My roommate is trying to push me to buy a new 144Hz Acer monitor that comes out today, but it's about £180 above my budget sooo....
Very no. If its the Acer GN246HL its a crappy TN panel, even if its a different model, at 144hz it's likely a TN model. The high refresh/low input lag "gamer" panels are almost always TN.
Seriously, what do you need 144hz for? Most professional grade monitors are 60hz.
The panel and driver electronics are all made by Innolux and it's speced, sold, and assembled through US based company called Impact Display Solutions.
I have thought about getting some tile management software. If windows just expanded the windows key + arrow key functionality so that you could configure your own zones it would work a lot better.
What's the price range for a display like that? I've been looking for a solution for a single display that can match my 3 monitor setup. Basically 1 vertical and 2 horizontal monitors that form a huge square display.
I'm not sure what it would retail for and it has no plastic case or stand. I know how much they cost in large quantities but I can't share that number. It also isn't that relevant to consumer displays since the pricing on this stuff is not entirely related to normal products. For example, the supply chain is guaranteed for X number of years with no changes to components (to avoid needing to re-certify a gambling machine every time some surface mount components change).
Innolux makes a lot of the panels for 4k displays. There are a lot of inexpensive 4k displays being sold right now but a lot of them look like they have low quality driver electronics or don't do 60hz.
Yeah, my problem with 4k monitors is the hz. The only decent ones I've used is my current one, and even then, reds on it are awful. I mainly use it to have spreadsheets and documents open so I can see a lot of data at once. My cintiq is for art.
sRGB: 72%. Generally, any "gaming" monitor is going to be a compromise, so if color accuracy for artwork is important, go with a professional geared panel rather than a gamer geared one.
On the other hand, if you're only doing occasional art work on the monitor, and none of it is color-critical (again, work meant for print), but doing a lot of gaming, it looks like an excellent choice. It is an IPS panel (AVHA actually same thing) and it does have good viewing angles, which means it better than essentially any other gamer monitor on the market. Its got a proper 8-bit panel too, not a 6-bit panel that is often seen in lower end e-ips monitors.
@EarthQuake
Yeah I know what you mean, which is also why I'm dropped the Acer from my choices, since I want to put work in front of gaming, so I don't want to compromise too much on the colours.
And I did just find a really nice asus monitor which looks like it might have great Hz, resolution and colour, the Asus MG279Q 27", 120Hz. The 3dguru site doesn't mention the sRGB, but other sites says it should be strong. It won't come out until 8th of May, so I'll wait until then and see what the reviews are on it, but it is looking good from what I can tell.
There are only a handful of companies that actually make panels for monitors, most come from LG, Samsung, and a couple others. The AVHA panel in that Acer comes from a company called AU Optronics based in Taiwan.
Although I haven't experienced one in person yet I'm thinking that 32 inch 4k would be an indeal size. Like Dell UP3214Q or Asus PA328Q. They are both wide gamut displays though, which is part of the reason they are quite expensive, but I'm sure there will be cheaper sRGB versions soon.
As far as the 32 inch BenQ I'm sure it's a nice display and I have seen some good reviews, but personally when I purchase anything expensive I stick with the most trusted brands. I know BenQ is well established by now, but I still think cheap gaming panels when mentioning BenQ. But for 32 inch 4k I guess it is the best cheap option.
I'm trying to decide on a decent IPS for ~$250, either 24 or 27 inch. I've narrowed it down between the Dell U2414h and the Asus MX279H but I'm having trouble deciding. Does anyone have experience with these or have any suggestions?
If you're from the UK you have to pay £50 VAT. Which I found out after it had been shipped when the shipping company sent me an email :poly117: Still worth the money though!
I'm trying to decide on a decent IPS for ~$250, either 24 or 27 inch. I've narrowed it down between the Dell U2414h and the Asus MX279H but I'm having trouble deciding. Does anyone have experience with these or have any suggestions?
The Asus MX279H is only 1080p, you don't actually get any extra space going to 27", you're just getting huge pixels.
Is a $6000 monitor worth buying? Perhaps if you're doing color correction for hollywood films as your full time job and someone else is footing the bill, otherwise, no, $6K is simply ridiculous for a monitor.
What is it that you do which makes you think you need a $6K monitor?
