LCD vs LED Monitors

[Garbz]

>> What LED monitors are we talking about now? The giant 5m high displays, or LCDs with LED backlights? The latter's viewing angles have been discussed and is nothing to do with LEDs, and the former as far as I know hasn't been manufactured in a consumer display size. If anything LED monitors have massive pixel pitches.
OLEDs on the other hand have a different display arrangement. They are usually a pentile display which is largely due to manufacturing constraints on the blue pixel. Expect this to change. CRTs only had the advantage here because their pixels were laid out in a triangular pattern, the phosphors definitely did not overlap each other and they were nearly always run below their maximum resolution (on account of their max res normally subjecting the viewer to horrendously low refresh rates). Run a CRT and an LCD at their highest res and the LCD looks much sharper and clearer.

>> I haven't seen a dead pixel since before the mythical y2k bug. Most if not all manufacturers have a dead-pixel free warranty policy.

>> IPS displays can be had for $300. PVA for less than that. We're on a photography forum where people talk about buying $200 calibrators for their monitors, I don't think the common man rules apply. You're arguing one cheap technology for another, there's problems regardless. Sure there were less colour related problems on a cheap CRT, that is very true and given a horrendously low budget I may concede this point of view, but they certainly are by no stretch of the imagination nice to use.

>> Dead / faded displays are again a function of being cheap not a function of the technology. My father has been through 3 cheap LCDs (wasn't the CCFL that died, but rather the inverters). Good displays should last for a long time. The NEC Multisync displays in the control room at the plant I work have been on 24/7/365 for 7 years, and only one was replaced because an operator put his fist through it. With most things you get what you pay for.

>> We'll have to agree to disagree on the consistent / cost effective bit. I've had greater success with LCD than tubes. I guess it comes down to what we buy, how we use it, and maybe even a bit of luck

As a matter of interest, other than the lack of colourmanagement functionality in Android, why wouldn't you edit a photograph on an OLED display, given how in theory it would be the ideal display for it? ... Oh and given that you'd probably be disowned by the photography world for editing a photo on your mobile


I should mention that I'm kind of biased towards new technologies. I've done quite a bit of work including a thesis in opto-electronics, so I kind of hold dear that OLEDs are going to rock our world

 

[rambler]

Simply put In LCD the light comes from directly behind the screen in the middle. With LED the light comes in from the edges towards the center.

 

[unpopular]

There are many types of flat monitors...
TUBE - it's big but it just works, and works, and works....

And it drifts and it drifts and it drifts. CRTs are notorious for instability.

CRT's have significant advantages in viewing area and resolution at any given price, but can you please admit you kind of made that up a little?

 

[SCraig]

As a matter of interest, other than the lack of colourmanagement functionality in Android, why wouldn't you edit a photograph on an OLED display, given how in theory it would be the ideal display for it? ... Oh and given that you'd probably be disowned by the photography world for editing a photo on your mobile

Sadly there are photo editing applications written for Android. I've never bothered to install one since I'm not crazy enough to try and edit a photograph on my cell phone.

I appreciate everyone's help in responding to this question. I decided to go with an NEC MultiSync P221W with their SpectraView color management system. It's PVA technology, wide gamut, and so far after only 2 days, seems to be a good addition. I haven't been able to play with it much yet but I think I'll like it.

 

[Garbz]

Simply put In LCD the light comes from directly behind the screen in the middle. With LED the light comes in from the edges towards the center.

... The technology and application have nothing to do with each other. My LCD has CCFL's from behind the screen, 4 of them oriented vertically. My laptop's has the CCFL at the bottom. My TV and my monitor at work have the CCFLs on the side. Samsung's ultra thin TVs have LEDs on the side, and there are Asus screens with a grid of LEDs from behind. Actually there's a HDR display which analyses the image being produced and then modulates the power of grid of many LEDs from behind to achieve incredible contrast ratios for an LCD screen by selectively turning off backlights in darker areas.

I decided to go with an NEC MultiSync P221W with their SpectraView color management system.

Nice. As a matter of interest how much did the SpectraView addition cost? Also does it still come with this calibration puck or do you get something different now?

Also the display you chose is a wide gamut display. Welcome to colour management hell. Before you edit any images make sure you use your calibrator. Also make sure any program you use to edit images is aware of the colour profile of your display or you'll produce things that look like garbage and won't realise it.

Some programs like Lightroom and Photoshop read the settings straight out of windows. Others like ACDSee Pro, and irfanview need you to specify which colour profile to use. It's up to you now to check every program understands colour management.

For browsers this is easy, you have one choice, Firefox, and you set it up you can either install this addon: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/color-management/ or go to about:config and edit the variables gfx.color_management.display_profile = Yourdisplayprofile.icc , and set gfx.color_management.mode = 1

 

[Cruzingoose]

>> What LED monitors are we talking about now? The giant 5m high displays, or LCDs with LED backlights? The latter's viewing angles have been discussed and is nothing to do with LEDs, and the former as far as I know hasn't been manufactured in a consumer display size. If anything LED monitors have massive pixel pitches.
OLEDs on the other hand have a different display arrangement. They are usually a pentile display which is largely due to manufacturing constraints on the blue pixel. Expect this to change. CRTs only had the advantage here because their pixels were laid out in a triangular pattern, the phosphors definitely did not overlap each other and they were nearly always run below their maximum resolution (on account of their max res normally subjecting the viewer to horrendously low refresh rates). Run a CRT and an LCD at their highest res and the LCD looks much sharper and clearer.

