My LED-LCD monitor never looks as good as my LCD..

P

plac

Gawd
Joined
Apr 20, 2006
Messages
621
My LED-LCD monitor never looks as good as my LCD..

I keep trying to upgrade my HP 22" widescreen monitor. #W2207. No 23" ever looks better. I am upgrading mainly to get that extra resolution up to 1080p..

so today i tried yet again for a HP LED-LCD 2311x. i want to get some proper calibration hints before i return it, as i have gone thru a lot of monitors and always come back to my big heavy 22"..

LED LCD monitors always look washed out to me. With more harsh text. And less rich colors.

After i eat im gonna hook both up at the time, on same pages, and compare colors side by side. I'll get pics.

I want a 22-23" monitor that looks just as good as my 13.3" sony vaio Z screen... best colors and clarity i have ever had.
 
Last edited:
I know the pics suck, but i couldnt use a flash or you wouldnt even see the screen. Mostly to show the color differences. For the first time, since i have both these monitors on at the same time, maybe the LCD isnt quite as bad as i thought.. But the color accuracy does seem better on the 22" LCD. OMG, after seeing the pics with my own eyes.. the old monitor DOES look way better for colors..

23" LED-LCD on LEFT. 22" LCD on RIGHT.

comparelcds1.jpg


comparelcds2.jpg


comparelcds3.jpg
 
Well of course there's going to be variation in color and contrast between different models, and even between individual units of the same model. You need to use a hardware calibrator that makes a profile for each monitor to get any sort of consistency.

Edit: That said--and it may be the fault of the camera or because the two monitors aren't on the same plane--but the monitor on the left looks considerably fuzzier than the one on the right.
 
.. Different panels have different qualities. Obviously IPS screens are going to look way better than TN. I'm assuming both of your monitors are TN though regardless of the backlight type. Even screens of the same type can vary greatly though. You can have a sony, samsung or LG tv next to a vizio .. all with the same tech specs more or less, and the vizio might look like total shit, though it has nothing to do with the backlight type.
...
..Cameras 'see' things differently than our eyes . For example, my fw900 'graphics professional' widescreen crt would always look very pale in photos, usually with a lcd looking good pictured side by side, when in person the opposite was true.
...
... Our eyes see blacklevels and colorspace differently depending on background lighting and room lighting. The outcome of photos can also be affected by room lighting. Colorspace testing is always done in dark rooms, because over saturating your screen with light will pollute the color space ag coated or not. Thats another reason the higher end screens come with hoods or canopies. Colorspace/color quality is therefore dependent on your lighting environment and of course tweaking or calibration of settings. As far as photos go, your brighter monitor might look better had you taken the picture in a bright room for example... and the darker monitor might look better with the picture taken in a dark room setting.
....
...Calibration of screens affects their output greatly, even non-professional editing of settings by eye can take some time to get good results. I used to calibrate my lcd's to get as close to my fw900 as possible , but would have to decide on some tradeoffs in my tweaks. Out of the box lcd's are usually extremely over-bright. I think LED ones are even brighter. You would have to turn the brightness way down so that its not washed out, and tweak a lot of other settings to get the most out of your monitor (contrast, digital vibrance, etc). Some people prefer "crayola" bloomy color settings and think any more reasonable color settings look bad by comparison. One person saying "I did already tweak the settings" doesn't mean they are proficient at doing so either.
...
...Screen coatings can affect the quality of an image. The anti-glare coating can vary from screen to screen. Some are over-aggressive, grainy, some more waxy than others, etc.
...
... I have an led edgelit 46" samsung tv that looks gorgeous to me, especially the richness. It is glossy. I've also been 'visiting' the 27" apple cinema display at the apple store, which is LED backlit ips, and glossy.. and I think it looks gorgeous as well. I also have recently set up an ASUS 19" 1440x900 LED backlit TN in portrait mode next to my hannspree 28" ccfl backlit TN, and I think the asus looks great. The hannspree looks almost brownish by comparison next to it. The 19" LED is not glossy by the way. I did have to turn the brightness down on the 19" a lot.
...
... Again you really can't tell from a picture, its a false impression of what your eyes see.
 
ya, i started thinking my new LED-LCD does look a bit more natural. then i found out what one of my issues is.. unless i have a BLACK solid desktop, all my desktop text seems to have a shadow on it. i need to find a way to disable that shadow, because thats what makes the text look crappy to me. when i go black backround to hide the shadow, then im happy with the text.

and i just found the setting for anyone else looking.. system props.. advanced tab.. performance settings button.. visual effects..

