NEC LCD2690

[Tarc]

They didn't make it clear that the contrast ratio suffers with ColorComp turned on. They say it reduces brightness, but it actually reduces contrast, so you have to raise the luminance of the backlight to get the same white level, but then the black level suffers.

Just sayin'...

It would be interesting to see those results in number!
I know nothing is perfect, but this is a damn interesting feature...

Do you have any link or info on this?

-Tarc

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

It would be interesting to see those results in number!
I know nothing is perfect, but this is a damn interesting feature...

Do you have any link or info on this?

-Tarc

Strange... Painman experienced the oposite when testing his screen with colorcomp on/off... contrast increased with colorcomp on level 3...

http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9138&start=0

 

[zoner3]

Can the DVI-I connection be used for another computer or can you just have one computer hooked up to this monitor at a time, using the DVI-D connection?

 

[Aquila76]

Can the DVI-I connection be used for another computer or can you just have one computer hooked up to this monitor at a time, using the DVI-D connection?

You can have three connected simultaneously (VGA, DVI-I and DVI-D).

 

[ToastyX]

It would be interesting to see those results in number!
I know nothing is perfect, but this is a damn interesting feature...

Do you have any link or info on this?

It can be seen visually, but I just did some manual measurements. The colorimeter was placed in the center of the screen and wasn't moved during any of these measurements. Click on the numbers for screen shots.



This is with ColorComp off and calibration on:

Gamma: PRG
Color Control: P

White: 200.26 cd/m²
Black: 0.34 cd/m²
Ratio: 589.0:1



Then I turned on ColorComp:

White: 152.48 cd/m²
Black: 0.34 cd/m²
Ratio: 448.5:1

As you can see, the white level dropped, but the black level stayed the same.



Then I raised the brightness setting until the white level was 200 cd/m²:

White: 200.25 cd/m²
Black: 0.45 cd/m²
Ratio: 445.0:1

As you can see, the black level suffers, and the contrast ratio stays about the same.



Then I set the ColorComp level to 5 and raised the white level to 200 cd/m²:

White: 200.20 cd/m²
Black: 0.52 cd/m²
Ratio: 385.0:1

As you can see, the black level and contrast ratio suffer even more.



Then I turned off ColorComp and color correction and set the white level to 200 cd/m²:

Gamma: NON
Color Control: N

White: 200.22 cd/m²
Black: 0.29 cd/m²
Ratio: 690.4:1

As you can see, calibration also affects contrast. That's also pretty close to the advertised contrast ratio of 700:1.



These measurements were done on the original since the replacement is being sent in for repair. The original seems to have measurably improved over time, although it still looks worse than the replacement did.

Strange... Painman experienced the oposite when testing his screen with colorcomp on/off... contrast increased with colorcomp on level 3...

http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9138&start=0

The contrast didn't increase. The two shots are basically the same. There's a slight difference because the white level is 119.3 in the first shot and 120.1 in the second. There's no significant difference between the two shots.

Those results don't make sense at all. There should be a significant difference. You can see this yourself by enabling ColorComp. The white level drops visibly, but the black level stays the same. This is expected behavior.







ColorComp is a good feature if you care about color uniformity more than contrast ratio, but for games and movies, it's best to leave it off since the visual difference is small anyway.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

Those results don't make sense at all. There should be a significant difference. You can see this yourself by enabling ColorComp. The white level drops visibly, but the black level stays the same. This is expected behavior..

Painmans results make sense because he recalibrates the screen after each adjustment. He also have a set white target.

"Target color temperature of 6500K, Gamma of 2.2 and a desired maximum luminance value of 120Cd/M². Contrast was left at its default value of 50 and black level was left at its default of 128"

 

[ToastyX]

Painmans results make sense because he recalibrates the screen after each adjustment. He also have a set white target.

"Target color temperature of 6500K, Gamma of 2.2 and a desired maximum luminance value of 120Cd/M². Contrast was left at its default value of 50 and black level was left at its default of 128"

No, the results still don't make sense. Recalibrating the screen can't get back the lost contrast.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

No, the results still don't make sense. Recalibrating the screen can't get back the lost contrast.

Yes it can, and it makes sense. Contrast is based upon white point/black depth= contrast. In Painmans case 120 cdm2 / 0.27 cdm2 = 444:1 in contrast. Since Painman have a calibrated brightness of max 120 cdm2 and brightness changes upon usage of colorcomp, recalibration is in order.

