A new NEC professional IPS? PA series

I got mine setup, but still waiting for Spectraview II to be updated so I can calibrate. I have it set to sRGB emulation and 150cdm2 right now. May be placebo, but I think I see more detail and colors look more vivid than my old 2490 (could be because its technically a full gamut display, but I do not notice neon looking colors like most full gamut displays in emulation mode). I will post more once I get it calibrated and once my GTX 480 shows up. ;)

By the way...kinda upset I wont be able to use Displayport for 10bit color. Not even sure if Windows 7 or any apps even support it anyways.

I will be selling my 2490 (yes, the polarizer version) with a NEC hood I have never used soon in the FS/FT forums.
 
mike_j_johnson said:
I got mine setup, but still waiting for Spectraview II to be updated so I can calibrate. I have it set to sRGB emulation and 150cdm2 right now. May be placebo, but I think I see more detail and colors look more vivid than my old 2490 (could be because its technically a full gamut display, but I do not notice neon looking colors like most full gamut displays in emulation mode). I will post more once I get it calibrated and once my GTX 480 shows up. ;)

By the way...kinda upset I wont be able to use Displayport for 10bit color. Not even sure if Windows 7 or any apps even support it anyways.

I will be selling my 2490 (yes, the polarizer version) with a NEC hood I have never used soon in the FS/FT forums.
Click to expand...

Mike, would you please post some detailed photos comparing PA241 with 2490WUXi ? Photos based on Albovin's suggestions few post back.

Thanks,
Rado
 
Mike, congrats on the new display - any news for us regarding the PA's scaling (or lack of)?
 
Looks like it has scaling to me, but I turned it off personally. It has the same scaling settings as the 2490.
 
mike_j_johnson said:
Looks like it has scaling to me, but I turned it off personally. It has the same scaling settings as the 2490.
Click to expand...

Also manuals confirms that:


PA241W manual:

EXPANSION Sets the zoom method.
FULL: The image is expanded to full screen, regardless of the resolution.
ASPECT: The image is expanded without changing the aspect ratio.
OFF: The image is not expanded.
CUSTOM: When CUSTOM is selected as the Expansion mode, it becomes possible to
adjust the H. ZOOM., V. ZOOM, and ZOOM POS.


2490WUXi manual :

Selects the zoom mode.
FULL: The image expands to 1920 x 1200, regardless of the
resolution.
ASPECT: The image expands without changing the aspect ratio.
OFF: The image is not expanded.
CUSTOM: When CUSTOM is selected as the Expansion mode,
it becomes possible to adjust the H. ZOOM., V. ZOOM, and
ZOOM POS.
 
Yep, you are right...there is definitely those scaling options. I finally just took some pics:



DSC01115.jpg


DSC01111.jpg



Here is my 6500K, 90CRI bias backlight (HIGHLY recommended along with hardware calibration of the display itself)...

DSC01114.jpg



DSC01116.jpg



Not really relevant...but here is the rest of my gear heh...

DSC01112.jpg



DSC01113.jpg
 
Question what exactly does the 90CRI bias backlight do ? I see alot of people using this kind of setup but I'm a bit puzzled as to why other than just looks.
 
mike_j_johnson said:
I got mine setup, but still waiting for Spectraview II to be updated so I can calibrate. I have it set to sRGB emulation and 150cdm2 right now. May be placebo, but I think I see more detail and colors look more vivid than my old 2490 (could be because its technically a full gamut display, but I do not notice neon looking colors like most full gamut displays in emulation mode). I will post more once I get it calibrated and once my GTX 480 shows up. ;)

By the way...kinda upset I wont be able to use Displayport for 10bit color. Not even sure if Windows 7 or any apps even support it anyways.

I will be selling my 2490 (yes, the polarizer version) with a NEC hood I have never used soon in the FS/FT forums.
Click to expand...

Hi, I can offer this photo for comparison.
http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/5571/child1.jpg
Could you please look at skin tones? Any difference?
Thanx.
 
albovin said:
This review tells us nothing more than we know about the monitor without this review.

