NEC LCD2690

[Meow]

The 2690 can't be calibrated to a lesser gamut.

hey Toasty, what do you do to tone down the oversaturation? Is it best to tune them down in the Advanced settings for the screen itself, or do you prefer to set that in the OS or videocard's software? What are your best ideal high quality Advanced settings for your 2690 now?

It can get really messy if you can configure the same things in 3 or more different places. I have a NVidia card feeding the 2690, and it has some terrible tuning software, it really gives you no insight whatsoever in what it is actually doing or changing. So you can calibrate it whatever you like, as long as this software does what it does the way it prefers to, you're on your own with actual application of - for example - watching a HD movie from some 1080p source file.

 

[ToastyX]

You can't tone down the saturation. That's the problem. I don't use the 2690 anymore. The 2490 is better.

 

[Meow]

You can't tone down the saturation. That's the problem. I don't use the 2690 anymore. The 2490 is better.

Sorry, I would have to disagree there. I really found the wider gamut to stand out compared to that of the 2490. Also, I'm perfectly capable of toning down the saturation, as I wrote, it can be done in too many different places, in detail. (I'm surprised to read such a weird unsubstantiated comment from you.)

 

[sosrah]

Sorry, I would have to disagree there. I really found the wider gamut to stand out compared to that of the 2490. Also, I'm perfectly capable of toning down the saturation, as I wrote, it can be done in too many different places, in detail. (I'm surprised to read such a weird unsubstantiated comment from you.)

I have the 2690 and i don't have over saturation issue too.
Maybe because i calibrate (hardware) it every month.

 

[ToastyX]

Sorry, I would have to disagree there. I really found the wider gamut to stand out compared to that of the 2490.

Then why do you want to tone down the saturation? The saturation is a result of the wide gamut.

Also, I'm perfectly capable of toning down the saturation, as I wrote, it can be done in too many different places, in detail. (I'm surprised to read such a weird unsubstantiated comment from you.)

Where can you tone down the saturation? You didn't go into detail. You just said it could be done in several places without explaining where or how.

The monitor doesn't have an adequate way of reducing saturation. I explained this before. The monitor can't be calibrated to a lesser gamut, so the saturation can't be reduced through calibration. The saturation setting is only available when modifying a color preset, but that only allows you to artificially add more saturation, not reduce it. The only way to reduce saturation through the monitor is to use the sRGB preset, but the sRGB preset is undersaturated and doesn't look right at all, and using it causes the gamma and color temperature controls to be locked out. The sRGB preset can be modified in the hidden factory menu, but you're not supposed to go in there, and it's a huge pain trying to calibrate a monitor manually. There just isn't a good solution here.

None of the video drivers I've used have any way of reducing saturation. The only settings I've seen are brightness, contrast, gamma, digital vibrance, and image sharpening, none of which can be used to tone down the saturation. On a Mac, you don't even get those controls. Even if there was a saturation setting, that wouldn't affect external devices like DVD players, game consoles, and cable boxes.

As for the 2690 vs. the 2490, I've tried four of each by now. They keep sending me old revisions with the standby mode problem, so they told me to call back in a few months to let the old stock run out.

Every 2690 I've tried has more backlight bleeding than even the "worst" 2490. Several people in this thread have complained about similar backlight bleeding on the 2690. Tamlin seems to have one of the better ones, but even his has a faint bright spot that I don't see on my 2490. Nobody has complained about backlight bleeding on the 2490, not even me.

Every 2690 I've tried has faint horizontal lines that are stronger on the left side of the screen. I don't understand how I seem to be the only one that notices them, but every monitor with the same panel seems to have the same lines. I tried the Planar PX2611W, and it has the same lines. Even the Hazro HZ26W has the same lines. I confirmed with IanM using my lines test image. He thought it was an illusion at first until I explained what was happening. I don't know why he didn't mention this in his review. Something's not right with these panels.

Every 2690 I've tried has a yellowish native white point. Although you can calibrate the monitor internally, the white point of the backlight still influences the colors a bit. The 2490 has a cooler backlight which looks more correct to me and doesn't skew the colors as much.

Those are the reasons I think the 2490 is better than the 2690. Other than that, they're similar. I'd only recommend the 2690 if you actually need the wider gamut for print work or things like wide-gamut photography. Otherwise, the 2490 is a better choice.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

Whats all this talk about desaturating the screen? You don't buy a wide gamut screen if sRGB is all you want. You buy a sRGB screen and thats all you get. LOL!

As for the sRGB profile, I did a measurement last year with running a "profile only" in Spectraview Profiler. Results/validation came out descent, though it was improved by using software calibration (GFX LUT) instead. I found the old screenshot:
http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/4197/srgbprofilezn8.png
I did have to default everything and turn off colorcomp for these results though.

Within color aware programs, which are those where color accuracy is critical, then you don't have to use the sRGB preset even, since they work with virtual colorspaces and translate into your monitor profile. A screen being sRGB is only "needed" outside of color aware applications and only if you wish. Personally, I find games and video's better in wide gamut. I even use a preset set with higher saturation/oversaturation for use on some movies and games. For surfing on internet, there is a possibility to use Firefox 3 beta with color management enabled and you will see internet in sRGB and pictures will have their profiles honored even if they are not in sRGB (more correct then using a non-color aware browser). This without using the sRGB preset.

My pictures of backlight came out mostly blue and I had problems taking pictures with my bad camera without capturing the moire effect that is to be found on S-IPS screens (changes in full black screen). When looking at the screen, it is totally uniform. I don't think you would have spotted any bad uniformity either if you eyeballed it. You had your issues with backlight and some others in this thread too, but there are those in this thread who don't have issues with backlight bleed. In addition, there are people on forums like dpreview, prad.de (german forum part) and Luminous landscape among others who doesn't complain about backlight bleed.

Backlight bleed and noise issues have been hyped much more in this thread also. The 2707WFP have had backlight bleed issues (even the CNET review reports backlight bleed) and sound issues as well here in the dedicated thread (and on other forums as well). There are also those who have gotten several defective units in a row like you did with the 2690WUXi. It happens. They are less noisy about it there though. NEC fixed the sound issues and major cudos to them (meaning Travbomb) for that.

The native white point on my screen was about 6000K-6100K. On the sRGB preset it was actually 6506K after the manditory waiting for the screen to internally adjust itself. This haven't been a problem either when software cabrating through presets or hardware calibrating through LUT/programmable. None of my measurments (usually the max DeltaE is about 0.4 or below) shows that this have had any impact negativily on my colors. Please explain and also to what degree you are talking about.

I respect that you find the 2490 better, especially since it seems you want a sRGB monitor. Clearly a dedicated sRGB monitor would be better for your preferences and it will also perform better in sRGB without any doubt. The 2690WUXi is not for those who seek to limit their screens to sRGB, but for those who doesn't want to be limited to sRGB and still have a choice to display sRGB upon need. If you wish to compare those two including also performance in different color spaces, I'd prefer you'd include a part on how well the 2490WUXi/2690WUXi performs with aRGB, PAL/NTSC material and perhaps also how they both perform in CMYK. All these gamuts will a regular user encounter.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/lcd-testmethods_2.html#sect1

Otherwise its strange basing your comparison between two screens wich are sold as two different gamut standards on how they perform only on one gamut standard (and making it sound like an error if a wide gamut screen performs less then a dedicated sRGB screen on sRGB material).

 

[Fraggs4you]

Long time lurker/member, first time poster.

I've read this ENTIRE thread..in one viewing !

@ Tamlin, I officially nominate you the internet's #1 NEC 2690wuxi fanboy without question.
You must belong to every friggin' forum that dares mention the 2690.
When you first started posting I really enjoyed your comments but it's gotten a little ridiculous now.


The wide gamut is more a liability than an asset for 95% of people.
I've physically looked at and compared both the 2490 and 2690.
To spend this kind of money on a monitor and resorting to software calibration for viewing sRGB content is an absolute waste.



@ ToastyX, you sir should be commended, on both your wonderful contributions and the unbelievable suffering you've gone through to find an "ideal" widescreen LCD monitor.



This journey has really put an education on me and I'd like to thank everyone on [H] who donates their time and expertise.

btw...I'm anxiously awaiting my brand new NEC LCD2490wuxi delivery. (any hour now! )

Peace,
Fraggs

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

Long time lurker/member, first time poster.

I've read this ENTIRE thread..in one viewing !

@ Tamlin, I officially nominate you the internet's #1 NEC 2690wuxi fanboy without question.
You must belong to every friggin' forum that dares mention the 2690.
When you first started posting I really enjoyed your comments but it's gotten a little ridiculous now.

I would have suggested you'd read a little about nettiquette before prancing in here like a prick in a "Oscar-comitee" nominating people as fanboys. Seems like you don't have a clue about what fanboy means, so here's a link:
link

I post in few forums (but a read alot of forums) and mostly not about the 2690. Where I have posted about the 2690 it have been to share or contest information. I've tested the 2690wuxi extensivelly since march, both professionally and privately, so I feel I have something to say here. On the forum where I moderate, I've posted 3 threads about the 2690. One before the monitor had even been reviewed by anyone, one user review about it and one thread explaining how to enable Spectraview for EU users. My finding here saved many, since we in EU are refused from NEC USA to order Spectraview 2 and we cannot order Spectraview profiler either (there's no place to order it). The 2690 isn't the only screen I've posted about and I've gotten a lot of positive PM's from people happy with their purchase of either the 2690 or another screen I've provided information about. Providing information and facts is what I do, not promotions. I don't care which screen people choose, but I care that they are informed, so I offer my time also as senior moderator to provide information that people can make an educated purchase of. If they buy this or that brand doesn't matter as long as their happy. After all, they are going to use the screen, not me.

If that's fanboy'ism in your world, then yes, I'm a fanboy. But, then again, you're a moran not understanding what it means, so I'll try not to get too offended.

The wide gamut is more a liability than an asset for 95% of people.
I've physically looked at and compared both the 2490 and 2690.
To spend this kind of money on a monitor and resorting to software calibration for viewing sRGB content is an absolute waste.

Thats not true. As mentioned above, I've used this screen professionally (for picture editing and creating marketing material) and I've also gamed a lot with it. I love the wide gamut and feels it enhances the immersion of the games and movies. If you've followed the links from user reviews and professional reviews of different wide gamut screens, you'll see that its not true what you are saying. I recommend reading about people using:
2707WFP (wide gamut)
275T (wide gamut)
3007WFP-HC (wide gamut)
226CW (wide gamut)
LP3065 (wide gamut)
XHD3000 (wide gamut)

and many more featured here in [H]

Btw, here's a little post from NEC employee who has a part in making these screens (link:

Tom


I'm sorry you are so upset about the apparent lack of a calibratable sRGB mode on the LCD2690, but please step back a bit and look at what is going on, and how things should work, and how things will hopefully work in the future.

First of all, the LCD2690 is marketed as a wide color gamut monitor. If that doesn't suit a particular application, the LCD2490 is the recommended alternative. It has identical features but is 2" smaller and of course closely matches sRGB colorspace.

The monitor is doing what is was intended to do - display images in wide color gamut. To use it in sRGB mode is kind of like getting a Porsche and driving it around in first gear. OK, granted there are times when you may need to do this, but it shouldn't be that often. This same "problem" applies to not only the NEC LCD2690, but also the 30" Dell etc.

How about the web browser and core OS - are they doing what they should be doing? The web browser *should* be color managing all web images and converting them to render correctly in your monitor's color space. If an image does not contain an embedded ICC profile, then it should be assumed to be sRGB and converted to display correctly on your monitor.
As you found out, IE on XP doesn't do this - it's color management unaware.

You can confirm this using the following test page:
http://www.color.org/version4html.xalter


Contrast that to a Mac, where the browser understands color management and this is pretty much a non-issue.

The latest beta of Firefox 3 is color management aware, if you enable it. So as long as you have the correct ICC profile for the monitor installed, images should be displayed correctly.

What is happening with the LCD2690 is that it is making the lack of color management in IE frighteningly obvious because of the huge color gamut difference between the image's color space and that of the monitor. This same issue is present with all other monitors, but because they are much closer to sRGB it isn't as apparent. So unless your monitor just happens to exactly match sRGB, you aren't getting exactly the colors you should be in IE.

Looking towards the future, it has finally become obvious that color management is necessary in web browsers and other applications. Unfortunately it took a long time and the introduction of wide gamut monitors to hammer this home. Things are changing, for example new versions of MS Office are now color management aware.
Now lets take a look at the sRGB modes on both the LCD2690 and LCD2490:


On both the LCD2490 and LCD2690, the sRGB preset is just that - a factory preset. It can't be user adjusted on either. If you are using a DVI digital signal then there shouldn't be much difference between your PC and the system used to calibrate it at the factory.

The sRGB spec basically specifies the gamma, white point, and red, green and blue primaries.

On the 2490, or any other standard gamut monitor, the primaries are pretty close to sRGB. The white point can be adjusted to D65 and gamma to 2.2 as per the sRGB spec. If you have a 3rd party calibration system or SpectraView II, you can also directly calibrate to "sRGB" because all that needs to be done is adjust the white pint and gamma.

Now on the LCD2690, because it's red and green primaries are so different from the sRGB spec, the only way to get it to emulate sRGB is to do some fancy internal processing tricks to make it seem like its actually close to sRGB. This means changing reds so they aren't such a deep red, greens so they aren't so green, etc. When you select sRGB this is what it is actually doing internally.

When it is in this preset sRGB mode, it is not possible to user adjust it's internal white point or gamma - because it's already doing all this processing on the image. If you really wanted you could use a 3rd party calibration system, but each time you switched in and out of sRGB mode, you would have to change the active ICC monitor profile etc.

So to call the LCD2690 fundamentally flawed or say it is the result of a major design blunder is not at all accurate. It is doing what it was intended to do. If all applications on XP correctly did color management, then this would be a non-issue.

If you don't want to take the leap to Vista or Firefox 3, have you considered getting a "cheap and cheerful" monitor as your secondary display? That would allow you to quickly preview how images would be seen by others in sRGB land. That or choose the LCD2490 if you don't mind spending all of your time locked into sRGB colorspace.
--
Will Hollingworth
Manager of OEM Product Design & Development Engineering
NEC Display Solutions of America, Inc

 

[ToastyX]

The native white point on my screen was about 6000K-6100K. On the sRGB preset it was actually 6506K after the manditory waiting for the screen to internally adjust itself. This haven't been a problem either when software cabrating through presets or hardware calibrating through LUT/programmable. None of my measurments (usually the max DeltaE is about 0.4 or below) shows that this have had any impact negativily on my colors. Please explain and also to what degree you are talking about.