 

[ToastyX]

Yes it can, and it makes sense. Contrast is based upon white point/black depth= contrast. In Painmans case 120 cdm2 / 0.27 cdm2 = 444:1 in contrast. Since Painman have a calibrated brightness of max 120 cdm2 and brightness changes upon usage of colorcomp, recalibration is in order.

ColorComp doesn't affect brightness. If it did, the black level would change as well. It affects contrast. Maybe calibrating can get some of it back, but contrast should still be affected.



I did some more tests with calibration.

ColorComp off, calibrated to 200 cd/m²:
White: 200.2 cd/m²
Black: 0.37 cd/m²
Ratio: 546.1:1
Screen shot

ColorComp level 3, calibrated to 200 cd/m²:
White: 200.2 cd/m²
Black: 0.43 cd/m²
Ratio: 468.2:1
Screen shot

Even with recalibration, the contrast ratio still suffers significantly at 200 cd/m².



Then I tried 120 cd/m².

ColorComp off, calibrated to 120 cd/m²:
White: 119.4 cd/m²
Black: 0.28 cd/m²
Ratio: 432.0:1
Screen shot

ColorComp level 3, calibrated to 120 cd/m²:
White: 118.4 cd/m²
Black: 0.29 cd/m²
Ratio: 412.4:1
Screen shot

ColorComp level 5, calibrated to 120 cd/m²:
White: 119.4 cd/m²
Black: 0.31 cd/m²
Ratio: 381.9:1
Screen shot

The contrast ratio still suffers at 120 cd/m², but not nearly as badly. That's why Painman got similar results. There probably still was a difference, but the difference was probably less than 0.01 cd/m².

Now the results make sense.

 

[Tarc]

Thanks for the detailed measures!

I mostly use my computer daytime in a very bright room, I think the brightness will tend to be higher.

I have somewhere read that in daylight, the black levels of lcds are perceptively better than those of a crt.

-Tarc

 

[Juardis]

Interesting that the Delta E was much better for the brighter calibration

Delta E for the 200 cd/m2 = ~0.2
Delta E for the 120 cd/m2 = ~0.6

Is this typical?

 

[ToastyX]

I have somewhere read that in daylight, the black levels of lcds are perceptively better than those of a crt.

They definitely are, but that's something CRT fans rarely mention. CRT monitors wash out during the day because phosphors react to ambient light. SED also uses phosphors, so it has the same problem. That's why I'm not excited about SED. OLED will have better contrast in all lighting conditions.

Interesting that the Delta E was much better for the brighter calibration

Delta E for the 200 cd/m2 = ~0.2
Delta E for the 120 cd/m2 = ~0.6

Is this typical?

The problem is the results are different every time I recalibrate, so I don't know if that's typical or not. I've gotten 0.6 at 200 cd/m² before. The black level seems to change as well. Sometimes I get 0.34 cd/m². Other times I get 0.37 cd/m². I'm not sure if it's the monitor fluctuating or if it's the calibration method used by the software or if it's the colorimeter fluctuating. When I do manual measurements, the results seem to be consistent enough during the time I test it, but when I come back later, the results change a little.

I'm also not sure why recalibrating brings back some of the lost contrast because the black level should already be as low as possible before recalibrating. Since hardware calibration also affects contrast, that can only mean the white level isn't lowered as much when calibrating with ColorComp on, so the contrast doesn't suffer as much. I don't know why it would do that unless ColorComp happens to make the area I'm measuring closer to the target color temperature. I guess that's possible.

I will do more measurements when I put up a review.

 

[Juardis]

The problem is the results are different every time I recalibrate, so I don't know if that's typical or not. I've gotten 0.6 at 200 cd/m² before. The black level seems to change as well. Sometimes I get 0.34 cd/m². Other times I get 0.37 cd/m². I'm not sure if it's the monitor fluctuating or if it's the calibration method used by the software or if it's the colorimeter fluctuating.

I've tried to calibrate my laptop about a half dozen times and each time it seemingly gets worst. And none of the calibrations had delta E's less than 3.0, so I was never really happy with the results. Thus my desire to replace my 5-6 year old desktop (wiith a 10+ yr old crappy CRT) and my Dell Inspiron 9300 laptop with something more suitable for editting photos. And since my lappy has a S-PVA panel, I really really did not want another one of those, so I restricted my new criterion to IPS.

As you can see from my sig, I went with the 2490. I was jonesing for the 2690, but in the end, I cheaped out. I hope I don't regret it, but since I AM coming from 17" mediocre quality CRT and a 17" widescreen S-PVA laptop, anything I get will certainly be an improvement over what I have. And since I don't know how good a 2690 is vs. a 2490, I figure I'd save $200 and pretend like I have top of the line.

