What a difference a decent monitor makes!

Discussion in 'Photoshop' started by Gary Edstrom, Nov 2, 2008.

  1. Gary Edstrom

    Gary Edstrom Guest

    What a difference a decent monitor makes!

    I am currently taking a class in Photoshop at our local community
    college. One of our recent homework assignments was to restore an image
    of a torn and stained B&W picture from the 1940's. I did the work at
    home and got the picture to a point that I thought was pretty good. What
    a surprise I was in for when I loaded it onto the display at school!
    There were a number of areas that I had missed cloning while I was at
    home. In addition, some of the cloning I did looked terrible!

    The monitor I was using at home belongs to the company I work for. It
    is just a simple low-end flat screen monitor and doesn't have a large
    contrast range. I decided to invest in a higher end monitor of my own.
    Yesterday, I purchased an LG monitor. What a difference!

    Another thing the monitor showed up was how really bad some of the
    pictures I took at ASA 400 with my Canon SD500 P&S 'Backup' camera were.
    I knew that the camera did not perform as well at ASA 400, even when
    viewed on my old monitor. But viewing those pictures on the new monitor
    really made them look bad! It just so happened that I had never printed
    out any of those ASA 400 pictures, so I never knew how bad they really
    were until now.

    Gary
     
    Gary Edstrom, Nov 2, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Gary Edstrom

    Gary Edstrom Guest

    Southern California...Sorry, that's as specific as i am going to get.

    Gary
     
    Gary Edstrom, Nov 2, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Gary Edstrom

    D-Mac Guest

    Probably the most significant thing you'll discover with a "decent monitor"
    is that all those printers you had a problem getting the colours right with
    all of a sudden start printing properly!

    I use Backlit Samsung XL series monitors. Before that I used a variety of
    different brands and thought the colour balance tool I used was good enough.
    It was but a $2000 monitor is not just good enough, it is the purpose of it
    all!.
     
    D-Mac, Nov 2, 2008
    #3
  4. Gary Edstrom

    pshaw Guest

    you may or may not want to try an eizo cg monitor ...once you've used
    one its hard to go back to a plain monitor :) ... the new 31" is a
    mere ...$5300 or so :) ...

    oh yes ...then a color calibrated light box so you can work in the
    evenings and know your colors will still be accurate ...

    steve
     
    pshaw, Nov 5, 2008
    #4
  5. Gary Edstrom

    Gary Edstrom Guest

    It is quite obvious that you and I have VERY different ideas of what
    constitutes a 'decent monitor'. I am NOT in the business of image
    processing or manipulation. I have never sold a picture in my life nor
    have I ever even exhibited my pictures. I am doing it simply for my own
    enjoyment with my own pictures. I don't need a $2,000-5,000 monitor!

    To me, a decent monitor is something that performs better than the one I
    had and this is MOST DEFINITELY in that category, even though it 'ONLY'
    cost $500.00.

    I have no need to impress others with a monitor I don't need and can't
    afford. I only need to please myself.

    Gary
     
    Gary Edstrom, Nov 5, 2008
    #5
  6. Gary Edstrom

    Rob Guest

    Isn't it the bigger the boys the bigger the toys!
     
    Rob, Nov 6, 2008
    #6
  7. Gary Edstrom

    Jurgen Guest

    The interesting part of all you say Mike is the way curvemiester works to
    disprove you.

    If I am to read what you say accurately, you are suggesting I can use any
    old monitor and as long as the photo I edit has white, black and gray in
    it, I'll get accurate colour balance just by using curvemeister to click
    on those three colours.

    You and I both know that is a load of bunkum. Without an accurate colour
    profile for a monitor, no colour correction software will be accurate. I
    agree that relatively low cost, non backlit, LCD screens can be profiled
    and coaxed into producing surprisingly good colour but without a display
    having an accurate profile, Photoshop cannot use a workspace with any
    degree of reliability, you won't get accurate colour output or even save
    an edited photo with accurate colour unless your monitor has a functional
    and accurate profile associated with it.

