fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2008 · Vaio xbrite-eco

  
 
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · Vaio xbrite-eco


Hello,

I will be upgrading my current Vaio laptop with a 17" xbrite-eco model. My old laptop display has been quite accurate without calibration and has served me well for over 5 years. Anyone with experience with the xbrite screen? How accurate are the colors? Color gamut close to sRGB?

Any info would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Edward



Jun 18, 2008 at 02:42 AM
Taylor Barrett
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · Vaio xbrite-eco


They are extremely inaccurate. The Xbrite screens have unbelievably high saturation and contrast levels to give them a "pop" when they're sitting on the display shelves at Best Buy, but its worthless for anything that might be printed or viewed on a color accurate monitor. Not at all worth the time for even a semi serious photographer.

Basically, (and some people may argue with me here, but I'm stating a fact; not opinion) a glossy screen is going to be worse then a matte screen for color accuracy. With a matte (anti glare), you're looking straight at the image. With glossy, you've got a slab of glass inbetween jacking up contrast levels to get that image that jumps out at you - this comes at a price however, anyone with a different monitor or your local print shop is going to see a completely different image.

Edited on Jun 18, 2008 at 03:49 AM



Jun 18, 2008 at 03:47 AM
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · Vaio xbrite-eco


Thanks Taylor for your info. In this case, I should forget about the Vaio altogether.

Could anyone in this case indicate any brand and model of laptops that are photo-friendly?

Thanks,
Edward

Taylor Barrett wrote:
They are extremely inaccurate. The Xbrite screens have unbelievably high saturation and contrast levels to give them a "pop" when they're sitting on the display shelves at Best Buy, but its worthless for anything that might be printed or viewed on a color accurate monitor. Not at all worth the time for even a semi serious photographer.

Basically, (and some people may argue with me here, but I'm stating a fact; not opinion) a glossy screen is going to be worse then a matte screen for color accuracy. With a matte (anti glare), you're looking straight at the image.
...Show more



Jun 18, 2008 at 09:53 AM
UCSB
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · Vaio xbrite-eco


I have a $3,000 Sony with XBrite ... I don't use it for photo editing because as stated above there is no way to get accurate results from them. The problem with the screen is that color/saturation changes with small changes in your viewing angle. So even if you calibrate the screen carefully you can't get it close. Actually, I feel that all notebook screens are junk and your best bet is to get a notebook with a digital DVI out so you can connect a quality monitor to the notebook.

My Sony notebook has been extremely reliable and done an superb job for me for it's general use mission. I have enjoyed the XBrite screen ... even though it is of no use for photo editing.



Jun 18, 2008 at 04:50 PM





FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account