The level of the review does not match the level of the monitor.
....
.
Click to expand...

Well, isn't it best that you do a review yourself? :p
And test with two different calibrators to make sure the readings are accurate. In TFT Central's review there was quite a difference between the colorspace it was supposed to emulate and the actual outcome.


albovin said:
When a reviewer is approaching (possibly) the new King of Monitors, he must treat the monitor Royally. He has to be prepared for the test.
.
Click to expand...

You're always praising NEC, don't you ever get tired?
The Eizo Coloredge line have been able to calibrate smaller, emulated colorspaces for years.
 
Jonte said:
You're always praising NEC, don't you ever get tired?
Click to expand...

I said "possibly".
The best monitor ever released is the NEC 2490WUXi so far. It's a fact. No prasing needed.

The Eizo Coloredge line have been able to calibrate smaller, emulated colorspaces for years
Click to expand...

Any links to test results, please?
 
Any links to test results, please?
Click to expand...
http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/review/2009/review-eizo-cg243w-part14.html

We have already spoken about this. The color space emulation just works perfect in this case because the desired profile information is tranferred into the display while the actual display state is respected. That means: If the displays covers the emulated color space completely (we should keep in mind that virtual all non WCG displays don't have this ability => but of course: In a managed application that this no big problem because a CMM handles the gamut mapping (relative colorimetric in this case) so there are only very few colors within the "under coverage" off) and behaves linear and "colorimetric stable" you will get ideal results. But you can already get at least sufficient results with a well implemented fixed sRGB mode. What you need depends on your field of application regarding unmanaged applications.

Although we have vastly improved the colorimetrical test procedure a few weeks ago the listed results remain valid. But for a more significant comparison with the PA241W we are trying to get a CG again - hopefully at the latest after SV II has been updated to support the PAs. After this update we can also clarify if NEC implements correction matrices for colorimeter in SV II (like for example Quato in iColor Display, Eizo in Color Navigator and I think also Lacie for their own screens). This is uncertain at the moment because NEC advertises a specific EO Display2 for their WCG displays.

This review tells us nothing more than we know about the monitor without this review.
Click to expand...
The restrictions apply mainly to other aspects here - especially: The profile validation is used for purposes it isn't capable of and there was no correction matrix used for the colorimeter (or better: A spectrophotometer used; that is indeed also subject to reservations regarding the sample interval but we had quite good experiences with the 10nm of the EyeOne Pro even with the narrow spectra of RGB-LED backlights). We have also missed the last problem for a long time.

May be placebo, but I think I see more detail
Click to expand...
Absolutely possible because the NEC changes gradation to a sRGB characteristic after activating the sRGB mode.

Best regards

Denis
 
Last edited:
Sailor_Moon said:
http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/review/2009/review-eizo-cg243w-part14.html

We have already spoken about this.
Click to expand...

Yes we have.
Prad.de is unable to give the answer so far. Unfortunately.

The remarks about recent tftcentral test are related to pred.de as well.

Three conditions for sRGB emulation to be tested:

1. Color space coverage tested.
2. dE, gamma, color temperature tested.
3. Visual comparison with a reference professional level sRGB monitor (obviously NEC 2490WUXi or NEC 2190UXi) performed.

When you complete ALL THREE steps you can claim that you tested the issue.

Are you going to test the new PA241W sRGB emulation?
Great!
But please don't even bother with "test results" unless you get the same level reference sRGB monitor next to it for direct visual comparison.

Are you going to test the new PA241W 10-bit advantage?
Great!
But please don't even bother with "test results" unless you get the same level reference wide gamut 8-bit H-IPS monitor next to it for direct visual comparison.

I believe it's high time for prad.de to get proper testing equipment if you want to publish trusty, 100% reliable reviews of serious monitors.

Note #1.
Your link is not accepted as a reply to my request for the links for "The Eizo Coloredge line have been able to calibrate smaller, emulated colorspaces for years " for two reasons:
1. The test is not complete.
2. It says nothing about "for years". The model you linked to has just been released.

Note#2.
This is not abstract ctiticism just for criticism. I believe many people will agree with me. This is the way how serious monitors (any monitors actually) should be tested. As you go into such precise and delicate matters, your tests have to be absolutely precise, leaving no space for understatements, contradictions and doubt.

Wishing more 100% professional and reliable reviews from prad.de.
Best regards.
 
Last edited:
Three conditions for sRGB emulation to be tested:

1. Color space coverage tested.
Click to expand...
Was tested. The UDACT measures the UGRA/ fogra media wedge and calculates coverage according to ISO12647-7 for proof printing - and we are using the ICC profile after profilation for representaion in Lab (D50). Better than a representation in the CIE chromaticity diagram (what you wanted) because it is far more uniform (not perfect that's why deltaE 94 and 2000 succeeded the original definition) and shows the luma component. For the CG243W you can see it on top of the page for sRGB color space emulation.

2. dE, gamma, color temperature tested.
Click to expand...
The CCT has very (!) little significance because it is only the correlated temperature. That's why we are now calculating the DeltaE to the desired white point (btw. this is no "fixed point" but depending on your colour matching conditions) and also the DeltaE for the next point on the black body curve. That's also why a homogeneity check with the CCT makes little sense (we calculate now the DeltaC/E (in this case the same) for a white picture regarding the center point). Have a look at the U2410 test. You will see that we now also show the gradation and neutrality of grey axis (DeltaC regarding actual white point). When we get the CG again (hoping that we manage to get one), this will be tested of course. Regarding gradation I can already tell you that the sRGB characteristic was achieved (CG222W and CG243W) when emulating sRGB.

Visual comparison with a reference professional level sRGB monitor (obviously NEC 2490WUXi or NEC 2190UXi) performed.
Click to expand...
A well elaborated colorimeterical part makes an eye to eye comparison -as you descibed it- pointless - in particular because the human eye is absolutely not appropriate for such tasks. Keep also in mind that the 2490WUXi covers sRGB not completely which would have an impact on a comparison especially without gamut mapping through color management.

Wishing more 100% professional and reliable reviews from prad.de.
Click to expand...
Regarding colorimetry this aim is now achieved. This took a lot of time and is problematic in terms of comparability with older tests (especially before summer 2009 when the first changes took place) but was inevitable. We are at the moment in a transition period. Because of linearity problems of the U2410 in custom color mode this display was already tested under the new conditions, some others afterwards will still use the "old" procedure. The NEC P241W that stands here at my desk at the moment will of course be tested with the new procedure.

I believe it's high time for prad.de to get proper testing equipment
Click to expand...
Thanks for the care. We have switched to the EyeOne Pro for "spectral autonomy" - but also using the X-Rite DTP94 for contrast measures and test of the generic correction in iColor Display. We are even providing you with a individual correction matrix for the DTP94 (makes little sense for other probes like EO Display2 and Spyder III because they have (if not handpicked) too high deviations among each other) regarding the actual spectrum of the display with the EyeOne Pro as reference (not absolute ideal but a spectrophotometer with sample interval <10nm (fogra recommendation) is out of the question).

Best regards

Denis
 
Last edited:
Sailor_Moon said:
A well elaborated colorimeterical part makes an eye to eye comparison pointless - in particular because the human eye is absolutely not appropriate for such tasks.
Click to expand...

Unbelievable!
My friend, until live people get colorimetrical implants instead of eyes, you obviously should stay away from monitor reviews!

Best wishes.
 
My friend, until live people get colorimetrical implants instead of eyes, you obviously should stay away from monitor reviews!
Click to expand...
lovely :) - My recommendation: Just skip reading our reviews. Users with color critical tasks are instead very thankful for our extensions that I tried to explain (and that were implemented with accordant feedback from the graphical industry). Btw: I'm not saying that an eye-to eye comparison is alway meaningless. But in this case and with this intention it is. From a colorimetrical point of view the 2490 would even not represent a (per definition quite dubious) reference in this case. Neither would that be valid for other screens.

