Screen for editing

[BW]

Why do you want to pay for an expensive screen. Do you really need it?

In case your set up is a complete set up from screen to printer, then it will work for such a close calibrated set up.
If you are printing outside or only web posting, then you really do not need a super duper screen.

Most importantly and always overlooked, is when people calibrate their monitor and printer and do NOT properly set up Photoshop for retouching...as for LR....it is slower than my GranMa playing Pokemon Go.

I´m not sure I do need an expensive monitor and the NEC is more than twice the price of the BenQ. The Eizo monitors are way out of the equation. The Samsung and Dell are somewhere in the middle and they would probably be overkill as well. Please feel free to post a picture of grandma playing pokemon go. I am sure she is faster than Lightroom

[Almass]

Please feel free to post a picture of grandma playing pokemon go. I am sure she is faster than Lightroom

LMAO 

[John G]

On a recent investigation into 4K monitors. It was stated that there has been interface issues between a software and how a 4K Monitor presents the fonts, the description being that the size of the font on show is almost unreadable.
I then investigated how my Post Processing Software choices work with 4K Resolution Monitors.
4K Monitors work with Lr / CS6 / Capture One and DxO, all of these in their latest editions work fine in the reports I have read.
There may be other info available to challenge my readings.
For me I am treading water, waiting for a 4K TV that will be seen to work as Good Quality Photo Editing Monitor, then a upgrade in Laptop will be justified to support editing using the 4K TV/Monitor.
If I remember correctly, there is a need to have a Graphics Card with a HDMI 2 output, this will then allow the full resolution to be displayed.       

[arthurking83]

No real problem with 4K on my 32" screen(running W10).

The added real estate makes the world of difference.
Had a look at a couple of 27" 4K screens, and didn't like the size of fonts and stuff .. so I decided that 30" + was the way to go and finally went with the 32".

The only two issues I have with respect to fonts come only from Nikon's CNX-D and Fastone's FSViewer.
They both don't scale well on 4K.
Both display text way too small for any eyes, let alone my failing versions!

My brother recently purchased a uber end Sony 4K screen of some description, a typical $5K model with as much fruit as can generally be had.
Didn't particularly like the rendering of images on it. Of course it's a massive 50 or 70" monster, which is probably what makes all the difference.

I think you'll find that most graphics cards will usually output via a DisplayPort for decent 4K bandwidth. 
HDMI 2 may be more popular on TVs and stuff like that .. DisplayPort will be more common on graphics cards.

I live on very meager earnings, but I do allow myself an indulgence or two once or twice a year(if the financials are there).
However! .. I did give myself the extra allowance this year to pay more for a screen than I would otherwise have.
The notion that you don't need to pay for an expensive screen may seem fine at first, but then almost invariably you buy a cheaper one, and only a few years down the track, you have to re-buy it all over again.
Thus spending about the same amount of money as you would have had you bought the expensive one in the first place!

It goes without argument that you should buy one only as good as you can afford(or afford to justify).

I know, had I got a 27", or even 28", I'd have preferred the extra real estate of a 30" .. so I'd have to spend more on getting a 30" in a few years time.
So I searched for as much info on 30+ inch screens, and the 970 Samsung came up as one of the better ones in terms of calibration and features .. for the price point.

It's going to last me at least 10 years, so the slightly excessive price(i'd otherwise normally not spend!) will eventually fade into a distant non event.
My other screen(I run a dual setup now) is my old crappy $100 cheapie LG that got me by for about 9 years.
If I can make do with that crappy old LG for 9 yrs, that used to display posterized colours in some situations where it didn't actually exist, I'm confident this Samsung will do me for double that.

[Frank Fremerey]

Arthur. I work with a fine photolab that calibrates all devices every morning and all paper rolls on exchange. They guarante 2 delta e deviation at max. My 600 Euro screen of 2009 still delivers very well reproducible professional results via that lab. I will replace it once it does not deliver any more.

[arthurking83]

.... My 600 Euro screen of 2009 still delivers very well reproducible professional results via that lab. I will replace it once it does not deliver any more.

That's basically what I did.
My screen from 2008 was only $100, I got it because I overspent on the PC specs, so budget forced me to get a cheapie screen. Worked well till mid this year, other than I always wanted something a bit better.

Thought about getting a 2.5K screen for under $1K, but then I'd end up at the same point in a few short years, so I decided a 4K was the way to go.
I had a quick read about Dell's new 27" 5K screen, but then decided against it because of the font's issue it' would certainly create somewhere in the rendering process .. so 30+ inch and 4K it was.