Thanks to everyone in this thread. This is what is great about the web and this forum in particular.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

ColorComp doesn't affect brightness. If it did, the black level would change as well. It affects contrast. Maybe calibrating can get some of it back, but contrast should still be affected.

The contrast ratio still suffers at 120 cd/m², but not nearly as badly. That's why Painman got similar results. There probably still was a difference, but the difference was probably less than 0.01 cd/m².

Now the results make sense.

Contrast is a direct result of the Brightness high(white) divided on the brightness low (black). Brightness/black depth = contrast.

Since brightness changes when you use colorcomp, it affects either the white or the black.
Since contrast is the white divided on black, it means contrast numbers change as well.

Through calibration, you can get contrast back, but that means altering the black and white.

Since contrast = white / black,
then contrast x black = white and
contrast / white = black

Since contrast is the relations between black and white (brightness range), then its correct to say that colorcomp effects brightness (among other things).

 

[zoner3]

I received my 2690 yesterday. I noticed when doing the dead pixel test with the black screen that the backlight is not as uniform as the Dell 2407 I had last week for a few days.
Is this just the nature of the panel type or the backlight that NEC uses? Also the screen looked uniformly darker with the Dell.

I don't notice any backlight issues in regular use (although very limited use at this point). Is the backlight evenness more important in certain types of use? I won't be playing movies or many games.

My 2690 (US) is a rev. 4B. Has zero pixel issues as far as I can tell.

I can only hear a high pitched hum if I have my ear in the back of the monitor about 3 inches from the case, top right. From the front I can't hear it, and the sound from my computer and UPS is much louder. Same thing with a lower pitched noise that I hear in the back top middle of the monitor.

Color is beautiful. Much better than the Dell 2407 with uniform color up and down, and left to right, and the colors look very accurate. I calibrated initially with the Eye One 2 software but will be downloading the Spectraview II software and using that.

 

[zoner3]

There wasn't a CD in my box. Was there supposed to be one and what is on it?

 

[ToastyX]

Since contrast is the relations between black and white (brightness range), then its correct to say that colorcomp effects brightness (among other things).

The word should really be luminance, not brightness. We're both talking about the same thing. The problem is people use the terms brightness, contrast, and luminance to describe different things.

Brightness is the black point.
Contrast is the white point in relation to the black point.
Luminance is what many people call brightness.

The Sony SDM-P234 is the only monitor I've used that had those labeled correctly.

ColorComp digitally reduces the luminance of white, which reduces contrast. Recalibrating shouldn't get back the lost contrast. Where would it get it from? The only way to get back the luminance of white is to raise the luminance of the backlight, but then that also raises the luminance of black.

Hardware calibration also digitally reduces the luminance of white to achieve the desired color temperature. It seems using ColorComp with hardware calibration doesn't reduce the luminance of white as much as using each individually. That's probably why it seems to get back some of the lost contrast when it really doesn't.

Now that I think about it, calibrating to the native color temperature would be more of a fair test to show that recalibrating can't get back the lost contrast.

Edit: SpectraView II won't let me choose a target intensity (white luminance) when I choose "Native" for the color temperature. That's a weird limitation.

Edit 2: I guess it's all relative. When using ColorComp with hardware calibration, getting back some of the lost contrast vs. not losing as much contrast when recalibrated can be considered the same thing depending on how you look at it.

The way I look at is ColorComp reduces contrast, and so does hardware calibration, but when used together, they don't lose as much contrast as using each individually.

In a sense, that means some of the lost contrast can be gained back through recalibration, but that only works if you weren't using the native color temperature in the first place.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

ToastyX, I think we are discussing the same thing, but its only a matter of getting the sematics right.

Since its measured in cd/m2/nits, then luminence would be most accurate, though brightness describes it adequately in this discussion. The meaning is the same.

Brightness/luminence is how bright it gets in cd/m2 (or nits if you prefer).
Black point is how dark it gets in cd/m2 (or nits if you prefer).
Contrast is the relation of brightness divided on black point.
White point is the Kelvin value its calibrated (usually according to the ambient light in the room you have the screen with 6500K as common standard).

When you turn on colorcomp, the brightness gets lower (less cd/m2). Since brightness is one of the values in contrast ratio, then the contrast ratio changes as well. In Painmans case, the brightness was calibrated at a value that even with a reduction in brightness, the contrast could be restored upon a recalibration.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

zoner3:

Congratulation with new screen!

