monitor for editing

[CatherineA]

I need a new monitor for editing and I wonder what people in this community could recommend. I know BenQ has a good reputation - or at least it did a some years ago when I was last looking into monitors. At that time some photographers used Macs but some weren't satisfied with the smaller colour gamut and bought a BenQ to address that.

Thank you

[LenR]

Hi Catherine, my choice would be Eizo. Check out their Coloredge line of monitors. They offer the best warranty (to my knowledge) of 10,000 to 30,000 hours depending on the model.

https://www.eizo.com/products/coloredge/

[Manfred M]

Len is right, Eizo make very good screens of photo editing. So do NEC and Viewsonic. These are aimed at the commercial photo editing market and are expensive.

I use a BenQ 99% AdobeRGB compliant screen that I calibrate and profile. It was around 1/2 to 1/3 of the price of the other brands and the reviews were very good for it. The only reason I went for AdobeRGB compliance was that I do a lot of printing and that colour space is important for that type of work. As sRGB is what people who post on the internet use, it is more than sufficient for most people.

You see a lot of screens that are compliant with DCI-P3 colour space; this is aimed at people who work on feature films. the P3 colour space is what theatre projectors put out. Apple (and others) are pushing this colour space.

[DanK]

Catherine,

I think there is a prior question: how do you display your images? Only online, or do you print? If you print, is your printing for casual use or more than that? IMHO, the answers to these questions determine how much it's worth spending.

Again in my opinion: the main reason to consider buying a wide gamut monitor is if you are doing a fair amount of serious printing. It all depends on what you photograph, but in my work, the proportion of material that is outside of the sRGB gamut is small, but it's not negligible. Because good printers can reproduce some colors outside of the sRGB gamut, it's worth it to me to pay for a wider-gamut monitor.

If you primarily display on computer screens, what almost all people will see is only sRGB. So for that use, the key is to get a monitor that reproduces almost all of the sRGB gamut. Not all monitors do, but lots of inexpensive ones are fine. Wider gamut monitors wouldn't be helpful, IMHO.

If you want a wider gamut monitor, the complications (and money) start adding up.

What I would want in that case is a monitor that can reproduce at almost all of the Adobe RGB color space. (Some monitors go beyond that.) These are called wide-gamut monitors, but you have to be careful, because not all "wide-gamut" monitors actually meet this specification. You have to check the specs for each one.

When I bought my wide-gamut monitor some years ago, a NEC PA271Q, there were three main contenders: Eizo and NEC, which were the premier brands, and BenQ, which was the budget upstart. At that time, my reading of reviews (I can't judge their accuracy) was that BenQ monitors were very good if you got a good one but that their quality control wasn't superb, and some people complained about the units they received. That situation may have been corrected in recent years. In the meantime, NEC was bought out by Sharp, and they have discontinued most of their wide-gamut monitors. The only one left in the PA series is 24 inches. So I think they are out of the running, which is unfortunate because they produced superb monitors.

The price difference between BenQ and Eizo is huge. Looking at 27 inch, the size I use, the BenQ SW270C is US$800 at B&H. The cheapest Eizo in that size, the EIZO ColorEdge CS2731 27" 16:9 Wide Gamut IPS Monitor, is US$1248.

I print a fair amount, and some for exhibiting, so I feel I need a good wide-gamut monitor. If I had to do it again, I would start by looking online to see whether other manufacturers are now producing monitors that are, say, 98% Adobe-RGB compliant. I'd then look online for recent reviews of a few. Just speaking personally, if the current reviews are good enough, I would probably try BenQ, but I would buy from a vendor that has a good return policy, like B&H, just in case.

[CatherineA]

Thank you very much for the replies, I really appreciate it.

I print quite a bit now, not for exhibits but for the personal pleasure. I spend hours editing so I am looking to invest in a monitor as a treat. I did get to try a BenQ SW270 last night that was connected to a laptop with an Apple M1 chip and 16GB ram. I thought that would be good enough to try out the new generative fill app in PS but the BenQ screen flickered like mad when the app was installed. The laptop screen didn't flicker but the BenQ screen did every time we tried to re-install the app. I think that Generative Fill looks like it could be great fun so I would like a screen that could handle it.

Thanks again for getting me on good ground for making a selection.

[Manfred M]

I'm not sure what the problem with your screen is, but it is likely a driver issue.

I run that Photoshop beta software on both my laptop and my desktop and have no issues with flicker; both are Windows machines. The laptop is about 18 months old and the desktop is around 8 years old. Apple has a long history of not supporting non-Apple products well and suspect that might be the issue here. Look at updating the drivers from the BenQ site...

[Round Tuit]

I fully agree with Dan's post.

If it helps, I have a BenQ SW240 which is a 24 in,16:12 monitor that is specked at 99% AdobeRGB compliant, 10 bit colour IPS screen. I bought it at Vistek downtown for approximately $500 CDN. At the time, an Eizo model with the same specification was close to $1000. I checked and Vistek still carries it at the same price.

So far I am pleased with it, have had no problem with reliability and once calibrated has a gamut that is slightly larger than AdobeRGB. I used to calibrate it every month but now only do it twice a year out of principle because the calibration does not change appreciably in that time frame.

[CatherineA]

Thanks for the suggestion, Manfred. I checked on the BenQ site and it doesn’t seem to be a driver issue. BenQ tech support hasn’t replied yet but maybe they can fix it. It was bought at the end of 2018 so maybe it’s reached the end of its lifespan. I don’t know.

[CatherineA]

Thanks Andre! That sounds like a great option and downtown Vistek is already my home away from home. And I’m glad to hear about the calibrating because for some reason I really dislike doing it.

