RE: Quantum Dot Tech - cheap wide gamut but is it ready for mainstream?
Rather inexpensive for a large gamut monitor. Intriguing color formation. Thank's Edmund / Roger -----Original Message----- From: colorsync-users-bounces+graxx=videotron.ca@lists.apple.com [mailto:colorsync-users-bounces+graxx=videotron.ca@lists.apple.com] On Behalf Of edmund ronald Sent: 25 mars 2016 01:20 To: 'colorsync-users?lists. apple. com' List <colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> Subject: Quantum Dot Tech - cheap wide gamut but is it ready for mainstream? http://www.4kshooters.net/2016/03/24/a-quick-look-at-the-worlds-first-quantu... Edmund
I’ve been waiting with interest to see Quantum Dot technology reach the market. However, after Apple bypassed Quantum Dot due to ecological issues, my enthusiasm has been somewhat curbed. There are other issues here; starting with this being a low resolution display for this day and age. I would also wonder about uniformity in a screen of this price range. And, for color management, there is the issue of being able to turn off the SmartContrast features. Finally, there is the question of what devices can effectively read, calibrate, and profile the display, given its new and unique screen type. I’ll be interested to hear answers to these issues from those on this list. C. David Tobie Senior Project Manager Workflow & Color Durst Phototechnik AG Julius-Durst-Strasse 4 39042 Brixen, Italy Telefon +39 04 72 81 01 11 Telefax +39 04 72 81 01 32 VAT Nr.: 00848170213 www.durst-online.com <http://www.durst-online.com/> cdtobie@durst.it <mailto:cdtobie@durst.it> skype: CDTobie
On Mar 25, 2016, at 9:10 AM, Roger Breton <graxx@videotron.ca> wrote:
Rather inexpensive for a large gamut monitor. Intriguing color formation.
Thank's Edmund / Roger
-----Original Message----- From: colorsync-users-bounces+graxx=videotron.ca@lists.apple.com [mailto:colorsync-users-bounces+graxx=videotron.ca@lists.apple.com] On Behalf Of edmund ronald Sent: 25 mars 2016 01:20 To: 'colorsync-users?lists. apple. com' List <colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> Subject: Quantum Dot Tech - cheap wide gamut but is it ready for mainstream?
http://www.4kshooters.net/2016/03/24/a-quick-look-at-the-worlds-first-quantu...
Edmund
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Colorsync-users mailing list (Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/colorsync-users/cdtobie%40mac.com
This email sent to cdtobie@mac.com
As usual I have to agree with David. - No process ever improves; so Apple has passed o OLED and on quantum dot - they have their reasons, and that's it. -Uniformity clearly must be an issue with a screen that has no backlight. This also applies to OLED. - Photographers need high resolution, especially on large screen like a 27". And see point 1 above, resolution improvements are slow and painful. - How can one expect to disable a feature like Smart Contrast? Not feasible, things are always wired forever. - Last not least spectros are not appropriate for screen calibration, and much too expensive as we all know. Look at the $10K or so Minolta spectro-radiometers. David is right: Until Philips or their IEMs bring out bespoke colorimeters with primaries wired in for the quantum transitions involved, this technology must be considered unusable, eeven at a pricepoint of $270 list for 27". :) Edmund On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 3:58 PM, Charles D Tobie <cdtobie@mac.com> wrote:
I’ve been waiting with interest to see Quantum Dot technology reach the market. However, after Apple bypassed Quantum Dot due to ecological issues, my enthusiasm has been somewhat curbed. There are other issues here; starting with this being a low resolution display for this day and age. I would also wonder about uniformity in a screen of this price range. And, for color management, there is the issue of being able to turn off the SmartContrast features. Finally, there is the question of what devices can effectively read, calibrate, and profile the display, given its new and unique screen type. I’ll be interested to hear answers to these issues from those on this list.
C. David Tobie Senior Project Manager Workflow & Color
Durst Phototechnik AG Julius-Durst-Strasse 4 39042 Brixen, Italy Telefon +39 04 72 81 01 11 Telefax +39 04 72 81 01 32 VAT Nr.: 00848170213 www.durst-online.com <http://www.durst-online.com/> cdtobie@durst.it <mailto:cdtobie@durst.it> skype: CDTobie
On Mar 25, 2016, at 9:10 AM, Roger Breton <graxx@videotron.ca> wrote:
Rather inexpensive for a large gamut monitor. Intriguing color formation.