I'll start with your questions:

1. new 2690 backlight uniformity question

Its very hard to answer this question, since there is little detail about what kind of backlight uniformity issues you have.
Take a picture if you can and also try to use colorcomp to see if the uniformity changes.
Check out also this link about the 2690WUXi and backlight.

Only on colorcritical tasks does backlight eveness matter. Even there there is a level of tolerance, but very small. The rest is based upon how intrusive they are.
My screen is uniform (even with colorcomp off) and so is many others in this thread, so I can safely say they can be.

The NEC with its colorcomp should bring you within the level of tolerance, providing that this is true:

ColorComp automatically optimises uniformity of colour, brightness and gamma distribution over the whole area of the display. To achieve this, every single panel is subjected to highly precise measurements during manufacture, and optimised within the hardware of the unit. The operating time of the unit, the temperature and the alignment of the display (horizontal or vertical) are taken into account for active optimisation. NEC Display Solutions has expanded the colour space of the new SpectraView® 2690 to provide ideal conditions when working in the pre-press, DTP, soft proofing or general colour-critical image processing fields. 91 percent of the NTSC colour space and 95 percent of the Adobe RGB colour space (size comparison) can now be accurately displayed.

link

I'd very much would like a comment from Travbomb on this one, especially regarding the cases of backlight issues in this thread.

I'll stop ranting now about this. Test colorcomp and provide a picture, and I'll see what I (and us others) can make out of that picture.

The CD contains: Drivers, manual and programs (gammacomp, naviset and long cable program). I don't know if they ship units with it outside of Europe.

Try the screen with movies and games too. You'll be positively suprised!

 

[sosrah]

There is something wrong with NEC clams that they use "Grade A" panels.

2690 is the only display with this LG.Philips panel and I wonder where they send "Grade B" panels !

Maybe they use "Grade B" panels for MITSUBISHI Diamondcrysta RDT261WH.

 

[zoner3]

After I posted that I talked to NEC tech support and tried Colorcomp. It did even out the backlight. It seems with Colorcomp on the Delta E goes up about .4 - .5 .

I will try to take a picture of the backlight tonight. It is too bright now in the room. Also, I need to try it with the Spectraview black test screen. In a passing look last night it seemed that that black screen may be darker than the Dead Pixel Buddy black screen. It shouldn't be (I think), so maybe it was just my imagination. I am also now doing testing on my main photographic editing computer. The first day I received it, before I made the decision to keep it, I installed it on my other computer which has the AGP version of the video card I am using on my photo editing machine, which was just rebuilt, and has a PCI express video card.

 

[p-n-p]

Has any one orderd a 2690 from new egg ?

If so did they ship it from New Jersey?

 

[zoner3]

zoner3:

Congratulation with new screen!

I'll start with your questions:

1. new 2690 backlight uniformity question

Its very hard to answer this question, since there is little detail about what kind of backlight uniformity issues you have.
Take a picture if you can and also try to use colorcomp to see if the uniformity changes.
Check out also this link about the 2690WUXi and backlight.

Only on colorcritical tasks does backlight eveness matter. Even there there is a level of tolerance, but very small. The rest is based upon how intrusive they are.
My screen is uniform (even with colorcomp off) and so is many others in this thread, so I can safely say they can be.

The NEC with its colorcomp should bring you within the level of tolerance, providing that this is true:

link

I'd very much would like a comment from Travbomb on this one, especially regarding the cases of backlight issues in this thread.

I'll stop ranting now about this. Test colorcomp and provide a picture, and I'll see what I (and us others) can make out of that picture.

The CD contains: Drivers, manual and programs (gammacomp, naviset and long cable program). I don't know if they ship units with it outside of Europe.

Try the screen with movies and games too. You'll be positively suprised!

I took a pic of the backlight but found out I couldn't attach it to a post here. After looking at my pic and other backlight pics posted by other people it doesn't really look that bad so I won't worry about it. I can't notice it when viewing things on the screen besides an all black screen, and I probably wouldn't have thought much about it if I didn't see the Dell 2407 backlight a week before. It may be more of an IPS versus a PVA difference when doing that type of test. My monitor doesn't have any dead pixels which is something that would have bothered me.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

Some backlight issues have been known to disappear by itself after some usage of the screen. You can post your picture here, either by link through imageshack or your other favorite upload site. As I told ToastyX, backlight uniformity issues can happen to all types of panels and also brand. Its not a panel issue, though IPS panels have a shade of purple thats visible on full black, while S-PVA's don't. Full black can appear more uniform at first glance on S-PVA's due to this.

