Super-Pink ... monitor calibration and Lightroom?

I've been working on a set of files in Lightroom 2 on a PowerBook G4. I transferred them recently to a Power Mac G5.
Before examining these files in Lightroom on the G5, I did a monitor calibration on my NEC 2080UX using an Eye-One device. The profile made the resulting GretagMacbeth test image look "better".
I then fired up Lightroom, and immediately noticed that any color close to pink-to-light-red appeared WAY too hot pink, way more than I ever saw on the PowerBook.
I did a second calibration and got the same results. (I did try various other pre-installed profiles, and they, too, make the pinks too hot in LR.)
Next, in Firefox I examined an image that I found on the web. I made a copy of that file and brought it into LR, and the reds in that image definitely shifted to pink.
Any ideas what might be going on?
I'm going to borrow a second 2080UX to see if it's the monitor...
-Allan

I would also download the free Eye-One Diagnostics software from the X-Rite site and make sure your instrument is working properly. Just a sanity check.

Similar Messages

Huey Pro Monitor Profile and Lightroom

I have saved a monitor profile on my computer, but don't understand how Lightroom uses that profile. I am currently using Epson and Ilford Paper on my Epson Stylus Pro 1400 and I have the correct color profiles for those papers.
My question is, if Lightroom does not manage the printing, what settings should be entered in the Epson Printer Setup to ensure that the printer is using my monitor profile in addition to the correct paper profile?

Wil-
First, what Jao said :)
Second: In regards to printing, a calibrated monitor profile gives us the best shot at a print looking like what we see on the screen, as long as when we print we have LR manage the color using the correct printer/paper profile and we turn off color management in the printer's driver.
If you have the printer manage color make sure that you tell LR to not manage color. In this case, the answer to your Printer Setup question is you have to choose whatever paper option most closely matches the paper you are using. Then, you have to go through a series of test prints and adjust your print driver color settings until they match what you see on the screen. You may have to alter those settings for different prints, to adjust for different image color balances.
It's really preferred to let LR do the color management, since you have both a monitor profile and a printer/paper profile.
Tony

Help Photoshop/Monitor Calibration and ICC Profiles.

I don't know if this is the right place to ask this, I am completely new here, if I am not, can you help show me where I can get answers to this?
If you can help me, then please. (:
So I'm helping my dad with a photography studio over the summer to make money for a car and I will be doing the editing and such.
I have CS4 on a laptop, that is connected to a NEC monitor with Multisync P221W with the Spectraview II calibration software.
We have done a few pictures before but it has always taken us a few prints from the costco photo center to get the colors and lighting right because
it always seems to be different than how I see it on the monitor. I have been told install the ICC profiles from http://www.drycreekphoto.com/icc/Profiles/California_profiles.htm#CA . I live in the victorville area, and there are 4 ICC profiles, 2 for each printer. How do I install all 4? And how do I switch from one to the other? Also how do I set up my NEC monitor for photo editing, the Spectraview program calibrates it and says that it's set up for Photo editing but are there standard values for the colors, gamma, etc? And also how do I set up Photoshop CS4 for editing, I have been told to go to color settings but I don't know what to do once I get there.
Thanks for your time.

Apparently photoshop is applying additional color correction on top of
what the monitor calibration software has already done. Is this
necessary? If this step is necessary, then why doesn't the monitor
calibration software do that, so that photoshop doesn't have to,
Photoshop doesn't apply any color correction to the images per se, it just operates in a selected color space, and takes into account your monitor profile.
The monitor calibration tells your video card - or the monitor itself for some high end monitors, how it should be set to meet chosen targets, and generates a profile for the monitor.
1. Caibrate your monitor and generate a profile
2. Tell your OS that that it your monitor profile
3. Set Photoshop to work in the space of your choice - sRGB, Adobe RGB, or ProPhoto 99% of the time
That takes you to a state where everything is in order more or less. If at this point your images look out of whack, it's almost certainly because they are, perhaps because they were previously corrected on a non-calibrated setup.
Photoshop and other color managed application should display them all more or less exactly the same, provided the files themselves have a color profile .

Monitor calibration and photoshop

After I run a monitor calibration software, I thought all the photos would look correct on my computer no matter what app I use to display them.
But photos in photoshop looks slightly different from the same photo displayed by the browser or by other applets in windows. So slightly different that you wouldn't normally notice unless you do a side by side compare.
Apparently photoshop is applying additional color correction on top of what the monitor calibration software has already done. Is this necessary? If this step is necessary, then why doesn't the monitor calibration software do that, so that photoshop doesn't have to, and so that the photo would look the same in the browser as in photoshop?

Apparently photoshop is applying additional color correction on top of
what the monitor calibration software has already done. Is this
necessary? If this step is necessary, then why doesn't the monitor
calibration software do that, so that photoshop doesn't have to,
Photoshop doesn't apply any color correction to the images per se, it just operates in a selected color space, and takes into account your monitor profile.
The monitor calibration tells your video card - or the monitor itself for some high end monitors, how it should be set to meet chosen targets, and generates a profile for the monitor.
1. Caibrate your monitor and generate a profile
2. Tell your OS that that it your monitor profile
3. Set Photoshop to work in the space of your choice - sRGB, Adobe RGB, or ProPhoto 99% of the time
That takes you to a state where everything is in order more or less. If at this point your images look out of whack, it's almost certainly because they are, perhaps because they were previously corrected on a non-calibrated setup.
Photoshop and other color managed application should display them all more or less exactly the same, provided the files themselves have a color profile .

Monitor calibration and color eyes display pro

Hi trying to calibrate a 27 inch imac for photos. If I use the color eyes display pro with calibration it hijacks the video card. Will this make my computer out of apple care warranty? Thanks. Any other calibrators that work? Color munki?

Apparently photoshop is applying additional color correction on top of
what the monitor calibration software has already done. Is this
necessary? If this step is necessary, then why doesn't the monitor
calibration software do that, so that photoshop doesn't have to,
Photoshop doesn't apply any color correction to the images per se, it just operates in a selected color space, and takes into account your monitor profile.
The monitor calibration tells your video card - or the monitor itself for some high end monitors, how it should be set to meet chosen targets, and generates a profile for the monitor.
1. Caibrate your monitor and generate a profile
2. Tell your OS that that it your monitor profile
3. Set Photoshop to work in the space of your choice - sRGB, Adobe RGB, or ProPhoto 99% of the time
That takes you to a state where everything is in order more or less. If at this point your images look out of whack, it's almost certainly because they are, perhaps because they were previously corrected on a non-calibrated setup.
Photoshop and other color managed application should display them all more or less exactly the same, provided the files themselves have a color profile .

X-rite eye-one display 2 monitor calibration and new 27' iMac

Hi,
I have been looking at the new 27" iMac to replace a 24" iMac Intel core 2 duo that I purchased last spring. The main problem being that I am a photographer/graphic designer and found out after I purchased this iMac that my x-rite eye-one display 2 monitor calibration system was rendered useless because the monitor brightness was way out of range (too bright) for the calibration software to work correctly.
My question is: Has anyone tried to use the x-rite eye-one display 2 with the new iMac 27" monitor? I understand that they may have fixed the monitor brightness problem, but now the new screen is lit by LED instead of LCD. Has this just presented a NEW problem that makes this color calibration system still useless or does it work despite the fact that the monitor light source has changed?
Thanks in advance for any info you can provide

The x-rite i1 display 2 won't work with any LCD lit panels. I've attended a x-rite training only six weeks ago and the guy explained the issues. So if you want to calibrate any LCD backlit screen, you have to get a more expensive thing -- maybe the Colormunki will do, but for sure the i1Pro will work. It's still a quite expensive upgrade.

