NEC 2490 / 2690 / Sean Reid / Luminous Landscape

[Edward Bussa]

Okay,

We've been talking about the NEC 2490 / 2690, with Andrew Rodney choosing the 2690 (comment here (http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=47729&postcount=6)).

Now Sean Reid gives the 2490 a rave review and Luminous Landscape gives it a mention.

My question is, does the Wide Gamut of the 2690 introduce challenges to the color management process (ie, is life just easier with the 2490?), or was the 2490 all that Sean had to review?

In other words, does anyone know if there was a reason Sean decided to review the 2490 over the 2690?

[Andrew Rodney]

My question is, does the Wide Gamut of the 2690 introduce challenges to the color management process (ie, is life just easier with the 2490?), or was the 2490 all that Sean had to review?

In other words, does anyone know if there was a reason Sean decided to review the 2490 over the 2690?

Different tools. Neither is easier or more difficult to deal with in terms of color management. A lot has to do with what kinds of images you hope to edit and understanding the advantages and disadvantages of the different products based on their gamut.

If you work with highly saturated imagery that falls outside of sRGB gamut (not that hard to find), there's an issue with sRGB devices in that there are colors in the documents you can't see to edit or soft proof. That's where a wide gamut display helps. But, if you work with images that basically fall into sRGB gamut, the wide gamut display can present issues in seeing subtle colors. Both deal with 24 bit images and what's important to understand is, the colorimetric differences between say R23/G78/B127 and R23/G79/B127 are father apart in a wide gamut display than a narrower gamut display. If you're working on a subtle color image, its harder to see the differences in values on a wider gamut display.

Ideally, you want both and would use them based on the types of images you are currently working on.

[Asher Kelman]

Both deal with 24 bit images and what's important to understand is, the colorimetric differences between say R23/G78/B127 and R23/G79/B127 are father apart in a wide gamut display than a narrower gamut display. If you're working on a subtle color image, its harder to see the differences in values on a wider gamut display.

Ideally, you want both and would use them based on the types of images you are currently working on.

Andrew,

What about is a wide gamut display that could be set to sRGB or any other space easily each with one's associated remapping tables?

Asher

[Andrew Rodney]

Andrew,
What about is a wide gamut display that could be set to sRGB or any other space easily each with one's associated remapping tables?


It can't really. We can't alter the chromaticity of the unit (with this technology). And you can't profile the system in that mode. Its mainly used for viewing say the web or other non ICC aware applications where a wide gamut might look butt ugly.

[Sean Reid]

Hi Ed,

I take it that you haven't read the review yet?

Cheers,

Sean

[Edward Bussa]

I haven't! But only because I don't have a subscription. I am in the market, shopping for a color management solution though - therefore the interest and the post.

[Edward Bussa]

Andrew, this makes me think that using a Wide Gamut display for everday use could be painful?

This is all news to me, and I know this is a topic that defies description with words, but are there any resources at your site or elsewhere that can help me get an understanding of this?

PS: Now that I look, your review of the NEC 2180 (http://www.ppmag.com/reviews/200602_neclcddisplay.pdf), seems to cover much of this ground already - thanks!

[Andrew Rodney]

Andrew, this makes me think that using a Wide Gamut display for everday use could be painful?

This is all news to me, and I know this is a topic that defies description with words, but are there any resources at your site or elsewhere that can help me get an understanding of this?

PS: Now that I look, your review of the NEC 2180 (http://www.ppmag.com/reviews/200602_neclcddisplay.pdf), seems to cover much of this ground already - thanks!

Its not at all painful. The best solution is an sRGB and wide gamut RGB display based on the type of images you edit. I have to say, I've seen no real issues using the wide gamut display thus far. Just received a 3090 yesterday, its HUGE and quite nice.

The 2180 isn't being made any more and NEC is moving them at some pretty aggressive pricing but for that kind of money, you can get a 3090 which is a mere 9 inches bigger. And if you think going from a 26" to a 30" doesn't seem like a lot, let me tell you its a really massive difference.

[Edward Bussa]

I noticed in the article mentioned the 2180 was selling north of $5000 - I just thought it must be selling now for much less because the article was written several years ago...

I also assumed the 2690 (and the 3090) is made with the same technology, is it not?

[Andrew Rodney]

Different technology. The 2180 is using LED backlight (three colored), the 2690 and 3090 are CCFL.

[Edward Bussa]

Because of your review i know how key it is. I'm disappointed!

Is the LED backlight a thing of the past for now or is there a professional line above the 2690, et al. ?

[Andrew Rodney]

Because of your review i know how key it is. I'm disappointed!

Is the LED backlight a thing of the past for now or is there a professional line above the 2690, et al. ?

I think the LED was very expensive and difficult to manufacturer. It might resurface, not sure. Or some other more useful technology will result someday like OLED. Right now, the NEC is the best bang for the buck I know of.

[Edward Bussa]

Well, it looks like the LED backlight has made its way into a product from a different mfg!

This monitor from HP looks like a killer monitor - several different color space profiles at the touch of a button!

From the press release "... unprecedented color fidelity through a tri-color LED backlight ..."

The dreamcolor system looks interesting as well...

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF05a/382087-382087-64283-72270-444767-3648397.html

[Ben Rubinstein]

Can I ask a dumb question? What kind of gamut did the good quality CRT's have?

[Georg R. Baumann]

Hi Ben,

here is on older article showing the Sony Artisan Gamut.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/accessories/nec-2180wg.shtml

[Michael Fontana]

Since yesterday night, I' in the market for a 2690 WUXI as well, as the main monitor, still a CRT died.

But somehow confused about the difference of the US vs Euro-versions. The Euro-versions won't allow to adjust the LUT, aka hardwarecalibration.

I don't understand that NEC has these policies; as we pay a 40%upgradet price anyway...

Seen that the gamut is wide, is it a big disadvantage?

[Andrew Rodney]

The only experience I've had is with the USA software which is awesome. Not sure you have a choice really. If you're in the US, get the US software and move on. As for outside Europe, not sure what options there are.

[Michael Fontana]

Well, Andrew,
even the software could somehow come to Europe, the Euro-displays are blocked.

That's what I found when doing some researches. It might be worth flying over... (??)

[Michael Fontana]

Andrew,

I'm sure that you know more about the difference from the 2690 WUXI to the LaCie 526. ;)

The point is, that LaCie has its main office/repair (here in Switzerland) about 1 km away from my studio, and the 526 does calibrate the hardware, meanwhile it'll be likely a adventure to get a 2690 with hardwarecalibration, here.

[Michael Fontana]

Well, after some (!!) hours of researches, I found out, that NEC has disabled in the 2008 (years) version of the 2690 WUXI the option to hardware-calibrate.

So this is different from the 2007-modell! With the 2007 one, it still was possible to get these options.

So basically NEC sells in Europe a hardware-calibratable display, but cripples it down to software-calibrating, only!! In the US, everbody gets the hardware-calibratable ones..

.....geeez; I better don't write, what I think about this company. Messing up with not less than 8 different names for a similar product, whithout specifying it.

[Nill Toulme]

I have long been baffled by NEC Europe's policies in this regard. I suppose it does lead to some extra sales of the (hardware-calibratable, software-bundled) Spectraview versions of the monitors, but it's a very strange and I suspect largely counter-productive way to go about it.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[Andrew Rodney]

So basically NEC sells in Europe a hardware-calibratable display, but cripples it down to software-calibrating, only!! In the US, everbody gets the hardware-calibratable ones

Yes but we also have 8 years of Bush (sorry, couldn’t help myself).

I'm real, real happy with the hardware calibratable unit here in the US but we both know which is the lesser of two evils.

[Nill Toulme]

You mean it's actually NEC USA that we have to blame for eight years of Bush? Dang, I'm sorely tempted to boycott them. But I love my 2090uxi too. ;-)

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[Andrew Rodney]

You mean it's actually NEC USA that we have to blame for eight years of Bush?

We can't blame NEC for that! We did that (well some did that) to ourselves....

[Michael Fontana]

Ok folks

let's hope Bush isn't involved in the LaCie 526 I'll get tomorrow.
Finally, I wanted it to be hardware-calibratable... and hope LaCie wasn't messing up the software, as the puck is the same. (Eye one)

Nil, a reeeealy bad thing about theat NEC company is, that they don't specify really that product; I' ve been messing arround nights (80 MB of files) just to figure out, which version works whith wich software and which puck..... for that time only, you should boycott that company ;)

Andrew, as you' re here:
In another forum you wrote:
"Wide gamut displays that ONLY provide the wider gamut are not good guys. What we need are displays that produce both the wide gamut (Adobe RGB (1998)) and sRGB. Why? Suppose you're editing an image that falls close to sRGB, say a bride in a wedding dress. On a wide gamut display, the colors are spread far wider making it far more difficult to see subtle colors. You have the ability to display 16.7 million colors (at least doing the math). Imagine your sRGB display is a half inflated balloon with 16.7 million dots painted on it. Now blow up the balloon 2X larger and the space between each dot grows larger. The subtle colors that may have had say a deltaE of say .8 now has a deltaE of 2 when displayed on the wide gamut unit. That makes it much harder to see subtle colors (say the difference between 150/175/200 and 150/176/200). "

Is this still correct with the 2690WUXI/LaCie as well?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand it like that:

In shots were the scene itself has a smaller gamut (like interiors with not much color) one should try to keep - with a wider gamut display - a rather °to big° contrast as later in print, that will be "equalised"?

[Andrew Rodney]

"Wide gamut displays that ONLY provide the wider gamut are not good guys. What we need are displays that produce both the wide gamut (Adobe RGB (1998)) and sRGB. Why? Suppose you're editing an image that falls close to sRGB, say a bride in a wedding dress. On a wide gamut display, the colors are spread far wider making it far more difficult to see subtle colors. You have the ability to display 16.7 million colors (at least doing the math). Imagine your sRGB display is a half inflated balloon with 16.7 million dots painted on it. Now blow up the balloon 2X larger and the space between each dot grows larger. The subtle colors that may have had say a deltaE of say .8 now has a deltaE of 2 when displayed on the wide gamut unit. That makes it much harder to see subtle colors (say the difference between 150/175/200 and 150/176/200). "



With the exception of the new (expensive) HP 2480zx, you get what you get in terms of the gamut. So ideally, you'd have both an sRGB and wide gamut (unless of course, all your work fell into one or the other group). IOW, current displays can't alter their gamut via a shift on the fly method like the HP.

[Georg R. Baumann]

Well, after some (!!) hours of researches, I found out, that NEC has disabled in the 2008 (years) version of the 2690 WUXI the option to hardware-calibrate.

So this is different from the 2007-modell! With the 2007 one, it still was possible to get these options.

So basically NEC sells in Europe a hardware-calibratable display, but cripples it down to software-calibrating, only!! In the US, everbody gets the hardware-calibratable ones..

.....geeez; I better don't write, what I think about this company. Messing up with not less than 8 different names for a similar product, whithout specifying it.


Thanks for that Inof Michael, I asked my dealer (CANCOM in Germany ) to get a statement from NEC on that, he tries to talk to them tomorrow. If that is the case as you described, I will not buy the 3090 in fact I already ordered one, and have to look again for a different 30".

Anything else that you can recommend in the 30 " class Andrew, let aside budget, just in terms of quality? It is really a confusing matter and I sure do not want to drop that amount of cash and get a sausage. From their site they would have another

- NEC spectraview 3090
- Samsung XL30
- EIZO SX3031W

... decisions decisions.... Thanks in advance for your opinion!

Of course I will let you Folks know what NEC says, if any....

[Nill Toulme]

Just to clarify what I understand to have been NEC EU's policy in the past, and assume (without evidence) still to be their policy... I believe they disable hardware calibration, and the ability to run the Spectraview calibration/profiling software, in non-Spectraview versions of the EU monitors. The Spectraview versions, in contrast, ship with the Spectraview software (and used to include a hood), and are fully hardware calibratable. (Is "calibratable" a word?)

It may be the case that there is not yet available in Europe a Spectraview version of the 3090wuxi, but that doesn't mean there won't be one, and soon.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[Michael Fontana]

Andrew,
as for the small gamut-images:
is it possible to make the palette-display - a 19' CRT - to became sRGB-type?
This would allow to verify these images as well. Both LAB-Plot in colorsync-utility looks pretty similar

Nill:

Untill spring 2008, in Europe, you could buy the WUXI, and even NEC disabled its hardware-calibration-function, it was possible to get it back, within a hidden OSD-menue.

And if some US-friends would buy a Spectraview-II-license and mail its serial to you, you could use it whithout limitations. But you couldn't buy it with a european banccard, or adress...

I went through all that stuff, including some 60pages-threads, so this is just a summarisation...

So quite some euro-photographers jumped on that, meanwhile the US-friends proofed, that not all US-citizens are bushlike ....that one is for Andrew ;) ...

Somehow, NEC got aware of that, and they changed the firmware on the european WUXI's, whithout telling a word in spring 08..... so some poeple did buy it and run into the fact, that they just bought software-calibratable displays, only.

George: AFAIR, NEC doesn't comments on that. (As far as I read..)
These info's concern the 2690WUXI, so I can't comment on the bigger one.

Nill's:
"I suppose it does lead to some extra sales of the (hardware-calibratable, software-bundled) Spectraview versions of the monitors, but it's a very strange and I suspect largely counter-productive way to go about it."

In my °unstable° printing "environnement" = no inhouse productions, but delivering the images to architects, magazines, book editor's etc (therefore sending RGB-tiffs) I found the influence of the prepress guys quite important; more important than the photographer having a artisan or not.

My goal was to get a hardware calibratable one, and even, when playing in the NEC's Kindergarten, it was impossible, my choice was relativly. easy.

[Andrew Rodney]

Andrew,
as for the small gamut-images:
is it possible to make the palette-display - a 19' CRT - to became sRGB-type?


It probably is.

[Georg R. Baumann]

I made up my mind as best as I could with the limitted knowledge I have.

I went for a two screen Solution, one being the Eizo CG 301W, the other is the Eizo HD2441W, the latter I could not resist as I got it for an unbelievable price and I can use it for blue ray as well as it provides two HDMI connections, very handy. :)

Of course hoping this to be a good decision, I am exited to see this in action.

I found the whole NEC story disturbing to say the least hence decided to not buy anything from them.

[Murray Foote]

I have an NEC 2690 (as well as an older NEC 2141SB CRT). In Australia they sell the European version but they do not sell the Spectraview version at all. When I researched the alternatives it appeared that you could buy the US Spectraview software separately but not the totally unrelated European Spectraview software. (Mind you, this was last year. I don't know if anything has changed).

I use Coloreyes who are unable to provide hardware calibration because NEC refuses to provide the necessary information (though I seem to recall seeing it as a supported monitor for hardware calibration with Eye-One Display 2). Consequently I don't have the DDC option for calibration. Coloreyes are very much down on NEC which is understandable. They are also very much down on the 2690 and I have wondered whether that is perhaps coloured by their attitude to NEC.

Regards,
Murray

[Andrew Rodney]

I use Coloreyes who are unable to provide hardware calibration because NEC refuses to provide the necessary information (though I seem to recall seeing it as a supported monitor for hardware calibration with Eye-One Display 2). Consequently I don't have the DDC option for calibration. Coloreyes are very much down on NEC which is understandable. They are also very much down on the 2690 and I have wondered whether that is perhaps coloured by their attitude to NEC.


Of course they are down on it and no, its not understandable. Too bad. There have been all kinds of display manufacturers (and other hardware manufacturers) who haven't allowed this for good reason (Barco, Sony Artisan to name just two). If you want a SpectraView, you hopefully want one because you know its capabilities along with its host software which cost far, far less and works far, far better than ColorEyes. Its like them complaining they can't use a Chevy transmission in a Ford.

Gee, I can't get my Hasselblad’s lens to fit on my Canon 5D, bad Hasselblad, bad Hasselblad. I'm really tired of hearing these ColorEyeys guys bitch and moan all the time (if it's not NEC, its Adobe and Apple who don't allow users to buy their expensive and complicated camera profiling product because in reality, those users don't need to). Sour grapes.

When I researched the alternatives it appeared that you could buy the US Spectraview software separately but not the totally unrelated European Spectraview software.

Well consider yourself somewhat lucky. At least you can get the US software which is what you want, not the European version (which NEC out sources to of all people, the company that was once in bed with ColorEyes but split from them!).

[Michael Fontana]

Gee, I can't get my Hasselblad’s lens to fit on my Canon 5D, bad Hasselblad, bad Hasselblad..

Not correct, Andrew! Bad example ;-)
You can easely adapt the Hassilenses to a EOS-mount....

BTW: do you know any possible reason for the NEC's behaviour - still in a week they lost 2 potential clients, in that not really widespread forum, here...

[Michael Fontana]

George

I had a look at the Eizo's too.
And having 2 display's is still a good idea; I went on that, again.
Good luck with' em!

So you can use the palette's display as "sRGB-display" as well...

[Andrew Rodney]

Not correct, Andrew! Bad example ;-)
You can easely adapt the Hassilenses to a EOS-mount....

BTW: do you know any possible reason for the NEC's behaviour - still in a week they lost 2 potential clients, in that not really widespread forum, here...

Easily? OK fine. There's all kinds of incompatible fits between manufacturers, hopefully you get the point.

As to NEC's behavior? I have no idea. Its a big company, like many such companies, there are policies in countries that differ. As to why they don't offer an SDK to ColorEyes? Why should they? What's in it for them? They control the entire product from start to finish. Much like Apple. Much like a lot of other companies. If their solution sucked, OK, that be an issue that would lead to loss of sales and bad buzz by reviewers. That's not the case here.

[Michael Fontana]

Yep, Andrew,

I was getting the point, just the example you named, wasn't a good one.

As for NEC I can understand not uncovering the SDK; but a company, living in a international, globalised world, meanwhile rejecting some potential customers °by default°, by castrating a product they sell in some other lands unrestricted, this looks strange to me.

If you would might have wrote, or NEC might have singnalised: ok, we have some software license or whatever issues, this might be a bit better understandable. But its just a No....

[Andrew Rodney]

As for NEC I can understand not uncovering the SDK; but a company, living in a international, globalised world, meanwhile rejecting some potential customers °by default°, by castrating a product they sell in some other lands unrestricted, this looks strange to me.