I'm trying to decide on a decent IPS for ~$250, either 24 or 27 inch. I've narrowed it down between the Dell U2414h and the Asus MX279H but I'm having trouble deciding. Does anyone have experience with these or have any suggestions?
I saw the 27" Asus in microcenter today, it looked like ass.
I'm leaning toward the dell, though the Asus is 25" and has that filter for harmful blue light, but seemingly not mountable and has a ugly stand. Will prob go with the Dell, unless there's any other suggestions.
Is http://www.eizo.com/products/coloredge/cg277/ unnecessary for the price? I don't mind the price if it will aid in creating correct values, unless it is unnecessary. My price range is from 1-2k.
That's way over kill, just buy 2 normal 1440p IPS monitors, the difference from a good IPS pannel and a print/photo/post-production grade IPS monitor is tiny, the purpose of those monitors is so you'll know exactly how the work will look printed out or displayed on very high quality displays and printers. You are making video game art for people that will be using a wide variety of monitors, many will proabably be TN panels. The extra accuracy isn't going to improve anything or make any of your work better. I'd rather have a calibrated IPS display with gsync or freesync and a high refresh rate monitor than a super color accurate, print grade, one.
The 144hz monitor, Asus MG279Q, I was looking at, has finally a review as well from TFTCentral. So the color range is Standard gamut ~sRGB, ~72% NTSC for it:
Yeah, consumers will have a wide range of (mostly terrible) monitors. This makes it even more important for content creators to use calibrated hardware. If you've got a crappy monitor with totally broken color, the range of busted-ness will be even higher when your customers look at your game/product/whatever.
More time I spend against of monitors more I think it's actually doesn't matter what monitor to use/buy.
Matter is only IPS letters and a colorimeter device.
I think that is mostly true. You can get any reasonable quality panel into good shape with a colorimeter. With lesser displays you might not be able to see the bottom few shadow tones and can have more pronounced banding in gradients. Neither of those things are as bad as an un-profiled display with funky colored back lighting.
tbh mostly any consumer IPS with a half decent colorimeter is going to be fine for most artists. Probably the only time you need to have really good panels/calibration is if you're doing high-end postFX work like color-grading and/or balancing lighting and materials. You want a good monitor for fine-tuning, basically.
tbh mostly any consumer IPS with a half decent colorimeter is going to be fine for most artists. Probably the only time you need to have really good panels/calibration is if you're doing high-end postFX work like color-grading and/or balancing lighting and materials. You want a good monitor for fine-tuning, basically.
But isn't that what texture artists are doing? (color-grading and balancing lighting/materials)
A texture artist is going to be balancing colors for a game that's going to be viewed on consumer displays. A movie or printed material is going to be viewed or printed using professional equipment. Maybe the person doing the final pass on lighting and post processing in a game will want a super accurate color monitor, but it's not required and it's not going to magically make your work look any better.
The difference between a good quality IPS screen, calibrated with a colorimeter, and a professional grade EIZO is going to be very small in most cases, game dev or otherwise.
Super high end displays are generally meant for print and advertising work, where you really, really need that shade of blue to look just right on your billboard/banner/etc. If you get the color of your client's logo wrong, they're going to be pissed. Its called color-critical work, and there is rarely a comparable situation in game dev, as mentioned a few times, final lighting/post would be the closest you would get.
If you're texturing a fire hydrant for a game, how important is it that the shade of red is just right? Probably not very, in all likelihood, most artists would pick the "wrong" shade of red even if they had a super expensive color calibrated monitor, which would have zero effect on the game. Still, you DO want a calibrated screen, so you can make sure that when you paint your fire hydrant red, its actually red, not orange or purple.
tbh mostly any consumer IPS with a half decent colorimeter is going to be fine for most artists. Probably the only time you need to have really good panels/calibration is if you're doing high-end postFX work like color-grading and/or balancing lighting and materials. You want a good monitor for fine-tuning, basically.
I am balancing lighting and materials and to be honest have never found an essential difference after monitors calibration , cheap or expensive ones.
Although I have always had colorimeters around $300 , not the cheapest ones
tbh mostly any consumer IPS with a half decent colorimeter is going to be fine for most artists. Probably the only time you need to have really good panels/calibration is if you're doing high-end postFX work like color-grading and/or balancing lighting and materials. You want a good monitor for fine-tuning, basically.