I didn't mention this earlier because I don't know how to quantify what I'm seeing. All I know is white on the 2490 looks more pure than white on the 2690 no matter how I calibrate them, probably because the native white point of the 2490 is closer to D65 than the 2690.

If the native color temperature is 6000K and you want a white point of D65, the correction has to be done through the panel, but since the backlight doesn't change, the backlight still has an influence over the colors. Due to the nature of fluorescent lighting, it's not always possible to counteract the influence of the backlight through the panel.

Also, 6000K is not a white point. It's a color temperature that includes a whole range of white points, some of which may, for example, have a slight green tint. I hate green tints the most because they're impossible to calibrate out. The Planar PX2611W I tried had a green tinge, and it drove me nuts because I couldn't get the colors to look right no matter how I calibrated it.

You also mention delta E numbers, but they mean nothing without context. Delta E is simply the distance between two colors. Unless I know what colors are being tested, the numbers are meaningless. The delta E numbers given by calibration programs are often biased towards the calibration method and are usually relative to the resulting white point, so that doesn't tell me how close to sRGB it actually is.

I respect that you find the 2490 better, especially since it seems you want a sRGB monitor.

I think the 2490 is better not because of the gamut. I think it's better because it doesn't have backlight bleeding or those pesky lines, and it has a better white point. If the 2690 didn't have those problems, I wouldn't have been so annoyed with it.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

Also, 6000K is not a white point. It's a color temperature that includes a whole range of white points, some of which may, for example, have a slight green tint. I hate green tints the most because they're impossible to calibrate out. The Planar PX2611W I tried had a green tinge, and it drove me nuts because I couldn't get the colors to look right no matter how I calibrated it.

I'll be quick now (time stretch), but will give you a longer and better answer with documentation later. Just want to clear up this a bit.

6000K is a white point (I'll give you links to that later, but if you wish to search, the K stands for Kelvin and you can search for what the Kelvin values indicates).

6500K is "standard daylight". How white looks to you, is influenced by 3 things:

Colortemperature (mixture between RGB values). The color temperature is your chosen white point.
Ambient lightning (the light in the room where you operate the screen)
Brightness uniformity of the screen (can "dirty" white if not uniform)

If these 3 are met correctly, white should be very white regardless of which screen you sit in front of.

 

[ToastyX]

No, D65 is standard daylight, which correlates to 6504K. D65 is a white point. 6504K is not.

D65 is 6504K, but 6504K is not necessarily D65.

Two monitors calibrated to 6504K may have different white points.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_point
http://www.thinck.com/howto-1.html

 

[ToastyX]

I can throw links too:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D65
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_temperature

D65 is a specific hue.
6500K is a range of hues. 6500K can lean towards green.

You also have to take into account how fluorescent lighting works:

Fluorescent lamps are made using myriad combinations of phosphors and gases. The illumination that they produce is almost never described by a point in color space that lies on the Planckian locus.

Difficulties arise when trying to describe the quality of light from a source other than a black body radiator, such as a fluorescent or high-intensity discharge lamp. The method used is called the "correlated color temperature" (CCT), which assigns a color temperature to light near the Planckian locus, but not on it. The above plot shows lines crossing the Planckian locus for which the correlated color temperature is the same. Nevertheless, the colors are not the same, and the method gives only an approximate specification of a particular color. Due to this shortcoming, the rated CCT of a fluorescent or discharge lamp does not precisely specify its color.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

I can throw links too:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D65
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_temperature

D65 is a specific hue.
6500K is a range of hues. 6500K can lean towards green.

You also have to take into account how fluorescent lighting works:

You must take into account that this article speaks of naked light, not processed light as found in LCD's. On an LCD, the light goes through color filters passing only the red, green and blue. When you attach a colorimeter, it read the primary colors and luminance.

When calibrating the white point, it isn't actually the Kelvin values you see, but the corresponding Kelvin value to the tristimulus values it has read.

The white point is made by mixing different amounts of red, green and blue. Therefore, the white point on an LCD is actually a color, not a "true Kelvin value" or a range of colors as you say.

 

[Fraggs4you]

Well Tamlin, I can see you really got your "fanboy" panties in a twist.
Maybe ‘post whore’ would have been more apropos.


Look, you’re really taking my comment way too seriously. I’ll let you slide with the name calling, though I’m surprised you stooped so low.
Like I said, I really enjoy/ed your posts regarding this monitor, but you won’t let anything remotely negative be said without
going into a lengthy rebuttal. After reading the above exchanges with ToastyX I now realize what’s
irking me about your posts lately.. it’s condescension. Please take this as constructive criticism and not flaming.
For you to ramble on and insult me and then dismiss what you said with the assumption that I didn't know the meaning of a word I used proves my point.
Bringing up your l33t internet status e.g. “senior moderator” doesn't help either.
I hope you don’t hit your head going through any doorways.
Also, take into consideration that I read this entire thread from start to finish.
Your perpective will probably be different but think about it. There's no denying you're a tremendous asset and very helpful.
My thanks to all the [H] members included you too.



Now, about the friggin’ gamut..
If you like oversaturated colors then more power to you. I do not.
Nor do I want to constantly jack with my settings to compensate for various color spaces.
Why spend this kind of money on a monitor and then “dumb it down”
or live with inaccurate color representation? That is why Tom was so upset and prompted the response from Will.
Your little copy/paste helps put things into perspective, but what most people don’t realize is the fact that the entire internet and nearly all image reproduction and marketing is done in sRGB.
Sure, a lot of post processing is done in aRGB, but then it’s likely converted to sRGB. Very few people buy a monitor to ONLY use it for wide gamut content.



Now, the reason I came here in the first place...


Finally got my 2490WUXi up and running, and it's a beauty. WOW !

I'm happy to report 0 dead/stuck pixels and No Backlight Bleed!
Color accuracy and sharpness of text is incredible. As everyone has noted, the brightness is insane.
The black levels are the best I've seen in a non-CRT computer display.
No banding or gradient issues.
C2 firmware revision and 751xxx serial.

I haven't had time to load any games yet because I recently replaced my C:\ drive and I'm in the process of upgrading my RAID.
Can't wait though!


Peace,
Fraggs

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

Well Tamlin, I can see you really got your "fanboy" panties in a twist.
Maybe ‘post whore’ would have been more apropos.

I see you have a great need to put negative labels on me. Don't wonder why I think you are a prick in return. The doesn't make it any better.

Look, you’re really taking my comment way too seriously. I’ll let you slide with the name calling, though I’m surprised you stooped so low.

You'll letting me slide? Now thats a joke. The word fanboy is almost exclusively used as a negative charged word. Even if the person is too stupid to know what it actually means, its common knowledge that its negative and flaming.
Often fanboy is used in conjunction with a dirty debate technique called poisoning the well, where you crap on other users who have an oposite view of things then you, before presenting your arguments. Both your posts might fall into this category.

Like I said, I really enjoy/ed your posts regarding this monitor, but you won’t let anything remotely negative be said without
going into a lengthy rebuttal. After reading the above exchanges with ToastyX

ToastyX have said several negative things that I haven't contested. To name some, I'll start with the 480P lines, the input lag and we both figured out together how the checkerboard vs. the black level slider works. I've also informed others about those issues with the 2690. I contest what I disagree upon and I present facts about it as well and I'll continue doing that. If you find the facts wrong, then contest them yourself, instead of throwing out labels and nominations. Otherwise, I take it that you agree, but don't like it. Tough luck.

ToastyX have his experience with this screen, I have mine. Sometimes they differ. Thats life. I respect Toastyx's experiences and I take it that he respects mine. If ToastyX would have gotten my screen, I'm sure he'd be happy as well with it. Its not like I'm lying and he's telling the truth because he informs about the negative and I about the positive. We're both telling the truth about what we see.

Bringing up your l33t internet status e.g. “senior moderator” doesn't help either.
I hope you don’t hit your head going through any doorways.
Also, take into consideration that I read this entire thread from start to finish.

Reading and understanding is not always the same thing. Bringing up my status as moderator was not about status, but function. First of all, being a moderator gives influence, but I've not used that to promote the 2690 in any way. My function is also both informing and troubleshooting for members, and I haven't promoted the 2690 there either. This was a response to your fanboy remark. A fanboy would have promoted the product. I'm not native english, but I think you should have understood my point there.

There's no denying you're a tremendous asset and very helpful.
My thanks to all the [H] members included you too.

Thank you for that. Its what I have been trying to do.

Now, about the friggin’ gamut..
If you like oversaturated colors then more power to you. I do not.
Nor do I want to constantly jack with my settings to compensate for various color spaces.
Why spend this kind of money on a monitor and then “dumb it down”
or live with inaccurate color representation? That is why Tom was so upset and prompted the response from Will.
Your little copy/paste helps put things into perspective, but what most people don’t realize is the fact that the entire internet and nearly all image reproduction and marketing is done in sRGB.
Sure, a lot of post processing is done in aRGB, but then it’s likely converted to sRGB. Very few people buy a monitor to ONLY use it for wide gamut content.

This is a professional monitor. aRGB have become the de facto standard for professional color processing. sRGB is used less and less (actually more are not moving over to aRGB, but to pro photo RGB) and professional print services and inexpensive home printers now offer aRGB and higher. For internet, sRGB is still the standard, but that will change once color management becomes a standard in browsers. Safari for windows is halfway there and Firefox 3 is already there.

You don't buy a wide gamut screen because you want to dumb it down. That I've already covered in my previous post:
http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1031886340&postcount=1206

If you had followed my advice and read up here on [H] about the actual users of wide gamut screens love the colors and the extended gamut, you'll see that people don't want to dumb down their screen to sRGB.
I'll help you to start it off:
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1143748 (2707WFP)
http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/review/2007/review-dell-2707wfp.html (professional review of the 2707wfp)
Do they complain about the color or praise it?

Check out whats being released of screens and the amount of wide gamut. sRGB is becoming obsolete. Both in monitor world and TV world. Vista brought more color management, something MAC have had for ages and new office is color managed. More is to come. Manufacturers are competing with getting the highest gamut and newer techs like LED, OLED etc. brings higher gamut. As Will mentioned above:

Looking towards the future, it has finally become obvious that color management is necessary in web browsers and other applications. Unfortunately it took a long time and the introduction of wide gamut monitors to hammer this home. Things are changing...

Now, the reason I came here in the first place...


Finally got my 2490WUXi up and running, and it's a beauty. WOW !

I

Congrats with new screen!

You should post your thoughts about it here as well:
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1191437
and here:
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1258835

They are more about the 2490.

Edit:
The 2690 I have in front of me is identical to yours, except for the larger size and wide gamut. No backlight bleeding, no pixel defects, no lines and so pure whites I don't have to use colorcomp. Do you blame me for liking it?

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

What all of you "need sRGB, internet is sRGB" people out there must realize, is that when internet explorer becomes color aware and color aware browser therefore becomes a standard, people would start putting out aRGB pictures and above out on internet. Those who are stuck in sRGB world will have the pictures dumbed down to sRGB, while those who have screens with larger gamut would see the pictures in all their glory MORE accurate then those with limited sRGB gamut.
Newest office from Microsoft is color aware and they have focused more on that in all their new programs. IE8 is due this year and I have no doubt they will incorporate color management for it. At least for Vista users. Meanwhile, wide gamut users can use Firefox 3 which have the option to enable full color managment. With color management, sRGB is a limitation, not an asset.

 

[cathpah]

fraggz4you...i gotta say, your first couple posts on here are pretty ridiculous and lame....and most importantly way overly negative. Keep it up, and I'm sure you won't last here long.

some people like this screen and some don't. No matter which side of the fence you are on, Tamlin's posts have been informative and thought/discussion provoking in general.

Don't hate on someone who has put SOOO much time and effort into this thread and answering questions/helping people on here.

Again, the monitor may not be the best choice for you....but no need to be a dick about it.

I for one am very thankful for the contributions Tamlin has made....as well as toasty and other members on here who might disagree with his comments. you might try taking a page from their books and actually post a helpful comment on here instead of just bashing people.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

Thanks cathpah! Its nice to hear that the time and effort I've put into this thread have had value.

During the discussion here about the white point, I've forgotten to add the information I've discovered about the black level.

There have been raised questions about different 2690's having different hue in the mura effect at angle. Some see red and others green. Also, it has puzzled me how black looks black on this screen even if calibrated to a high black point. I've tried with a black point at 0,87 cd/m2 and still it looked black, not grey. The reason for this was simple and right in front of my eyes all the time. Though the polarizer in the NEC improves black at angle, thats not why black is so black.

In the advanced menu, there is an RGB control on the black level adjustment. With this, you can control the "black point" as you would with the white point. Try this with your screen. Adjust red a bit higher and look at a full black screen at angle. You'll see that the black adopts a red hue. As "whiteness of white" is not entirely dependened upon the level of brightness, so is the "blackness of black" not entirely dependened upon the level of brightness.

Upon LUT calibration, it seems like it balances out the mixture of Black RGB as well as white RGB. Even if your black point is measured with a high luminance, it still looks black. No need to use the black level adjustment when hardware LUT calibrating, but its a nice option when doing manual calibration.

Its pretty unique, so I thought it was worth mentioning.

 

[bimmerboy]

Btw, here's a little post from NEC employee who has a part in making these screens (link:

"Contrast that to a Mac, where the browser understands color management and this is pretty much a non-issue."

Phew! This is reassuring! My mind is pretty much made up now to go with the 26".

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

ToastyX mentioned something about the 2690 (and 2490?) having problems with standby mode on MACs. Personally, I don't use Macs, so I haven't given it much thought until you mentioned Mac. I have read about other models having such issues (the 24" LG I think it was) and it was resolved by turning off DDC/CI. Don't know if it works for the Necs though. Perhaps ToastyX can tell more about this?

There was another thing I came to remember ... I read a lot in a forum and site called Luminous Landscapes. There was a post there I read from an authority when it comes to Photoshop (and much other things concerning image editing). His name is Andrew Rodney and have the Digital dog firm which trains people in this. Also, he is a friend of Karl Lang (father of Sony Artisan among other). Here's his post:

Based on my experiences and more importantly, the results of thorough scientific testing by Karl Lang and his presentation at PPE on the subject, the unit to get is the NEC 2690 driven with SpectraView II software. Yes, 93% of Adobe RGB isn't the entire enchilada but at this price point and performance, its a real winner.

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=20994&view=findpost&p=153861

A newer post from him reveals that this test he is speaking of is coming on Karl Langs homepage:
http://lumita.com/

Would be interesting read indeed. He also tested the 2490, so those who are interested in that screen might enjoy these tests too.

 

[ToastyX]

When calibrating the white point, it isn't actually the Kelvin values you see, but the corresponding Kelvin value to the tristimulus values it has read.

The white point is made by mixing different amounts of red, green and blue. Therefore, the white point on an LCD is actually a color, not a "true Kelvin value" or a range of colors as you say.

I know the white point is a color. That's what I've been saying. You keep showing me kelvin values, but 6500K doesn't mean any particular white point, especially considering the way fluorescent lighting works. Just because two monitors measure 6500K doesn't mean they have the same white point. One could be greener than the other.

The SpectraView II software tries to get the white point as close to the target as possible, so it's nowhere near as bad as the Planar, but in doing so, it loses some contrast since the native white point is a bit off. Even after calibration, I can still see the native white point influencing the colors. I'm not entirely sure why. Like I said, I don't know how to quantify what I'm seeing. Maybe it's because the calibrated white point drifts towards the native white point as it goes down the grayscale. I don't know. I'd have to do extensive testing to figure it out, and I'm just not in the mood. All I know is the 2490 looks better to me.

First of all, the LCD2690 is marketed as a wide color gamut monitor. If that doesn't suit a particular application, the LCD2490 is the recommended alternative.

The problem is the 2490 is not available in Europe, which gives many people no alternative.

Contrast that to a Mac, where the browser understands color management and this is pretty much a non-issue.

It's not a non-issue. In Safari, only images with embedded color profiles are corrected. Images without profiles are displayed without correction instead of assuming sRGB, so most images are still oversaturated. HTML and CSS colors are also displayed without correction.

What all of you "need sRGB, internet is sRGB" people out there must realize, is that when internet explorer becomes color aware and color aware browser therefore becomes a standard, people would start putting out aRGB pictures and above out on internet. Those who are stuck in sRGB world will have the pictures dumbed down to sRGB, while those who have screens with larger gamut would see the pictures in all their glory MORE accurate then those with limited sRGB gamut.

What you don't seem to realize is there's more to computers than the Web, and there's more to displays than computers. A color-managed browser isn't going to affect anything outside of browsing, and a color-managed operating system isn't going to affect devices like DVD players, game consoles, and cable boxes.

I tried using the 2690 with an HDTV tuner, but many times the colors were oversaturated. Skin tones were too red, grass was an unnatural shade of green, and red objects were too intense. I don't often see red like that in real life. In fact, after using the 2690 for a while, red started to look orange everywhere I went.

Web surfing was a problem even with a color-managed browser because like I mentioned, only images with embedded color profiles are corrected. Everything else is still oversaturated.

Games were always oversaturated since there's no way to do colorspace conversions on the fly outside of color-managed programs.

Wallpapers, icons, and window elements were also oversaturated.

Even viewing images in color-managed programs like Photoshop still suffers because 8 bits per channel is not precise enough to display colorspace conversions accurately. This is most noticeable with gradients. We need at least 12 bits per channel, but no monitor or video card supports that right now.

Until operating systems have full color management and we have 36-bit color, which is still many years away, wide gamut hurts more than it helps.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

I know the white point is a color. That's what I've been saying. You keep showing me kelvin values, but 6500K doesn't mean any particular white point, especially considering the way fluorescent lighting works. Just because two monitors measure 6500K doesn't mean they have the same white point. One could be greener than the other.

I don't think you have understood it, though I tried to explain to you above. Colorimeters provide tristimulus data while spectroradiometers provide spectral data. Kelvin values can apply to temperature in water even, so when its used it depends on the context. On an LCD, Kelvin values represent the correlated color temperature (CCT) which refer to spesific tri-stimulus values in an CIE chart, or in other words a color. That you took the Kelvin values I talked about as anything but a CCT and a tri-stimulus value shows you don't understand this.

The SpectraView II software tries to get the white point as close to the target as possible, so it's nowhere near as bad as the Planar, but in doing so, it loses some contrast since the native white point is a bit off. Even after calibration, I can still see the native white point influencing the colors. I'm not entirely sure why. Like I said, I don't know how to quantify what I'm seeing.

Then let me help you on your way:

For my 2690, I'm using the EyeOne Display-2 which at least with the tests Karl did on his, was only off 500K in setting white point. I can live with that. I'd prefer to have the black nailed better using this instrument.

link

The problem is the 2490 is not available in Europe, which gives many people no alternative.

For those who only want sRGB, its a problem that the 2490 isn't available and a shame to. Now that I've used the 2690 for a year soon, I wouldn't choose the 2490 even if it was available and I got paid the costs inbetween. I don't consider the 2490 an alternative, since its not a wide gamut screen. The wide gamut have been put well to use (and yes, I have been using it for sRGB material as well with great success).

It's not a non-issue. In Safari, only images with embedded color profiles are corrected. Images without profiles are displayed without correction instead of assuming sRGB, so most images are still oversaturated. HTML and CSS colors are also displayed without correction.

I have no idea about Safari for Mac, but Safari for windows only have color management half way. Firefox 3 does full color management and displays images without profiles as sRGB and doesn't assume the monitor is sRGB, but rather uses a virtual color space according to your monitor profile.

What you don't seem to realize is there's more to computers than the Web, and there's more to displays than computers. A color-managed browser isn't going to affect anything outside of browsing, and a color-managed operating system isn't going to affect devices like DVD players, game consoles, and cable boxes.

What you don't seem to realize is that your the only one I can recall who has complained about the sRGB preset (of those who have tried it). Secondly, you don't realize that screens coming on the market now are moving over to wide gamut (including the new 2408WFP). Thirdly, you apparently haven't read how users and reviewers themselves praise the colors of their wide gamut screen (Like the HC models of Dell, wide gamut screens of Eizo, wide gamut of Planar, wide gamut of Samsung etc.) That you don't like it, fair enough, but the reception of wide gamut screens have been great.

I tried using the 2690 with an HDTV tuner, but many times the colors were oversaturated. Skin tones were too red, grass was an unnatural shade of green, and red objects were too intense. I don't often see red like that in real life. In fact, after using the 2690 for a while, red started to look orange everywhere I went.

Web surfing was a problem even with a color-managed browser because like I mentioned, only images with embedded color profiles are corrected. Everything else is still oversaturated.

Which color-managed browsers are you refering to? As mentioned, Safari for windows aren't properly color managed. Did you try Firefox 3 as I recommend?

Even viewing images in color-managed programs like Photoshop still suffers because 8 bits per channel is not precise enough to display colorspace conversions accurately. This is most noticeable with gradients. We need at least 12 bits per channel, but no monitor or video card supports that right now.

Until operating systems have full color management and we have 36-bit color, which is still many years away, wide gamut hurts more than it helps.

Do you even work with Photoshop or even tried editing pictures with the 2690? I do and I have. So have many others in this thread, at prad.de forums, at dpreview forums, at luminous landscapes forums etc.

8-bits means 16,7M colors in RGB. Thats a big box of crayons.
In standard CMYK, the max is 4M colors (and many of them are not visible on a sRGB display due to "out of gamut"). When you print out a picture on a CMYK printer, it usually doesn't contain 4M colors. I don't know about you, but I get descent results even when limited to 4M colors in CMYK and so do a lot of photographers and professionals.
The sRGB color space is too narrow to make a good use of higher bit-depth. Its cramped enough already. Here's 3 colors. Check them out in wide gamut and sRGB:
230,240,200, 230,241,200, 230,242,200:

Wide gamut makes better use of the shades. In sRGB they are too close to have any practical application.

People often edit their pictures in up to 16-bit per RGB. This is good, especially if you need to reduce red, green or blue. You have a greater range to work with then without loosing information when converting it to 8-bit. Still, there are also many who edit their pictures in 8-bit per RGB even though it looses shades when red, green or blue are reduced. The results are still good.