What they are doing globally, which I think is a big mistake, is not supplying the same fine software universally. I can't imagine why they'd have a European version*that's somewhat crippled. Makes no sense to me. A person actually buying and downloading a piece of software, doesn't care where the server exists. But this goes back to this silly idea you have to purchase the software on top of the hardware, then get a physical CD, instead of just downloading it.

[Michael Fontana]

Getting the LaCie 526 this morning, on a first sight, it looks good:
no dead pixels, and compared to the (died) 22' CRT, its real estate, "sharper" and details came out, that weren't to obvious on the CRT.

I noticed too, that noise is better visible; assuming that the less sharp CRT just blurred it. Some images have a bit kinda film-like grain now.

After 2 hours of playing arround, I made the first calibration, and noticed quite a big influence in using the generique profile vs the hardware-calibration:


http://imago.macbay.de/OPF/CM/LaCie_526_generique.jpg


http://imago.macbay.de/OPF/CM/LaCie-526_hardware_cal.jpg

The calibration is click and go, and runs smoothly.
The extended gamut is visible whhen surfing, etc, but doesn't disturbs to much:
only when saving a sRGB-tagged file for web it becomes really obvious in the "save for web"- windows.

[Murray Foote]

SpectraView ... software which cost[s] far, far less and works far, far better than ColorEyes.
They used to cost about the same - $170 for a Spectraview download as compared to $175 for a Coloreyes Download but I see the Spectraview download is now $99.

I'm really tired of hearing these ColorEyeys guys bitch and moan all the time (if it's not NEC, its Adobe and Apple who don't allow users to buy their expensive and complicated camera profiling product because in reality, those users don't need to).
Well, there's that but what surprised me is that they have said that the 2690 is really no good and Samsung is a much better alternative. I haven't seen that come out in the reviews I've read from places like PRAD.

If you want a SpectraView, you hopefully want one because you know its capabilities...
Well consider yourself somewhat lucky. At least you can get the US software which is what you want, not the European version (which NEC out sources to of all people, the company that was once in bed with ColorEyes but split from them!).
OK, except that I was probably wrong. I explored a bit more and find it's available to US addresses and payment only. I can probably manage that provided I ascertain or gamble it works OK on my European sourced monitor (which I think is likely but I'll ask NEC).

This is the process I went through at the time: I picked up an Xrite Pulse cheaply when they were being discontinued which included an Optix XR colorimeter. I asked XRite and an upgrade to Optix XR Pro was no longer available. I tried the European Spectraview demo but didn't feel enthused for reasons I can't remember and anyway as far as I know I can't buy it. The US Spectraview I passed by at the time because it doesn't appear to have a trial version and perhaps because my second NEC monitor doesn't appear to be supported (I'll have to ask them about that). In going for Coloreyes I would have been influenced by the Dry Creek Review though that didn't include either version of Spectraview and is now three years old. There are very few comparative ratings on the web. Conversely, I saw a monitor review a month or so ago that got much better results with the Optix XR Pro than Coloreyes and that also set me wondering whether I should still be considering US Spectraview.

Regards,
Murray

[Andrew Rodney]

I see the Spectraview download is now $99.

Its always been $99 as long as I've been paying attention.

Well, there's that but what surprised me is that they have said that the 2690 is really no good and Samsung is a much better alternative.

Where? I'd like to read that.

[Murray Foote]

Where? I'd like to read that.

Well, it's in the Coloreyes Forum which is for Coloreyes users but since it's there expressed as authoritative statements I don't see any reason not to quote them...

From my experiences with the 2690s i couldnt really recommend them.
certianly a large gamut but not very even and the screen uniformity tool only seems to make it less good. The view angle also isnt stellar for what i was expecting.
If you are going to spend that kind of coin, spend just a bit more and get the CG241 EIzo or look at the samsung line.

It has been our experience that the 2690 needs to be calibrated at a luminance of at least 150 and in some cases even 180-200 before you get good consistent results. We have also noticed pretty big white point shifts after profiling while the monitor was just sitting there.
Having tested the Samsung XL monitors right next to the 2690 we can say with a high level of confidence that there is no comparison. The Samsung blows the 2690 away. And while we will probably never be given the sdk to talk to the high bit luts in the NEC we are working with Samsung to drive their XL line.

(Note: I calibrated at 130cd/m2 using Coloreyes for a good result. My recent soft proofs have been quite close. I notice in the US Spectraview 2 manual that I may also be able to get lower by turning ColorComp (screen uniformity) down.)

Our impression of the 2690 love fest is that too many people are being seduced by certain "industry experts" who are pushing the NEC for as yet unexplained reasons. We have heard from several large commercial organizations who have been testing the NEC, or rather being forced to test the NEC, saying that it performs exactly as we have been indicating. The Spectraview software is really very limited in it's diagnostic abilities further hampering users needs to analyze the monitor. No doubt many people are happy and will remain happy with them. We see a great deal more detail in the results and have not been impressed. If we were provided with the sdk we perhaps could say more.
As for the samsung, even without the sdk it pretty much blew away everything making manual adjustments in Coloreyes. We expect to have full control of this monitor in a month or two. but again even without it I was very impressed. There will be no change required to the monitor, only a software update from us.

Regards,
Murray

[Andrew Rodney]

Well, it's in the Coloreyes Forum which is for Coloreyes users but since it's there expressed as authoritative statements I don't see any reason not to quote them...

Thanks. Kind of what I'd expect from these guys, in private forum no less. As I've seen in the past with these guys, pretty high BS factor.

Of course, if you want to use the NEC at lower luminance (below 150), you can but you'll be doing so by adjusting the LUTs (which in this case are high bit and controlled by the software so its a moot point). Most LCD's, certainly new out of the box are going to be hard pressed to physically hit less than 150cd/m2.

What they mean by "inconsistent results" of course is undefined. Of course, these guys are preaching to their own choir here while again bitching about the lack of an SDK. I love the "if we had the SDK we could say more". They can't because they don't have one but that doesn't stop them from saying things that are not backed up and basically sound like spurious comments.

[Andrew Rodney]

I notice in the US Spectraview 2 manual that I may also be able to get lower by turning ColorComp (screen uniformity) down.)

You do want it on. Its off by default. It shouldn't be but it is.

[Murray Foote]

You do want it on. Its off by default. It shouldn't be but it is.

