Re: Barco vs Eizo
Re: Barco vs Eizo
- Subject: Re: Barco vs Eizo
- From: Roger Breton <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 07:10:37 -0400
Hi Steve,
Just to be sure. I'm not the original poster of this 220 opinion, below,
even though it says "Roger Breton at email@hidden wrote".
>> on 10/9/05 13:26, Roger Breton at email@hidden wrote:
>> <snip>
>> The CG220 looks pretty ugly and I still can't believe that such an expensive
>> device has only one USB socket!
>
> On one hand I see your point about the USB port but on the other hand, I don't
> typically use a display for a hub. I find a keyboard plugs into it just fine
> and that's all I want on my desk.
>
> Also, I like the design of the 220. It's black, which is good for viewing. It
> has clear controls on the front and their hood has a slider in the middle for
> allowing a calibrator hanger / cable to pass through when profiling. Once I
> fire one up I don't find myself looking at the display's edges anyway, the
> gamut of this one is pretty amazing. I guess our tastes must simply differ on
> this point...
>
>> I also question the usefulness of the effort that has gone in to matching
>> Adobe1998? What relevance does it have outside of Photoshop?
>
> tons!
>
> the CG220 is the only display I have found so far that has a sufficient gamut
> to display all of press Cyan from SWOP.
>
> Now we can argue that SWOP is a loose definition but TR001 is good enough for
> now and I find that it also displays 99% of the DTR004 gamut (GRACoL sheet
> fed).
>
> THAT is incredibly relevant to some people. Yes Adobe RGB is used within
> Photoshop but the images contained in it are relevant across the entire
> workflow. Many people also do their own final prints for display and the 220
> comes much closer to showing all inkjet colors as well.
>
>> That said, the gamut and the image quality *is* everything that they claim
>> and it made our 23" Cinema Displays look very lacklustre by comparison.
>>
>> But, when you've clicked the *ink black* and *paper white* checkboxes, I'd
>> rather have 3 Cinema Displays and an i1 for pre-press work!
>
> they still won't display a boatload of Cyan / Green detail though, regardless
> of the level of black.
>
>> You still can't trust your eyes when working in CMYK
>
> why not? SWOP has certified a number of soft-proofing systems and at least one
> of them (Remote Director) is being upgraded with press-console features so it
> can be used "on press"
>
> Hell has indeed frozen over for a number of people and they are enjoying the
> skating!
>
>> What's the point of spending more than 3x the price of a similar (and
>> larger) monitor when you spend most of your time watching the colour values?
>
> I suppose because there are a lot of people who don't watch the numbers.
>
>> However, if you're a photographer who wants the closest you can get to
>> WYSIWYG in Adobe1998 - it's most probably worth every penny.
>
> in that we are in agreement.
>
> I don't deny that its price is outside most people's budgets but for those who
> want or need what it offers I think it is a great solution.
>
> Regards,
>
> Steve
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden