Which 27" for graphic/web designer?

B

ben805

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
188
My NEC PA271W-SV went back to B&H due to defects, now I'm having a 2nd guess on my decision to go with it in the first place. I use the monitor for photo editing (Canon 5D mark2) and watching bluray through my PC, I do not game. After much debates I came to the conclusion of sticking with sRGB color space as far as post processing is concern, so the wide gamut from the NEC will most likely not being use when I edit photo which kinda defeat the purpose of paying $1400 for a monitor that I can't put to good use. Is there any better or equivalent options out there for <$1400? I do not want the Dell U2711 for sure, should I look into the Samsung SyncMaster S27A850D? Any other options? I don't mind going down to 24" as well.
 
If you're using sRGB and you're not concerned with screen to print color representation (ie you're not trying to match Pantones), I see no point in even asking what monitor to buy because it doesn't matter. Any monitor will do.

The anal retentive crowd will tell you to buy an IPS however (as a representative from the print industry going more than 10 years and as a graphic designer more than 15 years) my comment to that is that you shouldn't rely on a monitor, whether it's a CRT, LCD, TN, IPS, ANYTHING, for screen to print color representation because that's nearly impossible. I calibrate our color equipment at the shop at least once a week using a densitometer and I would never consider relying on my LCD for color representation; I print the swatch samples off the copier and go off those and my PMS books and try to find what is close enough and then adjust from there. I don't rely on a monitor for colors. There's too many variables in that equation to consider using a monitor for color representation IMHO.

If you're worried about color at all, even minutely, buy a calibrator.
 
So if you dont rely on your monitor for color, how do you know what your looking at will print how you see it?
 
When it comes to a monitor the coatings are all personal preference. I used to love glossys but now I dislike them.

Ben, I have a U2711 I LOVE this monitor, I even just bought 2 Ultrasharps from jaypeezee this weekend to complement the 27" I have. Like i said above I used to like the glossy coatings but I have no problem with the U2711's. And I know many would agree, it simply comes down to preference.


I say do some research find a good quality (most likely IPS) display with a finish you have a preference for and go with it. And for the money the DELL's are simply there, a lot of other monitors suffer from worse issues like blacklight bleed around edges or even uneven backlighting which from a graphic design standpoint is probably MUCH worse than a finish coat.
 
ben805 said:
zero2dash relied on his imagination to gauge color accuracy. :D :D
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

I'd question your level of education judging by your statement about "sticking with sRGB" to begin with. :p

But hey, what do I know, right? :rolleyes:
 
zero2dash said:
:rolleyes:

I'd question your level of education judging by your statement about "sticking with sRGB" to begin with. :p

But hey, what do I know, right? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
YOU are the one who said this:

zero2dash said:
I don't rely on a monitor for colors. There's too many variables in that equation to consider using a monitor for color representation IMHO.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:



Other than using your imagination to gauge color of the photo and graphic you worked on, do you also relying on throwing darts? Maybe you are depending on some super crystal ball that we don't know about? Judging by your previous responses I guess your magic skill must be off the chart at the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry where you graduated from. LMAO care to share some of your magic so we can foresee color? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
He's saying that you can use the monitor to get an idea of what the colours will look like, but he has to print it out to be sure. Then he can use the difference in colours between the monitor and the printed work and his professional experience to change the the modify the art on his monitor to make the colours look like what he wants on paper. Of course he will have to print it again to make sure.
 
No, actually he probably means that for knowing accurate color reproduction, he will compair the color value (likely a PMS value) with his Pantone color book to see how the color is actually printed.

And thus he does not rely on how the color looks on the screen to know how it will look printed.
Ofcourse he could have put that slightly less blunt :-p
 
Jansma said:
No, actually he probably means that for knowing accurate color reproduction, he will compair the color value (likely a PMS value) with his Pantone color book to see how the color is actually printed.

And thus he does not rely on how the color looks on the screen to know how it will look printed.
Ofcourse he could have put that slightly less blunt :-p
Click to expand...

Right.
Customer comes in, says they want a logo done in [insert PMS color(s)].
I do the logo in those colors.
Customer says "logo looks good, I want business cards."
I print a PMS chart off our digital copier (which has PMS color matching). HOwever being a 4cp (4 color process = CMYK) printer, it's still usually off a shade. I take the 4cp PMS chart and find the actual PMS color in my printed PMS swatch book. 186 red might look more like 193 on the copier....so I then change the file to 193 and then print it over to the Fiery to rip and print off the copier. I calibrate the Fiery using an X-Rite i1 at least 1x a week; I've tried using it to calibrate my monitor, actually (since there is software out there from X-Rite), but I've never gotten that to work.

That's why I said I don't use a monitor for colors. :) You can make an educated guess, but that's the best you can hope for. ;)
If your sole purpose is to use a monitor for colors, you're going to fail. If your other sole purpose is to design anything using sRGB for a client that will eventually print it off (either 4cp or on a printing press), you're also going to fail. RGB prints all sorts of f'd up on a 4cp, not to mention the fact that it obviously cannot be used for plates or separations.

You can use sRGB for websites and photos on a computer that are not meant to be printed. However I'd never actually create anything or leave anything RGB because eventually there's a good chance that it will have to be printed and you will have unnecessary work on your hands and a pissed off customer because you can't make the printed copies look like what they see on the screen. You can get a monitor and calibrate it and you'll get better contrast (for sure) and probably better shades....but if what you're doing is ever printed, you're going to have all sorts of problems because RGB is meant for monitors only and nothing else. I would not rely on sRGB for anything design related, whether it's graphic, web, print...anything. Monitors are RGB by nature so it's impossible to use a monitor for 4cp/PMS matching, just like it's also impossible for an RGB document to print the same way on a 4cp or a press that it looks like on screen.
 
Last edited:
Personally, I've a very low tolerance for vertical gamma shift, so I use IPS.

It's not because I'm a professional photographer.
 
I am happier with my 2711U than any other monitor I've used as a professional industrial designer. (All Dell Ultrasharps, HP ZR24W/2475w, Wacom Cintiqs, Apple cinema displays, etc)

IIRC isn't the current Thunderbolt 27" the same panel as the 2711 but with a glossy option if you hate matte coatings?
 
My U2711 is amazing, the AG really isnt that bad...especially if your going to be doing design on it
 
the AG coating on any of the newer Dell monitors will drive you insane it's like a really dirty screen that can't be cleaned
 
The dells and apple's supposedly use the same LG panel but different coatings. The dell uses ccfl backlight while the apple uses non-rgb LED backlight (still yielding around 86% adobe 1998). Another difference for those who are doing more than stills incl video and gaming is that the dells have a scaler that introduces a more input lag. The dell is more like a tv in that regard (imo), and has more input options. Most other brands of 2560x lcds have the over-aggressive AG coating already mentioned. The cinema display is clear glossy gorilla glass ("The screen is made from arsenic free glass. It is sold under the brand name Gorilla Glass from Corning. It is stronger than acrylic but not as durable (scratch resistant) as regular glass.") with a single mini display port input.
 
As I mentioned in another thread, I returned the u27 and with a 27" ACD and made the right choice (i'm a pro photographer). The glare on the ACD is ONLY a problem if you can see the reflection of lights behind you. otherwise it's clearly the better choice IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top