Alan321 wrote:

I can't profile my 2690 properly (using its built-in LUT) because I have the wrong colourimeter (a colormunki) and so I am using the default settings that I am assured are pretty accurate in the spectraview monitors. I use D65, 90 Cd/m2, gamma 2.2. I'll tweak it when I get my Eye One 2. So far I have seen a good match between print and screen but I'm not studying it very closely because A/B comparisons between a monitor and a properly lit print are tricky to do - it's just a perception that I'm getting what I expected. I have profiled my printer with the colormunki.

- Alan

What's wrong with the Colormunki? I use mine with my 2690 WUXI (version 1) and get excellent results. The prints from my HP B9180 mirror what I see onscreen.

calemon, working on the others but here is my curves with the correction added.

calemon wrote:
David: you do indeed have it set correctly, but your black is still way too hot. It may still be a case of the setting getting "stuck". Sorry I have nothing with more satisfactory detail

I would recommend a couple of things:

1/ On the curves add at least "correction" to that view. Right now you're just viewing target and results. You want to look for heavy corrections applied at low brightness. This will be elevating your black to a "grey" trying to make it perfectly grey instead of ever so slightly tinted. This is more for MRIs and the like than photography, honestly. I think it got stuck on me once too when I was first figuring this out.

2/ Go ahead and enable extended luminance stabilization. It will take longer but is more accurate. 120 isn't "very low", but it is "low" compared to the standard CCFL luminosity range.

3/ you could also try a round at 140 just to see if it's behaviour changes. You should be getting blacks around 0.2 at least. Once you crack that nut I think everything will fall into place.

4/ You could do a full factory reset on the panel, set it for sRGB or native gammas, color temps, and just use SVII and your colorimeter to MEASURE black without running a profile. If a full reset and running non-calibrated gets you darker blacks, you know it's something in your calibration that's throwing things off.

5/ your panel MIGHT be defective, but I think you'd notice huge blotches of backlight bleed and that sort of thing. I'm going to assume this isn't what's going on.


1, 2, 3 done. I already had targets in increments of 10 from 90 to 140. I ran the 140 target again, here is the info screen:



4. I did a factory reset the other day, but didn't measure anything afterwards. I'll see if I can figure out how to do what you suggested.

calemon wrote:
4/ You could do a full factory reset on the panel, set it for sRGB or native gammas, color temps, and just use SVII and your colorimeter to MEASURE black without running a profile. If a full reset and running non-calibrated gets you darker blacks, you know it's something in your calibration that's throwing things off.


Here is the black measure after panel reset to sRGB. Same black level for native mode also.

The 2690 black point and contrast ratio seem to be on par with the discussion here.

I see people in that thread talking about setting target CRs to things like 200:1. I only skimmed it so I don't know what all they're trying to do (not everyone on the Internet knows what they're doing or why they're trying to do it ). You've set whitepoints to 120 and 140, you've set your contrast to maximum, and the 2690 is NOT a 200-something CR monitor - there's something wrong, it is NOT within spec. Don't use what you read in that thread to conclude that 200:1 is "on par". Try a calibration run at 250 cd/m^2. If you aren't getting 700+ CR then it's all in the LUT/calibration.

Without deltaE shown in the graph like in my last pic, it's harder to pick out, but you can see the little non-linear hockey stick of extra correction in the lower left of your graphs.

Are you in the advanced OSD or regular? Advanced OSD is accessed by powering up pressing INPUT and POWER at the same time for a couple of seconds. In the advanced OSD you can see "color control" and "gamma" sections - both of which have multiple settings including PRG. "PRG" means that the LUTs are being used. Is your gamma and color control where you're trying to measure black point showing something other than PRG or is one of them still PRG?

calemon wrote:
I see people in that thread talking about setting target CRs to things like 200:1. I only skimmed it so I don't know what all they're trying to do (not everyone on the Internet knows what they're doing or why they're trying to do it ). You've set whitepoints to 120 and 140, you've set your contrast to maximum, and the 2690 is NOT a 200-something CR monitor - there's something wrong, it is NOT within spec. Don't use what you read in that thread to conclude that 200:1 is "on par". Try a calibration run at 250 cd/m^2. If you aren't getting 700+ CR then it's all in the LUT/calibration.


It was just an example of other people with the same issue, not meant to conclude that it is on par. Here is my target 250.



calemon wrote:
Without deltaE shown in the graph like in my last pic, it's harder to pick out, but you can see the little non-linear hockey stick of extra correction in the lower left of your graphs.

