Re: LCDs - brightness, contrast, remote proofing-part1
Re: LCDs - brightness, contrast, remote proofing-part1
- Subject: Re: LCDs - brightness, contrast, remote proofing-part1
- From: "Chris McFarling" <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 12:51:08 -0500
> > So one question has to do with the ACD. Since it has just a backlight
> > brightness control and no other controls, how are other users handling
> > situations were the lowest brightness setting is not low enough?
>
> Unless the unit is defective, that should not be the case, in my
experience.
However, if you have a retouching department that currently has 8 CRTs and
one LCD, that LCD will be hard if not impossible to setup so that images
look the same as they do on the CRT displays that the other 7 people are
looking at. Are others working successfully in an mixed CRT/LCD environment
where color accuracy is important from screen to screen?
>> In regards to the Dell 2005FPW....
> > "When a Digital Flat Panel monitor is connected via the Digital Video
> > Interface (DVI) connector, the contrast will be grayed out
(unavailable).
> > This is normal, and the flat panel is functioning as designed. While
> > connected via the DVI, the contrast for the flat panel is controlled by
the
> > video card."
> >
> > I found that odd, but ok. So, does that mean that the video card used
DDC to
> > simply communicate with the display and tell it what to set its contrast
to?
>
> Only if there are DDC controls present, which is *not* the case with the
> Apple Cinema Displays. I don't know about the Dell model, though.
>
> > Or does that mean that the video card must alter the signal being sent
to
> > the display?
I found the answer to this I believe. The reason for that has to do with
signal processing requirements. It's easier (i.e. cheaper) to provide the
internal electronics that can adjust analog signals than it is to provide
electronics that can adjust digital signals. Therefore several manufacturers
simply don't do certain types of digital signal processing and instead leave
the omitted functions for the video card to handle.
> > In addition to in-house use, we're starting to look at remote proofing
> > solutions. The latest generation packages, such as KPG Matchprint
Virtual
> > are using LCD displays now. With all I've read on LCDs, accompanied with
my
> > own experience, it makes me wonder how feasible such a thing is. Is
remote
> > LCD based proofing (or CRT based for that matter) really ready for
primetime
> > you think?
After gaining a better understanding of LCD technology over the last week or
so, as well as gaining some insight into how the leading remote proofing
packages work, I believe that the time has most likely come for serious,
color critical remote proofing.
> > Is an $800 ACD really able to perform as well as a $2700 CG210?
I would say no. And that was one of the biggest points of confusion for me
initially. If you look at the certified monitors for Remote Director or
Matchprint Virtual, you'll see that the ACDs are listed there along with
Eizo's and other LUT based displays. On the surface that made me think that
the ACDs were comparable to the higher end displays. However, I assume that
the fact that those ACDs are certified with those remote proofing packages
has more to do with Apple's marketing than it does with the displays
performance. From everything I've read, the technology proves that displays
with configurable LUTs (Eizo CG210, NEC LCD2180UX just to name a couple) are
superior to those without them. So while the ACDs look great and have a
solid brand name on them, you can get more bang for your buck elsewhere, if
accurate color is a major concern.
So echoing what Karl Lang said a little while back regarding monitor
recomendations...
> Price performance wise the great bargain is the NEC 1980SXI BK the
> price/vs colorimetric performance of this display can't be beat. The
> 2180ux Is a great display at a reasonable but high end price.
>
> In the mid-high wide screen I like the Apple and the SONY. Reject the
> display if uniformity is bad and make sure whomever you buy it from
> will exchange it.
>
> The Eizo 210 is great if you can justify the current cost. Give it
> two years and most high-end displays should perform at this level.
> 220 is a great display but suffers from all the downfalls of any wide
> gamut display.
>
> There is no reason to buy the La Cie 321 it's just an NEC with their
> label on it and an extra $400.
I'd say everything I've read backs up those statements exactly. There are
really two classes of LCDs currently, those with configurable 10 bit (or
higher) LUTs, and those without. If you can afford the LUTs, get them.
>I'm just trying to sift through the seemingly endless amount of good and
bad
>info surrounding LCDs and better educate myself to know what works and what
>doesn't.
> >Indeed. Me too. Plenty of "instant experts" out there.
And I'm probably coming off as sounding like one now :-). However, I will
say I've done a ton of research the last several days and have a very good
grasp on how this all works now.
If you too want to become an instant expert, I'd recomend reading this
report...
http://www.displaymate.com/shootout.html
It goes extremely in depth about every aspect of display technology.
_______________________________________________
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