Monitor calibration and gamma

Hello,
A properly calibrated monitor is essential for making prints that match the monitor image...
I also know that prints are generally darker than what is shown on the screen.
I've calibrated my monitor (without any colorimeter) but my prints still quite dark...
My monitor's color temperature : (white point) to 6500 K D65...
What am I suppose to do ?
Many thanks for your help...

if you really want accurate prints you can't compromise, the best option is to buy one of the USB monitor callibrators...
Otherwise personally i find the default profile to be best (on apple displays).
However the default gamma on new macs is 2.2 (which is for web and video and same as PCs)... Macs used to be set to 1.8 which is for print.
Try to select the default profile for your monitor and then calibrate (but do not use expert mode) then leave all settings the same except for gamma (change it to 1.8)
The other problem is that MBP LCDs are of the TN variety (twisted nemantic) these displays are no where near as accurate as non emulated full colour display like the ACD which is of the Super-IPS type... TN panels generally only have 6-bits per channel (64 * 64 * 64 = 262,144 Colours) where as full colour at 8-bit per channel is (256 * 256 * 256 = 16,777,216)... what happens is TN panels actually cycle colours really fast to emulate the colours it cannot actually produce... but unfortunately this is not as accurate as natively supporting it, and it's usually easily shown up by displaying a gradient.
The other problem with TN panels is the inconsistent contrast... when you tilt the display up and down the contrast will change quite drastically and at extreme angles it will invert... unfortunately all this means that it is not particularly accurate for colour work, you can get a fairly good idea of colour but for true accuracy a true colour display is needed.

LCD Monitor Calibration and FCS2

What preset are people using to calibrate FCS2 and their LCD monitor (I'm not talking about the external TV monitor). I've read a suggestion that "NTSC 1953" was the preset to use with FCS2, but it looks too dark on my monitor.
Thanks,
m

I use the pathetic Colorsync utility to calibrate my Dell and Viewsonic monitors and then save profiles. Unless you're doing print work in Illustrator or Photoshop or perhaps web-destined work in FCP, calibrating your monitor for video work is completely irrelevant and useless. For video work, it's essential you use an NTSC/ATSC device and not your computer monitor.

Monitor calibration and default brightness

I am using SpyderPro to calibrate my monitors. My G4 15-inch alum powerbook (purchased 11 months ago) has a brightness setting.
SpyderPro instructs me to set this monitor to its default. In this case, I've only brightness to set.
Might anyone know the brightness default?
Suzie
G4 Powerbook 15-inch alum Mac OS X (10.4.7)

Ideally, for your monitor profile to be valid, you should be checking images at the same brightness level that you set when you create the profile. I set my PowerBook to full brightness and calibrate it at that. When checking images, I set it to full brightness so that it matches the brightness assumed by the profile. I think the default is full on, but Philip Tyler has a point in that some LCDs are too bright at the top level. For example, there are reports that some Dell widescreen LCDs are too bright to be calibrated, even at their lowest setting. That's probably because Dell displays are made for consumers, not graphics pros like Apple's.
This is a tricky issue on the higher-end PowerBooks, because they have the ambient light sensor that can change the brightness at any time. I use my Eye-One calibrator with my LCD at highest brightness and make sure the LCD is set to that when checking images. It's a very good idea to turn off the auto brightness adjustment in the Displays preference during the calibration process to ensure it doesn't drift up and down during calibration. If you're a purist, you'll leave the ambient light adjustment off permanently so that the brightness is always the same, especially if you calibrated at a level other than full brightness. I like the feature so I leave it on, but not when calibrating.
With that in mind, I don't split hairs about color accuracy on the PowerBook. My calibrated CRT is so much better at rendering color that I feel like I can't trust my PowerBook LCD much even if it's calibrated. While it is a very good idea to calibrate the PowerBook LCD, if you really need good color, plug in a good external monitor. Either a decent CRT or a good DVI LCD like an Apple display.

Monitor calibration. Please help!!

Aloha,
I just downloaded the free trial of CS5. I am trying to use Adobe Gamma to calibrate my screen so that everything will print as I see it. I have already searched all about it. I CANNOT FIND IT TO USE IT. I cannot find where to download it.......I cannot find it already installed with the CS5. Instructions say that I have it when I download CS5 and for me to go under control panel and double click on the icon for it. I DONT HAVE IT. I only have the "Color management" icon which is already on my computer.
I am using Windows Vista 36bit.
A really appreciate your time with reading/responding to this tedious problem. Thanks!
-Brianna.

Not sure if you already found this answer somewhere else, but I found this article...the link for the entire article is...http://www.computer-darkroom.com/ps12_colour/ps12_1.htm I was also looking for the same thing, but I guess Adobe no longer provide Monitor Calibration...
Section 2 - Monitor Calibration and Characterisation
Monitor calibration and characterisation (profiling) is probably the most important aspect of a color managed workflow; yet many users seem oblivious to issues poor monitor calibration, etc can have on their documents. So, what is calibration, why is it so important, and why is it different from characterisation?
Calibration is a process whereby a device is brought to a standard state (e.g. a color temperature of 6500K and gamma of 2.2), whereas characterising the monitor is the process of determining how the monitor represents or reproduces color. We characterise the monitor by measuring how it displays known color values, then creating an ICC profile. The ICC profile is simply a data file that includes a description of the monitorsí color handling characteristics (i.e. its gamut). The calibration data will also be written into the ICC profile. As I've already mentioned, Photoshop then uses the monitor profile to automatically optimise the display of documents. It does so by carrying out an on-the-fly conversion between your document profile (e.g. ProPhoto RGB, Adobe RGB, sRGB, ColorMatch) and your monitor profile. This conversion does not alter the actual document in any way; just its appearance on the monitor.
Adobe stopped shipping Adobe Gamma with the Mac version of Photoshop a few versions back, but for a while kept it for Windows. This was because there was no software only alternative. Since Apple Display Calibrator Assistant was still installed within System Preferences Mac users never really found the absence of Adobe Gamma to be a problem. However, given that Windows Vista and Windows 7 don't play well with certain utilities, it was inevitable that Adobe Gamma would eventually be dropped from the Windows version of Photoshop. So, it came as no surprise that as of Photoshop CS3 Adobe stopped shipping Adobe Gamma, and it's still absent from CS5. For what it's worth, I think we can safely assume that Adobe will never again ship a monitor calibration utility with Photoshop.
Obviously, software only monitor calibration applications use the human eye to determine tone and color differences between a series of white/grey/black/color patches. However, it should go without saying that the eye isn't the most accurate method of measuring these differences. Therefore, my recommendation would be to use a hardware based system such as the DatacolorSpyderPro3, X-rite Photo ColorMunki or X-rite Photo i1 Display 2.
Tip for Mac OS X users: a tutorial describing the process of calibrating a display with the Apple Display Calibrator Assistant can be found here.
Useful Information on location of ICC/ColorSync Profiles
Photoshop CS5 is only compatible with Windows XP with Service Pack 3, Windows Vista or Windows 7 on the PC platform and OS X 10.5.7 or higher on the Mac platform. The upside of this is that the ICC and ColorSync profiles are more easily found.
Profile locations:-
Windows XP, Vista and Windows 7 - sub-folder named Windows\system32\spool\drivers\color
Mac OS X - ColorSync profiles are generally located in either the Library/ColorSync/Profiles or Users/~/Library/ColorSync/Profiles folder

What exactly does monitor calibration do?

I have used a monitor calibration software (with a hardware colorimeter). I know it makes the display image "better". But I want to know more detail.
There seems to be two stages of improvement.
The first stage benefits everything that displays anything, including photos in browsers.
The second stage benefits only software with color management like photoshop.
What are the benefits for the for the first stage?
It changes the gamma or linearity of the display to 2.2 (for PC)
It removes color cast so that grey do not have a color tint.
Anything else?
I assume it is at the second stage (inside color managed software) that a photo would look the same across different computers and different monitors.
Why not turn on color management in windows so that all software are automatically color managed?
Does this also mean that inside a non color managed web browser (which is most of them), the same photo on a web page could look differently on different monitors, even if they are all calibrated by the same calibration software? But they still look more similar to each other than if they were displayed on un-calibrated monitors, right?

The correct terms for what you described as first and second are Monitor Calibration and Monitor Characterization or Profiling.
Calibration brings the monitor to a desired state by changing the behavior of the monitor or said in other words, alters how the monitor displays colors.
During the calibration process the monitor calibration software first changes directly or through the user all that is possible with the hardware controls of the monitor to bring its display to the desired state and then whatever was not possible with the hardware controls will be accomplished automatically also as much as possible by using the video card.
Profiling is first checking and then describing the display characteristics of the monitor in a monitor profile file. A monitor profile file, among other things, describes how the monitor displays color values like the RGB numbers. Profiling doesn't change the monitor behavior. The profile file is used by the color managed programs to change the color appearance of the images they use by sending the appropriate color values to the video card. These color values may be different from the actual color values of the image.
On theory, you don't need calibration in order to have properly characterized monitor. All the color managed programs need, is a monitor profile that describes how the monitor displays color values. However on practice if the monitor is calibrated as much as possible to a desired state, it can have much more and better display capabilities than a monitor without calibration. A desired state of a monitor is when its full capabilities can be used with certain display targets. These targets are specified by the user and are usually the white and black points, color temperature, and gamma.
To illustrate how a monitor without calibration can be a problem, I will give the following example. If you reduce only one of the RGB signals significantly, lets say the Blue, by using the hardware controls of the monitor then all neutral colors will become yellowish. With such monitor display, to get neutral colors, the color managed programs have to reduce also the other two signals Red and Green using the video card to the lowest denominator of the reduced Blue and this in general will limit the range of the entire color space available on your monitor. And since color management is about simulating on your monitor other color spaces (device and non-device specific) if you have limited display capabilities your monitor will not be able to adequately simulate other color spaces no matter how well the color managed programs try to achieve that. And also, as you already guessed that, in this example the non-color managed programs will display everything yellowish on such monitor because they don't have color management capabilities to correct it.

Spyder3Pro monitor calibration in Snow Leopard

I've just tried to install the latest version of Colorvision's Spyder3Pro software for monitor calibration, and it appears to need Rosetta. Since I've decided not to install Rosetta (I can live without monitor calibration for a while), does anyone know if Colorvision are bringing out a native Intel build of software (32- or 64-bit) any time soon?

Are you kidding? Rosetta only takes up 3 MB (not GB) of disk space and has ZERO impact on performance. It's only utilized when you run legacy software, and only while that software is running, and any slowdown is experienced only by that application due to the Rosetta emulation.
Why would you not utilize a program if it uses Rosetta and give up something as important as screen calibration? That's crazy in my book. Is having maximum performance while you are calibrating your monitor something that is important? You won't even notice it.

How can I tell when my monitor calibration is "right"?

I have had good success with the built-in Mac calibration routine in the past with my Viewsonic CRT. It seems to work OK with my 20" Cinema Display, and another flat screen, but I have trouble with the first step of the calibration settings - there isn't any position on the left slider that looks right. I recently got a Spyder 3 Pro monitor calibrator and the results are SO different from my Mac calibration I don't know what to do next. I had good results before.
How can I tell if the Spyder profile, or the Mac profile is "right"?
Does the Spyder work properly with the Cinema Display?
With the Spyder I am using 2.2 and 6500 as starting points. I have important projects going to press so I need to know that I am sending out good files.
What is the final standard of "rightness" when it comes to monitor calibration?

Brian Townsend wrote:
I have had good success with the built-in Mac calibration routine...How can I tell if the Spyder profile, or the Mac profile is "right"?
Does the Spyder work properly with the Cinema Display?
With the Spyder I am using 2.2 and 6500 as starting points...
What is the final standard of "rightness" when it comes to monitor calibration?
There is not one standard because it depends on your output. For you, it sounds like the standard is that your screen gives you a rendering as close as possible to the press proofing standard that your company and your clients sign off on. In other words, a neutral gray and certain colors look the same on screen and on the print on your proof under your standard lighting. Your starting points sound OK, but for example, they would be wrong if your lightboxes are D50.
It's highly unlikely that the built-in profile is better than the Spyder. A hardware sensor is far more objective and accurate than the human eye.
I'm mostly repeating stuff I read in Real World Color Management so if your paycheck really does depend on this stuff you might read it or any other color management book. ColorWiki and the Chromix newsletter are other good resources for this.

New monitor/calibration; now colors won't display correctly in ACR and Elements

Just got a new ASUS LCD monitor, and calibrated it with the Spyder 3 Express.
Now when I open a .CR2 file using Elements to edit the RAW image, the color is displayed as yellowy-gray and dull. It looks the same when I pull it into Elements 7, unless I remove all color management (which, if I save the image, actually then renders the image colors neon and oversaturated with lots of pink and red tones).
I also use Lightroom 3 and I am having the same problem there. Upon import of either an edited Jpeg or a .CR2 RAW file, the color in Lightroom is displayed as dull, grayish yellowy-green.
If I export and view the very same image in GIMP, Picasa or on the web, as long as the colorspace is intact (sRGB), the color is accurate. Not so in Elements or Lightroom.
If you have experience with this problem is it the monitor, the calibration, or Elements and Lightroom. I am beyond frustrated and need to see my colors properly. I have not had this problem before.

I don't use Spyder to calibrate my monitor; instead, I use the software and tool that X-Rite makes and it came with my NEC wide-gamut monitor. I suspect that the tools are similar.
First, make certain that you're using your Spyder spectrometer and the accompanying software correctly. Although I consider myself relatively computer saavy, I find that I have to follow the instructions carefully.
Then, calibrate your monitor so that the colors and brightness the monitor displays are correct for your printer setup. In my case, the tool uses ICC color standards to set the colors. And, I tell it I want the monitor's brightness to be 90 candelas per square meter (cd/m2), which is about the same brightness as a blank white piece of photo paper. With the monitor brightness set at 90 cd/m2, I avoid getting prints that are too dark. If you calibrate the monitor correctly, the colors should look good and you should have a white that looks white and a black that looks black - that is, you shouldn't have any colors that don't look right.
Second, when you use Elements (PSE) or Lightroom (LR) to print, be sure to indicate that you want PSE or LR to control the colors and not the printer. It's very important, too, that you have the correct printer-paper profiles downloaded into the printer driver and that you select the correct paper profile. I have an Epson 3880 printer and I use Epson papers (mostly); so, I tell PSE to use the profile that fits the paper I'm using - for example, Epson Premium Glossy. When I downloaded the printer driver into my computer, it also downloaded the Epson paper-printer profiles and they appear in the print dialog boxes used during the printing process. (Other paper manufacturers, such as Ilford, make profiles available for downloading on their website.)
I hope this helps; if it doesn't let's go into some more.

Advice needed on monitor for Photoshop and Lightroom use

Hi. I am aserious amature photographer wishing to move to the next level and sell some of my work.
I just had a custom pc built to work with the new copies of Photoshop CS5 and Lightroom 3 I bought (lots or RAM and HD space, ssd, etc....)
The last piece of my system is to purchase a monitor. I want to be somewhere in the better then Best Buy but less than NEC/Eizo range in price, or between $500 - $900. I have worked with cameras since the early 80's and moved to digital several years ago but the only post processing I have done is with Photoshop Elements. I would be doing mostly prints to sell but also need to have a web site to do so. Will also use the pc for daily net surfing... but do not game or watch a lot of video on the pc.
Being really new to this whole process I have a few questions.
The first thing I need to decide is whether I need to look for a wide gamut display or not.
I realize the whole chain must be 10 bit (Adobe -OS - graphics driver - graphics card - display port.
I have Adobe Photoshop CS5 and Lightroom 3, Win7 64 bit, Zotac ZT 50701 10M video card (which uses GeForce GTX 560 fermi and an nvidia chipset. It does have displayport). I am having a hard time determining whether my video card actually supports wide gamut (10bit).
Standard vs Wide Gamut? Is wide gamut important enough to deal with the issues it brings (calibration, viewing things other than PS and LR or color managed, which appear to be rare?) Is sRGB good enough for most prints (don't do fine art, mostly nature and portraits but starting to do some HRD things). If wide gamut is the way to go I have no problem with that and have the time to learn about calibration, color management, etc... But I also want to make sure the juice is worth the squeeze.
24" vs 27"? Is there any advantage to one or the other when editing photos?
IPS vs PLS? I realize they are similar but are there differences worth noting?
Glossy vs Matte Anti-Glare? seems to be a lot of comments regarding the anti-glare coating, mostly poor. Yet I can see issues using a glossy screen in my study with a window to my back.
One manufacturer vs another? I realize Eizo, NEC and LaCie are at the top of the heap. But with my budget, after upgrading my pc and camera equipment, I can't make that work now. So I need to choose from the next group down (Dell, HP, Samsung, Asus...)
One or two monitors? It looks like many (mid-grade) wide gamut monitors do a lousy job of displaying anything but color managed sites. Is that necessarily true of all the mid-grades? Or can some be used for graphics but as well for routine net surfing, MS Office, etc...? Or am I better off getting two monitors, one for graphics and one for the rest? That would pretty much limit me to 24" or less given my budget (used to using a Dell 21" TN monitor that oddly crapped out just as my new pc was done).
The more I read reviews the more confusing it gets. There seems to be a difference of opinion even among pros on whether to go wide gamut or stick with an easier sRGB. Realizing a standard gamut monitor would be cheaper, I do want to make the right decision up front, given my budget.
The one thing I have found astounding is that there is nowhere to actually see many of the monitors I am considering. We live in Nashville TN but my wife is from Atlanta Ga so we drove there a few weeks ago to visit family and for me to visit monitor shops. Even the largest ones there (Fry's and Microcenter) had minimal IPS monitors, a few Dells and HP's. The knowledge of their sales folks was so poor I finally gave up. Felt bad about this until I posted this on another board and got a reply from a guy in LA (second largest city in the US) that he wanted to see a particular monitor and there was no place even there to do so.
Anyhow, here is what I have considered:
24" Wide Gamut: Dell U2410 and Asus PA246Q. Dells appear to be good IF you get a good one. The Asus appears to be a clone of the Dell that gets a lot of good press.
27" Wide Gamut: Dell U2711 that also gets a ton of good reviews
24: Standard Gamut: Dell U2412 and HP ZR2440.
27" Standard Gamut: Samsung S27A850D and Apple Cinema- The Samsung uses PLS technology versus IPS while the Apple is a glossy screen that will work with a pc.
Sorry for the long post. Any comments are greatly appreciated.

dkg62 wrote:
I realize the whole chain must be 10 bit
Not trying to talk you out of setting up a 10 bit pipeline, but it's still not very mature, and it really isn't a necessity to get a good editing experience.
Personally I find advantage in using two 4:3 ratio monitors for Photoshop work. All my panels are on the right monitor, while pretty much the entire left one shows the Photoshop main window and the working canvas space. My desktop is 3200 x 1200 pixels overall, and I find having the panels remain visible all the time is important.
Regarding whether a wide gamut is important... Will you be printing to devices that deliver a wide gamut? What other things will you be doing with your system?
It's not a no-brainer whether a wider gamut monitor is always "better" for everything, since it can accentuate the differences between the output from color-managed and non-color-managed applications, and it's definitely true that not everything is color-managed. With a monitor that's close to sRGB, for example, you might find Internet Explorer output acceptable, while using a wide gamut monitor will result in garishly oversaturated IE displays. On the other hand, FireFox (with a settings tweak) seems to get color management right, so there is an alternative.
I think, as John has implied above, you should work to get your head completely around how color-management works, soup to nuts. If you don't, there will always be things that are a mystery or which surprise you at the wrong times. Being able to order a print and have it come back with the expected color can be very important, as you might imagine.
-Noel

Super-Pink ... monitor calibration and Lightroom?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for