    This is where High end monitors like Samsung and EIZO come into their
    own. Out of the box they will all produce an accurate rendition of sRGB
    using the Photoshop sRGB profile. Something cheap monitors won't do.
     
    Jurgen, Nov 8, 2008
    #7
  8. Gary Edstrom

    Jurgen Guest


    I have long used black and white to obtain a correct color balance. As
    far back as 1982 when I set up a video color assesment system to color
    balance for Cibachrome prints I've used the concept of "black
    balance" (also white) as a primary source for starting accurate color
    balance.

    I have never read anything from the author you mention but color by
    numbers is a well documented method of color assesment being re-birthed
    now that most photo editing is done with computers. In my opinion digital
    assesment still falls short of analogue but that is only my opinion.

    What I read in your post was your (seemingly) total disregard for needing
    a correct profile for a monitor in order for color managed programs like
    Photoshop to work with. They need a working space. That working space
    needs to be correct or the purpose of using a color managed program is
    lost.

    There is little point in creating an ICC or ICM profile for a monochrome
    monitor if obtaining correct color balance is as easy as you make it out
    to be.

    Once, when someone suggested that turning off color management in PS may
    help obtain more correctly balanced prints from an uncalibrated monitor,
    you were quite forceful in pushing your opinion that such advise was
    wrong and the person concerned would be better off getting a decent
    monitor and having it profiled.

    Your statement now would seem to contridict your stance of a few years
    ago. Curvemeister - like PS itself, will not produce color corect results
    if Photoshop's workspace is not tied to a profile that renders color
    correct images. Follow that on and cheap (as in under 750:1 contrast
    ratio - non dynamic measurement) LCD screens will not allow that to
    happen any more than an aging CRT screen with compressed dynamic range
    will.

    Put simply, consumer class monitors are an extremely poor choice for a
    photographer who has already invested considerably in camera gear and
    software.

    Seriously Mike, Can you offer any sensible reason for buying $2000 worth
    of computer and software to edit photos from (usually) equal cost cameras
    and putting up with pretty much any monitor they give you? If someone can
    afford to spend $4000 on their hobby, what will an extra 20% to get the
    whole system right really matter?

    J.
     
    Jurgen, Nov 9, 2008
    #8
  9. So what monitors would you (and others) recommend for a serious amateur
    photographer?

    I bought a Viewsonic VP201 (1600 x 1200) some four years ago for office
    use, keeping a nice, but smaller, CTX crt for my photography (because
    I'd been told that crts were better than tfts for graphics work).

    However the quality of the Viewsonic seemed so much better that I moved
    my photography onto it.

    It's now getting a bit old - the bottom left is losing contrast, and I
    need to think of something else. What would you choose?

    Mike
     
    Michael J Davis, Nov 21, 2008
    #9
  10. Gary Edstrom

    Dave Guest

    'kay, this is twit is not available.
    Don't waist your time on a reply.
     
    Dave, Nov 21, 2008
    #10
  11. So why waste your time with a reply? Especially as you didn't seem to
    read what it said; the reply-to address *is* valid.

    Why do you have a problem with my reserving the right to change my
    reply-to address? Have you never had your address captured by spammers?

    In any case, I thought newsgroup postings are best answered by newsgroup
    replies.

    Mike
    --
    Michael J Davis

    <><
    The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.
    Dorethea Lange
    <><
     
    Michael J Davis, Nov 21, 2008
    #11
  12. Gary Edstrom

    Jurgen Guest

    View Sonic make some unique monitors. Almost all of them have Samsung
    screens in them. Hopefully this will tell you something.
     
    Jurgen, Nov 21, 2008
    #12
  13. I think it would, were it a CRT! ;-)
    I'm still v. happy with my Videosonic, but just wondered what's best in
    the middle range.

    Mike
     
    Michael J Davis, Nov 24, 2008
    #13
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.