CTYankee wrote:
I would much prefer to have 2 24" displays than one 30". I find its just too big and i have to move my head all around to find things. On 2 displays I can keep different windows or apps in their screen and find its much more organized and efficient. One could get a highly accurate 24" (NEC, Eizo) and a cheaper (Dell) for the price of a 30" and have more pixels, two displays, and better quality.
Excellent point. I've been evaluating monitor options for a few weeks now and this may be my solution.
The dells will show quite a bit of banding on a simple gradient. The apple monitor shows far less. I bought my g/f a dell, and I returned it because the banding was too severe.
Ben Horne wrote:
The dells will show quite a bit of banding on a simple gradient. The apple monitor shows far less. I bought my g/f a dell, and I returned it because the banding was too severe.
This is true for some of them, but depends on the revision and QC. The refurbs are usually flawed for example. It is possible to get a Dell that performs well to very well. I'm looking at two and gave away a third that was as good as any Apple (20" IPS that uses the same panel as Apple). I also had two that were very flawed. So it is a bit of a crap shoot...just google Dell Lottery.
Both the Apple 30" and Dell 30" use the same display panel: LG.Philips S-IPS LM300W01
The differences would be in the controls provided by Dell/Apple to adjust color, brightness, contrast, etc. I don't have any experience with either of them just passing on information that they both use the same LCD display.
I used to have CRTs (various sony / lacie) monitors and I am far happier with my apple cinema display.
One advantage of the apple cinema displays is that they are precalibrated out of the box and require very little modification by the LUT (the I/O lines from my eye-one are basically linear). I don't know if this is true of the Dells. In the past, people complained that the Dells were too bright, but this may have been fixed.
Chefdaniel wrote:
Save yourself some money and buy an awesome CRT. Image quality is amazing and puts 90% of flat LCD's to shame for under $200.00. If you can handle the size you are in for a bargain. Try the NEC multiSync FE992 and you won't be disappointed. Hope this helps.
My current set-up is 24" Calibrated Imac and Calibrated NEC monitor. And everytime it comes to prints the CRT is dead on. And in my book thats worth something.
Edited by Chefdaniel on Dec 11, 2007 at 06:43 AM GMT
CRTs are not up to par with good LCDs. They used to be, but unfortunately quality CRTs are not made anymore. The CRTs you can buy use crappy parts and are not what they used to be. Even the old Artisans are being rivaled by good LCDs these days. These are not my opinions, but those of the guy who designed the Artisan.
CTYankee wrote:
This is true for some of them, but depends on the revision and QC. The refurbs are usually flawed for example. It is possible to get a Dell that performs well to very well. I'm looking at two and gave away a third that was as good as any Apple (20" IPS that uses the same panel as Apple). I also had two that were very flawed. So it is a bit of a crap shoot...just google Dell Lottery.
You know, you constantly come in here and bash Dell. I will tell you with 100% certainty that this is 100% wrong. (as have been many of your past bashings) The refurbs are NOT usually flawed. Items are placed into the Dell Outlet as refurbs for a variety of reasons. In fact, a very high percentage of the items have never even been opened. They were cancelled orders, delivery refusals, mis-shipments, etc.
And Ben, a blanket statement like that is really stretching it as well. I have a 24" Dell on my desk that shows no banding at all. I've use countless other Dell monitors and I've rarely seen a problem. In the past, I've done things like setup 24-seat training systems for events like PhotoShop world where attendees used them all day. Rarely a problem, and never a complaint about banding, color or otherwise.
If you search the internet, you'll find bad reports about -everything-. Dell monitors are consistently rated very high, by well established publications and agencies. Just like the apple units are. If you want the absolute highest-end, best performing solution you'll pay a premuim for high. Usually a healthy premium at that. Specialized glass that has gone through high optimization, screening and modification brings a premium price. Dell offer commodity level pricing to a very good solution. It's a solution that's acceptable to a very high percentage of users...even those critical about their work. Will it work for everyone? No.
That said, it is very likely I will not respond any further to this or any similar thread. I refuse to get dragged into an arguement. But at the same time, enough is enough.
I'm going to add one quick comment just to be clear...
CTYankee and Ben, this is not meant to be a personal attack or judgement. I respect and appreciate your opinions and guidance you provide on this board. I always like to read your input and suggestions, and will continue to do the same.
Michael H wrote:
You know, you constantly come in here and bash Dell. I will tell you with 100% certainty that this is 100% wrong. (as have been many of your past bashings) The refurbs are NOT usually flawed. Items are placed into the Dell Outlet as refurbs for a variety of reasons. In fact, a very high percentage of the items have never even been opened. They were cancelled orders, delivery refusals, mis-shipments, etc.
And Ben, a blanket statement like that is really stretching it as well. I have a 24" Dell on my desk that shows no banding at all. I've use countless other Dell monitors and I've rarely seen a problem. In the past, I've done things like setup 24-seat training systems for events like PhotoShop world where attendees used them all day. Rarely a problem, and never a complaint about banding, color or otherwise.
If you search the internet, you'll find bad reports about -everything-. Dell monitors are consistently rated very high, by well established publications and agencies. Just like the apple units are. If you want the absolute highest-end, best performing solution you'll pay a premuim for high. Usually a healthy premium at that. Specialized glass that has gone through high optimization, screening and modification brings a premium price. Dell offer commodity level pricing to a very good solution. It's a solution that's acceptable to a very high percentage of users...even those critical about their work. Will it work for everyone? No.
That said, it is very likely I will not respond any further to this or any similar thread. I refuse to get dragged into an arguement. But at the same time, enough is enough.