2nd option from bottom of list: Use drop shadows for icon labels on the desktop
 
Maybe you're just used to the colors on your HP W2207 monitor even if they aren't accurate?

Anything under a 3.0 Delta E is in the more accurate range (lower is better of course) but the W2207 comes out of the box with a staggering 7.733 avg. Delta E which is going to make certain colors way over saturated.

15196.png


"There are also quite a few spikes, with several colors having a Delta E of greater than 10.0. If you don't have color calibration equipment and you depend on accurate colors, the w2207 probably isn't the best choice."

15191.png


^^ Although I'd have to give the W2207 props for having pretty good black levels, That in itself can make colors look overall deeper & richer.

edit: Review source here.
 
Last edited:
There's nothing inherently "better" about edge-lit LED backlight other than energy savings. Try to get your hands on an IPS monitor, and you will most likely be more impressed with the image. HP ZR22w is HP's 22" IPS model.
 
plac said:
I know the pics suck, but i couldnt use a flash or you wouldnt even see the screen. Mostly to show the color differences. For the first time, since i have both these monitors on at the same time, maybe the LCD isnt quite as bad as i thought.. But the color accuracy does seem better on the 22" LCD. OMG, after seeing the pics with my own eyes.. the old monitor DOES look way better for colors..

23" LED-LCD on LEFT. 22" LCD on RIGHT.

comparelcds1.jpg


comparelcds2.jpg


comparelcds3.jpg
Click to expand...


Too high concentration to light by LED.
My same Issue !
 
I guess I am used to the "wrong" colors on my HP 22, cuz i like it a lot. I got used to rich saturated colors, and the LED colors just seem shallow and weak. I wonder if a non-LED type would look a bit better. I think that blinding brightness is what kills it for me, and of course i have lowered the brightness as much as possible.
 
in the jeep forum pic above, the right pic is the correct colors. my old monitor. it is supposed to be shades of greens and browns. you can see the LED on the left makes everything a shade of green..

on ACER... i've always considered that a junk brand for the last 5-10 yrs.. but i see good reviews all the time. is that really a better brand these days, and does it have really rich red and blues?

I also thought about the Alienware 23" 3D thing, but im afraid it would have the same issue. If it is based on a Dell/Sony type monitor, then i'd probably like it.

Why dont they mention dot pitch anymore... i like a tight pitch.. probably because LCD monitors must not have dot pitch....
 
There must a reason top end monitors still uses CFLs almost exclusively.
 
Well, I did just get home from returning that LED monitor. It is quite a relief on the eyes to be back on my "old" HP 22" wide. I suppose if I am used to "off" coloring for so long, it will be hard to ever find a monitor that I deem to be better. And I suppose, why change it if im pretty happy with it.. I can live with the 1680x1050 resolution easily, and its easier on my eyes than 1920x1080 was.

Just bought a new video card tho, so im going to get a couple opinions before i open it. Heading over to ATI section now..
 
plac said:
in the jeep forum pic above, the right pic is the correct colors. my old monitor. it is supposed to be shades of greens and browns. you can see the LED on the left makes everything a shade of green..
Click to expand...

I went directly to the website http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/ and its definitely brown on my PX2370 which is an LED model, I wouldnt put the blame on LED itself for inaccurate colors it mostly depends on the model but also keep in mind most can be calibrated to have accurate color.

In comparison the PX2370 comes out of the box with a 2.3 avg Delta which is impressive especially for a TN panel.