I am balancing lighting and materials and to be honest have never found an essential difference after monitors calibration , cheap or expensive ones.
Although I have always had colorimeters around $300 , not the cheapest ones
I think the 2515's price is a ripoff, but I have a limited range of choices in my location. The 2414 is temptingly cheap, but I'm generally cautious about Dells since my current 2209WA (my first LCD) has suffered color degradation after 4 years of usage. Might be typical but disappointing nonetheless.
Biggest differences between the two dells:
2414: is a 6-bit 1920x1080 panel (decent 24" panels tend to be 1920x1200)
2515: is an 8-bit 2560 x 1440 panel, more work area plus better color accuracy
2414 is certainly a decent monitor for the price though.
If anything the Eizo is a huge ripoff here, its a 1920x1080 6-bit panel just like the 2414, but at twice the price. It most likely uses the exact same panel as the 2414. Only a few companies actually make LCD panels, like LG and Samsung (Dell and Eizo do not).
TFT mumbled something about the Eizo's 6-bit + FRC being nearly the same as the 8-bit. I suppose the price difference is the default calibration (+5 years warranty over the 3 years of the Dells'). Looks like the 2515 is the choice then.
Yeah honestly the difference between 8 bit vs 6+ FRC shouldn't be a deal breaker, but the 2414 is 6 + FRC as well. For the cost difference you can pick up a color calibrator, assuming you can find something local that is. But yeah I would probably just go for the 2515
Replies
Very no. If its the Acer GN246HL its a crappy TN panel, even if its a different model, at 144hz it's likely a TN model. The high refresh/low input lag "gamer" panels are almost always TN.
Seriously, what do you need 144hz for? Most professional grade monitors are 60hz.
And the high refresh was more for gaming, I'm using the computer for both work and gaming at home. But I doubt I will be getting it, as the sRGB is not optimal compared to other screens I looked at.
What's the price range for a display like that? I've been looking for a solution for a single display that can match my 3 monitor setup. Basically 1 vertical and 2 horizontal monitors that form a huge square display.
IPS? The viewing angles are quite poor in the specs.
Innolux makes a lot of the panels for 4k displays. There are a lot of inexpensive 4k displays being sold right now but a lot of them look like they have low quality driver electronics or don't do 60hz.
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/acer_xb270hu.htm
sRGB: 72%. Generally, any "gaming" monitor is going to be a compromise, so if color accuracy for artwork is important, go with a professional geared panel rather than a gamer geared one.
On the other hand, if you're only doing occasional art work on the monitor, and none of it is color-critical (again, work meant for print), but doing a lot of gaming, it looks like an excellent choice. It is an IPS panel (AVHA actually same thing) and it does have good viewing angles, which means it better than essentially any other gamer monitor on the market. Its got a proper 8-bit panel too, not a 6-bit panel that is often seen in lower end e-ips monitors.
Yeah I know what you mean, which is also why I'm dropped the Acer from my choices, since I want to put work in front of gaming, so I don't want to compromise too much on the colours.
And I did just find a really nice asus monitor which looks like it might have great Hz, resolution and colour, the Asus MG279Q 27", 120Hz. The 3dguru site doesn't mention the sRGB, but other sites says it should be strong. It won't come out until 8th of May, so I'll wait until then and see what the reviews are on it, but it is looking good from what I can tell.
From this page it says it's a 144hz panel: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/news_archive/33.htm#asus_mg279q
There are only a handful of companies that actually make panels for monitors, most come from LG, Samsung, and a couple others. The AVHA panel in that Acer comes from a company called AU Optronics based in Taiwan.
To clarify,
That monitor isn't 72% sRGB coverage. sRGB is approximately 72% of NTSC space.
This image compares a couple of color spaces along with the space derived from a profile for a paper stock:
That makes a lot more sense anyway, I was pretty shocked that a decent IPS panel would have had an sRGB range that low.
think that's what they are called.
As far as the 32 inch BenQ I'm sure it's a nice display and I have seen some good reviews, but personally when I purchase anything expensive I stick with the most trusted brands. I know BenQ is well established by now, but I still think cheap gaming panels when mentioning BenQ. But for 32 inch 4k I guess it is the best cheap option.