Spreading the 16.7M colors closer to aRGB instead of sRGB doesn't have that negative impact you are trying to promote here. In fact, I experience that I get a better use of the colors in aRGB then sRGB.

Not to mention that the 16-bit .ICM profile does a good job keeping shades during conversions.

I recommend the 2690 over the 2490 for work with colors based upon my experience with wide gamut over sRGB (I do have 2 sRGB screens as well).

Andrew Rodney/Digital dog is a leading expert and consultant on color management in Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom. link. He uses the 2690WUXi and recommends it.

Karl Lang, the father of Sony Artisan recommends the 2690 and he has also tested the 2490 and praised this btw. With a $20K spectroradiometer I might add and 900 patches.

Prad.de checked the screen up against UGRA and it passed

As I've said earlier, I enjoy reading your findings about what faults the 2690 might have. It is a bit "one track finding faults" mission, but I enjoy it nevertheless. You have a good eye for details and I respect your findings even if I don't agree. When it comes to working with photoshop and using this screen, I think you are way off. Here is where colors and sRGB/Wide gamut really matters and where the 2690 really shines in my opinion. Wouldn't trade it for the 2490 even if I got paid.

 

[ToastyX]

This is as clearly as I can put it:

A tristimulus value correlates to a single color temperature, but a color temperature does not correlate to any particular tristimulus value. A tristimulus value represents a specific color, but a color temperature does not.

The 2690 serves a specific purpose. It's designed for people who need a wide-gamut color-critical display, and only color-managed programs can take advantage of that. If you work with or view mostly sRGB content, the 2690 hurts more than it helps.

That's all I'm saying.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

This is as clearly as I can put it:

A tristimulus value correlates to a single color temperature, but a color temperature does not correlate to any particular tristimulus value. A tristimulus value represents a specific color, but a color temperature does not.

What you fail to understand is that the color temperature on an LCD IS a correlated color temperature. Your colorimeter is not a spectroradiometer. When you target a color temperature with your colorimeter, you are targeting a correlated color temperature. Your probe is trying to reach a spesific color (close to the Planckian locus line) using tri-stimulus values:

Edit: Found a better way to explain it to avoid confusion. (hard when everything needs to be translated and formulated in English, so bear with me). Watch this picture above. The curved line you see, is the Planckian locus. The lines you see crossing the curved line is the correlated color temperatures. Your colorimeter has limited color filters(compared to spectroradiometer), so its trying to get the correlated color temperature closest possible to the planckian locus line. To reach this point, it measures the tri-stimulus values red, green and blue (RGB/xyz). Its target is a spesific illuminant close to the planckian locus line. So, when you target your screen to 6300K or 6500K, the calibrator is using its readings of RGB to adjust white point as close as possible to an exact color of theoretical black body(P locus line) of either 6300K or 6500K, not a random color. Thats the whole purpose of calibration. As in the picture I linked earlier, it defines its white point by trying to reach spesific tri-stimulus values, not a random color. Same goes for every kelvin target you choose:

If you want to know the color temperature and not the correlated color temperature, get yourself a spectroradiometer. Unlike the Eye one that NEC sells with their LED displays, your eye one is not paired with the screen. Its generic. You might not have reached your target as happened to Digital Dog and Karl Lang with the eye one too. Your eye one might be closer tuned to sRGB of the 2490 then the wide gamut of the 2690.

Shortly: A correlated color temperature is a range of colors within a certain temperature, and your Kelvin target is a spesific color based upon tri-stimulus values read by your colorimeter within that correlated color temperature. The target is close to the planckian locus line or mapped on the daylight curve. Colorimeters provide tri-stimulus data while spectrophotometers provide spectral data. The colorimeter reads and adjusts the white point using the tri-stimulus data (by reading and altering RGB), since it cannot accurately measure the spectral data. When the colorimeter calibrates the white point, it reads the current tri-stimulus value (color) and alters it to the new target (new color). Regardless if you choose 6506k or D65 in Spectraview, both will have the same target color and coordinates. 6000K also refers to a spesific color and coordinates. Since your colorimeter both targets and reads tri-stimulus coordinates, your white point targets are spesific colors, not a range of colors.

In conclusion:
If we were talking about a color temperature(CCT) in general, I would agree it could be several colors. But, since we were talking about targeting a white point on two LCD's with a colorimeter, I disagree. The targets are spesific colors.
D65 will target the color coordinates of CIE xy where x = 0.3127 and y = 0.3290
6500K will target the color coordinates of CIE xy where x = 0.3128 and y = 0.3292
6300K will target the color coordinates of CIE xy where x = 0.3161 and y = 0.3325
6000K will target the color coordinates of CIE xy where x = 0.3217 and y = 0.3378
etc.
On both LCD's the colorimeter will try to reach the same coordinates, unless you manually enter new ones.

The 2690 serves a specific purpose. It's designed for people who need a wide-gamut color-critical display, and only color-managed programs can take advantage of that. If you work with or view mostly sRGB content, the 2690 hurts more than it helps.

That's all I'm saying.

Both the 2490 and the 2690 are targeted towards those who work in a color managed enviroment as Photoshop. Both screens can do sRGB on a color critical level, even softproofing accurately, but only the 2690 can do more. Those who work with color, often use and view more color spaces then sRGB. Even when working with the small CMYK color space, the 2490's "sRGB only" becomes a liability, not an asset. For color professional, the choice should be the 2690, not the 2490.

Outside of a color managed enviroment, its a different story.
First of all, since its not color managed, its not color critical either. Even by using only the sRGB preset, you have enough color accuracy for those tasks. For those who don't even work with colors, its a matter of subjective taste. Do they want deeper colors or not. As mentioned above, users of different wide gamut screens loves the deeper colors. Many don't care about whats accurate, but rather what looks good or not. Personally, I find games and movies better in wide gamut then sRGB and many have the same experience.
Secondly, color management is being implemented in a much faster rate now. Office, browsers, vista and even the windows photogallery have been updated to a more color managed version, the photo gallery live.
Thirdly, sRGB is being phased out by manufacturers. Dell, the largest company that sells screens are phasing out their sRGB screens and selling wide gamut instead. The 2008WFP, the 2408WFP, the 2208WFP, the 2408WFP, the 2708WFP and the 3008WFP are all wide gamut. The new techs like LED, SED, FED, laser etc. are all wide gamut. Since even the mainstream and low end TN's feature wide gamut, the software companies needs to accomendate the new technologies. Firefox 3 is already there and though Microsoft holds their cards close when it comes to the new and supposedly major updated IE8, I have no doubt it will be color managed when seeing that all their other new programs already have become color managed.

Buying a sRGB only screen now when they are being phased out by manufacturers and hopefully sRGB becomes obsolete, would be a bad move.

 

[gipsy]

While I am waiting (3 weeks) for my 2690, I am trying to prepare my desk for it.
Please advice is it possible to calibrate European 2690Wuxi with: SpectraView Kit – Colorimeter and Software
http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/A...7-73dacb301b84
if my frien buy it in USA for me and bring it here.
I am bit scared, as I been told that program is checking firmware in monitor and soft maybe want be working.

Thank in advance

Gipsy

 

[EnderW]

what's better - 2490 or 2690?

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

@Gipsy: The Spectraview 2 works with the EU version of the 2690. Its not checking firmware and you don't need to use changes in OSD as you need with the Spectraview profiler. The Spectraview 2 is an upgrade path which all multisync users can use (exept for those who live in EU ).