I do have it on. I went through all the custom settings. I was just saying that if I turned it down a touch I might be able to have the luminance down a bit too but I'm not aware of print density problems from the soft proof so it's not an issue for me anyway.

Regards,
Murray

[Murray Foote]

Untill spring 2008, in Europe, you could buy the WUXI, and even NEC disabled its hardware-calibration-function, it was possible to get it back, within a hidden OSD-menue.

And if some US-friends would buy a Spectraview-II-license and mail its serial to you, you could use it whithout limitations. But you couldn't buy it with a european banccard, or adress...

I went through all that stuff, including some 60pages-threads, so this is just a summarisation...

So quite some euro-photographers jumped on that, meanwhile the US-friends proofed, that not all US-citizens are bushlike ....that one is for Andrew ;) ...

Somehow, NEC got aware of that, and they changed the firmware on the european WUXI's, whithout telling a word in spring 08..... so some poeple did buy it and run into the fact, that they just bought software-calibratable displays, only.


Michael

I read the 60-page thread when it was a 60-page thread, including explanation of the secret switch for enabling hardware calibration. I lost contact with it after the forum crashed. It's now 70 pages and I just went back and read the rest.

"Tamlin" reports that prior to the early 2008 menu change you didn't need to disable the switch anyway to use Spectraview II with a European 2690. The probable but not certain inference is that European 2690s can still use Spectraview II and that the hidden switch would have been removed only to stop potential usage of BasiCColor Spectraview 4.

You may have seen reports from other fora that make this more clear but it may be that someone was defeated by the absence of the hidden switch and did not check whether they needed it anyway.

Regards,
Murray

p.s. NEC informs me that the original Spectraview for my old 2141SB is now available as a free download.

[Michael Fontana]

Tha, Murray

As far as I remember, there has been another independent source, indicating this early 2008-block.

I couldn't wait weeks to get this cleared, the LaCie 526 is running here smoothly since monday morning. After all, its the same display, same puck, and the cal software worked fine, and consistently, I made three cals, that day.

How do you clean the glass of the Wuxi?

[Murray Foote]

Just an electrostatic cloth. That's all I've needed so far.

[Stephen Baker]

Rodney -- I've seen your comments on the NEC WQXi3090 in several forums. Now that you've lived with the display would you please offer some advice?

I was ready to order the 3090 as my primary use is photography via Photoshop (working in A-RGB from RAW) and an Epson 3800 printer. I understand the features/limitations of a wide gamut display and will be using color aware applications (CS3, Safari, Firefox). Other programs that I use, like Cubase for midi music composition, won't be a problem if colors are not accurate.

But now that I'm ready to take the plunge, I've had responses from "experts" in other forums that warn me that banding will be worse with a wide gamut display because the colors are being spread further apart, and they refer me to Karl Lang's infamous posting about the disadvantages of wide gamut monitors due to the 8-bit bottle neck on input and output. Are they just not aware of the NEC's hardware calibration, LUT etc, or is banding on A-RGB displays an issue? Also, have you had the backlight leak that some have reported?

Thanks!

[Andrew Rodney]

I'm not seeing any issues with Safari, FireFox etc. I realize that stuff like Flash Galleries may not be color managed but they appear OK on this end. I'm more concerned about applications like Lightroom and Photoshop. They of course are fine as they understand color management.

As to Karl's post, the idea is more that if you're working with very subtle color within the sRGB gamut, the colorimetric differences between say 123/45/89 and 123/46/89 are higher (higher difference in deltaE). It might be a bit more difficult to see these subtle differences on a wide gamut display. But on an sRGB display, anything outside sRGB isn't visible. So there's no free lunch here. Neither is earth shatteringly problematic. In a perfect would, you'd have both displays or, what the technology in the future might provide is a unit that can switch gamuts when you need one or the other.

[Stephen Baker]

Thanks Rodney. So I would not see increased banding (vs. a standard def display) on a properly calibrated 3090? And have you had no backlight bleed issues with yours?

[Andrew Rodney]

Thanks Rodney. So I would not see increased banding (vs. a standard def display) on a properly calibrated 3090? And have you had no backlight bleed issues with yours?

You shouldn't.

[Georg R. Baumann]

In a perfect would, you'd have both displays or, what the technology in the future might provide is a unit that can switch gamuts when you need one or the other.

If I undersatnd that correct, the Eizo CG301W is getting close to that Andrew.

The ColorEdge CG301W has a color gamut that reproduces 97% of the Adobe RGB color space so it can display most colors in a photograph taken in Adobe RGB mode and CMYK color spaces used for printing. Furthermore, it has an sRGB mode to accurately reproduce this narrower but commonly used color space.

[Andrew Rodney]

If I undersatnd that correct, the Eizo CG301W is getting close to that Andrew.

I doubt it. The only unit I know of that's close is the new HP Dreamcolor. Totally new and different technology.

[Georg R. Baumann]

Hi Andrew,

well, it was a quote from the Eizo CG 301W description, but tell me, in what way would you test this feature on accuracy once I have the monitor here?

[Andrew Rodney]

All (most?) of the wide gamut displays have an "sRGB mode" but you can't calibrate and profile over that simulation, and in the end, you can't alter the chromaticity of the units which are fixed and, depending on the unit, somewhere in the neighborhood of Adobe RGB (1998).

[Georg R. Baumann]

I promised to let you guys know what I can find out.

I was talking to Mr. Seher from NEC display solutions Europe about hardware calibration of NEC displays.

He said that the products in Europe differenciate between "Multisync" and "Spectraview", whereby the 2690wuxi for example belongs to the multisync category and can not be hardware calibrated, and writes a gradation curve to the grafic card instead, hence is not the opimum solution for anyone wanting smooth color transitions on his display.

In the US the hardware calibration is realised with the bundeled Spectraview Software.

In Europe the Software is called NEC Profiler and comes exclusively with the Spectraview range. It is an OEM product that comes from a company called Basiccolor. Profiler has the same functionality that Spectraview software provides.

He also stated that the european Spectraview panels are handselected and go through a much tighter quality management selection process.

Thats about it that I could find out, needless to say, the spectraview editions have a higher pricetag.

[Keeson Man]

hello i m planning on getting either 2490 or the 2690 ( and i m more interested in the 2690 more since i could be using it as a bigger display that i can play PS3 and watching movies ) but here is one thing that i m a little concerning is that i m also into photography and wanted to start editing some of my pictures. so i dunno should i be going for the sRGB based 2490 or the aRGB based 2690. i know it would be the perfect thing to get both 2490 and 2690 but i do not have the amount of money atm and i dunno is it worth to get both too ( i have this thought of getting both 2490 and 2690 b4 cuz i wanted the 3090 in the first place ) ( or u guys can recommend me to other monitors too and please let me know the price of that too, thanks ) i dunno what other personal reference do i need to tell u so u guys can help me out better, so please let me know ;)

i will be adding more when i can think of it and remember lol

Cheers!

KeesoN

[Nill Toulme]

Welcome to OPF Keeson!

If you are just starting to edit your pictures — or even very experienced in that — you will be perfectly happy with either of these monitors for that purpose. The larger gamut of the 2690 is an advantage for certain extremely critical color management purposes, but that's far from saying it's necessary. Most of us are editing our work on sRGB monitors, and many of us are doing it successfully on monitors that aren't nearly as good as the 2490, much less the 2690. And either of them very likely provides the most bang for your buck currently available for photo editing use.

What I can't tell you is which of these two would be better for non-photo applications like movies and games. You should check the gaming sites for reviews in that context.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[Edward Bussa]

many of us are doing it successfully on monitors that aren't nearly as good as the 2490, much less the 2690. And either of them very likely provides the most bang for your buck currently available for photo editing use.

Well said, and thank you for saying it! That kind of takes some of the pressure off that I feel in making this particular decision...

Now... what non-mac laptop has the best screen for photo-editing? :)

[Nill Toulme]

Uh... one using a 2490 or 2690 as an external? ;-)

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[Edward Bussa]

If I have my facts straight, it looks like both the Dell m1330 and Sony SR have LED backlights... I'm not sure how that's different than the LED backlights that Andrew recommends, but I'm wondering how those displays perform?

[Keeson Man]

Welcome to OPF Keeson!

If you are just starting to edit your pictures — or even very experienced in that — you will be perfectly happy with either of these monitors for that purpose. The larger gamut of the 2690 is an advantage for certain extremely critical color management purposes, but that's far from saying it's necessary. Most of us are editing our work on sRGB monitors, and many of us are doing it successfully on monitors that aren't nearly as good as the 2490, much less the 2690. And either of them very likely provides the most bang for your buck currently available for photo editing use.

What I can't tell you is which of these two would be better for non-photo applications like movies and games. You should check the gaming sites for reviews in that context.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

ah damn! u found out that i m new to the forum! lol
anywayz thanks for the welcome =D

umm so does it really matter if it is sRGB or aRGB? for one reason that i would be liking the 2490 cuz it sRGB which most ppl are using for editing... and for the 2690 is that itz bigger and itz aRGB so i suppose when i do some gaming it would be nicer ( not saying itz gonna be bad for editing and most ppl tend to use sRGB over aRGB when editing ) so i m just a little lost lol

but thank you for ur info!

Cheers!

KeesoN

[Georg R. Baumann]

May be this clarifies your question re adobeRGB and sRGB a little better:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sRGB-AdobeRGB1998.htm

[Nill Toulme]

Adobe RGB will not be better for gaming. It's only better for some — some, mind you, not necessarily all — photo editing and other extremely color critical applications.

For gaming and movies you'll want (I think... this is way outside my bailiwick) to pay more attention to response times, ghosting, etc.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[Rod Witten]

Nill, could you elaborate re the photo editing as it applies to converting raw color images to black and white. In selecting a monitor, does the % of Adobe coverage matter in achieving the best B/W conversion. This question excludes the issue of whether or not the output device can utilize the image viewed on the monitor.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Nill, could you elaborate re the photo editing as it applies to converting raw color images to black and white. In selecting a monitor, does the % of Adobe coverage matter in achieving the best B/W conversion. This question excludes the issue of whether or not the output device can utilize the image viewed on the monitor.

Hi Rod, welcome to OPF.

The % Adobe RGB coverage (in principle) only affects the color accuracy. For black and white the most important thing is to get one's Gamma adjustment absolutely correct for each color channel. I like the gamma 2.2 chart from this site (http://www.aim-dtp.net/aim/evaluation/gamma_space/index.htm), to quickly judge the gamma calibration accuracy.

Correct per channel gamma will avoid false color casts in RGB black and white images, but it's probably even more important to get the output profile for a printer 100% correct, unless you only target on screen display. Viewing conditions will mainly determine your needs/possibilities for a good blackpoint, lighter tones are usually less of an issue for black and white alone.

Bart

[Nill Toulme]

I can't imagine why it would, but perhaps Andrew can. Andrew?

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[Andrew Rodney]

I can't imagine why it would, but perhaps Andrew can. Andrew?

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Sorry, coming into this late (and on location), what would?

As for as Timo, most in the CM community (and more than a few Adobe Engineers) think his ideas are on the fringe.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

As for as Timo, most in the CM community (and more than a few Adobe Engineers) think his ideas are on the fringe.

Timo's ideas, or should I say 'religious' beliefs, are on the fringe (and some are even over the edge).
Nevertheless, his chart is most useful and deserves credit.

Bart

[Nill Toulme]

Sorry, coming into this late (and on location), what would?
...

"In selecting a monitor, does the % of Adobe coverage matter in achieving the best B/W conversion."

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[Andrew Rodney]

"In selecting a monitor, does the % of Adobe coverage matter in achieving the best B/W conversion."
www.toulme.net

No, how could it?

[Nill Toulme]

My thought exactly (but I'm often wrong). ;-)

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[Rod Witten]

Thanks for the reponses thus far. My concern is that using a monitor with less Adobe coverage would limit the range of tonal variations seen on screen vs a monitor with greater coverage. While it may only result in a subtle difference it could be a factor in the final output (given that the output device can reproduce the coverage)

[Nicolas Claris]

Hi Andrew
do you think that the Eye One Display 2 would calibrate correctly the NEC SpectraView 3090 together with the SpectraView Profiler 4.1.9?
They both do calibrate the hardware of my NEC 2180UX

Thanks for your reply :-)

[Andrew Rodney]

Hi Andrew
do you think that the Eye One Display 2 would calibrate correctly the NEC SpectraView 3090 together with the SpectraView Profiler 4.1.9?