As an Apple fanboy of sorts I think I'm pretty fair about Dell products. I don't 'bash' them per se but rather present a realistic point of view. Good value but not always. I actually use them, so I can't be too much of a Dell basher. My gripe with Dell is that they are not consistent. Everything from poor accuracy to them switching to cheaper panels mid product cycle with no indication what you are buying. I do recomend them, but advise people to buy them from a place that will allow easy exchange.
I don't want to start an argument, but do want to make it clear that I'm not completely against Dells...and that Dells are not all created equal. In a Pro forum its much more important to take a harder stance against anything that is less than great (I even pan the new iMac with its glossy screen and the 20" with the TN panel...so I think I'm being fair if critical).
Edited by CTYankee on Dec 11, 2007 at 03:50 PM GMT
Chefdaniel wrote:
I totally agree about the LCD's. The gentlemen was referring to a apple monitor and I happen to own and have owned multiple. And my NEC CRT still is my go to for print color accuracy and resolution. I know that there are other alternatives and LCD"S are the way to go. Not only are some of them getting better and better everyday but they are also better for the
environment and just simply a better alternative. Now if you can afford one that matches the quality of my 200.00 CRT for under $2,000.00 that's the key. All this being said to a
professional photographer who just wants the best I totally agree. A$ 2,000 investment is small change for the something that is sob detrimental to obtaining the best results. Good luck with your purchase...Show more →
By what standard to you measure your CRT? Getting prints to match an LCD is not hard. I don't doubt your CRT is very good, but everything else out there says CRTs these days are not what they once were and even a good $700 Apple will outperform any CRT in accuracy. When the developer of the Artisan says today's CRTs are crap...I'm inclined to agree with him. Maybe NEC made a quality CRT again...but I'd still like to know how you measure quality.
Chefdaniel wrote:
Very simple. Edit your photo. Then hold it up to you monitor after printing using the same color space. I have used this method testing from MPIX, Miller's Lab, Costco, Smugmug and a local print shop that is highly regarded as one of the top labs in town. The colors and contrast best match my CRT but not perfect. I know when to make small adjustment in my contrast when using certain print shops and it's really only marginal. I really don't understand what else you would base a image on. If the damn thing is accurate and matches you have a winner. It does not take a computer expert to fig it out. What else would one do with a monitor when it comes to photography? Beyond workspace what else are you doing with your monitor. I also explained that I have a apple monitor. I also use the spyder pro for color, contrast accuracy. Now I'm very interested. What could I be missing? Maybe it's time for a upgrade just to see what the fuss is all about. I have canon's top camera gear I want the best when it comes to printing. So what else do you have. No bullshiXX what am missing out on? ...Show more →
That is a very subjective test to measure quality, and to be honest a pretty simple and easy one to pass... and by your own admission even your CRT does not match. The real test is when you put a colorimeter in front of it and test those colors. Are they what they really should be? Two displays can look nearly identical, and when compared to a print (not side by side, but monadically) both can be 'spot on'. However measure the colors with a colorimeter and suddenly one proves to be far more accurate. Its just that the testing method...eyeballing a print is not a very sensitive or objective way to measure. Not to mention some people are far more preceptive to color differences than others.
Yes, getting prints to match what you see is the end goal. But your brain and eyes can fool you. The match may not be as good as you think until you see it next to a superior display or check the actual LAB values with a colorimeter.
Technically speaking CRTs are made from very low quality parts. Their lifetimes are limited (as all CRTs are) so good color won't last. The design in them today is not what it was that allowed them to be the king of color work. As I've said before, the guy who developed the Artisan CRT (the best of the best) is on the record saying you can't buy a quality CRT unless you spend $$$ (and those too may be out of production now). The technology in modern LCDs is just much better than what is in modern CRTs.
Your NEC may produce color that is quite good, but the body of evidence out there all points to cheap CRTs (and LCDs) being mediocre for color critical work. When really challenged LCDs just perform better. As you said, the colors don't match perfectly...showing the limits of the display. With the right tools (display and color profiling hardware/software) it is possible to get those perfect results.
Michael H wrote:
And Ben, a blanket statement like that is really stretching it as well. I have a 24" Dell on my desk that shows no banding at all. I've use countless other Dell monitors and I've rarely seen a problem. In the past, I've done things like setup 24-seat training systems for events like PhotoShop world where attendees used them all day. Rarely a problem, and never a complaint about banding, color or otherwise.
Did someone cut you off in traffic today? I don't believe I ever made a blanket statment about dell monitors. I made a statement about my experience. Perhaps you would like to re-read my post? I found that in my experience, the apple was superior. I had the two monitors side by side on my desk, and the dell was showing a lot of banding, and the apple showed very little. Again, this is my own first person experience here. I don't see why I would have gone through all the trouble of returning the monitor and buying her a more expensive monitor if the two were equal.
Ben, I said I wasn't going to reply, but here it is anyway...
Maybe it was a bad day, but the more frustrating thing is in seeing so many broad-stroke generalizations taken as the absolute truth. The first line of your post is what got my attention...
"The dells will show quite a bit of banding on a simple gradient."
That to me is very broad statement. Maybe I'm beng to literal...who knows. There are SO many factors that could influence something like banding on any display. Not the least of which is a video card, and video cards a far from stable and working alike.
I'll roll back into my hole now. Ben, Doug, I don't mean to offend as I've stated above. One of these days I hope we get to go out and shoot something together.
I believe the Apple and Dell displays use the same LCD panel. You can't go wrong with either both are outstanding monitors and you will probably be using a calibration device either way.