@EnderW: It all depends on your preferences and your point of view which is best of the 2690 and the 2490. Thats all that matters in the end.

 

[EnderW]

@Gipsy: The Spectraview 2 works with the EU version of the 2690. Its not checking firmware and you don't need to use changes in OSD as you need with the Spectraview profiler. The Spectraview 2 is an upgrade path which all multisync users can use (exept for those who live in EU ).

@EnderW: It all depends on your preferences and your point of view which is best of the 2690 and the 2490. Thats all that matters in the end.

well could you give me a summary of the pros and cons?
the 2690 is only $100 more at dell and $100 for 2 inches doesn't sound like a bad deal (that's what she said)
quality is more important than quantity, but if the 2690 is the same quality with an increase in size, then I'll be tempted

 

[gipsy]

Thanks for respond Tamlin, may I conclude; as I dont have any hardware for calibration allready and I have to buy it, the best solution is to buy SVII-KIT in USA (my friend will bring it to Europe for me) direct from NEC and then use it on Europen version of 2690wuxi which I will get soon, or there is any other cheaper/beter solution.
I do lot of editing in PS but just for my self and I am happy with results from my printer(HP7360) without any calibration on either printer or my actual monitor(SAMSUNG 959NF).
Next investment is going to be HP 9180 Pro

Thanks again for shreing all your nollage with us.
BR
Gipsy

 

[Flipster]

I'm reading up on the 2690 now and planning on getting the monitor from WWW.DELL.CA where the price is $1,366 Canadian... I have a Monaco OPTIX XR hardware calibrator with MONACO EZcolor software... can I purchase the SpectraViewII software to use with this calibrator or do I have to purchase the calibrator that comes with the SpectraViewII system from NEC as well?

As a side note, is the 2690 better than the 2490? Is there a reason that I should go with one over the other? I'll be using this with PhotoShop CS3 and I want an excellent monitor so that I no longer have to worry about color problems again !

Thanks in advance...
Phil

 

[Luthorcrow]

Well just read the posts by Tamlin (2690) and Toasty (2490) but there is only feature that seperates them, their gamuts. The 2490 has an accurate sRGB (72%) gamut and the 2690 is 92%. Which one depends on two things.

1) What is your intended output for your designs? Viewed on a PC (web, etc) or print.
If you are not designing for print and your work is designed for PC content only, then the 2490 is generally a better choice.

2) If you are disigning for print and are willing to deal with the extra challenges a wide gamut monitor presents (PC content displayed incorrectly outside of color aware applications) then the 2690 might be a better choice.

The only other edge the 2690 definitely would have is if you are older, the larger dot pitch is a bit easier on the eyes.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

I'm reading up on the 2690 now and planning on getting the monitor from WWW.DELL.CA where the price is $1,366 Canadian... I have a Monaco OPTIX XR hardware calibrator with MONACO EZcolor software... can I purchase the SpectraViewII software to use with this calibrator or do I have to purchase the calibrator that comes with the SpectraViewII system from NEC as well?

As a side note, is the 2690 better than the 2490? Is there a reason that I should go with one over the other? I'll be using this with PhotoShop CS3 and I want an excellent monitor so that I no longer have to worry about color problems again !

Thanks in advance...
Phil

As Luthorcrow said, most about the screens are already mentioned. Under PS CS3, the 2690 would be the one to get unless you would never use anything but sRGB in the entire lifespan of your screen. Both can display sRGB accurately in Photoshop and anything that is color managed.

Outside of color managed programs, you have an sRGB preset you can use if you wish (I almost never use it). Problem is that you need to change your monitor profile as well then and reload GFX LUT. Spectraview profiler can do this from within the program, but I think Spectraview 2 only can use its own profiles and only monitor LUT calibrated ones. Spectraview profiler can use any profile. Its an easy switch.

On Spectraview 2, you might need to disable the LUT loader from startup, manually change profile and restart the machine, so windows will load the new profile into GFX LUT. Thats more hazzle and if you don't do it, it won't look right.

The Spectraview 2 software can be purchased without calibrator (as long as you live in US and not EU. NEC denies EU citizens to buy Spectraview 2).

sRGB and aRGB are artificial color spaces that doesn't exist in nature. None of them are correct according to nature. If you are used to looking at an sRGB screen, a wide gamut screen would seem more saturated. If you're used to looking at a wide gamut screen, a sRGB screen would look washed out. What you are used to, becomes your "reference point" and if you get used to something else, your reference point changes.

Like the owner of X-bit labs said:

Anyway, I guess that many users, and myself among them, will prefer monitors with incorrect but pure colors, i.e. the 275T, to monitors with incorrect and muddy colors, i.e. older sRGB models.

Colors are more pure according to all color sciences. Red has less yellow and blue has less green on a wide gamut screen, so colors are percieved more pure even if the material doesn't have the same gamut. Therefore, many find it more pleasing to game in wide gamut. I have Firefox 3 installed which is fully color managed, but I surf in Opera which is not.

Personally, I prefer wide gamut on all content vs. sRGB. sRGB is being phased out anyway by monitor manufacturers and they are competing in increasing gamut. Even TN's of today have become wide gamut. If you wish to look into sRGB world for the rest of your monitors lifespan, then you should get the 2490.

I've seen people recommend altering gamut in their settings to get stronger colors, even though black level detail suffers. Many praise the "digital vibrance" which oversaturate and crushes colors. On wide gamut, you get stronger colors and smoothly mapped as well without color crush or loss of black level detail. People like colors and since accuracy is only used in color managed programs, your accuracy doesn't suffer in PS, since it operates with virtual colorspaces anyway.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

Thanks for respond Tamlin, may I conclude; as I dont have any hardware for calibration allready and I have to buy it, the best solution is to buy SVII-KIT in USA (my friend will bring it to Europe for me) direct from NEC and then use it on Europen version of 2690wuxi which I will get soon, or there is any other cheaper/beter solution.
I do lot of editing in PS but just for my self and I am happy with results from my printer(HP7360) without any calibration on either printer or my actual monitor(SAMSUNG 959NF).
Next investment is going to be HP 9180 Pro

Thanks again for shreing all your nollage with us.
BR
Gipsy

You're welcome. Unfortunately, the Spectraview 2 is the only program you can purchase (unless you buy a Spectraview edition in EU, where you get Spectraview profiler, a certificate and a hood). If you can borrow a probe, you can test Spectraview profiler demo out with lut calibration using following method:
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11427

I would advice you to just buy the program and select a probe later if its correct that the generic Eye one which comes with Spectraview 2 is off target when it comes to white point. Will from NEC said that they are working on support for Spyder 3, which might be better for this screen. Digital dog will test that out when the support is implemented. It has something to do with the calibration matrix of the probe and its compatibility to the display.

 

[Flipster]

Hey Tamlin...

You mentioned that the SpectraViewII software could only be purchased in the US, not EU! I would ASSUME this means that it is not available in Canada (where I live) as well... can you confirm that or not?

 

[Luthorcrow]

...sRGB and aRGB are artificial color spaces that doesn't exist in nature. None of them are correct according to nature. If you are used to looking at an sRGB screen, a wide gamut screen would seem more saturated. If you're used to looking at a wide gamut screen, a sRGB screen would look washed out. What you are used to, becomes your "reference point" and if you get used to something else, your reference point changes...

