Recommendationn on 22" monitor for PS up to $1000

F
Posted By
feurio
Jan 17, 2004
Views
319
Replies
7
Status
Closed
Hi folks,

What do you think and know from your experience is the best monitor for graphics in PS? I’ve been through a lot of reviews but they have no reference to graphics and design.

Thank you in advance
A
Alvie
Jan 17, 2004
I used a 23" monitor for many months. I sold it recently and bought 2, 17" monitors. I could never quite justify the screen size compared to the working space of one big monitor. Now I can have all my tools plus a decent size preview on one screen and the whole of the other screen is devoted to the image. I bought Philips 170S LCD screens and butt them together. No problem with colour or eye strain… Perfect!
ABC

"feurio" wrote in message
Hi folks,

What do you think and know from your experience is the best monitor for graphics in PS? I’ve been through a lot of reviews but they have no reference to graphics and design.

Thank you in advance

S
Stephan
Jan 17, 2004
"Alvie" wrote in message
I used a 23" monitor for many months. I sold it recently and bought 2, 17" monitors. I could never quite justify the screen size compared to the working space of one big monitor. Now I can have all my tools plus a
decent
size preview on one screen and the whole of the other screen is devoted to the image. I bought Philips 170S LCD screens and butt them together. No problem with colour or eye strain… Perfect!
ABC
Of course you don’t have color problems.
You are the genius who solved all colors reproduction issues by turning off color management!
(You would solve the world’s energy problem by shutting down oil supplies)

Stephan
A
Alvie
Jan 17, 2004
"Stephan" wrote in message
Of course you don’t have color problems.
You are the genius who solved all colors reproduction issues by turning
off
color management!
(You would solve the world’s energy problem by shutting down oil supplies)
Stephan
———————————————-
That’s really nice Stephen. Thank you for your interjection and Hi-jack of the thread.

If everything worked well without colour management… Why would anyone use it?
True, some people – for reasons beyond my comprehension, think colour management is something every Adobe Photoshop user *MUST* use. The simple fact is that if you use a suitable video card, proper (Windows) profile for your monitor and you use the manufacturer supplied ICC for the printer, all things being equal, the photographs you print should look like the ones you edit. If you use my print service and don’t follow my instructions, you WILL NOT GET consistent or even representative results.

Way to many photographers I service, have doubled up on their output profiles and used some God awful colour management settings and can’t understand why their output look so different. For them, colour management is an interference to their workflow and the only way they can get anywhere near useful output is to turn off colour management. If they choose to use my lab (or any other Durst system) they only need to apply my ICC just before they cut a disk to send me and their photos will be very close to what they edited.

On the other side of the coin. People like you who claim to know so much about everything to do with Photoshop and deride others for their simpler solutions, cause digital lab operators the most grief. Somehow the phrase: "A little knowledge is dangerous" fits in there somewhere.

The real thing I have a problem with about you and your ilk, is that you seem to think I spent over 100 grand of my superannuation fund on a digital print lab and another 10 on a factory technician to get a system that will produce consistent results… And should abandon that tried and proven system just because you want to use some cocked up colour management system that suits *YOU*. It would be really nice if you actually took the time to understand that not everyone asking for help here knows as much (or little?) as you do.

Stephen, Get a perspective on things. There really is another side to everything. For you, your system may work flawlessly. For many, many others of whom a large proportion make a living from Photography and are just now moving to digital, they don’t have nor can afford the time to acquire intimate knowledge of computers and software. They are after all; Photographers first.

Maybe if this forum was divided into 3 sections.
1. *Experts*
2. Novices
3. Pirates and interjectors
It might be a more helpful place to post requests. You offer no help at all to anyone, on any subject. All you do is hi-jack threads and post derogatory remarks for your own amusement. You are: The Pest of AGP. ABC
S
Stephan
Jan 18, 2004
"Alvie" wrote in message
"Stephan" wrote in message
Of course you don’t have color problems.
You are the genius who solved all colors reproduction issues by turning
off
color management!
(You would solve the world’s energy problem by shutting down oil
supplies)
Stephan
———————————————-
That’s really nice Stephen. Thank you for your interjection and Hi-jack of the thread.

This is not an hi-jack, you see this is a NG, you post and other people reply.
You’ll see you’ll get used to it with time.
If everything worked well without colour management… Why would anyone
use
it?

Haven’t you noticed? I does not!

True, some people – for reasons beyond my comprehension, think colour management is something every Adobe Photoshop user *MUST* use.

Is it that hard to understand? Let me explain: Photoshop users, most of them, like to be able to print what they see on their screen. They like to print on their own printer for proofing AND where ever they need to print after that. Is it still beyond your comprehension now?

The simple fact is that if you use a suitable video card, proper (Windows)
profile for
your monitor and you use the manufacturer supplied ICC for the printer,
all
things being equal, the photographs you print should look like the ones
you
edit. If you use my print service and don’t follow my instructions, you
WILL
NOT GET consistent or even representative results.

From what you say here I don’t think I would like to use your services

Way to many photographers I service, have doubled up on their output profiles and used some God awful colour management settings and can’t understand why their output look so different. For them, colour management is an interference to their workflow and the only way they can get
anywhere
near useful output is to turn off colour management. If they choose to use my lab (or any other Durst system) they only need to apply my ICC just before they cut a disk to send me and their photos will be very close to what they edited.

On the other side of the coin. People like you who claim to know so much about everything to do with Photoshop and deride others for their simpler solutions, cause digital lab operators the most grief. Somehow the phrase: "A little knowledge is dangerous" fits in there somewhere.

Nice try, I do happen to be living from my photography and I did spend time on sites like the one I recommended you to make sure I learned what I need to know.
When I send someone on their way with a CD of their pictures, they never come back to tell me the prints look terrible.

The real thing I have a problem with about you and your ilk, is that you seem to think I spent over 100 grand of my superannuation fund on a
digital
print lab and another 10 on a factory technician to get a system that will produce consistent results… And should abandon that tried and proven system just because you want to use some cocked up colour management
system
that suits *YOU*. It would be really nice if you actually took the time
to
understand that not everyone asking for help here knows as much (or
little?)
as you do.

Spending lots of money makes you an expert?
There are lots of labs with very expensive machines out there producing consistent shit;
For some reason I tend to think yours is one of them

Stephen, Get a perspective on things. There really is another side to everything. For you, your system may work flawlessly. For many, many
others
of whom a large proportion make a living from Photography and are just now moving to digital, they don’t have nor can afford the time to acquire intimate knowledge of computers and software. They are after all; Photographers first.

All depends what you call photographers
Maybe if this forum was divided into 3 sections.
1. *Experts*
2. Novices
3. Pirates and interjectors
It might be a more helpful place to post requests. You offer no help at
all
to anyone, on any subject.

If you knew how to do a search you’d find out that I helped quite a bit on this group over the years
And, unlike you, I never played Expert
You appeared here on January 9 this year, 10 posts so far, and have not offered help but this:
-A oh so funny jokes like "Can some send me a couple of $100 bills so I can try a scan on them please?" on 01/10
-Or helpful posts like " Buy a legal copy."01/06 -Or: "and learn too. Wanker!" 01/15
-Or: "Get into the real world and discover the people who spend thir life supporting the software actually have a clue too. Idiot! "01/15 -Or: "RTFM perhaps?" 01/09
This is half or your "contribution" so far BTW

Is this what you call help? You call people names, RTFM them and tell them to turn off their color management!
Some help really…

All you do is hi-jack threads and post derogatory
remarks for your own amusement. You are: The Pest of AGP.

Again, not hi-jack and all I did was to point out that your *solution* to color control is absolutly, completly, wrong.

Stephan
BV
Branko Vukelic
Jan 18, 2004
Alvie wrote:

"Stephan" wrote in message
Of course you don’t have color problems.
You are the genius who solved all colors reproduction issues by turning
off
color management!
(You would solve the world’s energy problem by shutting down oil supplies)

Stephan
———————————————-
That’s really nice Stephen. Thank you for your interjection and Hi-jack of the thread.

If everything worked well without colour management… Why would anyone use it?
True, some people – for reasons beyond my comprehension, think colour management is something every Adobe Photoshop user MUST use. The simple fact is that if you use a suitable video card, proper (Windows) profile for your monitor and you use the manufacturer supplied ICC for the printer, all things being equal, the photographs you print should look like the ones you edit. If you use my print service and don’t follow my instructions, you WILL NOT GET consistent or even representative results.
Way to many photographers I service, have doubled up on their output profiles and used some God awful colour management settings and can’t understand why their output look so different. For them, colour management is an interference to their workflow and the only way they can get anywhere near useful output is to turn off colour management. If they choose to use my lab (or any other Durst system) they only need to apply my ICC just before they cut a disk to send me and their photos will be very close to what they edited.