There are a lot of myths going around here. One say that if you get an Eizo, you get a totally uniform screen due to quality control. I wish this was true, but its not.

Lets look at the real facts and measured numbers (according to prad.de's indepth reviews):

Eizo S2111W (doesn't have options to improve backlight):

link

NEC 2690WUXi (before colorcomp):

NEC 2690WUXi (with colorcomp level 3 of 5 on same panel):

link

As you can see, you can get backlight issues on every brand and panel type. Its always a luck of the draw, though colorcomp improves the odds greatly.

 

[Chippy]

I don't know what those numbers mean Tamlin.

At what nominal output level are the measurements taken?

Cheers

Chip

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

I don't know what those numbers mean Tamlin.

At what nominal output level are the measurements taken?

Cheers

Chip

Hi Chip

I don't know more then what we both can read in the reviews.
The issue discussed in my post is the backlight uniformity and the images represents values of brightness (luminance, measured in cd/m2 as always) measured on 15 different points on screen.

As explained in the review, the original value is the center square value. This goes for all pictures. The rest is numbers measured across the panel without changing the original value, which is meant to check for deviation of brightness values (backlight uniformity).

My apologies if this wasn't clear enough.

 

[Chippy]

Thanks, although all of that was clear enough. The crux of my question was the sentence "At what nominal output level are the measurements taken?"

The reason I ask this is because the evenness of illumation of the 2690 is demonstrably *inferior* to that of the Eizo S2411W when comparing two *black* screens. Yet this is seemingly contrary to the results posted above.

Whether this issue with the 2690 is caused by backlight bleed through, or panel warping due to poor manufacturing tolerances or by some other effect, I don't know. But its certainly not one of the NEC's many strong points.

Chip

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

Thanks, although all of that was clear enough. The crux of my question was the sentence "At what nominal output level are the measurements taken?"

I'm not sure what information you are after when you ask about nominal output level. Could you specify a bit what values you want and in which form?

The reason I ask this is because the evenness of illumation of the 2690 is demonstrably *inferior* to that of the Eizo S2411W when comparing two *black* screens. Yet this is seemingly contrary to the results posted above.

I don't know what comparisons you refer to when you speak of S2411W and the 2690. Could you provide a link?

The results above is about the S2111W and the 2690WUXi. These are measured deviation, not subjective impressions. That might explain the contradiction(why actually the S2111W is *inferior*).

Whether this issue with the 2690 is caused by backlight bleed through, or panel warping due to poor manufacturing tolerances or by some other effect, I don't know. But its certainly not one of the NEC's many strong points.

Chip

You lost me again here. According to the test at prad.de, colorcomp brought the backlight uniformity down to a level of 1.3% deviation which is pretty good (and a lot better then the S2111W). Did you mix the screens a bit? And it should be like:

Whether this issue with the S2111W is caused by backlight bleed through, or panel warping due to poor manufacturing tolerances or by some other effect, I don't know. But its certainly not one of the Eizo's many strong points.

 

[sosrah]

Another review of 2690 from Japan:

http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=ja_en&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmiyahan.com%2Fme%2Freport%2Fcomputer%2F070125_WUXGA_LCD%2FLCD2690WUXi_5.html

 

[zoner3]

Some backlight issues have been known to disappear by itself after some usage of the screen. You can post your picture here, either by link through imageshack or your other favorite upload site. As I told ToastyX, backlight uniformity issues can happen to all types of panels and also brand. Its not a panel issue, though IPS panels have a shade of purple thats visible on full black, while S-PVA's don't. Full black can appear more uniform at first glance on S-PVA's due to this.

There are a lot of myths going around here. One say that if you get an Eizo, you get a totally uniform screen due to quality control. I wish this was true, but its not.

Lets look at the real facts and measured numbers (according to prad.de's indepth reviews):

Eizo S2111W (doesn't have options to improve backlight):

link

NEC 2690WUXi (before colorcomp):

NEC 2690WUXi (with colorcomp level 3 of 5 on same panel):

link

As you can see, you can get backlight issues on every brand and panel type. Its always a luck of the draw, though colorcomp improves the odds greatly.

I looked at the new post with the link to a new Japanese review and the front backlight pic of the 2690 in that pic is similar to my 2690 (with colorcomp on) if you flip the right and left sides.

 

[ToastyX]

backlight uniformity issues can happen to all types of panels and also brand. Its not a panel issue

You make it seem like backlight bleeding isn't more common with certain types of panels, which directly contradicts my experience and the experiences of others.

Explain to me why every 23+" IPS monitor I've tried had the same kind of cloudy backlight bleeding. On every one of those monitors, I noticed the panel was secured unevenly in the same manner. Some areas were loose while other areas were tight, which caused warping. I could move the uneven areas around, but I couldn't get rid of them. Painman noticed the same thing on all three of his displays. I've only seen that happen on monitors with IPS panels. I've never seen that happen on monitors with PVA panels. Are you implying this is all one big coincidence?

Explain to me why so many people complained about the same kind of cloudy backlight bleeding on the Dell 2005FPW, which has an S-IPS panel, yet hardly anyone complained about any kind of backlight bleeding on the Dell 2405FPW, which has a PVA panel. Here's an old picture of my 2405FPW in the dark with no backlight bleeding: http://www.toastyx.net/2405fpw-dark.jpg

Explain to me why many people have complained about backlight bleeding along the top and bottom edges of monitors with 22" TN panels, regardless of brand.

Based on these and other experiences, I can only conclude that backlight bleeding is more common with certain types of panels than others.

I'm also tired of people blaming the problems on bad luck. The problems are common enough that people have received replacements with the same problems. That's not bad luck. That's bad manufacturing.

There are a lot of myths going around here. One say that if you get an Eizo, you get a totally uniform screen due to quality control. I wish this was true, but its not.

It's not a myth. Go get an Eizo. It won't have backlight bleeding unless it's damaged, in which case you can get a replacement. You won't have to worry about going through replacement after replacement because the problem is not common with Eizo monitors. The problem is Eizo doesn't have a monitor with the features and capabilities I want.

Lets look at the real facts and measured numbers (according to prad.de's indepth reviews):

Those are brightness uniformity tests, which have little to do with backlight bleeding. Backlight bleeding is the problem, not brightness or color uniformity. Most monitors are not perfectly uniform, even ones without visible backlight bleeding. Those results do not tell me whether or not their units had backlight bleeding.

As you can see, you can get backlight issues on every brand and panel type. Its always a luck of the draw, though colorcomp improves the odds greatly.

ColorComp does not affect backlight bleeding, at least on mine.

You also make it seem like this problem isn't common even though several people in this thread have seen the same kind of backlight bleeding on this monitor.

Another review of 2690 from Japan:

http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=ja_en&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmiyahan.com%2Fme%2Freport%2Fcomputer%2F070125_WUXGA_LCD%2FLCD2690WUXi_5.html

Even the first picture in this review shows what I'm talking about. Both monitors have IPS panels, and both have that cloudy backlight bleeding, although their 2690 seems to be much better than the ones I received. There's still some backlight bleeding though, especially in the top right.

I also recommended a 23" Apple Cinema Display to someone on this forum, and his also had the same kind of cloudy backlight bleeding. Then he got a replacement, and the replacement wouldn't even turn on. I hesitate to recommend any monitor now.

I know it's possible for IPS panels not to have backlight bleeding because my NEC 20WMGX2 doesn't have any. Now I'm starting to wonder what's different about the 20WMGX2.

 

[Chippy]

@Tamlin:

Sir, dare I say it, but you are starting to sound like a 2690 fan boy.

I have no issue accepting that my Eizo is inferior to other panels in a variety of areas. I try to be objective about it.

But I have noticed that you are intolerant of any criticism of the 2690. Even when such criticism is beyond credible reproach. I made the comment

"the evenness of illumation of the 2690 is demonstrably *inferior* to that of the Eizo S2411W when comparing two *black* screens. Whether this issue with the S2111W is caused by backlight bleed through, or panel warping due to poor manufacturing tolerances or by some other effect, I don't know."

There are countless images around of lousy backlight bleed on 2690's. I have seen several, and I am sure you have too. Even in this very thread. Yet you seem to deny this?

Indeed the 2690 has many good points, but I suggest that your defending every single aspect of its performance - in the light of contrary reports - diminishes your credibility somewhat.

Cheers

Chippy

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

@Tamlin:

Sir, dare I say it, but you are starting to sound like a 2690 fan boy.

I wouldn't be offended if you have that impression and I can also see why. Its easy on a forum to get this label if one discuss mostly one piece of hardware or preferences and often have to assume the "defending role". I can assure you that it isn't so. Any screen is just a piece of components and there are no perfect screens out there today. I could even get the same impression from you regarding the S2411W, though its not nessesarily so.

Despite what you believe, I'm trying to be a bit more "level headed" about the issues presented.

So far, I have seen "conclutions" about backlight bleed presented in the form of an "absolute fact", but without any statistical or scientific evidence or "facts" to back it up with. The only "fact" presented so far, is a subjective impressions from forum reading and some personal experiences. This is not something I would find valid to draw a general conclution out of.

ToastyX brings out his own experiences as the "truth" about some panels and brands. If he would have been the user Xeth, who got 6 FPD2485W (S-PVA panels) with backlight bleed in a row, his view on this might have been different.

I'm sorry, but I cannot accept the "evidence" presented so far as general rule of thumb even if it gives the impression of me being a "fan boy". ToastyX's conclution about backlight bleed from the japanese review is questionable also at best. Here is the actual image of the screen (found in the review):
http://miyahan.com/me/report/computer/070125_WUXGA_LCD/LCD2690WUXi/LCD2690WUXi_BacklightLeak.jpg

Since I have to work, I need to write answers now and then during the day. Later, you'll see my response to ToastyX's post where I will go more indepth and it would hopefully make my post to you more clear as well. I chose not to write everything here to avoid duplicate posts.

 

[Chippy]

The only "fact" presented so far, is a subjective impressions from forum reading and some personal experiences.

I don't think photographic evidence is generally regarded as "subjective impressions".

http://www.pixelplay.com.au/nec/

Chip

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

I don't think photographic evidence is generally regarded as "subjective impressions".

Chip

Not if to show how things are on one screen. But if to use this to make a general statement about a model or even a panel type, then its a subjective impression based upon one image.

Then there is the cause of backlight bleed. Yes, there are different kinds. Painman's unit, which is refered to here, had a problem with the panel cover/coating that pressed to hard against the panel itself, making backlight bleed. This he got reduced greatly by physically moving the coating. These issues can be caused by manufacturing, transport, storage etc.

My coating is actually so loose I can hear it hit the bezel when moving it.

Its also worth noting, and the japanese reviewer illustrated this well when he was comparing S-IPS vs. H-IPS, that IPS based panels are viewing angle dependent when it comes to black (purple hue) unlike PVA based panels.This is common knowledge and have been used to identify panel type earlier as well. Btw. your link illustrates my point here a bit too.

ToastyX on the other hand might have had the old fasion backlight bleed with accurate pictures to show for it.

My point is that putting all your faith into a few photographical samples which may not give an accurate representation of the problem and presenting it as "photographic evidence" for a general conclusion about 1000's of screens of a specific model or a panel type itself, is something I would consider impudent (no offence ment).

 

[Chippy]

@Tamlin:

Is arguing a hobby for you, or do you do it professionally?

Are you really suggesting that (as well as every other - according to you - class-leading aspect of the 2690's performance) its also the greatest at black levels and backlight bleedthrough? I know it hurts you to admit any tiny weeny flaws. But to suggest the 2690 is THE BEST at *everything* is a - frankly - ridiculous stance. Even a dummy knows S-IPS panels struggle to compete with S-PVA in terms or backlight bleed and black levels.

When I said "I suggest that your defending every single aspect of its performance - in the light of contrary reports - diminishes your credibility somewhat", I meant it for your benefit, not mine.

Chip

 

[ToastyX]

ToastyX brings out his own experiences as the "truth" about some panels and brands. If he would have been the user Xeth, who got 6 FPD2485W (S-PVA panels) with backlight bleed in a row, his view on this might have been different.

I just want to make it clear that I'm not saying PVA panels can't have backlight bleeding or that IPS panels always have backlight bleeding. My point is that cloudy backlight bleeding seems to be very common in monitors with IPS panels, while in monitors with PVA panels, backlight bleeding seems to be isolated to a particular model or production batch. This is from trying several different monitors and seeing others post about the same problems. Xeth is only complaining about one particular model based on his own experience.

As far as I know, LCD panels come preassembled with the backlight and polarizer. This means different monitors using the same LCD panel without modifications can have the same problems. The one thing different about the 20WGMX2 is it has a glossy polarizer instead of an anti-glare polarizer. Perhaps this is one explanation for why the 20WMGX2 is different.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

@Tamlin:

Is arguing a hobby for you, or do you do it professionally?

I'm not the one entering this thread creating an argument about this. I should ask you the same.

