell won't replace them, they're just "within specification", whatever that is in Dell's world.​
    It is certainly an assessment mixed with a dash of exaggeration. For me, they've been great on the phone when purchasing and the friends that have had to phone them for returns or warranty, they've had a Fed-ex driver come and pick up the item at their residence and all with no hassle. They certainly aren't the best monitor available but their price-for-performance mark has made many happy customers
     
  10. david_henderson

    david_henderson www.photography001.com

    After a lot of vacillation a couple of years ago I bough a Dell U2410 for photo work. I'd been pretty much set on a NEC Spectraview but the way you needed then to buy the Spectraview feature in the UK made this feature a very expensive oncost and I got the impression also that setup was going to be a lot more complex.
    So I bought the Dell, and all I can say is that I can make prints at external labs that match what I see on the monitor pretty well without grief , and the calibration doesn't seem to drift very much at all. I had a 19" Ultrasound before that was pretty good too. Recognise the strong support NEC has and that Dell monitors might be variable with who they're buying panels from this week. But I can report only on what I've seen and used.
     
  11. The spectraview feature is fine, but I got the PA272W without it....and it's a fine piece of equipment. It was only slightly off, out of the box. I'd suggest that (whatever you get) you may want to wait a little longer and get what you feel you deserve or fitting your operation. Good luck choosing.
    Les
     
  12. Those prices are surprising. Here in Norway, a very high-cost country by any standard​
    Yes well, my country is sort of poor as far as financial strength goes. But there' s nothing like high prices to make a poor man feel good about buying something (there' s something about the feeling of finally buying something expensive, I guess) .
    Regardless, thanks for the advice. I found the suggested monitor (NEC EA244) at around ~440$ here. I' ll have a look. Seeing as the discussion evolves, more money is going to be needed and I believe that this purchase is going to be put on hold for more money.
    One thing that strikes me is the fact that the NEC are among the best (along side Eizo) but you can' t really find complete reviews over them, or qualifications (what' s for graphics, what' s for gaming, ect. ) .
    Regardless, this thread can continue for me to choose which model to buy (the best one) .
    Thank you everybody for your answers!
     
  13. Yup, go NEC, skip Dell (nothing special).
     
  14. Yup, go NEC, skip Dell (nothing special).​
    Hello,
    I found a Dell U2711. Researching it on the internet I' ve seen it' s got very good reviews. Would it overcome the NEC? It' s from a different age (released in 2009 I think) . But apparently is a time when DELL had better quality control.
    All the best!
     
  15. Would it overcome the NEC?​
    No, quite different aim’s for the to products. To match up, get wide gamut behavior and a much better product than that Dell, you’d be looking at the NEC PA series. See: http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00d1fl
     
  16. Would it overcome the NEC?
    No, quite different aim’s for the to products. To match up, get wide gamut behavior and a much better product than that Dell, you’d be looking at the NEC PA series. See: http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00d1fl
    Hello,
    Yeah well the NEC PA242W is about 1300$ and the Eizo CS240 1032$.
    Seriously, 600$+ doesn' t buy you anything good (forget the large inches) ?
    Thanks!
     
  17. Seriously, 600$+ doesn' t buy you anything good (forget the large inches) ?​
    Compared to the NEC and Eizo, not even close. How important is a wide gamut display which has unequaled calibration functionality and color purity across the screen? The NEC comes with a calibration device which I assume you‘d add any way and vastly superior software control over that process.
     
  18. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    I found a Dell U2711. Researching it on the internet I' ve seen it' s got very good reviews. Would it overcome the NEC?​
    No. But the u2711 is a fantastic monitor for the price and very popular here among PN users. If you can find a u2711, I'd go for that over the 24" choices you started the thread with, Nicolae.
    How important is a wide gamut display which has unequaled calibration functionality and color purity across the screen?​

    Considering that most are printing at Costco and sending jpgs to Facebook, obviously not very much
     
  19. Considering that most are printing at Costco and sending jpgs to Facebook, obviously not very much.​
    Considering that every printed output device at Costco and most other’s exceed sRGB gamut (and Costco provides and allows a full color managed workflow), it’s very important if you want to SEE what might be printed when you soft proof data that one hopefully has that’s also outside sRGB using a much better RGB Working Space.
    Eric, you own a wide gamut display? Or you just output to Facebook?
     
  20. I don't think Dell makes monitors. Although I think NEC are better than Dell brand you should seriouly consider the NEC294 aspect ratio of 21:9. Myself I don't see I can make good use of such a wide monitor.
     
  21. If you can find a u2711, I'd go for that over the 24" choices you started the thread with, Nicolae.​
    Hello,
    My choices were a 27" (Dell) and a 29" UW (NEC) .
    Regardless, I' m going to buy a U2711 (I think) , cause the investment for a really really good monitor (semipro or pro) is too high for this hobby.
    Nevertheless this thread has helped me in concluding this, which is beyond `super` cause I will save a penny or two.
    I don' t know what the future budget will be for the monitor, or when, but if we' re still around, I' m going to bug you people.
    All the best!
     
  22. If your income doesn't depend on a predictable screen to output match, it may be hard to justify the cost of a NEC PA or an Eizo Coloredge. I can see that, they are expensive.
    So to get realistic. What do you need? You don't need wide gamut. You don't need programmable 14 or 16-bit look up tables and hardware calibration. You don't need huge screen size or resolution.
    What you do need is good basic quality, panel uniformity, good separation into highlights and shadows, an even tonal response without sudden bumps and obvious banding. Getting a 27 inch model is not very smart, you pay a huge premium for screen size alone. A 23 or 24 inch model gets you substantially higher quality for the same price.
    Panel uniformity in particular is not a given. You'd think so, but it's not. And when it's not, nothing kills your editing pleasure quite as effectively.
    My suggestions would be NEC EA244 (or possibly P232 if budget allows), or Eizo EV2336/2436/Foris FS2333. These are all high quality at reasonable price.
     
  23. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    If your income doesn't depend on a predictable screen to output match, it may be hard to justify the cost of a NEC PA or an Eizo Coloredge.​
    Granted it is all subjective, but are you suggesting that with the u2711 one can not "depend on a predictable screen to output match"? My income does depend on wysiwyg accuracy and I certainly am successful without using a NEC or Eizo.
    I've never owned or calibrated NEC's but that is because I'm around them all the time while leaning over the shoulders of my photo editors and there is nothing about NEC that makes me want to rush home and sell my Dell and spend the extra 40% in $$$ for one. I think the u2711 is a great choice.
     
  24. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    Oh Dag, did you really have to make us go through another Andrew thread? Regardless, that comparison screen shots are not really a fair shake with a blank white Dell screen and nice middle grey Ezio. I can't replicate those results on my Dell so I'll take your post there with a grain of salt and is not enough to convince me. Leo, in that thread, summed it up best:
    As with most photographic products, it seems you pay a premium to get that last 5% quality, and for me paying 4x the price for that last 5% is a bit much at this point in time.​
     
  25. Hello,
    What I do know about display homogeneity:
    1. There is no perfect homogeneity display panel.
    2. They all have a minimum requirement of homogeneity; white usually bigger as it's easier to obtain, and black lower because it's harder to obtain due to, mainly, mechanical stresses induced in the panel, which are the second most common cause for low homogeneity (aside from the manufacturer starting design flaws) .
    3. LG display panels tend to be not so good from the start.
    4. A display homogeneity can be measured with a Konica Minolta camera that is a spectrometer, and is far more precise because of its mathematical algorithm and interpretation of results.
    5. No display panel is perfect, as far as homogeneity goes, there are accepted tolerances, like everything in nature . You, me, and everyone else have to live with this fact.
    But this is a scientific subject, with results not really offered to the general public (just the minimum value, not the distribution of homogeneity for each monitor) so debating it on `point of eye results` over this simple thread is pointless guys. So take it easy and thanks for your input.
    Take care!
    P.S.
    1. There are display panels that have the darkest black, but have a lower homogeneity value than one with a greyish black.
    2. I resonate with the fact that quality is the best compromise anyone could make for their money (I stated it before in this thread, in a different form) . The thing is, I don' t have that much money (and I bet most of us also don' t) . So this muscle flexing over 5 [%] quality is sort of pointless, when my wallet is thin. But that doesn' t mean I don' t consider what you are saying, but the subject is becoming a... non subject.
    3. So, my solution. If some of you are so intent and set in me buying a better quality monitor, with the money I don' t have, I propose for me to to do just that, and put the money I have and the militants the rest (which I don' t have) . Cause this is the kind of road this threads tend to get (I' ve checked the forum about this subject after I started this thread; have to say people are ... feisty) . So please tell me if you are down to my proposal and I will send you my bank account. Only 600$ more to get a good quality monitor!
     
