Monitor recommendations sought for photo editing

[The late XV105]

In my home office I currently use a employer-supplied Samsung Syncmaster 920N VGA 19" 4:3 aspect ratio monitor connected to both work laptop and home multi media PC via KVM switch. Within the context of this post the latter machine is used extensively for Photoshop editing.

The monitor is perfectly "fine" (and terrific value for money for anyone needing a perfectly ordinary monitor), but yesterday I was blown away by the quality of photographs shown on a friend's new 46" Samsung LED HD television via WLAN to his media server. Sure "BIG" brings its own impact as well as opportunity to actually use those gazillion pixels in a file, but the quite stunning colour rendering and depth of contrast was a joy to behold.

Hardly surprising, but after yesterday's experience I've now decided to buy a new monitor with photo display quality as the primary decider.

I'm therefore open to recommendations and indications of likely price brackets to get the ball rolling, please. Both the laptop and media PC have DVI sockets even though my current monitor is VGA (so I will also need to change the KVM switch), and I presume I should be looking at 22-24".


TVM,
XV105

[green granite]

I recently brought a Dell 2408WFP. 24" which uses S-PVA screen technology as opposed to the normal lower grade TN screen. It's very very good for photos, pin sharp and can be set up fairly accurately for correct colour rendering. About £400 depending where you go.

Review and lots of other info about monitors here: Dell 2408WFP Review (http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_2408wfp.htm)

[Loose rivets]

46" Samsung LED HD television via WLAN

Any idea what the WLAN gizmo cost? The set comes with hard-wired connector, but the wireless attachment is extra. Can't find it on Samsung's site.



Certainly, just plugging in my 'Stick' on that model produced fantastic results.

Thing about flat screens is that they are not usually multi-synching. I still like a tube to go all the way back to 1024 x 768 for many purposes.

[green granite]

I can have any resolution from 800*600 up to 1920*1200 on my Dell.

[The late XV105]

46" Samsung LED HD television via WLAN

Any idea what the WLAN gizmo cost? The set comes with hard-wired connector, but the wireless attachment is extra. Can't find it on Samsung's site.

A couple of hundred notes I guess; it's called a Microsoft Xbox 360!
This games console includes a Media Center Extender, so matey has access to his entire photo collection on PC upstairs, from the comfort of his lounge.

[The late XV105]

Thanks, green granite; it looks like a nice piece of kit and also gives me some pointers to use for comparison before I make my decision.

One question though that you may be able to answer from the instruction manual if you'd be so kind; I notice from a photo in the link you posted that it has one VGA and two DVI connections; what happens if you connect to all three? Does the monitor have a switch (be it software driven or physical) to toggle between them?

TVM.

[green granite]

You can select which input you wish to use from the monitor's menu

Full features here: Documentation (http://support.dell.com/support/edocs/monitors/2408WFP/en/UG/about.htm#Product%20Features)

further bits of the manual : Documentation (http://support.euro.dell.com/support/edocs/monitors/2408WFP/en/UG/index.htm)

Also I would recommend you trawl though all the info on that earlier site I gave you as it explains an awfull lot about the various technologies available and also the pros and cons of each, as well as the reviews of most of the quality monitors

[Loose rivets]

I can have any resolution from 800*600 up to 1920*1200 on my Dell.

Sounds like it's not bound by native resolution problems, I've taken that on board for when my 19" Gateway 2000 goes TU.

The CRT monitor I'm using is so good that I'm pushed to tell the difference between it and my Sony Trinitron at home. I never thought I'd hear myself say that. And, like a lot of my kit, it cost nowt.

[The late XV105]

You can select which input you wish to use from the monitor's menu
Full features here: Documentation
further bits of the manual : Documentation


Great.
Very helpful, thank you.

Also I would recommend you trawl though all the info on that earlier site I gave you as it explains an awfull lot about the various technologies available and also the pros and cons of each, as well as the reviews of most of the quality monitors


'Twas subsequently done in the wee small hours of today with the rest of the family asleep and my brain cells able to properly focus on something other than work, wife, or the demands of a brace of two and a half year olds :)

[Loose rivets]

Something about square law there. A brace is four time more trouble than two ones at a reasonable interval. I remember it well. :\ Oh, and another one 11 months later.:rolleyes:

[The late XV105]

Something about square law there. A brace is four time more trouble than two ones at a reasonable interval. I remember it well. Oh, and another one 11 months later.

