Video Displays - the good, bad, ugly, calibration standards, content development, & enthusiast hw

So, I'm creating this thread for all of the off-topic discussion of displays and calibration, display standards, color reproduction, and the like. Inherent in this is the software used for content development, the hardware used (such as the newer graphics cards upcoming and the CPU and ram used to drive the software, and other such items). So long as it is discussing this wide-spanning topic, it is on topic (so let's have some fun).

To begin, I'll mention that the reference display settings often use 100-120cd/m2 (nits are pretty much 1nit=1cd/m2), gamma 2.2 (for older content, whereas newer content can be gamma 2.4 using BT.1886), REC.709, 6500 color temp.

I personally use CIE2000 for the color formula, Absolute Y w/ gamma for my gray scale dE handling, etc. I use HCFR and DisplayCal, primarily.

@LunaP ; @bloodhawk ; @Georgel ; @D2 Ultima ; and anyone else I'm forgetting to tag. This is to have a room for all the off-topic wonderful conversation we infected the Clevo Overclocker's Lounge with the other day.

Also, @LunaP - I realized what you want in a display is the new HDR-10 spec. The calibration standard for it is still emerging and very few displays (other than TVs) have or use it yet, but in a year or two, you'll be very happy. It has about 1000 nits for the lower end, so 10X as bright as your current displays if you calibrate them to a reference display! Giving you one more thing to look up (I didn't think about it because it is so new and calibration standards are currently being developed.

For everyone else - HDR=High Dynamic Range, which is another way of saying a specific wide gamut. For wide gamut, you have Adobe RGB, DCI-P3, and REC.2020, all of which make sRGB and REC.709 look limited. But, remember, having a wider gamut means nothing unless the content was made to use that higher gamut...

So, here is a discussion of HDR-10!
http://www.rtings.com/tv/learn/hdr10-vs-dolby-vision

 

We ain't seeing any good HDR screens for at least 3 years is my guess actually. 10-bit 4:4:4 or 12-bit and response times & input lag times low enough to actually make them usable is going to be a good while, especially making them affordable.

 

Very true, but HDR, as it is now being called, is an emerging standard. We've had Adobe RGB for awhile, but it was the setting of REC.2020 that has led to the fight over whose standard for HDR will be adopted, the Dolby Vision with 4,000 nit and 12-bit color depth, or the easier open standard of HDR-10 - 10-bit+ color depth and 1,000-4,000 nit. Very few displays even try for this standard and the calibration standards for these are still emerging, meaning it will take 2017 and 2018 to get displays that both perform at this level AND become more affordable. The response and lag times are often a concern, but I'm starting at trying to look for displays that incorporate this newer high-end of the emerging standards. Especially 12-bit color (68.71 Billion colors)...

 

So, calibration sensors are broken down into two categories: Colorimeters and spectroradiometers. Most people opt for colorimeters due to costs. But even these are further divided into reference devices and not. To give a quick category per device (to be updated as time goes on:

Colorimeters:

i1 Display Pro (X-rite; rebranded by Chromapure i1 Display III (i1D3), Calman C6)
Spyder5
CR-100 (Colorimetry Research) (reference)
Klien K-10a (reference)

Spectroradiometers/Spectrophotometer:

SpyderPrint (Spyder5Studio includes both this product and Spyder5 colorimeter)
ColorMunki Photo/Design (Colormunki Display is an i1 Display Pro with different firmware and slower time and Colormunki smile is an i1D2)
I1 Professional 2 (X-rite) (Poor low-light sensitivity)
CR-250 (Colorimetry Research) (reference)
JETI Specbos 1211 (reference meter)

There are obviously more, but I cut the list off at a top of $10,000 and did not discuss older sensors that have been supplanted by newer, more accurate editions for the consumer based models. I'll arrange by cost at a future date, but wanted to get this out there (and it is mostly in order of cost or grouped by lower and higher costs).

 

This basically means another 3k$ Hole in my pocket come the next Wacom release IF they follow that trend, they're stuck @ 150 atm but w/ the matte overlay it flipping KILLS the brightness to the point my eyes feel sore after a while... I never get that w/ my companion 2 cuz the brightness is there... Why must Faggotry exist....

 

Lmao! The benefit of matte is the loss of glare, although it lacks that pop which is what you hate. At least you now know the emerging standards coming with even brighter displays for reference calibration! One more avenue to waste money on!!!