Get a dell if you have the money, but if you want a budget high quality display then this is a very good alternative imo http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/qnix_qx2710.htm
If you're from the UK you have to pay £50 VAT. Which I found out after it had been shipped when the shipping company sent me an email :poly117: Still worth the money though!
The Asus MX279H is only 1080p, you don't actually get any extra space going to 27", you're just getting huge pixels.
A) Is Eizo318 worth buying?:
http://www.eizo.com/products/coloredge/cg318-4k/
Or should I just buy cheaper good quality 10bit ISP monitor with an XRite-ColorMunki?
Thank you.
I currently have a samsung un32d5500rf
I can't figure out what the srbg value is though.
What is it that you do which makes you think you need a $6K monitor?
I am creating a library of pbr materials with correct sRGB values from photographed textures with an X-Rite Colorchecker Passport.
I saw the 27" Asus in microcenter today, it looked like ass.
I'm almost in the same boat though, budget under $300 and looking at the[ame="http://www.amazon.com/MX259H-25-Inch-Screen-LED-lit-Monitor/dp/B00UFCVKI4/ref=sr_1_5?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1434240754&sr=1-5&keywords=asus+mx"] Asus MX259H [/ame] or the [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Dell-Ultrasharp-U2415-24-Inch-LED-Lit/dp/B00NZTKOQI/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1434240966&sr=1-1&keywords=u2415&pebp=1434240967728&perid=A2F443E859E4458C87AA"]Dell u2415[/ame].
I'm leaning toward the dell, though the Asus is 25" and has that filter for harmful blue light, but seemingly not mountable and has a ugly stand. Will prob go with the Dell, unless there's any other suggestions.
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/asus_mg279q.htm
Matter is only IPS letters and a colorimeter device.
All this effort we put into making sure all our colors are great end up being viewed on the lowest end lcd tv / monitor that most gamers can afford.
Just going to Quakecon shows you how poor most of the hardware is that people use.
I think that is mostly true. You can get any reasonable quality panel into good shape with a colorimeter. With lesser displays you might not be able to see the bottom few shadow tones and can have more pronounced banding in gradients. Neither of those things are as bad as an un-profiled display with funky colored back lighting.
But isn't that what texture artists are doing? (color-grading and balancing lighting/materials)
Super high end displays are generally meant for print and advertising work, where you really, really need that shade of blue to look just right on your billboard/banner/etc. If you get the color of your client's logo wrong, they're going to be pissed. Its called color-critical work, and there is rarely a comparable situation in game dev, as mentioned a few times, final lighting/post would be the closest you would get.
If you're texturing a fire hydrant for a game, how important is it that the shade of red is just right? Probably not very, in all likelihood, most artists would pick the "wrong" shade of red even if they had a super expensive color calibrated monitor, which would have zero effect on the game. Still, you DO want a calibrated screen, so you can make sure that when you paint your fire hydrant red, its actually red, not orange or purple.
I am balancing lighting and materials and to be honest have never found an essential difference after monitors calibration , cheap or expensive ones.
Although I have always had colorimeters around $300 , not the cheapest ones
I am balancing lighting and materials and to be honest have never found an essential difference after monitors calibration , cheap or expensive ones.
Although I have always had colorimeters around $300 , not the cheapest ones
Eizo EV2450 @ $660
Dell U2515H @ $580
Dell U2414H @ $330
I think the 2515's price is a ripoff, but I have a limited range of choices in my location. The 2414 is temptingly cheap, but I'm generally cautious about Dells since my current 2209WA (my first LCD) has suffered color degradation after 4 years of usage. Might be typical but disappointing nonetheless.
2414: is a 6-bit 1920x1080 panel (decent 24" panels tend to be 1920x1200)
2515: is an 8-bit 2560 x 1440 panel, more work area plus better color accuracy
2414 is certainly a decent monitor for the price though.
If anything the Eizo is a huge ripoff here, its a 1920x1080 6-bit panel just like the 2414, but at twice the price. It most likely uses the exact same panel as the 2414. Only a few companies actually make LCD panels, like LG and Samsung (Dell and Eizo do not).
BTW, o hai
Also, haiiiii