Makes a huge difference now viewing/editing D800 files.
I've also downloaded a few 5Dsr images and Canon's DPP and again .. the 4K is worth the effort.

If this one keeps me settled for about 10 and a bit years, maybe beyond that point I may look at whatever 8K screens are being offered at reasonable prices.

I use BasicColor for my calibrating software(via a Spyder3) because the Spyder3 software is rubbish!

This is the validation report for the cheapie LG screen:


I've actually had better, on my last PC install.
I recently updated the main parts of my PC, keeping only the graphics card.
On my older(now very slow) PC, the validation was just a tad better, can't get to that report as the PSU was also scavenged from that PC box for this new one .. but using the same graphics card software and monitor, it was slightly better in it's calibration.
But a max DeltaE of 1.37 isn't too bad for a $100 screen from 9 years ago.

The Samsung at the moment is causing me some anomalous issues. Not calibrating as well as it did on the old box too.
I've got that one down to 0.8(max) and 0.24(average) DeltaE, but again, on the old box it was slightly better in both, more like 0.1(av) and 0.3(max) or something to that effect.

Can't work out what I've done wrong to muck it all up. And I think the Spyder3 isn't the best tool for calibrating either tho, it's very inconsistent in both it's calibrating and reporting ability.
Next step is to get a XRite of some type that is known to work well with BasicColor.

ps. the main reason for me to update my screen was for the occasional posterisation I saw on images on the old LG(remembering it's still connected as a secondary screen).
I've gone back to some of those old images, posterisation mainly in dark blue skies, and there are traces(hints) of some on the LG, but nothing on the Samsung.
But what got me was that the effect is no longer as bad as it used to look on those images on the old LG.
I'm thinking maybe the graphics card has something to do with that too(I just never thought it'd be that different).

So for the OP, something to keep in mind .. about $/performance ratio.
I reckon it's more prudent to spend your money wisely in various parts, rather than bling up to the max on one part, at the detriment of some other component, which may net you no real advantage.

pps. the new PC hardware is spectacular! .... the new M.2 Samsung SSD is eye popping!

[Frank Fremerey]

BasicColor Software is the best. I tried several times to buy it but they did not even answer my call. Great product bad service I guess.

The i1 Display series is very good hardware. I hadtge Spyder 3 but is was clearly not as good.

[BW]

I understand that you are far more into this than me. The IT guy at my workplace have set up the specs on the PC and it looks like it is going to be a monster. However, the monitor "problem" seems to be up to me. The 4k doesn't seem to work to well with CNX, but I seldom use it. But when I need it, it would be nice if it was running smoothly. It also a decision between wide gamut or not. So far I have the impression that a wide gamut screen are helpful in professional work and when it comes to printing. However the problem arise when the full Adobe RGB are compressed into sRGB for web. One have to maintain two separate workflows or being able to preview the sRGB version. For those of you who work on wide gamut/10 bit screen, I would be very interested in your opinion? I also want the screen to be viable for at least 6 years, but I don't expect the Internet to be full Adobe RGB within that time frame. I reckon I will buy within a month so I have some time to make a "rational" decision, whatever that means

[bobfriedman]

i use this.. http://www.eizoglobal.com/products/flexscan/ev2736w/index.html  and external hardware calibration Spyder5elite

there are 4k versions.

[John G]

One small advantage of doing a long daily train commute, means there is always time to go online and read many articles.
On the subject of new Monitors a spec I recalled, but have failed to find a link to verify it.
Is that there are Monitors available that can display different Colour Space/Gamut at the same time with a vertical split screen presentation.
I have searched to find if this is a monitor option, or if there is a need of a supporting software, I have not been able to find the info again.
I believe I am correct in stating there is a availability for this use of a monitor.
It may be a consideration of a member looking to upgrade a monitor in the future.

[BW]

i use this.. http://www.eizoglobal.com/products/flexscan/ev2736w/index.html  and external hardware calibration Spyder5elite

there are 4k versions.

Looks like an affordable option Bob. Thank you!

A split screen option would be nice John

[pluton]

  I do all final processing/editing in the native ProPhoto RGB of Lightroom using the full gamut of the monitor, and have found that the built-in Adobe software conversion (upon export) from full gamut viewing on the monitor to sRGB for web is automatic and without trouble.  Maybe someday I'll encounter a situation where the auto ARGB to SRGB conversion fails, but nothing noticeable has happened in 4+ years.

[BW]

I have the same experience as you. The sRGB output only differs from the Lightroom rendering only by having more contrast and slightly more saturated colors.