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Yeah but putting nearly 100% matte coating is just asking to be burned alive in an oven. I removed it off my Companion 2 ( previous wacom ) and applied a 25%, pretty much still eliminated glare increased everything 15%+ and still gave me that gloss look while giving tooth for drawing on <3 I hate when people(companies) go full blown apple!!! NEVER GO FULL BLOWN APPLE!

 

But, but, but... But mindless drones purchase Apple!

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

So I set it to 1.9 and recalibrated leaving it as ( ignore lighting ) something felt diff but wasn't sure if it was just my eyes or not. I wish there were other screens I could compare with to see if its just mine, ugh. It def kicked up a bit in brightness though calibration darkened things again but this time not as badly.

 

IIRC With the latest Mobile Studio Pro they toned down the coating quite a bit.

I always use my Eizo CG as a reference, when I calibrate my other monitors.
Mostly at 6500+130+ 1xGamna+Matrix. Really helps with the blacks. Director of you hate the lower end shade clipping.

 

Did you have the device set to try to do 2.2 from the 1.9? Do you have an option to verify the calibration?

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

I'm guessing because of the lack of on screen controls, it's difficult to lock down the luminance ?
In those cases I usually prefer 3xCurve + Matrix. Helps a lot with the Gamma.
Definitely Slower, but better Gamma.

 

I have to use 3x curve on my AOC to get around 2.2 gamma as well...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

It's definitely takes it own sweet time though lol.
With my i1 Display Pro, the AUO calibrates much better than with something like the Spyder 5.
Even on my Eizo, the i1 does a much better job. but is sometimes slower.

 

Well, the i1DP has faster possible shutter speed, but the slower time has lots of factors. I like doing a 65 cube for my display (3.5-4 hours). Then the hunting for shades, the video card, the software...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Yeah I think my verification takes the longest because of the ludicrous grayscale charts I use xD
But with panels like the AUO in my Signature, backlighting different that most other panels out there. I guess that adds a lot of time as well. But if get those milky whites, I'm down for anything. Leaving it running overnight in the the dark helps a lot as well I think.
Video Card LUT , though is something I need to figure out how to properly setup.

 

Definitely the way to do it! What software have you used/do you prefer?

Have to admit, I'm trying to learn that part of the puzzle as well (video card LUT) (even with what I've learned, I've got a long way to go). But settings can also go won't with driver changes, etc...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

They dialed it up

which spyder though I have the elite + for the 5

and whats this x3 curve u guys are talking about?

@ajc9988 I didn't it pretty much looked the same in color just w/ a better brightness after the calibration , I didn't attempt to do the better grayscale one, which I will later, though atm working on a refund for this so I can get a diff one from amzon since I do plan to keep it.

 

Personally I love DisplayCAL, specially because the author is super proactive and quickly answers questions and squashes bugs.
Sometimes though CalMAN is preferred ,mainly on the desktop. I feel CalMANs charts are somewhat better. I always end up borrowing my work license :S.

Damn. From the reviews it felt like it was improved. Such a shame.
The Hardware for all the Spyders is the same, the only thing that differes is the software. That is why DisplayCAL is preferred, since it's open sources and offers total control. But can be a bit overwhelming at first.

To put it simply it's a calibration setting in DisplayCAL. Super slow, but much accurate.

 

My monitor has three gamma settings for the monitor itself to apply gamma. Or at least that is what I'm referencing. The difficulty with gamma is to make sure it appears right. You have display gamma filter, video card gamma filter, and software gamma filter that all feeds in to be the total system gamma filter. Making sure, with all the filters, that it is set right is a pain in the ass!

As bloodhawk pointed out, all the same hardware, different software (although calman changes the firmware on the i1D3 from x-rite stock and x-rite uses a different firmware on the i1D3 for the colormunki display which purposely gimps the speed, or so I've read).

I do HCFR with Ted's patterns for my TVs, played through the internal program for video. I tried Calman's free program, but the settings for the blue, although good in some ways, got the 0-75% saturation closer at the cost of 100% saturation being in left field. It also had a learning curve, but all of these software's do! BTW, if you want to take Nvidia's gamma out of the equation, turn on the iGPU and do the display calibration of display onboard settings that way. It is more bit perfect to display from the pattern generator. Then do the LUT from displaycal for Nvidia. Or just don't mess with the display settings at all and let the software do all the corrections.

I like hcfr and displaycal, both using argyll, but am considering the cheaper software for home cms from lightspace to try. Problem is they only have three types of 3D LUTs supported by it. I want one for madvr, one for resolve, and one for reshade.me, all of which displaycal has and lightspace's website even shows that displaycal is almost equal with them in most categories.



Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Weirdly enough, none of my devices have iGPU's XD
The only one that has it is the P870DM-G, but even then its entirely un-usable

Ill give HCFR a shot next, one of my colleagues mentioned it the other day as well.

 

It uses argyll for its patches and is fairly powerful once you find where it all is. Not as user friendly as displaycal our calman, but I wasn't happy with calman's step through after having learned hcfr. The big thing is going into preferences and setting that correctly first and foremost. Everything else is mostly self explanatory. You'll need to go there to switch patterns for the custom check later for whichever you want... You start with grayscale, then primary and secondary. Then, I do a 10 point saturation and prefer saturation over luminance. I use 75/75 amp/saturation for my TVs because out at 100 kinda is finicky anyway and because it wins up really accurate for every other point by focusing on that for the display CMS (for those tvs)...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Gotcha! Ill probably end up bugging you about it once i get down to setting it up

 

No problem! Once you learn where all the parts are, it gets really easy to do and you can go crazy OCD playing with it...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Comparison on lightspace webpage of itself, calman, and displaycal. Obviously take with a grain of salt, but an interesting comparison:
http://www.lightillusion.com/calibration_comparison.html

 

@ajc9988 http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/benq-pd2700q-27-inch-qhd-designer-monitor,4820-4.html

helping a friend get a monitor, they do comics, and illustrations, though they've already gone over their budget building a new PC, which D2 and I pushed them towards HWE over skylake. With that said wanted to get ur input on that monitor for them. Looking to go no higher than 350$ at this point and its on sale @ 330, and has a moveable adjustable stand as opposed to previous benq/acer models. I get 600$+ she can get a good monitor, doesn't have to be crazy but just nice.

 

Might want to check the ASUS Pro Arts. Those are pretty good but might go into the $4xx. But worth the extra $_$ over the BenQ.

 

Let me check my list, but I think that one was one on it...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Also among the ASUS Pro Arts the 279Q's are slightly better than the 278Q's.
Not sure if the nomenclature is still the same.

 

@LunaP
So, $200-400 range:
Dell Computer Ultrasharp U2415
Dell Ultra HD 4K Monitor P2415Q
BenQ 27" 2560x1440 2K QHD IPS Designer Monitor (PD2700Q)

$400-600:
https://www.amazon.com/HP-E9Q82A8-ABA-Professional-LED-Backlit/dp/B00JRYNM9G/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1484698585&sr=8-2&keywords=HP+E9Q82A8#ABA+DreamColor+Z24x+Professional
HP E9Q82A8#ABA DreamColor Z24x Professional 24' ($443.99)
BenQ 27-inch IPS Quad High Definition LED Monitor (SW2700PT) ($599)

$600-$700:
ASUS PA249Q 24.1
Dell UP2716D 27"

So, unless they want the Dell UHD 4k P2415Q, I'd say that the BenQ is a solid monitor at a decent price!

 

The SW is really good.....

See the review here: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/benq-sw2700pt-27-inch-qhd-professional-monitor,4374-6.html



@ajc9988 @bloodhawk

Any thoughts on nice ultrawides with decent performance? Looking at possibly adding a monitor around March/April and a second ultrawide would be great.

I have yet to find an actual real 10 bit ultrawide panel.

 

I would wait out on the Ultra wides for now, unless you really want one, then LG's are pretty good.
There are few due to come out in the next few months that will be much better.


I'll look up the one I bought for someone a few months back once I'm home.
But a 10bit panel will be almost impossible to expect.

 

It also had a 14-bit 3D LUT, which helps for amazing accuracy!

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

I am using a U3415w for now but I been waiting for something better for quite a bit now tbh. Good srgb coverage but lacking in argb. Not that really I cares about ARGB too much haha.

I am just so used to the way I can multitask on an ultrawide I dont really want go back to a conventional 16:9.

