From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A364138CC4 for ; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 16:37:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5D599E08DC; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 16:36:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.web-xs.org (mail.web-xs.org [148.251.4.204]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 256FBE08B2 for ; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 16:36:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.web-xs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E7BA6EC1F73 for ; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 18:36:55 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.web-xs.org Received: from mail.web-xs.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.web-xs.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kJB9zxL0Aq0q for ; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 18:36:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from server-1.localdomain (p54A708CF.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.167.8.207]) (Authenticated sender: lukas@der-erste-sinn.de) by mail.web-xs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E78ED6EC1F69 for ; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 18:36:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hal9000.localdomain (hal.localdomain [192.168.0.2]) by server-1.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1245E3F681 for ; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 18:36:53 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 18:36:16 +0200 From: To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Purchase and setup of monitor calibration device Message-ID: <20150329183616.1545b30e@hal9000.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20150328201116.GC5901@kern.lan> References: <20150328114155.GB5901@kern.lan> <20150328184509.4ed9c3b5@hal9000.localdomain> <20150328201116.GC5901@kern.lan> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: d12a6b8d-a095-4f1a-94bb-85d40d87f6bb X-Archives-Hash: 55247d41deaa479fe3c0a5781e923f82 Frank Steinmetzger wrote: > I thought about getting a wide-gamut display, namely a Dell with > rgb-LEDs, but in the end decided against it because its quality seems About two years ago I tested two Dell U3011. The first one had such a bad homogeneity of luminance that I sent it back instantly. The second one was a lot better but nevertheless not as good as my Acer and after some days of thinking I also sent it back. Same thing with my new Samsung monitor. The first one I received had a big problem with backlight bleeding so I contact the vendor. They exchanged the monitor and the second one was ok. It also has a little backlight bleeding on the upper left side, but it is only slightly visible when watching dark pictures in a low light environment. At normal conditions it is invisible. So I decided to stay with this one. It seems that these days the quality of a lot of products fluctuates, even in the professional domain. Of course that depends on the quality control of the manufactures. But even very expensive products (like professional camera lenses) from well-known manufactures are often concerned by quality variability. But if you buy online, you always have the option to send back a unsatisfactory product. > to fluctuate a lot. And while I do some photography, I don=E2=80=99t do it > professionally or deal with printing. A wide gamut monitor is a great thing even if you don't need it for softproofing. I shot a lot of colorful photos (e.g. from bugs, blossoms and live concerts with colored limelights). They look great on an AdobeRGB monitor but much more "boring" on a standard monitor.=20 It's the same with UHD. The sharpness is amazing. I never saw my photos in such a great quality. Everything looks so clear and realistic, almost three-dimensional. I never planned to spent so much money for a monitor, and the expense still hurts. But since I have it I never wanna give it away. :-) > > If your monitor don't have a wide gamut but have a LED backlight > > then some of the cheaper colorimeters are also not suitable because > > LEDs doesn't emit a continuous spectrum and thus can "confuse" older > > colorimeters like the Spyder2 AFAIK. >=20 > That=E2=80=99s good to know. I decided for an Eizo with a standard IPS pa= nel > and probably white LEDs. It is reported to have a good colorspace I also thought about buying an Eizo. But they are very pricy. An Eizo without wide gamut, without factory calibration and without 16bit LUT hardware calibration costs more as my Samsung with all these features. Maybe the Eizo is more reliable over the years, but who knows. > coverage, though. But as I mentioned, ideally I also want to use it > on my laptop which has a very bad TN panel with LEDs. Perhaps I could > even use it on my very old CCFL monitor which is still in very good > shape. Try out an Spider4. You can buy it as a new device for about 75=E2=82=AC. T= est the results on your monitors and when you are not satisfied, just send it back. No risk at all. You can also buy a Spyder2 at ebay. A friend of mine bought one for 20=E2=82=AC. Of course you can't send it back when it doesn't work for you = (I don't know if it works well with LED backlights).=20 -- Regards wabe