The Colorimeter for sure. I would suspect the software too although it sounds like you're using the European version of the software? I'm not (I'm using the US) which does work fine but have no experience with that option.

[Andrew Rodney]

Thanks for the reponses thus far. My concern is that using a monitor with less Adobe coverage would limit the range of tonal variations seen on screen vs a monitor with greater coverage. While it may only result in a subtle difference it could be a factor in the final output (given that the output device can reproduce the coverage)

There's the viewing issue if you will and the conversions which are separate.

Yes, a wide gamut display will visually produce higher delta's between smaller differences of color (or tone) than a smaller gamut display as I think I described. The output device is totally separate.

[Nicolas Claris]

The Colorimeter for sure. I would suspect the software too although it sounds like you're using the European version of the software? I'm not (I'm using the US) which does work fine but have no experience with that option.

I don't know from which continent it comes from, I got it on NEC website:
http://www.spectraview.nec-display-solutions.com/license/?oemId=3&language=en
(need to log to have access to download area…)
it says:
SpectraView Profiler v4.1.9
... new calibration algorithm (CIECAM02),
....automatic hardware adjustment of JUST viewing booth via software,
....Universal Application (Mac with Intel processors support)
....Colorvision Spyder 3

SW windows and settings look really identical than Basicolor that I bought a few months ago…

[Andrew Rodney]

I don't know from which continent it comes from, I got it on NEC website:
http://www.spectraview.nec-display-solutions.com/license/?oemId=3&language=en
(need to log to have access to download area…)
it says:


SW windows and settings look really identical than Basicolor that I bought a few months ago…

That's not the US software. That is called SpectraView II and the current version is 1.0.42.

[Bob Israel]

I've read through this entire thread and probably settled on the 2490 even though most of what I do is photo editing. However, I already own the Spyder2 Pro calibration tool and software. While the SV II that comes with the 2490 might overall offer more capability for this monitor, will the Spyder2 calibrate this monitor?

[Nill Toulme]

Yes it will, and the "ColorVision/Datacolor Spyder 2" is also listed as a supported sensor for the Spectraview II software, meaning you could decide to buy that software separately (which I highly recommend) and use it with your existing sensor.

Nill

[Bob Israel]

Very good and thanks for the quick response. In other words, I can get the Spectraview II software separately, use my Spyder 2 with it and save a couple of hundred bucks!

[Bob Israel]

Yes it will, and the "ColorVision/Datacolor Spyder 2" is also listed as a supported sensor for the Spectraview II software, meaning you could decide to buy that software separately (which I highly recommend) and use it with your existing sensor.

Nill

By the way, is the Spectraview II software availabe at the NEC site?

[Nill Toulme]

Yes I believe so, and I saw a message just this week saying it had started shipping again. It's excellent.

Nill

[Murray Foote]

I've read through this entire thread and probably settled on the 2490 even though most of what I do is photo editing. However, I already own the Spyder2 Pro calibration tool and software. While the SV II that comes with the 2490 might overall offer more capability for this monitor, will the Spyder2 calibrate this monitor?
It will though the Eye-One Display 2 may be more accurate. In case you change your mind, though, NEC warn that the Spyder2 does not have a large enough gamut to accurately profile the 2690.

Regards,
Murray

[Bill Graham]

I just received the 2690 today, set it up and calibrated to 140cd/m2, native color temp with the i1d2 using the i1Match software. Even with Color Comp on I'm noticing a significant lightening of the corners when displaying a black image in a darkened room, pretty comparable to the Viewsonic VP930b I replaced with the 2690.

Is this normal/average/run-of-the-mill for this display? Or should I return it and ask for another?

Or should I wait for the SVII software and calibrate again? Will calibrating with the SVII help? Or any other suggestions?


TIA for your advice,
Bill

[Murray Foote]

Hi Bill

Maybe you need to back off on the ColorComp somewhat. I find the screen display very even on mine, which is suggested by the PRAD review: http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/review/2007/review-nec-lcd2690wuxi-part9.html

I don't think calibrating will make any difference for that.

Regards,
Murray

[Bill Graham]

Hi Bill

Maybe you need to back off on the ColorComp somewhat. I find the screen display very even on mine, which is suggested by the PRAD review: http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/review/2007/review-nec-lcd2690wuxi-part9.html

I don't think calibrating will make any difference for that.

Regards,
Murray

Murray,

Thanks for the suggestion. I played around with colorcomp for quite a while today and it didn't seem to make any significant difference in what I'm seeing. Tanks for the link to the review, I'm seeing much more variation in brightness than they reported. I'm even seeing it with normal task lighting using a black image for the desktop.

I started a new thread here: http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=57544#post57544 with some info on the settings I've come up with and since this is more of a technical problem and not really relevant to this discussion.

Thanx,
Bill

[George Koulomzin]

... If you're working on a subtle color image, its harder to see the differences in values on a wider gamut display. ..

I think it just the other way around. In sRGB, the deltaE2000 between the colors you give as an example is .434, while in aRGB, it is .515. This means you have a better chance to see the difference between two colors on a wider gamut display.

Of course, if your ultimate output is into sRGB, the wide gamut display might be deceiving....

[Mike Shimwell]

I think it just the other way around. In sRGB, the deltaE2000 between the colors you give as an example is .434, while in aRGB, it is .515. This means you have a better chance to see the difference between two colors on a wider gamut display.

Of course, if your ultimate output is into sRGB, the wide gamut display might be deceiving....


Hi George, in case Andrew isn't around, I think the point that he was making is that a large gamut display may tend to swamp vry subtle changes in colour because the smallest differences it can display are bigger than the changes you are trying to make. Hence you cannot see the small changes.

Mike

[George Koulomzin]

fair enough....

[Edward Bussa]

I've been pondering this one since the comment was made.

The interpretation I've settled on is this: In the software used to manipulate your image (ie, lightroom), the adjustments are made via some predefined scale, such as 1 to 100. This divides your gamut into 100 equal parts. This means that on a wide gamut monitor, each division covers "more ground" or "color" or "gamut". Therefore, you may find yourself in a situation where the adjustment you want is in between two adjustment increment values such 76 & 77.