:)

Thankfully the same rule applies for the fun, too! Regarding your last sentence, we're at 32 months and counting now, but the missus was suggesting #3 on the way home with the first two!

[Jofm5]

I have held off on this thread for a while but after due consideration I will answer as if you want a professional output you will need to understand the following - if its just lesiure then best guess may do.

You say you want a monitor for photo editing but you dont really say what you are editing for. There is no answer that can be given without further info such as the destination of what your editing...

You may/may not know this... But when light is stored on a physical medium the components are traditionally broken down into Cyan, Magenta, Yellow and Black (CMYK) yet when representing a photo on a monitor it is made up from RGB. When using a physical medium it is the removal of colours that gives white, but when using a monitor it is an addition of colours that gives white. This is the physics of reflection of colours versus the transmission of colours.

Having worked in a production environment (over 15 years ago now so allow for improvements please) - it was always the case that the larger monitors regardless of resolutions used to give the poorer results (unless expensive) due to introduction of moiré effects introduced by the techonology. Regardless of the monitor the photo editing can be completed successfully by comparing like with like within the photo.

If you want the true representation of a photo on a monitor then this will require calibration between the monitor and the physical photo - this is done using the pantone charts -this also allows you to calibrate any application such as photoshop etc with the printed output. Typically because a monitor is a transmitted medium the colours will be more vivid however comparing and pairing the colour on the screen with the pantone colour on the printed medium can reduce this and give much more natural editing and output.

It all really depends on what you wish to do really - due to the differences between the CMYK of printing and the RGB of viewing you almost always have to work to pantone calibration tables for accuracy and even then it will often require adjustment - there is no answer or recommendation that can be made for an individual monitor in reality.

In short - if you want serious photo editing then get a monitor that is mainstream and has been reviewed for moiré effects and colour representation - then research if there is the facility to get a known pantone conversion for your output device - if there is not make sure there is the appropriate software for you to enter your own pantone conversions into both the application and the driver. This is the only way you can truly get the output you desire - if you have any friends in a printing agency/publishing house or newspaper - they can go into further detail as it is a standard issue across those industries.

Cheers

Jof

[Bushfiva]

Something like an NEC Spectraview with an Eye-One puck largely automates the process now.

XV105: if you genuinely want photorealistic colors, the screen will appear way dimmer and washed out than you may be used to. "Real life" is around 120 cd/m², way less than a monitor in normal use.

[green granite]

Jofm5, there are special devices called Colorimeters ( for example) ( LaCie Blue Eye Pro Review (http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/lacie_blue-eye.htm) )) to correctly calibrate monitors as five says a good starting point is to set the brightness level at around the around 120 cd/m², the contrast at about 50% and the RGB levels should also be set up but vary considerably from monitor to monitor. obviously it depends on the individual monitor as to the exact figures. Larger TN based panels should be avoided due to the relatively poor viewing angles giving a brightness shift across the screen when viewing from a fixed position.

[Bushfiva]

Eye-One's the colorimeter recommended for NEC.

[The late XV105]

Thanks for your help, Jofm5, Bushfiva, and green granite. Some I knew already, some not.

Although not written in my post this is the device I have been looking at for calibration: Spyder 3 Pro (PC/Mac): Amazon.co.uk: Software (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Spyder-3-Pro-PC-Mac/dp/B000X4X37A/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=software&qid=1244721521&sr=8-1)

[Bushfiva]

Yes, great product. Be aware it won't fix a screen that can't be fixed, and if you do go for an NEC screen, consider getting the NEC colorimeter because its software integrates tightly with the screen LUT. If you're a perfectionist, you might want something that includes an ambient light sensor, but if you're not generating revenue from your efforts it's probably not necessary.

[The late XV105]

Thanks, Bushfiva. Nice to get some extra product feedback and advice if I do go with NEC. The latter isn't on the cards at the moment but you never know.