Thank's Edmund / Roger
-----Original Message----- From: colorsync-users-bounces+graxx=videotron.ca@lists.apple.com [mailto:colorsync-users-bounces+graxx=videotron.ca@lists.apple.com] On Behalf Of edmund ronald Sent: 25 mars 2016 01:20 To: 'colorsync-users?lists. apple. com' List < colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> Subject: Quantum Dot Tech - cheap wide gamut but is it ready for mainstream?
http://www.4kshooters.net/2016/03/24/a-quick-look-at-the-worlds-first-quantu...
Edmund
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Colorsync-users mailing list (Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/colorsync-users/cdtobie%40mac.com
This email sent to cdtobie@mac.com
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Colorsync-users mailing list (Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/colorsync-users/edmundronald%40gmail...
This email sent to edmundronald@gmail.com
ᐧ
As usual, the degree of Edmund’s sarcasm is so great, that its difficult to determine what he is actually saying. My usual strategy is to ignore his posts entirely. However, having been foolish enough to post to this list once, I’ll make a single pass at replying…
On Mar 25, 2016, at 5:26 PM, edmund ronald <edmundronald@gmail.com> wrote:
As usual I have to agree with David.
Who knows? Like Doctor Who, you’re actual meaning is usually lost...
- No process ever improves; so Apple has passed o OLED and on quantum dot - they have their reasons, and that's it.
Apple uses OLED in the Apple Watch. Apple passed on Quantum Dots for larger screens, due to ecological issues. I may disagree with various Apple strategies, but I feel that they are better endowed to determine what technologies are green, and what ones are not, than I am. So their avoiding Quantum Dots is not a good indicator.
-Uniformity clearly must be an issue with a screen that has no backlight. This also applies to OLED.
Uniformity has proven to be the downfall of many great technologies. And its still important today. So, I add it to my list of unknowns, that I hope members of this list may have meaningful information on. Perhaps someone will actually use their fancy spectrophotometer to measure one of these screens at multiple locations, and post the results.
- Photographers need high resolution, especially on large screen like a 27". And see point 1 above, resolution improvements are slow and painful.
Photographers desire pixel-level resolution, not just for tasks that require it, like sharpening, and dust busting, but for everything else, if possible. I would not waste deskspace on a display that did not have “retina” grade resolutions any longer, and I assume most other photographers feel similarly. My ancient 30” Cinema Display was 2,560 x 1,600, and seemed uselessly low-res for the last couple of years that I used it.
- How can one expect to disable a feature like Smart Contrast? Not feasible, things are always wired forever.
Many auto-contrast functions in expensive TVs were hardwired in a way that made calibration impossible. So its an issue worth flagging.
- Last not least spectros are not appropriate for screen calibration, and much too expensive as we all know. Look at the $10K or so Minolta spectro-radiometers.
There used to be this concept of display price to calibrator price ratio. With a display for two hundred and some odd dollars, that ratio is likely to be reversed. X-Rite has made moves to bring spectros back to a starting point over a thousand dollars. So its a legitimate question to ask whether the purchaser of this type of low cost display will use a calibrator at all.
David is right: Until Philips or their IEMs bring out bespoke colorimeters with primaries wired in for the quantum transitions involved, this technology must be considered unusable, eeven at a pricepoint of $270 list for 27".
There are other options than a four or five digit priced spectro, and a “bespoke colorimeter”. For instance, the existing lines of general use colorimeters may provide library entries with corrections for Quantum Dot screens. Or built-in calibrators may serve the need; though those have not made it to this price range yet. With spectro-measured factory primaries, the remaining tasks are largely luminance related. So, I refine my list: It will be interesting to see what these displays offer for canned corrections (a display this wide-gamut must have a reasonable canned profile, or colors will be objectionable), it will be interesting to see what uses these displays are sufficient for (at this rez, photo and video really aren't on the list). C. David Tobie Senior Project Manager Workflow & Color Durst Phototechnik AG Julius-Durst-Strasse 4 39042 Brixen, Italy Telefon +39 04 72 81 01 11 Telefax +39 04 72 81 01 32 VAT Nr.: 00848170213 www.durst-online.com <http://www.durst-online.com/> cdtobie@durst.it <mailto:cdtobie@durst.it> skype: CDTobie
Ah, I see CD has got a well-calibrated sarcasm detector. My take here is that QD tech seem to be arriving on the market with a bang; I'd be optimistic, as these seem to be quantum techs, just knowing the primaries may suffice to use a simple sensor to calibrate. The primaries are defined by the physics in such a case, so it's more about knowing how the sensor reacts to them. Edmund ᐧ On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 2:12 AM, Charles D Tobie <cdtobie@mac.com> wrote:
As usual, the degree of Edmund’s sarcasm is so great, that its difficult to determine what he is actually saying. My usual strategy is to ignore his posts entirely. However, having been foolish enough to post to this list once, I’ll make a single pass at replying…
On Mar 25, 2016, at 5:26 PM, edmund ronald <edmundronald@gmail.com> wrote:
As usual I have to agree with David.
