Jump to content

Monitor for web design/ photography

Joss

By Joss,
in Dev Talk

 Share

Recommended Posts

Joss Hero Member

Joss

Posted
Posted

The trouble with my set up is that it was originally for music produciton - lots of monitors, not good quality.

So, I need to replace the middle on with something better.

Any clues?

I cant spend a fortune, am on PC and haven't got room for larger than 27 inch.

One I have been reading about is the Dell u2713h - not the HM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pwired Hero Member

pwired

Posted
Posted

I saw one lately when I was in a print shop. A real slick all in one monitor from Apple

imax 27 inch with icore5.

You can use this to get inspired for buying your next monitor.

Buy a 4k monitor ultra hd

Be sure though your graphics card in your computer has enough power

to drive such a beauty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
totoff Sr. Member

totoff

Posted
Posted

And, as you were mentioning it, there is no such thing like "accurate colours" in webdesign. Your best bet is to purchase a monitor with neutral colour balance, sharpness and good viewing angle. The overall quality matters. And that's it. If you would like to make print work that's a different beast. Than accuracy matters a lot.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
apeisa Hero Member

apeisa

Posted
Posted

<little offtopic>

Actually the best bet is to buy 299$/€/£ laptop, 199$/€/£ Android and iPhone and look all the sites through those. I think that will represent the masses (not the designers with their high end monitors of course).

</little offtopic>

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PhotoWebMax Sr. Member

PhotoWebMax

Posted
Posted

I have always bought the best display I could find. I so want the new 5K retina iMac, which might be the best display around, and you get the computer with it. 

I currently have the matte screen 30" Apple Cinema Display. I calibrate it with the Gretamacbeth Eye on One system (with a Mac Pro). Great system but it is getting older as the saying goes. 

I need to have color/colour accuracy that matches printing as close as possible. Most web work involving photos does not need to be this critical.

But once you have a great display you will find that even basic eyes on screen functions like looking at text becomes so much nicer with less eye strain, etc...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Joss Hero Member

Joss

Posted
  • Author
Posted

And, as you were mentioning it, there is no such thing like "accurate colours" in webdesign. 

Oh, I know that - but with my current set up it is more of a case of "I haven't the foggiest!"

It would be at least nice to have one monitor where I can say, well, at least I know that is right and can blame everyone else for it looking wrong on their monitors! :)

Antti, I need another computer like I need a hole in the head! :)

@photowebmax - that is the other side of it; I want to use it for my photography which has nothing to do with the web. But I am not rolling in cash, so I need to find the compromise.

Mind you, my speakers for my music cost, er ...  a lot of money!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PhotoWebMax Sr. Member

PhotoWebMax

Posted
Posted

Joss, one other thing you could do is visit a decent print shop and see if they offer a "calibration kit". Might take some digging to find one that offers this. They are either free or a minimal charge.

A kit should include a calibration chart, a print out of Adobe process colors, a gray scale and a digital file of everything so you can compare how it all looks on your displays versus the print outs. 

Its not just color. You want to have good separation between the faintest of whites and the deepest blacks. Your grays should be gray and not tinted with cyan, magenta, or yellow.

Of all the colors in the spectrum yellow is my arch nemesis. I am always fighting it...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Joss Hero Member

Joss

Posted
  • Author
Posted

We used the same idea in video editing years ago, but those were really super-high end calibrated monitors that would actually respond to the adjustments. (very out of date now, of course)

The DELL that I list above and a couple other I have now looked at seem to get pretty close to the adobe specs and have hardware calibration. Having said that, I don't have the best card out, so I will get better than I am currently, but not as close as I would like.

It is probably the result of years in production, but I like to have confidence in my machines so I don't have to think about it, even if it is not as vital in my current line of work. Habit, really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
adrian Hero Member

adrian

Posted
Posted

Am I the only one who still prefers matte screens? I paid extra for one in my 2011 MacBook Pro and still have a Dell FP2407 (which is matte), but I am looking to upgrade my external to a 4K monitor to ease the strain on these aging eyes. That monitor has served me well, but it is now suffering from burn-in / ghosting.

I haven't researched hard yet, but would love to know if anyone finds a decent quality 4K screen without the glass, or has some inside information on how to avoid the horrible reflections. I hear that Apple Retina displays have less reflection, but I still think it's annoying.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PhotoWebMax Sr. Member

PhotoWebMax

Posted
Posted

A lot of the glare factor is the room environment. My previous office was a basement which made it simple to control the light level and glare. We now have a new house. My office looks out on water with six windows/door glass panels. The afternoon sun hitting the water made it really tough to work. I had to get white roll up contrast control screens that you can see through but the glare is greatly controlled. It made a huge difference. I still like the matte displays as well.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
yellowled Sr. Member

yellowled

Posted
Posted

As for calibration – it probably won't satisfy the needs of a photographer, but I got myself a Spyder 4 Express a few months ago (got it on sale, too). I have a (rather crappy, cheap) monitor here which is for my (rarely used) Windows machine, but I also use it as an external display for my MacBook every now and again because the MBAs display only goes to 1440x900.