 

The longer you can hold out, the better. They are just now getting HDR-10 televisions on the market, meaning this year's releases could see plenty of 10-bit displays come out at a better price. HDR-10 is 1000-4000 nit, DCI P3 support (to go with potentially good Adobe RGB support), and 10-12 bit color depth. That with HDMI 2.0b (expanded support of High Dynamic Range media) or DP additional support, suggests letting them push out new models will serve you best. The new displays have to be able to meet the TV standards to generate the content, so I can give a better answer as the time gets closer (just remind me later when you are looking)...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Not hoping for HDR, that tech is at least another year out. I dont want to pay a lot of money to be a beta tester.

But thanks for the offer. Definitely, I might push it back to around September. I would be very interested in HDR once it matures and are definitively gonna be next standard.

 

HDR is already out. Let me demystify it. HDR is just another way of saying wide color gamut, but doing so for marketing (wcg uhd doesn't sound as good as uhd hdr!). The standard they adopted is rec.2020, a standard with a gamut so wide, no manufacturer can hit it! So, what HDR actually is getting at is meeting two standards: 1) Adobe RGB, and 2) DCI P3. Now, Adobe rgb has more greens, dci p3 has better reds. But, if it does hdr10, you are guaranteed a brighter screen, 10-bit color depth (1.07B colors), and great coverage on ARGB, P3, or both. Finally, if that doesn't interest you, that can potentially push down costs of displays that do not have those features!

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Thats interesting....

If lets say I want to get something in April/May, what would be a good choice if I am not limited to ultrawides? I do need screens above 27inch for that matter. I personally prefer panels at are 32inch or higher.

I am seriously interested in the LG31UM97. Thoughts guys?

 

What price range? Also, I know new TV models come out that time frame, but haven't followed display releases, but could keep an eye out. . . . If you are buying a TV, a week or two before the super bowl is when manufacturers liquidate inventory to get ready for new releases, but I haven't learned when that period is for displays...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

That display has good specs. I'd want to read a little more on it. One DP1.2, meaning you must use that for 4K@60. No hdmi2.0 support. Some users suggest flickering @4k@60, so don't know if that is a one off or indicative of the line. Love the feature of split screen ARGB/sRGB to compare images in the two standards! Huge if you play with colors in both standards and put out two versions of graphic material. Has good coverage of both ARGB and DCI P3.... But looks solid. I'll do a little more digging in that price range with roughly similar specs...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Thank you, I half wished I went for that display instead of my 3415w haha. At least I wont be spoiled by the glorius 21:9.

I dont mind having to use DP.

 

DP 1.2 is around 17.8Gb/s (15.7Gb/s after all things), hdmi 2.0 is 18Gb/s, DP1.3 is 32.4Gb/s (25.92Gb/s after encoding overhead), etc....

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

But that stuff isnt really a big deal unless you are saturating it. None of us gonna be using 120hz 4k or 8k anytime soon so we are probably fine.

 

K so BenQ it is I guess, canada adds on another 100$ so that puts it around 450$, thats why I said the 350$ price range. I really don't get why people suggest things outside of a price range after one is given. Especially when its stated theres no more budget for it, like seriously I would LOVE to hear the logic behind it.

They're not doing insane color realistic stuff, the fact it has near 100% is good enough + 1 billion colors vs the standard, that + 27" and IPS and 350 cd/m and an adjustable stand. It should be good. Asus has like 1-2 decent panels for that, that I've seen but only worth it when on sale given the matte they use. Since I don't live near them I wouldn't be able to remove it for them in person sadly.

 

Here is a really decent 27" monitor for a great price :

https://www.massdrop.com/buy/nixeus-27-pro-vue-1440p-ah-ips-led-monitor?referer=VF9M7H

@LunaP @ajc9988

 

Helps if you include a direct link, that just takes u to the main site. Had them go w/ the 2700PT since noone recommended anything else within the range I asked for.

 

That is the actual link, you need to register to see it unfortunately.

 

Yeah eff that.

Anyways googled it, seems to be quite the PoS in reference to hardware etc, + claiming 10 bit and only supports 78% of the adobe/NTSC range is pretty bad. Looks to be another korean rebrand of an Class B/C grade LG. Pretty much like Qnix = you're gonna def need a calibrating tool cuz more than likely its gonna look funky. Appreciate the attempt though.

 

Good to know. Didn't know these guys were a BS brand as well.

 

since the 2700 wans't available anymore / discontinued in Canadia opted for the http://www.benq.us/product/monitor/GW2765HT/specifications/ over the 278Q since the 278Q seems to have issues itself as well.