Who knows? Like Doctor Who, you’re actual meaning is usually lost...
- No process ever improves; so Apple has passed o OLED and on quantum dot - they have their reasons, and that's it.
Apple uses OLED in the Apple Watch. Apple passed on Quantum Dots for larger screens, due to ecological issues. I may disagree with various Apple strategies, but I feel that they are better endowed to determine what technologies are green, and what ones are not, than I am. So their avoiding Quantum Dots is not a good indicator.
-Uniformity clearly must be an issue with a screen that has no backlight. This also applies to OLED.
Uniformity has proven to be the downfall of many great technologies. And its still important today. So, I add it to my list of unknowns, that I hope members of this list may have meaningful information on. Perhaps someone will actually use their fancy spectrophotometer to measure one of these screens at multiple locations, and post the results.
- Photographers need high resolution, especially on large screen like a 27". And see point 1 above, resolution improvements are slow and painful.
Photographers desire pixel-level resolution, not just for tasks that require it, like sharpening, and dust busting, but for everything else, if possible. I would not waste deskspace on a display that did not have “retina” grade resolutions any longer, and I assume most other photographers feel similarly. My ancient 30” Cinema Display was 2,560 x 1,600, and seemed uselessly low-res for the last couple of years that I used it.
- How can one expect to disable a feature like Smart Contrast? Not feasible, things are always wired forever.
Many auto-contrast functions in expensive TVs were hardwired in a way that made calibration impossible. So its an issue worth flagging.
- Last not least spectros are not appropriate for screen calibration, and much too expensive as we all know. Look at the $10K or so Minolta spectro-radiometers.
There used to be this concept of display price to calibrator price ratio. With a display for two hundred and some odd dollars, that ratio is likely to be reversed. X-Rite has made moves to bring spectros back to a starting point over a thousand dollars. So its a legitimate question to ask whether the purchaser of this type of low cost display will use a calibrator at all.
David is right: Until Philips or their IEMs bring out bespoke
colorimeters with primaries wired in for the quantum transitions involved, this technology must be considered unusable, eeven at a pricepoint of $270 list for 27".
There are other options than a four or five digit priced spectro, and a “bespoke colorimeter”. For instance, the existing lines of general use colorimeters may provide library entries with corrections for Quantum Dot screens. Or built-in calibrators may serve the need; though those have not made it to this price range yet. With spectro-measured factory primaries, the remaining tasks are largely luminance related.
So, I refine my list: It will be interesting to see what these displays offer for canned corrections (a display this wide-gamut must have a reasonable canned profile, or colors will be objectionable), it will be interesting to see what uses these displays are sufficient for (at this rez, photo and video really aren't on the list).
C. David Tobie Senior Project Manager Workflow & Color
Durst Phototechnik AG Julius-Durst-Strasse 4 39042 Brixen, Italy Telefon +39 04 72 81 01 11 Telefax +39 04 72 81 01 32 VAT Nr.: 00848170213 www.durst-online.com <http://www.durst-online.com/> cdtobie@durst.it <mailto:cdtobie@durst.it> skype: CDTobie
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Colorsync-users mailing list (Colorsync-users@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/colorsync-users/edmundronald%40gmail...
This email sent to edmundronald@gmail.com
On 26 Mar 2016, at 01:29, edmund ronald <edmundronald@gmail.com> wrote:
My take here is that QD tech seem to be arriving on the market with a bang; I'd be optimistic, as these seem to be quantum techs, just knowing the primaries may suffice to use a simple sensor to calibrate. The primaries are defined by the physics in such a case, so it's more about knowing how the sensor reacts to them.
Here is a review that is quite thorough: <http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/philips-276e6-27-inch-quantum-dot-monitor,review-33495.html> Turns out that you can turn the Smart Contrast off. -- Martin Orpen Idea Digital Imaging Ltd
On Mar 26, 2016, at 9:53 AM, Martin Orpen <martin@idea-digital.com> wrote:
Here is a review that is quite thorough:
<http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/philips-276e6-27-inch-quantum-dot-monitor,review-33495.html>
Based on that review, it sure sounds like this is the hands-down best buy for large-gamut displays for those with the ability to profile it. Granted, most of those with the ability to profile such a display are going to be looking for higher spatial resolution and aren't going to be worried about price so much and so on...but there'll be plenty of situations where this will be a clear winner. ...and it sure does give hope for a future with lots of inexpensive large-gamut displays.... Cheers, b&
participants (5)
-
Ben Goren
-
Charles D Tobie
-
edmund ronald
-
Martin Orpen
-
Roger Breton