Best wishes.
Click to expand...
Thanks.

Best regards

Denis
 
Last edited:
I think it would be enough of OT bickering, don't you guys think? Focus on topic and stop discussing unrelated matters, if you want it so bad, go ahead and start your own thread on testing methodologies and whatnot.
 
albovin said:
(...)
But please don't even bother with "test results" unless you get the same level reference wide gamut 8-bit H-IPS monitor next to it for direct visual comparison.
(...)
Click to expand...
I've seen you write this a bunch of times now, and I still can't get my head around the science. Can you please explain it in detail?
 
setekh said:
I've seen you write this a bunch of times now, and I still can't get my head around the science. Can you please explain it in detail?
Click to expand...

IMHO:

- PA241w has 10-bit lcd panel based on H-IPS technology with wide gamut
( gamut is subset of colors which can device reproduce, being wide type means that the device can show more colors than non-wide type, so to show maximum of possible colors - you need a device that could represent each color channel with as many bits as possible )

- each of 3 base color channel ( R,G,B ) is defined by 10 bits which means 1024 steps for each color channel gradient, so the panel is capable off showing total 1 073 741 824 of possible colors

( 2^10 = 1024, bit is represented by value 0 or 1, hence the number 2 in the equation, the number 10 represents quantity of bits needed to describe the color, we have 3 color channels to combine with each other, hence the 1024*1024*1024=1 073 741 824 )

Many "common" wide-gamut displays have only 8-bit panels, so they can`t show as many colors as the wide-gamut offer. So logically, 10-bit panels utilize wide-gamut much better.

To find out, if PA241w's 10bit panel is better in practical sense, that everyone could see it's benefits, you need for comparision a "common" 8-bit panel based on H-IPS technology with wide-gamut, for example NEC 2690WUXi
 
setekh said:
I'm sorry, I didn't express myself properly. I ment why do you insist on comparing 2 monitors side by side and deprecate calibration results. Why do you find available calibration hardware to report innacurate results in terms of colour accuracy? Do you reckon they don't do a good job identifying wavelenghts?
Click to expand...

Carbohydrate 17.3g
Dietary Fiber 3.0g
Starch 0.1g
Sugars 13.0g

What is this?
Is it tasty?
This is an apple.

You can get perfect calibration results in numbers for a particular monitor.
But when you LOOK at it, you may see over/undersaturated colors, unrealistic skin tones, for example.

Numbers are important but that is not enough.
We don't consume numbers, we consume pictures.
After calibration and getting numbers you must tell us what you actually see.
You compare the test model with a reference picture to tell the difference.
Without that your test is not complete.

It's a practical question. Should I buy this WG monitor with sRGB emulation or turn to a proper sRGB monitor?
Same with 10-bit.
Is there any VISUAL advantage over 8-bit monitor? Or I just waste $$$?

Practical experience in testing and using monitors tells us: perfect numbers do not always mean perfect picture.
 
Last edited:
Is there any VISUAL advantage over 8-bit monitor? Or I just waste $$$?
Click to expand...
For a 8bit workflow - of course not because FRC is used in both cases to avoid loss of tonal values (that's why for example even the LG W2420R (10bit panel) shows slight FRC artifcats when using a 8bit signal). With a 10bit workflow you can bypass the FRC stage - but good FRC (as implemented by NEC, Eizo or LG) shows only few negative aspects. Beyond that you get a higher amount of tonal values in a true 10bit workflow. Nice to have but not absolute essentially (maybe with even bigger gamuts). Keep in mind that a 8bit panel with a FRC stage in the panel instead of having it in the scaler is often advertised as "10bit panel" too.

You can get perfect calibration results in numbers for a particular monitor.
Click to expand...
No - if you know what (and how*) to measure and what patches are needed to get a valid impression (especially regarding linearity). You will not insist that the basis of the hole graphical industry respectively colorimetry is fundamentaly flawed (exactly that would be the consequence of your conclusion)? If that is your opinion you must also be so forceful an not profilate your non WCG display in your sRGB workflow under any circumstances because the transformations through a simple ICC profile would be also flawed then (wether you are using matrices in software (=> via the CMM regarding matrix profiles) or in hardware (=> color space emulation) makes no difference). We could all use only displays that would be exactly matching the desired parameters out of the box (and only this parameters). A soft proof would be utterly impossible because it involves transformations between different color spaces at any rate.