[arthurking83]

..... The 4k doesn't seem to work to well with CNX, but I seldom use it. But when I need it, it would be nice if it was running smoothly. It also a decision between wide gamut or not. So far I have the impression that a wide gamut screen are helpful in professional work and when it comes to printing. However the problem arise when the full Adobe RGB are compressed into sRGB for web. One have to maintain two separate workflows or being able to preview the sRGB version. .....

NOTE: 4K screen and CaptureNX2 work fine .. perfectly!
CNX-D is the problem.
The font's don't scale well. On my 1080 screen, the fonts are about 12 pt in size, on the 4K screen, they scale down to 6pt or something. You can see them and differentiate each item, but it just doesn't look nice, other than all the items in the edit list are viewable on the screen at all times without the need to scroll.
CNX2 OTOH works perfectly. more room to see more items in lists and menus, but the font is also nicely scaled.

In normal viewing the difference between sRGB and aRGB is minute. Some colours render a little bit more saturated in aRGB mode.
I don't push process my files to really need an aRGB screen.
But the few times I've seen posterisation has always been in blues(eg. sky) when they have been captured very dark ie. with a polariser and say a grad filter or something like that combo, and trying to maintain a good overall exposure in the highlights.
Sometimes the blues come out extremely dark and my old screen would display some posterisation in the blue tones.

On a series of images once, it drove me mad trying to un-posterise them with various PP steps.
I think it was BR that made mention that maybe the posterisation wasn't in the actual image, but only on the screen .. so I printed a couple of sample images affected(on a crappy printer no less!) and sure enough print came out crappy, but no posterised effect in the blue sky.
So those particular images just didn't render well on that screen(which is my secondary now).

I go back to look at those images and now there is no posterisation at all, either on that same screen, nor on the Samsung in either sRGB or aRGB mode.
But back then when I did see the posterisation, I had a nVidia graphics card of some low-mid range(something like a GT400-ish type model .. can't really remember)
It could have been the card, or my calibration point back then.
The point here is that don't just rely on the screen, all the other hardware can make differences too.

The only problem to watch for with screens like that Eizo ev2736w model is the hardware specs. It' can only display sRGB colours(ie. 16million) .. and it doesn't specify with how much certainty(in percentage terms).
So if you want to set your software to view your images in aRGB, while the image may look differently rendered, it won't be an actual aRGB rendering(1 billion colours) .. the screen's hardware is the limiting factor.

My basic review now having a large 4K aRGB capable screen:
* aRGB capability - basically a must have
* 4K capability - awesome to have, not necessary but can help in PPing. I also do other stuff too(mapping/spreadsheets/etc) the 4K(with proper scaling ability from the software) is probably the most notable user experience on a daily basis. eg. web browsing is so much nicer.
But there is a downside too! all other devices now(especially compact mobile types) are a PITA to use by comparison
* 30"+ screen size! - great to have, 27" would be the absolute minimum at 4K I reckon.
* the Samsung's ability to split between aRGB and sRGB is nice to have .. just wish it wasn't a convoluted process to activate.
*  watching HD movies is painful now! :p .. 1/4 the screen size and almost impossible to upscale nicely. (note this is my terrible attempt at sarcasm .. I don't watch movies on my PC .. that's the job of the TV! )

ps. the other thing that I'e found works nicely is sending something from my 4K screen to my old HD screen. The scaling is automatic in nearly all instances. So if I send (say) CNX2 from the 4K to the HD screen(and back), it automagically re-sizes the software window to suit.
This is where you clearly see the advantage of 4K.

[arthurking83]

 .. and to give you an idea of the difference between 4K and HD(1080) image rendering on screen for PP-ing:
(and note I really hate CNX-D, but this program worked well, as it doesn't auto scale when going from one screen to the other)

On the HD screen, with the film strip icons set to a medium size, a 36Mp D800 fill view is displayed at 13% pixel size. I send that screen to the 4K and it fits in 1/4 of the screen.
increase the size of the thumbnail film strip to suit(ie. medium) and the fit view of that same image as above at 13% is now displayed at 32%. It could technically become even higher(say 40%) if I kept the thumbnail strip smaller, but it's handy to see larger views of the various elements.

I suppose if you extrapolate this variance and applied to to an 8K screen at some point in the future, you could easily set the screen up to view your images at 100% pixel view and maintain a view of the entire image!

Hopefully in about 10 years I can afford to update to a 14bit 8K 40" screen myself too :p
(for now, I'm scrounging here and there just to be able to justify a new calibrator).