While it is true that CM is not needed in some cases (like WWW where differences in various monitors that people use make it virtually impossible to "match" colors), it is indispensable in pre-press work. Even if you’re not a perfectionist, CM can (and will) save you a lot of time and give you at least the very basic predictability. If, OTOH, you don’t know how to use it, it can give you a lot of pain in the back…

On the other side of the coin. People like you who claim to know so much about everything to do with Photoshop and deride others for their simpler solutions, cause digital lab operators the most grief. Somehow the phrase: "A little knowledge is dangerous" fits in there somewhere.
The real thing I have a problem with about you and your ilk, is that you seem to think I spent over 100 grand of my superannuation fund on a digital print lab and another 10 on a factory technician to get a system that will produce consistent results… And should abandon that tried and proven system just because you want to use some cocked up colour management system that suits YOU. It would be really nice if you actually took the time to understand that not everyone asking for help here knows as much (or little?) as you do.

Stephen, Get a perspective on things. There really is another side to everything. For you, your system may work flawlessly. For many, many others of whom a large proportion make a living from Photography and are just now moving to digital, they don’t have nor can afford the time to acquire intimate knowledge of computers and software. They are after all; Photographers first.

Maybe if this forum was divided into 3 sections.
1. Experts
2. Novices
3. Pirates and interjectors
It might be a more helpful place to post requests. You offer no help at all to anyone, on any subject. All you do is hi-jack threads and post derogatory remarks for your own amusement. You are: The Pest of AGP. ABC

Al, I think you’re going a bit too far with this. Better give it a rest. 😉


Branko Vukelic ()
R
Rob
Jan 18, 2004
My recommendation is a dual monitor setup with a 19" Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 930SB for primary monitor,
http://www.necmitsubishi.com/products/home/ProductDetail.cfm ?product_id=250&division=MITSUBISHI
and a 19" NEC MultiSync FE990-BK for secondary monitor, http://www.necmitsubishi.com/products/home/ProductDetail.cfm ?product_id=212&division=NEC . They come in identical cases and together give you more desktop real estate than a single rediculously expensive ginormous monitor. Use the primary as the color accurate editing monitor, and the secondary to hold tools, thumbnails, and navigator previews. You don’t need a rediculously expensive secondary monitor because only the primary monitor can be profiled in windows currently. It couldn’t hurt to see what a properly configured ACDSee can do with such a setup either. Of course you would want a multi-display adapter that makes use of ATi’s Hydravision, nVidea’s nView, or Matrox’s Dualhead.

"feurio" wrote in message
Hi folks,

What do you think and know from your experience is the best monitor for graphics in PS? I’ve been through a lot of reviews but they have no reference to graphics and design.

Thank you in advance

H
Hecate
Jan 19, 2004
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 16:44:46 -0600, "Rob" wrote:

My recommendation is a dual monitor setup with a 19" Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 930SB for primary monitor,
http://www.necmitsubishi.com/products/home/ProductDetail.cfm ?product_id=250&division=MITSUBISHI
and a 19" NEC MultiSync FE990-BK for secondary monitor, http://www.necmitsubishi.com/products/home/ProductDetail.cfm ?product_id=212&division=NEC . They come in identical cases and together give you more desktop real estate than a single rediculously expensive ginormous monitor. Use the primary as the color accurate editing monitor, and the secondary to hold tools, thumbnails, and navigator previews. You don’t need a rediculously expensive secondary monitor because only the primary monitor can be profiled in windows currently. It couldn’t hurt to see what a properly configured ACDSee can do with such a setup either. Of course you would want a multi-display adapter that makes use of ATi’s Hydravision, nVidea’s nView, or Matrox’s Dualhead.
Except the colour reproduction and sharpness of Iiyama monitors using the same tubes is better. So make that two 19" Iiyama. And if you really want a single 22" go for a 22" Iiyama. 🙂



Hecate

veni, vidi, reliqui

Powered by Creative Market

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections