I'm in need of a new laptop under HP warranty. It will be a Spectre replacement. At the moment, I'm primarily using Photoshop and Camera Raw.
(1) Has anyone had issues with NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q design (4 GB) and Creative Cloud products?
(2) What are thoughts on 4K UHD AMOLED vs 4K UHD IPS display types for photo editing?
Moved to the Photoshop forum.
OLED has an absolute zero black level, which sounds impressive, but will give you massive trouble in the real world with actual real black levels. You simply won't be on the same page as anyone else. The black level has a huge impact on the perceived "punch" of an image, much bigger than most people realize.
In other words, it will look great on your screen, but may be absolute garbage in print or even on the web as seen by others.
So you need a calibrator, and one that can set black level. I'd recommend somewhere around 0.3 cd/m² for web work, higher for print (depending on the actual process).
4K is overrated for photo. You don't need it, and it may even be a disadvantage. Especially on a laptop where the screen is small to begin with, and so pixel density already very high. For critical work, you need to have a sense of the pixel structure at 100% view, for judging sharpness and noise. This is difficult on 4K.
4K is much more useful for vector work, text, graphic design etc.
Hello D Foss,
Thank you very much for your detailed reply! The issue with blacks on AMOLED that you so articulately described was my concern. Hardware sales reps keep pushing AMOLED even after I repeately indicated it would be used for photo editing & graphic design. Thanksfully, I am able to build the unit from scratch and they offer two 4K ISP WLED-backlit display types. One with 340 nits and another with 400 nits. I think I should go with the 400 nits for brightness.
I've worked with a 4K IPS laptop before with an extra non-4K 25" monitor and that setup was fine.
Thanks again. I very much appreciate receiving your input.
Ok, but again, 400 is much too bright and will get you in trouble if you're going to print or otherwise share files. What you see as bright white will look muddy on other screens or paper. A general consensus is that around 120 will be a good visual match to paper white in most "normal"/average conditions.
Hello again D Foss,
You typed OLED and I'm referencing AMOLED. I missed that distinction when I first read your reply. Do you still feel the blacks are a problem on AMOLED just like OLED?
I'm just assuming the "AM-" is some sort of marketing appendage...will check up.
Hi. Thanks for checking on the AMOLED blacks. I curious to hear what you discover. I suspect it will be the same visually as your mentioned for OLED even though it is a more advanced technology.
It's as I thought: AMOLED is just a subset of OLED, with the same basic characteristics, including the unrealistically deep blacks. Fine for watching movies; a disaster for production work and file sharing. Unless "tamed" through calibration.
The "Active Matrix" is required for larger size panels with lower power consumption and higher refresh rate. Both are typical selling points for laptops.
I'd go for an IPS panel - proven technology that is particularly well suited for photography.
Oh my goodness, I've been typing your name wrong all morning. I'm sorry about that D Fosse. Please accept my appologies.
Don't worry about it 😉 I've got a lot of names wrong in my time...
"Great contrast ratios" is precisely what you want to avoid.
A supreme quality inkjet print on the best possible glossy paper has a contrast ratio of maximum 300:1. That's from paper white to the deepest black. However, a standard IPS desktop monitor, out of the box, has a native contrast ratio of 1000:1 up to 1600:1 or so. Already it's too much!
This means that if your monitor white point is 120 cd/m² - normally a good visual match to paper white - your black point should be no lower than 0.4 cd/m². That's 300:1. This gives you a realistic preview on screen of what the printed file will look like. A good calibrator lets you set the black point like this.
People say "you can't match screen to print". But you can, and this is how you do it.
This is what a monitor is for, this is the holy grail: what you see is what you get.
All this applies to web work as well. Obviously there's no "paper white" on the web - but the point is that a white surface is the only common visual reference we all share and can easily relate to. It brings us all on the same page.