Uniformity - what is a reasonable expectation?

sblantipodi

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
3,571
As title.

What is an average brightness and color uniformity on an average monitor?

Is a Delta E of <= 6 and a brightness <= 20% accross the monitor good?

What are the monitor's manufacturer "tolerance" for delta E and brightness uniformity accross the screen?
 

Baenwort

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 10, 2003
Messages
178
Each manufacturer is different and most vary or have none on most of their lines. I know of no compiled source.

As far as empirical data and measured averages that would be a question best addressed to rtings as theyvare the only one who still gathers enough data to say.
 

kasakka

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,011
Each manufacturer is different and most vary or have none on most of their lines. I know of no compiled source.

As far as empirical data and measured averages that would be a question best addressed to rtings as theyvare the only one who still gathers enough data to say.

Exactly. It's not called "panel lottery" for nothing. Personally I have been pretty lucky with my displays over the last 10 years and haven't had to exchange any. But then again I don't do anything so color critical that I would have to be very picky about uniformity - I'm good as long as I don't notice it as an issue.

Another factor would be how different vendors handle returns and exchanges. In the best case you get a brand new monitor which may or may not have issues, in the worst case you get a monitor someone else already returned for some issue.
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
6,806
As title.

What is an average brightness and color uniformity on an average monitor?

Is a Delta E of <= 6 and a brightness <= 20% accross the monitor good?

What are the monitor's manufacturer "tolerance" for delta E and brightness uniformity accross the screen?

It's different for different companies in terms of their end product. It also depends on what the monitor is to be used for.
Let's be real. If you're buying a $100 monitor regardless of brand a lot more "defects" in all regards will be acceptable. It will have much lower color gamut, worse panel uniformity, backlight uniformity, etc on down the line.

If however you're spending $2000 on an NEC or Eizo panel designed to color grade on a lot more of these specs will be tighter as the market that these monitors are designed to be used in have those requirements. Part of the reason why Hollywood spends $10,000-$30,000 on a single reference monitor is because they expect perfection (high tolerances) and high levels of support. It's just obvious (to be frank) that those levels of expectations cannot be had on a consumer grade, lower cost monitors.

So "average" isn't exactly relevant. It's more like, "what is this monitor used for?" and "what level does it cost in order to reach that level of performance?"

“Expectation” is a relative term that relates to cost and monitor purpose.

I would argue that the “reasonable expectation” is: “you get what you pay for.”
 
Last edited:

sblantipodi

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
3,571
It's different for different companies in terms of their end product. It also depends on what the monitor is to be used for.
Let's be real. If you're buying a $100 monitor regardless of brand a lot more "defects" in all regards will be acceptable. It will have much lower color gamut, worse panel uniformity, backlight uniformity, etc on down the line.

If however you're spending $2000 on an NEC or Eizo panel designed to color grade on a lot more of these specs will be tighter as the market that these monitors are designed to be used in have those requirements. Part of the reason why Hollywood spends $10,000-$30,000 on a single reference monitor is because they expect perfection (high tolerances) and high levels of support. It's just obvious (to be frank) that those levels of expectations cannot be had on a consumer grade, lower cost monitors.

So "average" isn't exactly relevant. It's more like, "what is this monitor used for?" and "what level does it cost in order to reach that level of performance?"

“Expectation” is a relative term that relates to cost and monitor purpose.

I would argue that the “reasonable expectation” is: “you get what you pay for.”

I ask this because some "cheap" manufacturers like Acer and Asus are approaching DeltaE in their specs.
X27, XV273K from Acer and PG27UQ from Asus are declared by the manufacturer to be calibrated and to have an under DeltaE 1

Why they talk about DeltaE and they don't say anything about uniformity?
My Acer Nitro XV273K once calibrated is able of a DeltaE < 0.5 in the center of the screen but then the DeltaE goes up to 5 in the left/right corner.
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
6,806
I ask this because some "cheap" manufacturers like Acer and Asus are approaching DeltaE in their specs.
X27, XV273K from Acer and PG27UQ from Asus are declared by the manufacturer to be calibrated and to have an under DeltaE 1

Why they talk about DeltaE and they don't say anything about uniformity?
My Acer Nitro XV273K once calibrated is able of a DeltaE < 0.5 in the center of the screen but then the DeltaE goes up to 5 in the left/right corner.