I know I have ran into adjustment scale increments in lightroom that border on being too wide for my tastes even on my RGB gamut monitor.

[George Koulomzin]

Another way of saying this is that too many distinguishable colors are quantized into the same 8 bit value (in the case of 24 bit color). Since a device can display only one color for each of the 256 possible values (presumably some middle color), the color distance between two adjacent values (say 127 and 128) might be perceptible. Color would then no longer appear to be continuous.

We need 16 bit paths to our monitors, printers, etc....

Until we get them, would it be correct to say one should work in the smallest color space which will fit the gamut of the image?


I've been pondering this one since the comment was made.

...Therefore, you may find yourself in a situation where the adjustment you want is in between two adjustment increment values such 76 & 77. ...

[Edward Bussa]

I'm starting to rethink this and am questioning if I can reason out what the issue really is.

The adjustments in lightroom can take you from R0 to R255 (using a scale from -100 to +100), right? A value of R128 should look identical on both the standard gamut monitor and the wide gamut monitor as should R129 and R130, etc. Only when you get into the extreme settings like R251 does the image potentially start to look and behave different, right?

On the standard gamut monitor, the color will "stick" at, say, R245 and fail to display any setting beyond that because R245 is at the limit of its gamut. So, only when you crank the Red up to, say, R251 do you begin to see a difference in the way the monitors behave, right?

In other words, the software makes adjustments from NO RED (R0) to ALL RED (R255). This is an absolute thing, not reliant on what colorspace your monitor or your image are using, right? The colorspace just determines what color values your image can store or your monitor can display, no?

I'm not sure if this is true or if the software actually adjusts what the R values mean (R0, R128, R255) based on the color gamut of the image... ?

[George Koulomzin]

I'm starting to rethink this and am questioning if I can reason out what the issue really is.

The adjustments in lightroom can take you from R0 to R255 (using a scale from -100 to +100), right? A value of R128 should look identical on both the standard gamut monitor and the wide gamut monitor as should R129 and R130, etc. Only when you get into the extreme settings like R251 does the image potentially start to look and behave different, right?

In other words, the software makes adjustments from NO RED (R0) to ALL RED (R255). This is an absolute thing, not reliant on what colorspace your monitor or your image are using, right? The colorspace just determines what color values your image can store or your monitor can display, no?

I'm not sure if this is true or if the software actually adjusts what the R values mean (R0, R128, R255) based on the color gamut of the image... ?


First off, I am not familiar with light room, and I presume that the +- 100 comes from lightroom. The actual underlying values for 8 bit color would be 0-255.

I think your original intuition was correct. Here's another way of saying it. Suppose you have a color space that can represent all color of interest to you. Think of aRGB as a subset of that, and sRGB as a subset of aRGB. If you are limited to 8 bit color (and for simplicity lets stick to just the red axis) the reds must be represented by values in the range 0-255. Stretch a rubber band across the sRGB space, mark it off into 256 equal segments, and the all the colors in any one segement must be represented by the same number. Now take that rubber band and stretch it out further so that it spans all of the aRGB space. As you do so, you will note that a) the marks on your rubber band move, and that the distance between the marks increases. Thus the color represented by 127, for example, in one space is not the same as the color represented by 127 in the other space, and furthermore, a larger range of actual colors is lumped in to the same 127 value.
Look at http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sRGB-AdobeRGB1998.htm; this site also addresses the question I had earlier about whether one should operate in the smallest color space your image will fit into....
Also, look at the CIE 1931 xy Chromaticity diagram on http://www.normankoren.com/color_management.html#Sci_nutshell; this diagram will help when you visualize the rubber band stretching across a larger space (albeit not on the red axis).

Hope this helps...

[Andrew Rodney]

The adjustments in lightroom can take you from R0 to R255 (using a scale from -100 to +100), right? A value of R128 should look identical on both the standard gamut monitor and the wide gamut monitor as should R129 and R130, etc. Only when you get into the extreme settings like R251 does the image potentially start to look and behave different, right?

The underlying color space used in LR and ACR is ProPhoto primaries with a linear tone curve (1.0). The percentages are a conversion of this underlying processing space mapped to an sRGB tone curve (2.2). In a way, the numbers here and in other app’s are kind of meaningless since they don’t actually represent the data you’re working with. Does a liter of gas tell you anything more about the gas itself than a gallon of gas? In CMYK, you’re still dealing with 0-255 8-bit scale while the numbers you see are 0-100% for ink in what could be a “16-bit” document. Another disconnect.

As to color spaces, the effect of larger spaces with the same encoding values, this might help:
http://www.ppmag.com/reviews/200509_rodneycm.pdf
http://www.ppmag.com/reviews/200510_rodneycm.pdf

[Edward Bussa]

Thanks for the timely links.

So LR and ACR consistently work in the ProPhoto color space. So all the adjustments scales span that underlying wide gamut "process space", at least for raw files.

From the articles you linked Rodney, I learned that the ultimate number of color aliases (adjustment levels) you have to work with is based on the bit-depth of the file. I had not realized the implications and/or differences between color space and file bit-depth. Thank you.

Now my Nikon D300 can capture to 14-bit files. I'm not sure how this plays into the adjustment scheme in LR. Is LR aware of the bit-depth of my raw file?

When I make an adjustment in LR, it renders the change to my screen. Since LR is always working in the ProPhoto color/processing space, the only difference the gamut on my monitor would make is whether or not I can see the colors being rendered.

But I think this might be where the sRGB tone curve comes into play. This is being introduced by my monitors color profile. The rendering from LR is being mapped to my monitors gamut, right? Now I begin to see how a wide gamut monitor can cause an adjustment to be too coarse. Essentially, the tone curve from a wide gamut monitor's profile is "longer", correct?

[Michael Fontana]

Edward

why do you profile your display into sRGB?

Coming from a huge gamut - actually it's in LR Melissa RGB which is a derivate from PPRGB - if you have a wide gamut display, it doesn't makes sense to reduce it to sRGB if you want to edit your photos.

[Edward Bussa]

Michael, thank you for your concern! Contrary to my misleading statemnts ;) my monitor actually is an RGB gamut monitor (2490WUXi)...