Are you in the advanced OSD or regular? Advanced OSD is accessed by powering up pressing INPUT and POWER at the same time for a couple of seconds. In the advanced OSD you can see "color control" and "gamma" sections - both of which have multiple settings including PRG. "PRG" means that the LUTs are being used. Is your gamma and color control where you're trying to measure black point showing something other than PRG or is one of them still PRG?


Page 5 and 6 on my advanced OSD (gamma and color control) both say "picture mode is programmable".

BTW, in the advanced OSD setting the black level main to around 85 instead of current 128 looks about what I would want from the calibration.

If either says "PRG" then you haven't done a full reset - this pertains to the measurement of black level with no profile/calibration to measure native contrast before SVII starts messing with things.

It's interesting that your CR is so much higher at a target of 250. I'm going to guess that at your panel age 120 and 140 are both using panel blocking to reach that target.

Have you posted what's shown in the Color Tracking tab on a 120 or 140 run? I'm curious about the deltaE at low values.

Maybe the 2690 black level is higher than the 2490, but I'd be surprised if it was double. The newer displays were supposed to have 100:1 higher CR than the older like mine if I remember correctly.

calemon wrote:
If either says "PRG" then you haven't done a full reset - this pertains to the measurement of black level with no profile/calibration to measure native contrast before SVII starts messing with things.

It's interesting that your CR is so much higher at a target of 250. I'm going to guess that at your panel age 120 and 140 are both using panel blocking to reach that target.

Have you posted what's shown in the Color Tracking tab on a 120 or 140 run? I'm curious about the deltaE at low values.

Maybe the 2690 black level is higher than the 2490, but I'd be surprised if it was double. The newer displays were supposed to have 100:1 higher CR than the older like mine if I remember correctly.



The black point measured .38 after factory preset.

Color tracking at 120.


Color tracking at 140.

I got a new NEC2490 with Spectraview a few days ago, so I've been following this and other threads with great interest. Initial efforts at calibration give me several questions, but first I've got to get over one major problem. Hope someone can help.

I'm seeing fairly significant backlight "bleed" through black screens at even small angles. I understand the older 2490's had a polarizer filter that improved viewing angles, and my new one does not. But I didn't expect an effect this bad. I view the screen from a distance of 18 to 24 inches (due to special prescription glasses), and I see fading in all 4 corners on black screens. If I repositon, or back up 4 feet, it looks OK. But if I view from 4 feet at a 45 degree angle, it looks bad.

So I'm wondering, do I have a bad unit? Have I really screwed up the calibration? Or is this as good as it gets? I'm pretty confident in the calibrations. Done several, and all the numbers look OK. And yes, I made sure the monitor and video card hardware were reset. And I downloaded all fresh drivers and Spectraview software. If this is as good as it gets, I'm seriously thinking of returning the unit and finding something else. I've got the NEC 2490 on a new system, side-by-side with a NEC 2070 on my old system. The difference is night-and-day.

To demo, I tried taking photos of the screen. Waited till night, and shot in an all dark room. Placed the camera exactly where my head would be for normal viewing. First image is a normal screen, made for base exposure. Second is a black screen made at the same exposure. Got the black screen by using the Windows screen saver. Third is the same black screen image given a +1 exposure boost to emphasize the effect. Forth is an angle shot, normal exposure. Please excuse the wide angle distortion.

So what do you think? Bad unit? Bad operator?

redcrown:

The LCD2490WUXi does indeed have an A-TW polarizer while the LCD2490WUXi2 does not. I believe I read that the newer PA series also lacks the A-TW polarizer.

I have a v1 with the polarizer.

It comes and goes, but on a totally black screen (ie. booting the system) I get a little bit of lower-left bleed. Sometimes it isn't there, sometimes it is quite noticeable. I never notice it when actually using the system. I've read that a lot of people with the specific panel in the 2490 (not just the 2490v1 itself) get some lower-left bleed and that it's "common". I have not read the same thing about any of the other corners.

When I first got this display I was coming from a Sony GDM-F520 CRT and when I went off angle to the side on a black display I could see a little green/violet glow depending on the direction. IPS technology panels exhibit white glow at extreme off angles and the A-TW polarizer greatly reduces this but gives the green/violet effect in its place. I noticed it when "testing" the monitor after purchase, but never noticed it at all when actually using the display and haven't really noticed it much since even in very dark situations.

A lot of gamers who frequent a hardware-oriented forum I participate in always use their PC in total darkness. Of course a lot of them are also students and use their PCs "in their room" for absolutely everything - watching movies with friends etc... I strongly recommend not working in the dark. IPS panels are not particularly high contrast but are the best technology for gamma/color uniformity. IPS will be one of the worst LCD technologies in terms of having "grey" blacks and isn't going to excel at large fields of mostly black.

You may very well have a defective panel with glow at all four corners. I bought my 2490 used so this didn't apply to me, but I remember reading that some people have required some "break in" time to get the panel to seat properly in its frame with a couple of heat cycles and a lot of bleed issues actually go away. Depending on the return policy at your place of purchase, how long you have, and how much of a pain it is you might consider doing an exchange. Of course you could get a worse display in the process with a stuck red pixel or something, right? You take your chances

If you have the time - don't work in the dark, perhaps leave the display on one night overnight (no power saving, but a screen blanker is OK) and see how much you continue to notice the corner bleed in actual use. My windows backdrop is usually a dark grey, and I don't use many apps with large expanses of black (like the DPR shot you have there). Whenever I go off axis I see fingerprints highlighted by ambient light (from others in the family) before I see any weird glow effects.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2pIysomGPI

About the lack of polarizer - 30 sec. clip.

Not sure if anyone has mentioned the fact that NEC suggests only one calibrator for its wide-gamut monitors -- the Spyder 3. It says all the others can sometimes create color "bumps".

Regarding the lack of ATW polarizer in the v2 monitors, has anyone noticed any negative effect when viewing head on or at slight angles? I'm trying to decide whether to get a v1 or v2 of the 2490 and have seen suggestions that the non-ATW "glow" can be seen in some cases even head on. If there's no discernable difference then I'll probably get the v2 simply because it has better contrast ratio and slightly better sRGB accuracy (97% vs 94%).

pipspeak wrote:
Not sure if anyone has mentioned the fact that NEC suggests only one calibrator for its wide-gamut monitors -- the Spyder 3. It says all the others can sometimes create color "bumps".

Regarding the lack of ATW polarizer in the v2 monitors, has anyone noticed any negative effect when viewing head on or at slight angles? I'm trying to decide whether to get a v1 or v2 of the 2490 and have seen suggestions that the non-ATW "glow" can be seen in some cases even head on. If there's no discernable difference then I'll probably get the v2 simply because it has better contrast ratio and slightly better sRGB accuracy (97% vs 94%).


I have yet to hear of anyone "preferring" a 2490v2 when having both in front of them, if that means anything to you...

pipspeak wrote:
Not sure if anyone has mentioned the fact that NEC suggests only one calibrator for its wide-gamut monitors -- the Spyder 3. It says all the others can sometimes create color "bumps".


Hopefully with the exception of the NEC branded X-rite that comes with Spectraview.

pipspeak wrote:
Not sure if anyone has mentioned the fact that NEC suggests only one calibrator for its wide-gamut monitors -- the Spyder 3. It says all the others can sometimes create color "bumps".

I've owned my 2690 v1 for a while and have not been following the NEC calibration discussions very carefully ... where did you hear about the Spyder 3 being the preferred solution? I currently have an Eye One Pro, but would consider picking up the Spyder 3 also if it was a better solution.

UCSB wrote:
pipspeak wrote:
Not sure if anyone has mentioned the fact that NEC suggests only one calibrator for its wide-gamut monitors -- the Spyder 3. It says all the others can sometimes create color "bumps".

I've owned my 2690 v1 for a while and have not been following the NEC calibration discussions very carefully ... where did you hear about the Spyder 3 being the preferred solution? I currently have an Eye One Pro, but would consider picking up the Spyder 3 also if it was a better solution.


My mistake... the SV release notes refer only to the Spyder 2 being below par for the 2690 and suggests using the Spyder 3. It does not comment on any other colorimeters so I assume they're all OK (including the Eye-One v2 bundled with the SV-series monitors).

calemon wrote:
pipspeak wrote:
Not sure if anyone has mentioned the fact that NEC suggests only one calibrator for its wide-gamut monitors -- the Spyder 3. It says all the others can sometimes create color "bumps".

Regarding the lack of ATW polarizer in the v2 monitors, has anyone noticed any negative effect when viewing head on or at slight angles? I'm trying to decide whether to get a v1 or v2 of the 2490 and have seen suggestions that the non-ATW "glow" can be seen in some cases even head on. If there's no discernable difference then I'll probably get the v2 simply because it has better contrast ratio and slightly better sRGB accuracy (97% vs 94%).


I have yet to hear of anyone "preferring" a 2490v2 when having both in front of them, if that means anything to you...




It does... and might explain why so many retailers are selling the v2 dirt cheap (B&H for $729 until it ran out of stock a month or so ago). Now I can get either a refurb v1 or a brand new v2 for more or less the same price (~$700).