"Another great feature of this 23-inch monitor is the deltaE of under 2.3 with the factory settings. For those of you who aren't used to our test criteria, the deltaE needs to be under 3 for the colors to look accurate to most people's eyes." - digitalversus
 
mathesar said:
I went directly to the website http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/ and its definitely brown on my PX2370 which is an LED model, I wouldnt put the blame on LED itself for inaccurate colors it mostly depends on the model but also keep in mind most can be calibrated to have accurate color.

In comparison the PX2370 comes out of the box with a 2.3 avg Delta which is impressive especially for a TN panel.

"Another great feature of this 23-inch monitor is the deltaE of under 2.3 with the factory settings. For those of you who aren't used to our test criteria, the deltaE needs to be under 3 for the colors to look accurate to most people's eyes." - digitalversus
Click to expand...

thanks for the tips. good to know i just got a particularly bad model.
 
The HP W2207 monitor has a glossy screen which generally means colors are over-saturated to give that "vibrant" look.

Monitors that use LED (a.k.a WLED) backlight only have a color gamut of 68% which is below normal color gamut of 72%. Generally speaking normal color gamut is great for displaying accurate colors on the screen.

Color gamut of 68% makes colors a little bluish, some people may notice it, some may not. No real benefits to below normal color gamut.

Wide color gamut is usually at least 92% and give colors a slightly greenish tint. The benefit for wide color gamut is for accurate printing purposes. It is much to calibrate a wide color gamut monitor and a good quality color printer for color accurate printouts.

WLED is basically a blue LED with a yellow coating to simulate white.

RGB-LED uses a combination of Red, Green, Blue LEDs to create white light. Obviously this is a pretty expensive solution for true white.
 
ZoNe said:
There must a reason top end monitors still uses CFLs almost exclusively.
Click to expand...

Well, CFLs are cheaper, and as stated, there is no visual advantage to an LED backlight. There main claim to fame is energy savings, but when you are talking about a 20"-27" screen, the savings are minimal compared to the savings of big screen TV using LED over CFL. So, to no surprise, there hasn't been a real need or demand for them in the monitor world.
 
probably too late since you already returned the monitor, but your w2207 is far too red. it's most obvious on the mma mania site. the center (where all the text is) is supposed to have a white background. the background in your photo shows a shade of pink. the background is supposed to fade from red to grey, but yours sort of fades from red to grey-pink.

you can also see it in the [h] screenshot. the last post column is supposed to be grey, but it's clearly a reddish-grey. even on the jeepforum site, all the browns are far too red. this is what it looks like on my monitor:

SUbuG.jpg


i don't think i could pick which panel was better without seeing them in person, but your w2207 is definitely not displaying colours accurately, and is definitely not more colour accurate than the wled one you were comparing to. it might actually be worse - again, can't tell without seeing them in person.
 
The ccfl does have a better color space - slightly better color range than a regular LED backlight. In order to get close to that, at least spec wise in color space testing - you need an RGB-LED backlight.The 27" LED backlight cinema display I'm getting is LED backlit but not RGB-LED backlit. I still think it looks awesome. LED backlit screens usually turn on to full brightness immediately (no warm-up or initialization period), and should have a longer lifespan vs any possible dimming or discoloration over the lifespan. In some cases, a benefit to using LED backlit screens is that the screens can be made thinner too.