You had me up to that point. All color spaces will continue to be artificial until they exceed the human color range at which point we only need one. Sooner that happens the better.

That said you statement above is completely false. In that vast majority of images, we could edit in either in sRGB or aRGB and then convert to either profile and as long as the images are displayed in the correct color space the difference between the two images would be too small for most people to notice, even if they take their time and studied the images. They’re exceptions to this rule but the number times an image contains colors out of the sRGB gamut is much more rare then you think. Neither color space is superior to the other. The only issue is that content designed in one color space needs to be displayed in that color space. That is pretty much it. The only reason 99% of PC content needs to be displayed in sRGB is because that is the color space it was designed in.

There are no color advantages for viewing an image outside of the intended color space other than seeing colors not used by the designer or i.e. incorrect colors. The fact is your not going to see any colors that out side of the sRGB range, when viewing sRGB content on a wide gamut monitor, the values just won’t be mapped to the correct color hues.

Although the owner of Xbit labs might be a smart guy and generally knowledgeable, he statements you quoted (I am assuming the text after the reference to him is a quote) simply demonstrate that he should refrain from this subject as he is simply wrong. There is no gain in color purity when viewing an image that is not wider gamut to start with. All we are talking about are the same select group of RGB values being mapped to shades not intended by the designer.

The only way to see better color or increased color purity would be to view an image that is designed for a wider gamut to start with such as aRGB.

That said if you prefer to have your colors oversaturated just for the sake over saturating them, then fine but please don’t perpetuate a myth that displaying this content in this manner is providing more pure colors, etc. It just is simply not true.

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

@Luthorcrow:

I'll start of by showing you this chart:

A color on an LCD is made by mixing different amounts of Red, Green and Blue. The gamut on a screen determines how pure each channel can be. Lets take green: The closer you get to maximum green, the less red and blue is used in the mix. How large the gamut is on the green channel, determines how pure the green is. In other words, the larger the gamut, the purer each primary color can become.

Color spaces isn't made to make things look the best, but to make things look the same. sRGB was chosen as a standard because it was the lowest common color space that most screens were "close enough" to display. Not because it looks good. Infact, many color professionals feels its too narrow.

Here is 3 colors for you (230,240,200, 230,241,200, 230,242,200):

Most people would have problems seperating these colors. Even on wide gamut screens and now they are big patches. If those colors were smaller patches or placed apart on the screen, it would be impossible even for the sharpest eye to seperate them. On an sRGB screen, those colors have no practical application, since they are too close to be seperated. On wide gamut screens, those shades are further apart and gives you purer colors. Still they are too close for there to be any useful purpose of having a shade inbetween.

Only in editing those shades (and higher bit depth) have a purpose. This is because you are reducing the amount of shades in many edits, so you need more shades to take from. You have a bit to spare though. A picture with a resolution of 640x480 can have a maximum of 307 200 shades if none are repeated. A full resolution of 1920x1200 can have a maximum of 2 304 000 shades if none are repeated. Even in 8-bit, the crayon box is big. You can fill 7 (7.28) 2690's with unique colors. Standard CMYK have a max of 4M colors, but you can almost fill 2 screens with 1680x1050 resolution with unique colors.

In mine (and many others) opinion, aRGB makes better use of the colors then sRGB in 8-bit.

Inside a color managed enviroment, its important that colors look the same throughout every process. This is not a problem on a wide gamut screen even if the colorspace used is sRGB. Inside a color managed enviroment, it uses virtual colorspaces so sRGB can be displayed as sRGB on a wide gamut screen. Here it won't have any significant difference if you choose the 2490 or the 2690. The problem comes when you choose the 2490 and plan to use anything else then sRGB. Inside a color managed enviroment, having a narrow gamut represents a problem, since your image will be clipped. There will be a range of colors outside the sRGB screen you won't be capable of viewing.

Outside a color managed enviroment, the 2490 have an advantage when sRGB material is shown. An advantage even to most other screens. You can internally calibrate it to sRGB and since profiles aren't used outside of color managed enviroments, you are dependend on what the screen itself can do (you can do minor adjustments in GFX lut, but thats about it). But, programs outside of color managed enviroment usually doesn't require any accuracy either.

I forgot to add the link from X-bit labs to the quote above so you could read the context. Here it is: link

What Oleg from X-bit labs means, is that what looks good is entirely subjective. Color spaces is made for things to look the same, not nessesarily the best.

If I look out my window at the same sunset day in and day out, and suddenly one day there is a beautiful colorspill over the sky, I wouldn't be grumpy at God for not using the same "color space" and that every sunset should look the same.

Same goes with every task I do on the computer. If working, I need colorspaces and predictable colors. If not working, I want what looks best for ME. I don't use defaults in games. It doesn't matter to me if it doesn't look the same or what the game creator "indended" it to look. I would be angry if they took away the capabilities for me to tweak games to my liking.

Same goes with movies. I have presets made soley for movie watching. I don't go for what is accurate, but for what looks good. I don't play the movie in DVD resolution either, even though thats how its made. I upscale it to full screen because that gives me more joy.

Same goes with internet. I have Firefox 3 installed and can surf in sRGB without changing presets. I use Opera, because I'm used to it and feel comfortable with it. I don't care that its not colormetrical accurate according to the CIE charts. I surf, thats it. Don't even switch to sRGB preset.

That you are a defaults kind of guy, who doesn't change things are ok. Thats what you like. Fair enough.
But, you must realize that many others are not so fond of defaults and don't care about the colormetrical standards when watching a movie. We care about what looks good and what we don't like. Read the threads about users of different wide gamut screen and see how they praise the colors. Its pointless for us to argue what looks best. I like wide gamut and juicy colors and when I'm not working, I don't care about aRGB/sRGB color spaces. The 12-bit gamma and 12-bit LUT makes sure I don't get banding and other artifacts. I still have 8-bit colors regardless of viewing sRGB or aRGB in wide gamut and should there be a colorful sunset outside my window, I'd enjoy it and don't grump about it not being standard color space.

 

[miyklusha]

You're welcome. Unfortunately, the Spectraview 2 is the only program you can purchase (unless you buy a Spectraview edition in EU, where you get Spectraview profiler, a certificate and a hood). If you can borrow a probe, you can test Spectraview profiler demo out with lut calibration using following method:
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11427

Just got 2690 from “Provantage”. The trick with enabling Spectraview didn’t work. In Spectraview Profiler LUT calibration, TAB is grayed out. Any idea?

 

[Tamlin_WSGF]

Just got 2690 from “Provantage”. The trick with enabling Spectraview didn’t work. In Spectraview Profiler LUT calibration, TAB is grayed out. Any idea?

Another person PM's me about the same. I told him to switch spectraview off and on again in OSD and then it worked for him. Try the same.

In the info tag, you should see under model SV 2690 after this change (instead of LCD2690WUXi).

@Flipster:
Spectraview 2 should be available in Canada, since its under Nec USA.
As far as I know, Spectraview 2 is denied for residents in EU and Australia. Our creditcards are blocked from NEC USA.

 

[Furious Salesman]

Hi guys, I posted this question in another thread, but I can't seem to find it.

I have a NEC LCD2490wuxi. I bought a copy of Spectraview II and a Monaco Optix XR DTP94 quite a little while ago. I am using Vista 64bit which has no support for the Monaco Optix, so I am unable to calibrate at all.

Is it possible to setup the 2490 on a friends computer that has XP and calibrate to the LUT or create a ICM profile and then port it over to Vista 64? Would that work?