Are you really suggesting that (as well as every other - according to you - class-leading aspect of the 2690's performance) its also the greatest at black levels and backlight bleedthrough? I know it hurts you to admit any tiny weeny flaws. But to suggest the 2690 is THE BEST at *everything* is a - frankly - ridiculous stance. Even a dummy knows S-IPS panels struggle to compete with S-PVA in terms or backlight bleed and black levels.

If you had bothered reading my post properly, you'd see I'm suggesting, and I quote(my post to zoner3):

"Some backlight issues have been known to disappear by itself after some usage of the screen. You can post your picture here, either by link through imageshack or your other favorite upload site. As I told ToastyX, backlight uniformity issues can happen to all types of panels and also brand. Its not a panel issue, though IPS panels have a shade of purple thats visible on full black, while S-PVA's don't. Full black can appear more uniform at first glance on S-PVA's due to this."

I neither said the 2690 was best at backlight bleed, though you tried to turn this into a pissing contest or a monitor bash.

When I said "I suggest that your defending every single aspect of its performance - in the light of contrary reports - diminishes your credibility somewhat", I meant it for your benefit, not mine.

Chip

When you enter a thread, starts an argument (what was your purpouse about it again?), generalising and bashing both IPS panels and the model 2690, without any shred of evidence save your "photographic evidence" of a few screenshots, then you should worry about your own credibility.

If you could at least show some evidence (as I've asked you for) proving that backlight bleed is a general flaw with the 2690, we could have discussed this properly. With the few reports you have refered to as "evidence of a general backlight flaw", it seems to me that you read into this as "the devil reads the bible". A few reports on [H] represents the world wide distribution of the NEC 2690WUXi. Even a moran would have questioned the "evidence" you have provided so far. Is this the only "evidence" you have for your claims?

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

I just want to make it clear that I'm not saying PVA panels can't have backlight bleeding or that IPS panels always have backlight bleeding. My point is that cloudy backlight bleeding seems to be very common in monitors with IPS panels, while in monitors with PVA panels, backlight bleeding seems to be isolated to a particular model or production batch. This is from trying several different monitors and seeing others post about the same problems. Xeth is only complaining about one particular model based on his own experience.

And thats your personal impression of this, based upon your experience and what you've read from others. I fully respect that. Generalizing upon this, claiming it to be a fact however, I would disagree upon. There is no evidence supporting either that backlight bleed is a general defect of the NEC 2690 or H-IPS panels. Reviewers have spoken highly of the backlight uniformity and also about the colorcomp function.

My experience is that I've heard reports of backlight bleed on almost all panels. Especially of consumer grade panels. I have gathered some links about different brands and backlight bleed besides the one about the Gateway. I can present them, or we can agree to disagree upon this.

As far as I know, LCD panels come preassembled with the backlight and polarizer. This means different monitors using the same LCD panel without modifications can have the same problems. The one thing different about the 20WGMX2 is it has a glossy polarizer instead of an anti-glare polarizer. Perhaps this is one explanation for why the 20WMGX2 is different.

Now we're getting somewhere. There are reports of the 20WGMX2 with backlight bleed too. Some of them seemed to be pressure related though (like painmans 2690WUXi). I'm open to that there can be variations as well between them and that this can lead to backlight bleed. There are many causes of backlight bleed. That the 2690WUXi should be especially vulnerable to backlight bleed, I find hard to believe. This I would want to see proven first. Especially since this H-IPS panel have a different structure then standard S-IPS panels as shown in the Japanese review.

Wasn't the Dell 2005WFP modified as well? I seem to remember that it had higher initial brightness and contrast then the panel default and similar panels on the market.

My point (as originally written to zoner3) is that all panels, brands and models are vulnerable to backlight issues. Backlight bleed has several degrees and causes. Colorcomp is a nice tool and help even out the uniformity of the panel, and so did zoner3 experience himself .

 

[zoner3]

With my limited experience with one sample each of 3 panel types, TN, PVA, and H-IPS, I could make some generalizations about backlight, but I am not sure how valid they would be and even if they are relevant in terms of the end use of the product. All I know is that the 2690 I received is a beautiful monitor and I have no regrets in getting it for my intended purposes, 1 - photographic , 2 - reading text, email, etc. and 3 - the occasional card game, Mahjong, etc. This monitor is not perfect and in 3 - 5 years if I was looking for a new monitor I would hope to find one with the strengths of this one, plus improvements in some other areas. In the meantime, I am much more satisfied overall with this monitor than I was with my Sony Artisan.

Thanks to everyone for your input into the discussion of this monitor. It helped me to make the decision to try it.