  26. The thing is, I don' t have that much money (and I bet most of us also don' t) . So this muscle flexing over 5 [%] quality is sort of pointless​
    Point taken and accepted. However, there's no reason you shouldn't get the best possible within that budget, which is why I suggested NEC EA244, Eizo EV2336/Foris FS2333 etc. If you insist on 27 inch at the same price, you go substantially down in quality.
    not really a fair shake with a blank white Dell screen and nice middle grey Ezio.​
    You forget that I've had one of these Dells in the house in front of me. It's real and I know what it looks like, and that photograph is a very accurate representation. My point is only to prepare people for what they may be getting. You didn't, so count yourself lucky.
    But yes, you're right, I do have an agenda here. It's this: It upsets me that they should get away with this, which in my book borders on fraud. I paid the equivalent of $800 for he U2410 at the time, and I've never felt so royally had before or after. Dell just said "tough luck" and wouldn't replace the thing, which was utterly useless. $800 out the window.
    Looking at the photograph, you can see their thinking. The screen actually is 6500K blue/yellow across, and that's their specification. The green/magenta shift is irrelevant to their specs. So they get away with it.
    You get what you pay for. When you get a top-spec'ed unit at a third of what it should cost, bells should be ringing. That means they're cutting corners. So what I'm saying is, put your money where it counts, not where it looks good on paper.
    Anyway, I've made my point. But Andrew? What does he have to do with this? He can speak for himself if he chooses.
     
  27. The OP picked the 27 inch I think not for size but for about twice number of pixels.
     
  28. Regardless, that comparison screen shots are not really a fair shake with a blank white Dell screen and nice middle grey​
    He doesn’t get it Dag! Pointless. And now we know he has little if any real experience with such display systems (expect for standing over someone’s shoulders which again is pointless in accepting that opinion as good reference for information about these kinds of products).
    The thing is, I don' t have that much money (and I bet most of us also don' t) . So this muscle flexing over 5 [%] quality is sort of pointless​
    That 5% value came from where, calculated how? Further, for some of us, the difference in a 5% quality (or change in color expectation from reality) is what separates a job getting rejected and one that’s accepted! For those posting snapshots (in B&W) to Facebook, I’d agree that the extra money probably isn’t cost effective. For those pro’s around here, and very serious amateurs that take a so called 5% quality difference seriously, it’s a big deal! Dag’s photo’s illustrated this. My images showed the huge differences in two display products. Proof is in the pudding and both Dag and I provided a big bowel of pudding to taste.
    You get what you pay for, be it a lens, a display or a quality reproduction.
     
  29. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    Point taken and accepted. However, there's no reason you shouldn't get the best possible within that budget, which is why I suggested NEC EA244, Eizo EV2336/Foris FS2333 etc. If you insist on 27 inch at the same price, you go substantially down in quality.​
    Agreed on your reasoning Dag, but I wouldn't agree with the Dell being substantially less quality. Since the late 90's, I have first hand experience with the best monitors sitting at dozens of desks of others I work with and for. For myself, way back in the early 2000's, I can't even remember what I paid for my 15" crt NEC/Ezio. Then I jumped to a NEC lcd and then onto Dell 24" by mid 2000's. And today, some of the editors/art dept. that I deliver to use 24" Wacom Cintiq's for color correction and pre-press. So...
    It's hard to tell who is who and what crusty dog can talk the loudest and longest on internet forums from their armchair and and speaking the gospel as if we will be seeing a display difference that is equal to the difference we might see between camera sensors. My empirical knowledge shows that it just isn't so.
    You get what you pay for. When you get a top-spec'ed unit at a third of what it should cost, bells should be ringing. That means they're cutting corners. So what I'm saying is, put your money where it counts, not where it looks good on paper.​
    To me, monitors are like audio speakers. You will hear a great difference in models offered in the low to mid range area, but once you have $2500 to spend on speakers and start looking in the upper mid range, the differences become discernible. There is nothing about any of the dozens of $1500 NEC/Ezio that has motivated me upgrade from $900 Dells.
    You forget that I've had one of these Dells in the house in front of me. It's real and I know what it looks like, and that photograph is a very accurate representation. My point is only to prepare people for what they may be getting. You didn't, so count yourself lucky.
    But yes, you're right, I do have an agenda here. It's this: It upsets me that they should get away with this, which in my book borders on fraud. I paid the equivalent of $800 for he U2410 at the time, and I've never felt so royally had before or after. Dell just said "tough luck" and wouldn't replace the thing, which was utterly useless. $800 out the window.​
    Getting a lemon and then being told by the manufacture to stuff it, would really upset me as well, Dag. I'd probably do as you are doing here and be upset enough to educate others and do everything possible to prevent another Dell sale. But yes, your are honestly talking about a completely different company, and product, that I have experience with.
    Nicolae,
    http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1168453/0
    http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00bIWk
     
  30. That 5% value came from where, calculated how? Further, for some of us, the difference in a 5% quality (or change in color expectation from reality) is what separates a job getting rejected and one that’s accepted! For those posting snapshots (in B&W) to Facebook, I’d agree that the extra money probably isn’t cost effective. For those pro’s around here, and very serious amateurs that take a so called 5% quality difference seriously, it’s a big deal​

    Hello,
    Are you OK? It seems to me you are trying to pick a fight here. I get your point. I' ve took a note of it, and it isn' t a deal breaker for me to spend extra money right now. I DON' T (maybe you' ll read it better) earn a living from editing photos.
    You have your job, of making photos and/ or selling them, I have a job and this is a hobby. I want to perfect myself, but it' s like buying a race car before you even have your license because you `hope` someday you' ll be somebody. It isn' t cost effective.
    As I' ve showed here, in my country the prices are rather high for what they are selling (check it for yourself if you don' t believe) , so right now I ain' t going to spend.
    But for you to monkey around here and pick fights, is just childish.
    So, again. Thank you for your input, and take care!
    All the best!
     
  31. Fight,no. Justification for a value that is defined to dismiss the extra expenses of a high end product, yes. What IF it's 25
    percent? Do you think the difference Dag shows Is 5 percent? Both he and I could measure the difference in deltaE and
    create a real value if we had the two instead of assuming or making up values to add to our side of the argument. But just
    look at his examples and tell us it's 5 percent OR so minimal it is not worth considering!
     
  32. He doesn’t get it Dag! Pointless. And now we know he has little if any real experience with such display systems (expect for standing over someone’s shoulders which again is pointless in accepting that opinion as good reference for information about these kinds of products).​
    Andrew, stop disparaging the integrity of someone's response by disrespecting them this way and instead support your points with real facts and evidence about why a particular display is better for hobbyists that others reading can use to make a meaningful informed purchase.
    Dissing someone's response doesn't help anyone.
     
  33. I tried to make a long post yesterday but hit a wrong key and lost it all at the submission stage. Sigh. I cannot remember what I wrote.
    While we are talking about these three companies products, do not forget to cover the HP models. I am not talking about the wide gamut Dreamcolor models, but the $700-$800 models that are similar to the Dells being mentioned here. They are an option too.
    Rather than thinking that the higher priced models are going to bring photography happiness. A decent monitor and a calibration unit will make a substantial difference over all of the cheaper monitors that most people use that are uncalibrated. The regular Dell monitors that businesses and government use are generally not going be used for quality photography work. Though I see them everywhere in almost any point where people are served by the staff behind the counter.
    After being burned or spurned by Dell, I bought the NEC 24" wide gamut model from B&H. I could not find any company in Washington state that I could buy off the shelf, any manufacturer's higher quality monitors. I really wanted to see them in action before I spent the money. Having discovered this problem, I chose the NEC sight unseen based on its reviews. I literally had not noticed the HP models before the NEC purchase. Otherwise I would have given them a close look. But again, no one in Washington had them setup for viewing.
     
  34. 5%​
    All right. I'm not going to argue the matter further, at least not now. Nicolae's position is perfectly valid, we all have a pain threshold, and he probably got a bit more than he bargained for here.
    I would just like to add some general remarks that may explain why I tend to get a bit, ah, impatient, in discussions like this. And I think Andrew feels the same way. Here's the thing: A display is a special case. It's not like any other piece of computer hardware. A display is functionally an analog device, meaning the quality of the output does not equal the quality of input plus time.
    This makes the display the single most critical piece of hardware in the entire processing chain. Everything hinges on it, it impacts your work in a very direct way.
    Yes, there is a law of diminishing return and paying double doesn't give you "double quality", whatever that is. That's missing the point. Getting it absolutely right is often expensive. You use the display to predict the final output. If the display adds noise of its own, or subtracts, or distorts, prediction value goes down very rapidly. So yes, there is a difference and even a small difference can go a long way and make it "worth it".
    This is all about priorities. We all have budgets, so we have to put the money to good use. Spend it where it really makes a difference to your work. That's all I'm saying.
     
  35. It is, though, not necessary to have a 100% perfect monitoring device, as long as we know it and how and by how much it deviates from perfection. And even without knowing that expressed in exact numerical units of some entity or another: i used to get perfect prints using a bad monitor and a bad print shop by learning what each did so i could compensate. The only times that went wrong was when the print shop didn't stick to my "no further adjustments!" directive (which they too often did. But, very fair, they always redid the job at no extra cost to me. Even large and expensive ones).<br>Besides, unless we manage to have the images viewed on equally perfect systems, always, we are kidding ourselves about how important it all is: not vey many people will see the images as perfectly as our calibrated monitors show them to the happy few who own such things. In the music industry it is good practice to run a mix over a car stereo, the bad mono transitor radio in the kitchen, a colurful "hifi" system and anything else that people actually use instead of the highly neutral monitors in a acoustically well treated auditioning room.<br>It is of course important to know what to expect at the outcome of the proces in which the monitor is used as a tool. And it helps having a perfect monitor. But it is not that necessary as some may suggest. Just get to know how your monitor behaves.
     
  36. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    Are you OK? It seems to me you are trying to pick a fight here.​

    Scroll through his posting history Nicolae....three quarters of the threads Andrew participates in, are just like this.
    Dag’s photo’s illustrated this.​

    If we look at the photos in question from this PN thread...
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]


    Maybe my 10-bit RGB calibrated u2711 is inaccurate, but they seem to illustrate that the Dell is on a white blank screen (that was taken from another poster on another forum), and we're comparing it to Dag's Ezio on a grey background? I'm not sure about anyone else, call me more names, but I'd like to see them on equal footing to make a fair judgement.
    My images showed the huge differences in two display products.​

    [​IMG]
    That's a huge difference? Or is it 5%? lol, it doesn't matter. But of course we'd expect his image to show a difference when comparing his below-average Apple display compared against his top of the line NEC. But that's not significant for this thread and determining "the huge differences" that Nicolae will see between the NEC vs Dell that he's considering. Instead, it's just more distraction and misinformation at the sake of fighting and trying to be right. Sadly, even if you could put up with the noise here at argue.net, PN is becoming unreliable for quality and accurate information.
    Nicolae's position is perfectly valid​

    Everyone's position here is valid, Dag. Thanks for exchanging a difference of opinion in a mature manner. If money was no object, I'd certainly get an NEC. But at the moment, for most, it is akin to spending 40% more for a very slight gain.
    This makes the display the single most critical piece of hardware in the entire processing chain. Everything hinges on it, it impacts your work in a very direct way.​
    Dag, for me I put the lens first, the sensor in the body second, and monitor third. I've never looked at anothers work in a gallery, in a book, or on the net and wondered what monitor they were using or felt their image would be improved if they had a better monitor.
    But it is not that necessary as some may suggest. Just get to know how your monitor behaves.​
    Exactly, Q.G. And all the while, no one has asked what Nicolae prints or what kind of client base he serves. No one has asked operating system or onboard graphics or dedicated gpu or his viewing and work conditions.