Boy, did using that tiny thing improve the colors on the old Samsung display. And it's incredibly easy to use as well. I probably wouldn't have spent money on that if the Samsung didn't for some weird reasons have really bad colors ex works. (And I would never want to adjust a monitor without it ever again.)

That being said, I'm with apeisa here. If you're getting it for yourself, fine. Nothing wrong with that. But if you mean to “simulate” how people view the sites we build, you're probably better off with a cheap, crappy display that's not adjusted very well …

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Joss Hero Member

Joss

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks Yellowled, I will look into that.

I know what you mean about checking on ordinary monitors. I have done that for years with film and sound, but I also like a reference point, especially when doing photography and matching to external graphic sources accurately. 

For instance, with sound I will always check the final mix balance on a range of nasty speakers in the studio. But I still needed dead accurate reference speakers to fine tune the sound before the balance process started. Likewise in video and film editing, the editors I worked with used a TV in the corner to check it would look fine on peoples old TV at home, but they used a reference monitor to work with the original footage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PhotoWebMax Sr. Member

PhotoWebMax

Posted
Posted

I guess checking how your work looks at the lowest common demoninator has value, but if you are producing photo work in a professional sense (working on your own creations or the work of others) then having a solid display is important. I like having a decent display system and a good graphics card as I find it saves time, and involves less eye strain during long editing sessions.

I used to do the final CMYK settings for a high end guitar quarterly magazine. There were many issues and things to chase down while figuring out the print quality of the final magazine against test proofs and what you saw on the screen at home. Added to the mix is fun stuff like the publisher swapping printing companies during the endless quest to find that Holy Grail moment of achieving the best color for the dollar...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
horst Hero Member

horst

Posted
Posted (edited)

@Joss: those spyders are very good, but when you buy one, use it often! The new generations of those uses a sort of organic colorfilters inside. The older ones have had glass filters. Those with glass works 10 - 20 years. Those with organic filters are unusual just after the guarantee period expired. (2 years and 3 month after I bought the last one for 270,-€ it was unusual). Now I borrow a 10 or 11 years old from a coleague when I need one. There are spyders available with glass inside for the cost of around 800,- €, ... sighh.

Here are resources from the European Color Initiative for a visual calibration: http://www.eci.org/en/downloads you need to look for "Here you can find useful “monitor” downloads."

@adrian: yes, matte, only matte!  If I need to face painting I use the mirror in bathroom. :lol:

And I'm a EIZO Fan.

@Joss: that model you have selected reads very well in its description. I think it wouldn't be the badest decission. But it is always worth to do a lot recherche and read some good tests.

EDIT:

@Totoff: very good resource, thanks!

Edited by horst
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Philipp Sr. Member

Philipp

Posted
Posted

I have the previous model of the Dell monitor you described in your first post (Dell U2711). The viewing angel and colors are great. Even for amateur photography. I've never calibrated the display with a tool like the spyder but the printed results don't look different than the file on the monitor.

I think a DELL monitor isn't a bad choice.

Overall, most modern displays are great (having IPS, good colors) compared to the flat screens from five years ago. Buy one of those DELL 27" and try to get a hand on one of those spyder tools. You'll be fine and like all the pixels you can use:) You could also think about 4K, but the market is changing quickly here and the Windows support for such HiDPI displays isn't as great as on Mac (IMHO)

My next monitor would be an Asus PB287Q but I'm holding my money for cheaper IPS 4K monitors with HDMI2.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Peter Knight Hero Member

Peter Knight

Posted
Posted

Am I the only one who still prefers matte screens? I paid extra for one in my 2011 MacBook Pro and still have a Dell FP2407 (which is matte), but I am looking to upgrade my external to a 4K monitor to ease the strain on these aging eyes. That monitor has served me well, but it is now suffering from burn-in / ghosting.

I haven't researched hard yet, but would love to know if anyone finds a decent quality 4K screen without the glass, or has some inside information on how to avoid the horrible reflections. I hear that Apple Retina displays have less reflection, but I still think it's annoying.

That's a great monitor. Had one for about 7 years and it never let me down. Colors are brilliant too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Joss Hero Member

Joss

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well, I don't want to spend more than four or five hundred to be honest. I need to watch size too - This will replace my current middle monitor and I only have so much space. As you can see. I am just on windows.

post-822-0-91963100-1417180269_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...