What should I look for in a new monitor?

[vleo512]

What should I look for in a new monitor for Photoshop CC and Lightroom Classic?

Several MIR submisssions have not received a merit recently and the main reason given in the critiques is because of banding.  I'm not seeing any banding on my monitor, and I'm wondering if it has something to do with my processing workflow or my screen. 

I usually do some basic edits in Lightroom, then switch to Photoshop if I need to do more, and then save as a tif docu,emt.  I go back to Lightroom Classic to export a JPG for MIR.  I'm on a Dell workstation with the i9 Intel processor.

I calibrate my monitor, but am looking to purchase a new one.   What should I look for?

[John Waller]

What is your budget?

Which monitor do you currently have and what do you normally calibrate it with?

Can you upload examples of your work where banding is allegedly present but you cannot see it?

[Trevor.Dennis]

Paging @D Fosse 

[D Fosse]

Banding happens because of insufficient bit depth. It sounds like you're working in 8 bits?

In addition, jpeg compression can introduce color banding on its own, because the color component is more aggressively compressed than the luminance component. It's not usually a problem as long as you keep working in 16 bits up until the jpeg save, but it can still show in smooth gradients, especially synthetic gradients created in Photoshop.

As for the monitor, you want one with even color and brightness across the entire screen, from corner to corner. Over the years I've been pretty shocked at how even quite costly monitors can look like this:

This is something they can get away with because there's no parameter for it in the spec sheet.

You also want a 10 bit capable monitor with true hardware calibration. This means the calibration is performed internally in the monitor's own processor, in high bit depth, securing an absolute even output to a 10 bit panel. This eliminates any on-screen banding.

For photography, you don't need 4K. It can even be a disadvantage, because you really need to get a feel for the pixel structure of the image at 100% view. You need this to properly assess sharpness and noise. In my experience, the ideal size and resolution is 27 inch at 2560 x 1440 pixels. You can go down to 24 inch at 1920 x 1200 if you have a secondary screen.

4K is more of an advantage with vector data and text, in apps like Illustrator and InDesign.

The only really safe bet is still Eizo. People say they're expensive, but that's a misunderstanding. It's the other brands that are cheap. They compete by price, and cutting corners to cut the price is common (as per the photo above). With Eizo you get exactly what you pay for. NEC also used to make high quality monitors, but they seem to have discontinued their Spectraview line.

The Eizo CS series is the best value for money on the market. The CS 2731 is about $1300, the CS 2400 under $1000. They are both excellent. Just make sure you get the edition that has ColorNavigator software included. It supports all calibration sensors available.

[davescm]

I support everything D Fosse says above. I have two CS2731 monitors here and they are excellent. I've just checked, both now have over 13,000 hours on them. In the UK they also came with a 5 year warranty.

Dave

[D Fosse]

Yes, I have a CG 2730 at home.  At work I still use a pair of 24 inchers (CG 246 and CX 240*), both bought in 2013 and still performing as new! There's not a dead pixel on them and the calibration is dead accurate. The two screens are absolutely indistinguishable, even when I swap profiles just to check.

I don't know the hours, but they have been on for 8 hours a workday for those 11 years... the quality of these monitors is amazing.

(*the CX series was a stripped down version of the CGs, without the built in sensor and video features).

[Trevor.Dennis]

Dag, how would a gaming monitor fair for content creation?  Only Techspot has a review of 4K monitors today.

[D Fosse]

@Trevor.Dennis 

To be honest, I would not recommend 4K for photography. You need to get a feel for the pixel structure at 100% view, for sharpness and noise. I'm still convinced 2560 x 1440 at 27" is close to ideal.

Other than that, OLED is probably great for video and gaming with the deep blacks and high contrast.

But if what you do has any reference to an old-fashioned print on paper in any way - that it could be printed even if it isn't - then the contrast ratio is just too high, HDR or no HDR.

Even in a traditional monitor the contrast ratio is too high. That's why you see the often repeated notion that "screen and print can never match". They can, but you need to dial up those blacks a bit, and put a cap on the whites. In other words, reduce the contrast ratio.

[davescm]

I just read that review and from an imaging point of view it has the same omissions as many others. No tests of uniformity, no tests of how functions such as local dimming impact screen calibration, only one mentions hardware calibration I.e. the ability to upload calibration LUT to the monitor. The focus is on different requirements for gaming. When preparing images for print, super fast refresh and eye burning brightness is not important - the ability to match paper white and have accurate colour corner to corner is.

Dave

Edit: I see Dag replied while I was typing. We are saying similar things.

[D Fosse]

Yeah, I agree with everything Dave says, but for once I thought I should emphasize something else than I usually do 😉

[Lumigraphics]

I can't afford a pair of $1300 displays, sadly. But I did get an insane deal on a pair of 24" LG UltraFine, $20 each at Goodwill. They both work perfectly and are a huge step up from my older Dell UltraSharp models. 4K, Display P3, no dead pixels, and good uniform brightness as far as I can tell. Maybe someday I'll have a loaded Mac Studio and some pricey monitors and a big Thunderbolt RAID box... oh boy. Not today, Satan. 😕

[D Fosse]

Fair enough, we all have budgets and living costs. I've bought all my equipment as I had the chance to do it. Next month it might not be possible.

My point here has been about priorities. At $1300, yes, a CS2731 is in the upper end of monitors. But I see people everywhere with MBPs costing three times that. For some reason, nobody seems to think that's excessive. An iPhone costs twice that. And yet they all seem to have one.

The monitor is the most critical component in a computer system - at least it is for us who make images for a living. It's the one single component that has a direct impact on the quality of your work. I would argue that it makes more sense to get a good monitor and cut the budget on the computer.

[Conrad C]

The reason I had no problem putting a little more money into the display (NEC SpectraView) is that it’s sort of like buying a camera lens: Not only is it a critical component, but it has the potential to outlast almost anything else in your system, certainly your computer. So it can justify a higher budget, because you won’t have to replace it as often as other things. Both of the displays on my desk are over 10 years old, I might continue using the SpectraView until it starts to fail calibration some day.

Also, talking about display budgets sounds a lot like how audio pros talk about speakers: “You spent thousands of dollars on top quality components to get the best possible processing, and you’re going to cheap out on the one thing that lets you actually hear what you spent all the money on?”

[D Fosse]

@Conrad C , has NEC stopped producing the Spectraview line? I don't see them on the B+H site now. It was nice to have an alternative.

But I never could figure out NECs policies, by not marketing them in Europe, and even making them very hard to get. Spectraview was always a US thing. I did have one many years ago, and it was excellent - except I had to order the software shipped from US, and even paying customs for it when it arrived.

[Conrad C]

…has NEC stopped producing the Spectraview line? I don't see them on the B+H site now. It was nice to have an alternative.

By @D Fosse

I first started seeing mentions around the web that SpectraView was discontinued roughly two years after Sharp acquired NEC Display Solutions, for example:

NEC, We Hardly Knew Ye – The Online Photographer, November 2022

If you go to the Sharp NEC Displays US website, look at the Discontinued Displays page, and filter by SpectraView Series, they’re all listed there, including my model.

Sharp Discontinued Displays

Today, if someone is looking for a good wide gamut display that supports hardware calibration, they can be pointed to Eizo ColorEdge, the BenQ and Asus photography lines, and maybe the Apple XDR displays.

[westdr1dw]

A major factor to consider especially when upgrading a computer is to buy what you can afford. A monitor is one component of the system you may only need to buy once. Therefore should be the highest quality you can afford or need based on your requirements. A new motherboard, CPU, and RAM you replace ~5 years. A new monitor buy once. 

[NB, colourmanagement net]

@vleo512 As others have mentioned if you have the budget an Eizo Coloredge screen is worth the expense. Then even appearance and 5 years warranty means it's not perhaps as expensive as it seems.

I hope this helps
neil barstow, colourmanagement net - adobe forum volunteer - co-author: 'getting colour right'
google me "neil barstow colourmanagement" for lots of free articles on colour management
Help others by clicking "Correct Answer" if the question is answered.
Found the answer elsewhere? Share it here. "Upvote" is for useful posts.

[westdr1dw]

Unless you have a special need for ta Eizo Coloredge and most do not would look for something more practical.  Consider what you would use the monitor for. Would upsize for something in the screen size >31 inch. BenQ built some good monitors  a few years ago. Suggest researching before purchase. 

[D Fosse]

Suggest researching before purchase.

By @westdr1dw

The problem with that is that the things that really matter aren't in the specs. Panel uniformity, shadow and highlight separation, accurate tone curve, the ability to precisely calibrate to any white point and black point for a perfect screen to print match. Those are the really important things, and none of it can be found in the specifications!

There really isn't much help in research. Judging by the specs, a Dell is as good as a top-end Eizo. Rest assured, it's not (again, refer to the photo in my first post above).

If you're part of a production chain where your work is passed on to others, you really need to know exactly what you're passing on. The only thing that can tell you that is the monitor. That makes the monitor the single most critical component in your system. We all have a budget, but the monitor should be a major priority right from the start.

[John Waller]

Agreed on specs being incomplete but, for me, research on serious devices such as Eizo's would go well beyond specs.

There are plenty of reviewers and labs offering extensive, in depth reviews covering the important features. I would read the articles and blogs and watch good independent videos reviewing the product.

[NB, colourmanagement net]

@John Waller "There are plenty of reviewers and labs offering extensive, in depth reviews covering the important features. I would read the articles and blogs and watch good independent videos reviewing the product."

Bit of a minefield that - Sadly there are also plenty of "reviewers" who do little more than rehash the manufacturers PR [seeking clicks perhaps]. And even many who should perhaps be considered more as "influencers" with all the baggage that title currently brings.

It's getting hard to trust online reviews sadly. 

There are reviewers who want free kit in exchange for a review - after that is it going to get a bad write up. 

Then, of course, there are those who have purchased certain kit and now trumpet it's value - in some cases seemingly to justify their own purchase decisions.

That’s perhaps why the OP is asking here. 

You'll see Dell displays getting great reviews in both text end video, but look at the truth in @D Fosse post above .

just my 2p

I hope this helps
neil barstow, colourmanagement net - adobe forum volunteer - co-author: 'getting colour right'
google me "neil barstow colourmanagement" for lots of free articles on colour management

[John Waller]

Bit of a minefield that - Sadly there are also plenty of "reviewers" who do little more than rehash the manufacturers PR [seeking clicks perhaps]. And even many who should perhaps be considered more as "influencers" with all the baggage that title currently brings.

It's getting hard to trust online reviews sadly. 

By @NB, colourmanagement net

@NB, colourmanagement net Agreed on all points.

I think that has always been the case since the early days of the web. These issues were around long before the web was born. The key, as always, is to be very discerning (borderline skeptical) and choose carefully who you follow.

Reviews which merely describe features laid out on the manufacturer's website and press releases are clearly not reviews. Just PR or lazy, paid-by-the-word journalism. Most of those are easy to spot. I look for independent tests and original opinions, particularly where good and bad are discussed in a balanced way.

Most trusted review sites - and even reputable "influencers" - understand the value of disclosure of commercial arrangements to add credibility to their opinions.

[NB, colourmanagement net]

@westdr1dw By "Pracical" do you mean cheaper? If only benQ had properly working calibration software to allow use of the much trumpeted inbuilt calibration LUT then it could be a seri ous option. Of course there the old rule that you don't get what you don't pay for so one would need to look at an example and assess uniformity . 

I hope this helps
neil barstow, colourmanagement net - adobe forum volunteer - co-author: 'getting colour right'
google me "neil barstow colourmanagement" for lots of free articles on colour management

[westdr1dw]

Was unaware BenQ has quality issues. Seems like a lot of bashing over selection. Again depends on the majority of what it will be used for. Buying a Eizo Color Edge (>$5k) is like buying a Lamborghini. As I stated buy what you can afford, however, since a monitor is may be a one time purchase, portion your budget with needs. The overwhelming majority of people taking pictures are content with a smartphone. Should they go out and buy a $5k camera?  If you have the money to spend on the Color Edge then may be it is right for you. 

[davescm]

The excellent Eizo Color Edge CS2731s that are mentioned above (I use two) currently retail at under £1000 each in the UK which translates to under $1200 each -  not > $5k and is cheaper than many smartphones.

Dave