Best regards

Denis

*
I'm for example thinking of the often misused and misunderstanded profile validation function of a calibration software
 
Last edited:
Lets keep it simple, we all have high expectations for PA241w, mainly because the 10bit + wide gamut allegedly done right. That the PA241w allegedly could practically emulate all common colorspaces, hoping that the emulation is so practically precise that there should not be any doubts, that it could replace all other so-so widegamut monitors which are trying to practically emulate sRGB colorspace for example.

So, therefore it is natural to look for two kinds of proof, to be absolutelly sure:

1 - proof by technical measurement tools ( calibration equip. etc... )

2 - proof by human sight ( human eyes patented by Mother nature, or God, it`s your choice :) )

I advise to the reviewers this :
If you have to review allegedly high class - high perferormer unit, then it is absolutelly vital to include 2. type of proof ( in forms of detailed photos for example ), to solidify the review's conclusion. Is that hard to understand it ?
 
albovin said:
You can get perfect calibration results in numbers for a particular monitor.
But when you LOOK at it, you may see over/undersaturated colors, unrealistic skin tones, for example.

Numbers are important but that is not enough.
We don't consume numbers, we consume pictures.
After calibration and getting numbers you must tell us what you actually see.
You compare the test model with a reference picture to tell the difference.
Without that your test is not complete.

It's a practical question. Should I buy this WG monitor with sRGB emulation or turn to a proper sRGB monitor?
Same with 10-bit.
Is there any VISUAL advantage over 8-bit monitor? Or I just waste $$$?

Practical experience in testing and using monitors tells us: perfect numbers do not always mean perfect picture.
Click to expand...
That, I'm afraid, is voodoo science. I find it is common belief shared in most creative arts, but it is wrong nonetheless. Let me ilustrate why, using your example

albovin said:
Carbohydrate 17.3g
Dietary Fiber 3.0g
Starch 0.1g
Sugars 13.0g

What is this?
Is it tasty?
This is an apple.
Click to expand...
This is a simple breakdown of what makes an apple. You don't specify which sugars it is composed of. You don't mention water levels or texture. If, however, you also provide those parameters, it can easily be said if the apple is tasty or not - that's the whole point of food science.

The same will apply to any other subject - given a sufficient number of parameters, it will allow you to replicate results and conclusions. You claim that the image you see doesn't match the reference picture; what bothers me is why. You can either be limited by a spectrophotometer that isn't sensitive enough (although I don't use the kind of devices you can hold in one hand, so I wouldn't know), software that can't process the results properly (and I don't know the first thing about software, so I can't comment), any sort of physican interference during the calibration process or, if nothing else fails, an inaccurate model. I was fishing to see if you have an opinion on that.

Anyway, enough of that. Looking only at the colour spaces at the TFTcentral's review, I see that the emulated sRGB is still quite different from the actual colour space. When compared to the U2711 review (that's the only other one that details sRGB emulation), one can see improved behaviour in the purples and slightly less green coverage. Yet they are both far from matching sRGB. Eizo CG243 still shows the best behaviour I have encountered (although the review is from prad.de, so take it with a grain of salt, since the conditions and tools aren't the same) and, at least on paper, it looks pretty decent. Now I'm curious to see a side-by-side comparison.
 
Looking only at the colour spaces at the TFTcentral's review, I see that the emulated sRGB is still quite different from the actual colour space.
Click to expand...
I will not anticipate our review: But no - the color space emulation of the PA241W (the sRGB mode applies the same functionality) works just as exactly as it is intended to do. You must consider some things that we will mention in the review.