    Later
     
  37. This makes the display the single most critical piece of hardware in the entire processing chain. Everything hinges on it, it impacts your work in a very direct way.​
    No doubt about that.
    However, I'm not seeing a huge level of impact on my editing of Raw images on my $330 27" LG 27EA63vp LED sRGB gamut display to justify paying the extra $500-$1000. I get decent screen to print matches going on its second year. What impact have you experienced dealing with similar inexpensive displays?
    Grant you I no longer trust Dell's display quality control after what I went through with screen non-uniformity and got tired of return shipping hassles buying displays online so I just settled on the convenience and liberal return policy buying an LG at my local Best Buy. NO REFURBS! Best Buy let me exchange a bad one for a brand new unopened box off the shelf. Calibrated it with the Colormunki Display and get no banding in gradients and near perfect uniformity across the screen.
    00d2MY-553654184.jpg
     
  38. And all the while, no one has asked what Nicolae prints or what kind of client base he serves. No one has asked operating system or onboard graphics or dedicated gpu or his viewing and work conditions.​

    The key question was asked:
    Andrew Rodney [​IMG][​IMG], Dec 27, 2014; 07:06 p.m.: How important is a wide gamut display which has unequaled calibration functionality and color purity across the screen?
    OS, graphic card, viewing conditions etc are moot don’t change the capabilities and qualities (or lack thereof) between the Dell you say you love and the NEC/Eizo’s who’s capabilities exceed it.
    That's a huge difference? Or is it 5%? lol, it doesn't matter.​
    Tim and I agree it’s a huge difference:
    Tim Lookingbill, Jul 05, 2014; 05:38 p.m.
    The Apple Cinema display looks that bad?! Is it calibrated/profiled? If so, then you're right. That's a huge difference.
     
  39. Here’s the bottom line. There’s nothing special about the Dell under discussion and as one informed poster has shown us, it is actually able to produce awful purity. He’s not alone either. It was recommended by an armchair observer (and I’d agree), if you post snapshots mainly to Facebook, or you don’t understand the implications fully of what a high quality display system can provide, anything that emits color is probably just fine for you. Dag’s beautifully written post on the limitations of a display system is a keeper! Many photographers will agonize over the choice of a lens, the amount of RAM in a system they hope to buy yet put the display far lower on their priority list thinking as some armchair display expert, that they are all about the same (a mere 5% difference, a figure that has no empirical basis in fact).

    I don’t have any vested interest in what display any photographer buys. I do have an interest in educating people on the topic based on actual usage over two decades working with just about every high end display system (and those that are not). Take everyone’s suggestions seriously based on the facts they provide instead of made up values or lack of experience using said devices as an over the shoulder observer.

    I asked early on, what is important to the person deciding on a display. We’ve seen a superb example of purity issues alone between two systems under discussion and it is now other’s who have to decide based on the facts presented which way to go in making a buying decision. A good display system will serve you well for many years, don’t skimp thinking they are all pretty much the same It’s like suggesting all lens are the same because they contain glass. If someone stated they tried ten 50mm lens on their camera while visiting a local camera shop for a hour and claimed are all without 5%, he’d be laughed out of the forum.
     
  40. Hello,
    This thread is closed. Thank you all for posting!
    If any other messages need to be exchanged between the posters, please do it by PM' s.
    It looks more and more like a school ground fight here.
    All the best!
     
  41. It looks more and more like a school ground fight here.
    It' s that type of a thread again?​
    What type of thread did you want or expect?
    Did you get meaningful information so you can make an informed purchase? That's all that matters.
     
  42. It looks more and more like a school ground fight here.
    It' s that type of a thread again?
    What type of thread did you want or expect?
    Did you get meaningful information so you can make an informed purchase? That's all that matters.​
    Hello,
    Let' s say I expected more maturity. All points were taken into consideration, but as I previously stated, the money factor is always the decisive one.
    So, for around 390$ I got a unused (or so it' s claimed) DELL U2711.
    For a starter I think is a good first investment.
    All the best!
     
  43. I got myself a pair of used NEC LCD2190UXp for $60 each. Not great but work fine.
     

Share This Page