....The more I read up on things I found some interesting info I thought I'd pass on since some of it applies to comments made in this thread:
..
....There are aggressive Anti-Glare coatings (AG) on all the other high end ccfl backlit IPS screens in the current generation. Anti-glare can distort text, desaturate the way colors appear to your eyes (a pale wax film "frost" on the screen), make screens appear greasy or sparkly, and pollute whites.
..
... Unless you are doing work for print -- practically all of the monitors and projectors viewing any material you author on your extreme color space monitor will have a much narrower color space and not get any benefit from your extra-superior % color space authoring.
..
.... If you are using a monitor in a bright room, the light itself is pollutiing the color space. Most color space testing is done in dark rooms regardless of the screen type. The higher end displays (Eizo, NEC, LaCie) all come with hoods/canopies so that the light doesn't pollute the color space and image quality. I think that it stands to reason that in conditions where light is hitting the screen, especially conditions where a lot of light is hitting the screen -- the % difference in the color space between a ccfl and an LED backlit screen may not be as great, or the max color space number per spec is at least inaccurate in those environments as pertains to your actual eyes (i.e. probably a lower rating in bright light).
..
... As for IPS screens with different backlights -- According to some reviews, the %'s of the old adobe 1998 RGB color space (which is a wider color space than sRGB so is used to split hairs) are 83% for the (non rgb) LED backlit cinema display vs 96% for the dell u2711 -- not the 68% the prev poster quoted for the non-rgb LED, at least in the case of the 27" cinema display.. This is very dependent on the screen brightness though, and the brightness we perceive a screen to be is changed by the room's lighting environment - so its subjective based on your lighting environment and how you tweak or calibrate your settings -- and as I stated previously , the 83%/96% is only realized with a colorimeter in a dark/dim room. In a light room without a monitor hood I doubt it would be possible to get those numbers.
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/apple27inchcinemadisplay_092610174635/24902.png
..
... Glossy screens by nature appear more rich in color that is true. I do not believe this is due to crayola bloom settings (like vivid on tv's in showrooms) or any side effects effects of the screen itself , its because the screen isn't covered by a defracting waxy~crystal film.
..
 
Last edited:
I personally like over saturated colors. Real life looks boring. :p I wouldn't worry about color accuracy unless you need it for something like photoshop. Find a monitor that you can make look how you like.
 
munkle said:
I personally like over saturated colors. Real life looks boring. :p I wouldn't worry about color accuracy unless you need it for something like photoshop. Find a monitor that you can make look how you like.
Click to expand...

That's the one I stuck with. The old HP w2207. I like the colors, i like the saturation, and its less blurred than the LED style in all my comparo pics. I suppose until it breaks, i dont plan on replacing it. I already tried a Samsung AND Asus LED a few months back also, didnt like them either.
 
Well I do own a 19" asus 1440x900 LED and I like it, although its more for browsing and chat in portrait mode on the side. I don't see any color, brightness, or paleness problems with it after I tweaked it. I had to use the OSD to turn the brightness down quite a bit first, then I used the nvidia desktop color controls to bump the digital vibrance up slightly and play with the contrast and brightness settings. It really needed the brightness turned down a lot.
..
The 27" glossy ips cinema display I want to get looks incredibly rich/saturated though and I love how it looks. (I've visited it at the apple store a few times). I'll end up tweaking it a bunch however. The LED backlit TN will prob look inferior next to it but overall should be fine. I should be able to get the ACD by sometime next month. So - big fan of LED backlight so far. My tv is a 46" LED edgelit glossy samsung too. Its too bad you haven't found an LED backlit screen that you like.
 
Hey plac.Looks like we are on the same boat here.I just got Asus LED monitor and everything looks blurry and the colors are washed out as well.I am returning my LED monitor as well and keeping my old HP w2338h.
 
Oleg said:
Hey plac.Looks like we are on the same boat here.I just got Asus LED monitor and everything looks blurry and the colors are washed out as well.I am returning my LED monitor as well and keeping my old HP w2338h.
Click to expand...

those old HPs arent bad at all, are they...
 
Have found a feedback on newegg

Pros: Nice size for desktop. Vibrant colors. Plenty bright enough for use in my sun-room.

Thin, light and non-obtrusive.

MOVIES ARE BEAUTIFUL.

Cons: Pretty much I see the amount of ghosting I'd expect for a 5ms monitor... No egg dinged for that.

I see color dithering in test images and sometimes in "normal use"; it seems short on "real" colors.

NO VESA MOUNT.

Other Thoughts: Install disk did not automatically activate color profile. Need to go into "Advanced" menus on display to select and activate it.

I am "lukewarm" about this monitor but for the price I think I should be "ecstatic."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top