I understand your question. But basically what we're talking about is quality control and what different manufacturers tolerances are in terms of end product. This is basically what I was trying to describe in so many words in my last post.
As an example, different manufactures have different tolerances as to what they consider as a panel defect even on something as "obvious" as dead pixels. Some won't accept returns or "won't consider it a defect" for a panel to have as many as 5-6 dead/stuck pixels.

More directly, these panel manufacturers very intentionally state what they can state in order to make themselves look as good as possible without giving information that perhaps puts them in a less good light. Acer has clearly left certain parameters off their spec sheet that do just that. I'm not sure why you're surprised about this. This is also why websites like TFT central are relevant in terms of giving extended specifications. A lot of manufactures are even squirrely about giving details that are even more directly relevant like hiding the difference between true 10-bit versus 8+2FRC and calling it "10-bit".

However to address just another point, at least at this point in the game, I haven't found a single "gaming monitor" or "gaming monitor manufacturer" that does particularly well at specifications related to image quality. Even the x27 Predator isn't true 10-bit. And like you mention won't/doesn't have excellent uniformity. You either are buying a panel for image quality or for gaming/motion performance. So far there isn't anything that really covers both well. Although Asus has made product announcements for an impending ProArt Display that has >60Hz refresh VRR (although what type is unknown), FALD, and "pro image quality" relative to the "ProArt" line. This is more or less the only display I know of (whether on the market or only in product announcement form) that has any combination of high image quality and gaming features. No word on MSRP yet, but if previous monitors of this type are of any indication I would likely guess it's going to be >$4k.

Sad to say, Acer doesn't have a single display with particularly excellent image quality, which I realize doesn't help you much. As you mention you're more or less gambling on panel lottery as they don't have particularly high tolerances on what you're going to get out the other end. And they do not guarantee that their uniformity will be inside of any spec. This is what I was trying to tell you in the previous post. They don't guarantee you one. There is no "average" or "expectation" set. And you can't really expect either as they don't/haven't set any monitor to reach "image quality" standards save for what they have mentioned like "90% DCI-P3, 8-bit+FRC, etc.
 
Last edited:

sblantipodi

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
3,571
I understand your question. But basically what we're talking about is quality control and what different manufacturers tolerances are in terms of end product. This is basically what I was trying to describe in so many words in my last post.
As an example, different manufactures have different tolerances as to what they consider as a panel defect even on something as "obvious" as dead pixels. Some won't accept returns or "won't consider it a defect" for a panel to have as many as 5-6 dead/stuck pixels.

More directly, these panel manufacturers very intentionally state what they can state in order to make themselves look as good as possible without giving information that perhaps puts them in a less good light. Acer has clearly left certain parameters off their spec sheet that do just that. I'm not sure why you're surprised about this. This is also why websites like TFT central are relevant in terms of giving extended specifications. A lot of manufactures are even squirrely about giving details that are even more directly relevant like hiding the difference between true 10-bit versus 8+2FRC and calling it "10-bit".

However to address just another point, at least at this point in the game, I haven't found a single "gaming monitor" or "gaming monitor manufacturer" that does particularly well at specifications related to image quality. Even the x27 Predator isn't true 10-bit. And like you mention won't/doesn't have excellent uniformity. You either are buying a panel for image quality or for gaming/motion performance. So far there isn't anything that really covers both well. Although Asus has made product announcements for an impending ProArt Display that has >60Hz refresh VRR (although what type is unknown), FALD, and "pro image quality" relative to the "ProArt" line. This is more or less the only display I know of (whether on the market or only in product announcement form) that has any combination of high image quality and gaming features. No word on MSRP yet, but if previous monitors of this type are of any indication I would likely guess it's going to be >$4k.

Sad to say, Acer doesn't have a single display with particularly excellent image quality, which I realize doesn't help you much. As you mention you're more or less gambling on panel lottery as they don't have particularly high tolerances on what you're going to get out the other end. And they do not guarantee that their uniformity will be inside of any spec. This is what I was trying to tell you in the previous post. They don't guarantee you one. There is no "average" or "expectation" set. And you can't really expect either as they don't/haven't set any monitor to reach "image quality" standards save for what they have mentioned like "90% DCI-P3, 8-bit+FRC, etc.

problems is that those "uniformity specs" are difficult to find even on higher end monitors like BENQ and others,
I was only pointing out how stupid is to put DeltaE in the specifications if that DeltaE is referrred to the center of the screen only. :)

who cares if a monitor is capable of DeltaE <1 if then on the right of the monitor the DeltaE is <6
 

bigbluefe

Gawd
Joined
Aug 23, 2014
Messages
958
I think it's more that if you have reasonable expectations, no monitor is going to be satisfying.

