My understanding of the LCD technology is that the naitive white point of the monitor is determined by the backlight and any filter that may exist between it and the LCD itself.
This would lead me to belive that the white point can not be changed from it’s naitive state without darkening the display considerably. As the display attempts to filter (through the LCD itself) the appropriate wavelengths in order to lower (presumably) the color temperature.
Yet here I stand at a Sony LCD screen which has color temperature settings and even individual RG and B level controls. (Sony SDM S73)
Am I right in thinking that this is how it works, and that overall brightness (or contrast, I should say) would be lessened? If this is the case, the contrast ratio would change with white point, correct?
Thanks for indulging me… I’m trying to make a decision for a new monitor for my home system (no color critical tasks) and I would like an LCD but I want one I can get at least SOME simbalence of balanced color!
Brian,
I am in the “throws” of a real,major calibration problem with a 17" Gateway standard 610XL Radeon9200 LCD monitor. After numerous problems with color management, with printing to my Epson2200 via PSElements 3.0, I was informed by EVERYONE to calibrate my monitor FIRST b4 changing printer profiles, ICC profile whatever. I have spent close to $1000 in various calibrating software/hardware and am now using Monaco Optix XR Pro. It is the best so far but is not doing anything for my problems. Those problems are, white balance way off the scale, luminesence way out of whack, gamma ugly. When calibration profiles and run the resultant graphs are taken “aghast” by the pros(forums and at Chromix, Inc). My ATI Radeon9200 card has user selectable options in RGB, gamma,contrast, and brightness but when the calibration profile is defaulted to what you see is sometimes ugly. While this does not affect the printing much at all the monitor is terrible. Consensus is that there is not much LCD info on calibration at all. And what is available is very sketchy and on a experimental stage at first. But yet the still tell you it will work on ANY LCD monitor and maybe it will on the top-of-the-line ones but not mine!
My point is go with a crt or a very top of the line LCD and do your research. There is a guy who uses LCDs in a professional imaging environment. I can get his info if you like.
Now I must admit I am not “on top” of all the ways to accomplish the use of this technology but listening to the sales come-ons…“any idiot can do it!”
Good luck! Let me know if you need this guys email/url
I know you stated you are not interested in color management just(i am assuming) visual quality. You work for Sony(?). Their monitors are pretty top shelf!
Dan
I’m really on the fence here; In terms of price, I can get a stable, easily calibratable and HUGE (21") trinitron CRT for under $300. A 17" LCD that might do the job is well over $500.
I own Optix XR Pro (love it) and use it in combination with a DTP92 X-Rite Monitor Optimizer. I would need to buy an instrument capable of calibrating an LCD, so there’s an extra expense there as well.
My gut says go CRT; my wife says go LCD! (She hates my gigantic desk) If the need ever did arise to do color critical work, I would kick myself for not having a CRT.
This is probably adjusting the LUT of the video card or internal monitor LUT rather than any actual physical adjustment of the monitor (like adjusting RGB guns on a CRT). From what I’ve been told, its generally not recommended to alter the RGB controls or set a white point too far away from the native white point, to avoid aliasing, artifacts, banding, whatever.
Then native white point of this particular LCD is 9600, but it has a settign for 6500 as well. Then there’s “User” which lets you adjust the R, G, B output individualy.
This is perfect for software like Monaco Optix, where I can watch the sliders move around while I adjust R, G, B and brightness. I fell like this is better than doing it in the video card with a LUT, but if that’s just modifying a different LUT (in the monitor itself) then it’s probably not much better.
Well, CRT it is then. I’ll look into the LCD in about 9 months when the technology has caught up to the consumer market.
Thanks for the input. Feel free to elaborate if you wish; I’m interested in any technical insight to this adjustment.
There ARE LCDs currently available using internal LUTs than can be effectively adjusted to something other than native WP without too much of a downside. The problem is documentation is poor as to which models those are. I don’t know where your Sony falls in that lineup. Reportedly the Eizo CG series (14 bit) and the top end NEC LCDs (8-10-8 bit) do not suffer too badly from the side affects usually associated with non-native WP tweaks.
I have also seen numerous reports of people messing with the “hardware” controls on “lesser” monitors and claiming beter results but what “better” is is hard to quantify.
It would be a great service to the LCD buying public if there was a comprehensive list laying out in better detail which displays had internal LUTs, which were DDC enabled, which had S-IPS panels etc. I have researched this quite heavily and there is little to be found.
The few in depth reviews I have found were done by gamers with different priorities.
I concur with all of the above and the Ezio seems to be the professional’s lcd of choice. But again if you are only interested in a visual perfect versus image, color management…I would go crt for safety…
Mine will too, but with a different instrument. I have a DTP92 (AKA Monitor Optimizer) which attaches with a suction cup. (Bad for LCD!)
I would have to buy the Monaco hardware to do an LCD.
EDIT Has anyone ever done an LCD with the X-Rite instrument? I can’t imagine that functionaly they’re that different… although I don’t think the software will allow LCD calibration with that instrument.
As a resolution to all this; I decided to go with a CRT. TigerDirect had a great deal on the 19" ViewSonic E90fB. It’s the top of their SOHO/Education line and has the same tube and OnView system that their G (graphics) line does. (The mainboard is different, and allows a lower resolution as max.)
Thank you all for your insight. The purchase of this monitor will give me a larger screen that will be more consistent and can be calibrated with my existing hardware.
I’ve done a bit of color work on my monitor recently and thought I would give you an update.
The CRT has some color shift at the extreme corners; I expect that to a degree.
The anti-glare coating is much more noticeable on this monitor than my ViewSonic G70fmb I use here at work.
Calibrations appear to be stable, I find that warm-up time is very long with this monitor… over an hour before I would consider calibrating or doing critical color work.
I don’t really have any gripes, and in terms of color “accuracy” I wouldn’t even know how to begin to describe to you how it performs… In my office (gray walls, but not Munsel) with daylight only (South and West) the prints from my Epson R200 match the screen in most areas, lacking only in that the printer is slightly “warm” overall. (It’s a canned profile from epson… who knows…)
(She hates my gigantic desk) If the need ever did arise to do color critical work, I would kick myself for not having a CRT.