[Manfred M]

Thanks for the suggestion, Manfred. I checked on the BenQ site and it doesn’t seem to be a driver issue. BenQ tech support hasn’t replied yet but maybe they can fix it. It was bought at the end of 2018 so maybe it’s reached the end of its lifespan. I don’t know.

The other issue could be the connection to either your laptop or the screen. Try removing these and plugging it in again. If you have a different cable, try using that to see if it helps.

[ajohnw]

I've used a Dell UP2716D for some time now. It can be hardware calibrated for both 100% of sRGB and aRGB with software they provide and a particular brand of calibrator. Software available for windows and mac. Dell UK currently show it as unavailable but they are still available from suppliers here. They have been pretty popular with photographers.

In the past I have also used other Dell monitor where they comment on sRGB coverage and then used a calibrator on them. Same with the UP2716D as I run linux but I have had good calibration results with all Dell's I have used. No failures - touch wood either. If this one fails I will just buy another providing I can.

Main reason for 27" is the taller profile than others, They did offer a 25" version but that appears to have gone.

[CatherineA]

Thank you John! I still haven’t bought a new monitor so I will that Dell to the list of what I will look into further. I have heard that people like that 27” of display so that’s something to keep in mind too. All the best

[DanK]

I also use a 27 inch. I find that is a good compromise between seeing detail and apprehending the entire image at once. But it's a matter of taste.

[ajohnw]

I've found this site very useful when choosing monitors in the past. It generally shows out of the box reviews and the results of calibration.
https://tftcentral.co.uk/category/reviews
The full reviews also include comparisons with others.

Things seem to have changed a bit since I last looked. What I see as crazy refresh rates but assume these don't have to be used as they must add a load to the graphics engine in a pc of any type.

There could be other similar sites but that is the only one I am aware of.

[Manfred M]

I've found this site very useful when choosing monitors in the past. It generally shows out of the box reviews and the results of calibration.
https://tftcentral.co.uk/category/reviews
The full reviews also include comparisons with others.

Things seem to have changed a bit since I last looked. What I see as crazy refresh rates but assume these don't have to be used as they must add a load to the graphics engine in a pc of any type.

There could be other similar sites but that is the only one I am aware of.

Like most sites dealing with screens, the main audience here is gamers. They are the ones looking for high refresh rates to make motion look smooth and tend to want "punchy" colours. The same thing goes for graphics cards, which need lots of onboard RAM and processing power to run high end graphics. If you look at a "serious" gamer, they tend to use curved screens (up to three of them) to give a "surround" view.

While the high end video editing industry has more in common with photographers than gamers, they are looking to produce results for digital cinema displays. These use light sources that are heavier in the reds and yellows than what high end photographers are looking for. The DCI-P3 colour space was developed for this market and a lot of screens use it (the whole Apple line, as an example).

For HD video streaming (even the high end stuff) that we see at home, video uses Rec 709 which is almost identical to sRGB. In the "old days" DVDs and BluRay videos used this colour space, basically to reduce storage and bandwidth requirements. I believe the 4K stuff for videos uses Rec 2020.

I am not aware of any computer hardware sites that cater to photographers, although the occasional review that can be helpful does pop up. High end photography still ends up in prints, which uses a variant of the traditional CMYK processes, so getting screens that can handle the full Adobe RGB colour space are important there.

[ajohnw]

Having looked on the site and failed to find a couple of BenQ factory calibrated monitors it does look like it is not as useful as it was. These types also similar from Dell can generally be improved via calibration, Significantly usually.

Also if the Dell I use became unavailable I would be looking at BenQ's hardware calibratable monitors.

[Manfred M]

Having looked on the site and failed to find a couple of BenQ factory calibrated monitors it does look like it is not as useful as it was. These types also similar from Dell can generally be improved via calibration, Significantly usually.

Also if the Dell I use became unavailable I would be looking at BenQ's hardware calibratable monitors.

Factory calibration means that brightness, contrast, gamma, etc. have been set in the factory. Unless one is planning to use the screen straight out of the box, this is not particularly useful. Most computer screens, straight out of the box are set to be used in an office environment, which is too bright to give good contrast and too bright for photo editing. Screens typically come set at output levels of 200 - 300 cd/ square meter, nowhere near what photo editors use; typically 70 - 120 candela per square meter. They should also be set up in a workspace where the light falling on the work area is below 70 lux (ideally below 30 lux). Most often, office light levels are set to 500 lux or higher..

Calibration does not include profiling to ensure correct colour rendering. What's more it is not calibrated / profiled to your video card.

[ajohnw]

Terminology Manfred. To me calibrating a monitor involves correcting the gamut as much as possible and also setting a suitable brightness level/ Also gamma. My experience is that monitors that state factory calibration and sRGB coverage are likely calibrate well compared with a shot in the dark on some monitor or the other. Maybe and example will help on a very cheep monitor not that I am suggesting this one as a solution for the OP
https://tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2719d.htm

Brightness as screens are often supplied is one method of makers declaring very high contrast ratios.

I also use the 2 tests on this site that has caused me to lust after something better in the pasr - it doesn't currently as all ok.
https://www.drycreekphoto.com/Learn/...nsitivity.html

[DanK]

I have a wide-gamut monitor that came with numerous factory calibrations, including sRGB and Adobe RGB, if I remember right. (I'm away from the monitor now and can't check.) Nonetheless, the instructions recommended recalibrating it.

[rpcrowe]

I am quite happy with the BENQ 27 inch monitor that I have been using for many years.

I tried gaming monitors for my photo editing and they just weren't my cup of tea.