The monitor manufacturing industry basically asks you to be this:

61l7SPIKlgL._SL1373_.jpg
 

sethk

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
1,866
DeltaE is usually quoted for color accuracy across the spectrum measured at a single point. I don’t see panel uniformity mfg specs. quoted as delta E as often.
 

sblantipodi

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
3,571
DeltaE is usually quoted for color accuracy across the spectrum measured at a single point. I don’t see panel uniformity mfg specs. quoted as delta E as often.

yes but this is a nonsense.
who cares to have a good DeltaE in a single point of the monitor if most of the monitor does not have the same accuracy?
 
  • Like
Reactions: blkt
like this

XoR_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,063
yes but this is a nonsense.
who cares to have a good DeltaE in a single point of the monitor if most of the monitor does not have the same accuracy?
It matters because any inaccuracies will add up.

Today many monitors will have native gamut pretty close to sRGB and as long as we are talking about IPS panels accuracy across the screen will be good. If this is not enough there are proffesional monitors with better panels, hardware calibration and digital uniformity correction.
 

sethk

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
1,866
Panel uniformity is usually quoted as a luminosity percentage deviance from normal (higher being worse), because it is mainly a luminosity issue (brightness), due to the way the backlight and polarizer assembly in monitors is a big contributor to it. Tom's central also measures a 9 point Delta E color deviance, and lists color uniformity deviance on some reviews, but this is rare in reviews in general.
Here's TFTCentral's description of the term: https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/features.htm#uniformity

With regards to what's good or acceptable for panel uniformity, it appears < 10% average deviance in consumer/gaming monitors is considered "good". In recent reviews, TFTCentral has said uniformity was quite good for a monitor with a worst case deviance of > 30% but average deviance < 10%.

Is that actually good? Not in my opinion, but it's not the most egregious issue, since VA panel color shift is much worse in how noticeable it is than that level of panel deviance, but for calibrated IPS panels which are generally pretty good, panel uniformity becomes the remaining issue (along with contrast). Note that panel uniformity varies from sample to sample as well as being different across different monitor types, so reviews are not completely predictive of what you may get.
 

sblantipodi

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
3,571
Panel uniformity is usually quoted as a luminosity percentage deviance from normal (higher being worse), because it is mainly a luminosity issue (brightness), due to the way the backlight and polarizer assembly in monitors is a big contributor to it. Tom's central also measures a 9 point Delta E color deviance, and lists color uniformity deviance on some reviews, but this is rare in reviews in general.
Here's TFTCentral's description of the term: https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/features.htm#uniformity

With regards to what's good or acceptable for panel uniformity, it appears < 10% average deviance in consumer/gaming monitors is considered "good". In recent reviews, TFTCentral has said uniformity was quite good for a monitor with a worst case deviance of > 30% but average deviance < 10%.

Is that actually good? Not in my opinion, but it's not the most egregious issue, since VA panel color shift is much worse in how noticeable it is than that level of panel deviance, but for calibrated IPS panels which are generally pretty good, panel uniformity becomes the remaining issue (along with contrast). Note that panel uniformity varies from sample to sample as well as being different across different monitor types, so reviews are not completely predictive of what you may get.

this is the result of brightness uniformity testing using
i1 Display Pro and i1 profiler on my Acer Nitro XV273K

not that happu with it.

unifo2.jpg


deltaE uniformity is not that bad but not stellar too

unifo3.jpg
 

sblantipodi

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
3,571
those are the crap results from a 2019 1000USD mainstream monitor, the Acer Nitro XV273K

View attachment 213363

View attachment 213364

and those are the results from a "real" monitor bought 10 years ago for 700 USD

uniformity.jpg


uniformitydelta.jpg


take your considerations.

I hope that this madness will stop with current monitors, current monitors are way to crappy.
 
Top