Best regards

Denis
 
Last edited:
Sailor_Moon said:
I will not anticipate our review: But no - the color space emulation of the PA241W (the sRGB mode applies the same functionality) works just as exactly as it is intended to do. You must consider some things that we will mention in the review.

Best regards

Denis
Click to expand...
Great. I am looking forward to reading your review.
 
Regarding the readings of tftcentral. I don't know exactly what went wrong - but I think that they used the "Metamerism" option of the screen (and of course there is the problem with using a colorimeter that isn't trained to the spectrum (e.g. through a correction matrix in software) of the screen - what you can see if you look at the measured whitepoint) which is enabled by default in many modes.

Best regards

Denis
 
Last edited:
setekh said:
Looking only at the colour spaces at the TFTcentral's review, I see that the emulated sRGB is still quite different from the actual colour space. When compared to the U2711 review (that's the only other one that details sRGB emulation), one can see improved behaviour in the purples and slightly less green coverage. Yet they are both far from matching sRGB. Eizo CG243 still shows the best behaviour I have encountered (although the review is from prad.de, so take it with a grain of salt, since the conditions and tools aren't the same) and, at least on paper, it looks pretty decent. Now I'm curious to see a side-by-side comparison.
Click to expand...

How do you like this behavior:
srgb.jpg
 
albovin said:
How do you like this behavior:
srgb.jpg
Click to expand...
I'm not quite sure what you want me to comment on. I feel like you're baiting me into saying it seems like a more accurate reproduction of the colour space and that you're going to slam me with some pearls of wisdom, so let's just skip to that part :)
 
When we should expect your review ? I`m eager to read it
Click to expand...
The test is completed and should be written down during this week. I can't say exactly when it gets published - but hopefully this month.

Best regards

Denis
 
setekh said:
I'm not quite sure what you want me to comment on. I feel like you're baiting me into saying it seems like a more accurate reproduction of the colour space and that you're going to slam me with some pearls of wisdom, so let's just skip to that part :)
Click to expand...

:) Almost.
Indeed, "it seems like a more accurate reproduction of the colour space".
This is the Dell 2408 sRGB mode known to have one of the best color space matching on paper and one of the worse picture quality in reality.
 
Last edited:
albovin said:
:) Almost.
Indeed, "it seems like a more accurate reproduction of the colour space".
This is the Dell 2408 sRGB mode known to have one of the best color space matching on paper and one of the worse picture quality in reality.
Click to expand...
How that can be I can't conceive. Well, I'll stop bothering you with my apparently silly questions and I'll just have to read up a lot more on the subject. Thanks for the pointers so far, too.
 
albovin said:
:) Almost.
Indeed, "it seems like a more accurate reproduction of the colour space".
This is the Dell 2408 sRGB mode known to have one of the best color space matching on paper and one of the worse picture quality in reality.
Click to expand...

Could this have been caused by the 2D CIE chart of the monitor gamut appearing to be accurate, while a 3D CIE chart of the gamut may have shown it to be completely inaccurate?
 
Last edited:
Cyberbeing said:
Could this have been caused by the 2D CIE chart of the monitor gamut being appearing to be accurate, while a 3D CIE chart of the gamut may have shown it to be completely inaccurate?
Click to expand...

If thats the case, then the numbers aren't lying, its then just a simple misrepresentation at worst, and for that matter, misinterpretation at best. the numbers then in that case don't lie, they are simply presented in a misleading fashion.
 
I'm doubting between the pa241w and the dell u2410.

Right now I only see the panel uniformity and the larger contrast when calibrated as advantages for the pa. Don't know if that makes up for the +/- 500 euro extra in price though.

I am concerned about the white glow on the u2410 with some people even reporting getting headaches from reading black text on a white backround. But I suppose both panels probably suffer from the same issue since it seems more related to the general use of ips panels:

flatpanelshd review:
The IPS panels have a different anti-reflective coating than TN and VA panels. PA241W has the same coating as most other IPS panels and this also means that the panel has a white crystallized glow to it.
Click to expand...

Anyone see any other reasons to go for the pa241w instead of the dell u2410?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top