>> I haven't seen a dead pixel since before the mythical y2k bug. Most if not all manufacturers have a dead-pixel free warranty policy.

>> IPS displays can be had for $300. PVA for less than that. We're on a photography forum where people talk about buying $200 calibrators for their monitors, I don't think the common man rules apply. You're arguing one cheap technology for another, there's problems regardless. Sure there were less colour related problems on a cheap CRT, that is very true and given a horrendously low budget I may concede this point of view, but they certainly are by no stretch of the imagination nice to use.

>> Dead / faded displays are again a function of being cheap not a function of the technology. My father has been through 3 cheap LCDs (wasn't the CCFL that died, but rather the inverters). Good displays should last for a long time. The NEC Multisync displays in the control room at the plant I work have been on 24/7/365 for 7 years, and only one was replaced because an operator put his fist through it. With most things you get what you pay for.

>> We'll have to agree to disagree on the consistent / cost effective bit. I've had greater success with LCD than tubes. I guess it comes down to what we buy, how we use it, and maybe even a bit of luck

As a matter of interest, other than the lack of colourmanagement functionality in Android, why wouldn't you edit a photograph on an OLED display, given how in theory it would be the ideal display for it? ... Oh and given that you'd probably be disowned by the photography world for editing a photo on your mobile


I should mention that I'm kind of biased towards new technologies. I've done quite a bit of work including a thesis in opto-electronics, so I kind of hold dear that OLEDs are going to rock our world

>>>>If anything LED monitors have massive pixel pitches.
OLEDs on the other hand have a different display arrangement. They are usually a pentile display which is largely due to manufacturing constraints on the blue pixel. I should mention that I'm kind of biased towards new technologies. I've done quite a bit of work including a thesis in opto-electronics, so I kind of hold dear that OLEDs are going to rock our world

OLED has incredibly fine dot pitch and will likely be the winner as soon as technology progresses. If there is any flat display that will truly replace the tube, OLED may be the one, but not now as it has some aging problems. The blue fades a lot faster than green or red making the display cool and harsh when new but will fade to a warm yellow at its end of life. This aging is already manifesting itself in yearling phones.


>>>I haven't seen a dead pixel since before the mythical y2k bug. Most if not all manufacturers have a dead-pixel free warranty policy.

Not according to others on the phone and laptop forums. Although some manufactures will replace a device ONCE, repeated replacements are not available during the warranty period.


>>>CRTs only had the advantage here because their pixels were laid out in a triangular pattern, the phosphors definitely did not overlap each other and they were nearly always run below their maximum resolution (on account of their max res normally subjecting the viewer to horrendously low refresh rates).

I know the phosphors did not physically overlap, the color spectrum reproduced indeed does, making a more continuous viewable spectrum.

 

[Cruzingoose]

Simply put In LCD the light comes from directly behind the screen in the middle. With LED the light comes in from the edges towards the center.

Not exactly....

LCDs are edge backlit by LED or fluro tubes. If you take one apart, you will find the light source on an edge of plastic with lots of layers of different plastic sheets sandwiched. This spreads the light making it appear that the light source is behind the display. Think before the days of computer video projectors. The overhead project used clear sheets and magic markers. Then came the early LCD units that replaced the plastic sheets. These were transparent displays using the light source in the projector to present the image.

LED displays generate their own light. There is no backlight.

 

[matthewo]

Most lcds use ccfl bulbs with an inverter. Think small scale floresent tube lights.

I once replaced an inverter for a custom project i was doing rebuilding an lcd display that stopped working

I agree a good lcd display will last a long time. My 21" gateway lcd has been a champ for 5+ years. But it wasnt a cheapo one. It was around $400

 

[unpopular]

Simply put In LCD the light comes from directly behind the screen in the middle. With LED the light comes in from the edges towards the center.

Not exactly....

LCDs are edge backlit by LED or fluro tubes. If you take one apart, you will find the light source on an edge of plastic with lots of layers of different plastic sheets sandwiched. This spreads the light making it appear that the light source is behind the display. Think before the days of computer video projectors. The overhead project used clear sheets and magic markers. Then came the early LCD units that replaced the plastic sheets. These were transparent displays using the light source in the projector to present the image.

LED displays generate their own light. There is no backlight.

Often manufacturers will call LED backlit displays simply LED Displays, prob to get some cross marketing from the true oLED display mystique.

I don't know how my LED backlit display arranges the backlighting, however I do know that my old iLamp had four CFL tubes running horizontally along the back of the monitor - i know this because I did take it apart. Not all monitors are constructed the same or have the same configurations in regard to backlighting.

 

[SCraig]

Nice. As a matter of interest how much did the SpectraView addition cost? Also does it still come with this calibration puck or do you get something different now?

Also the display you chose is a wide gamut display. Welcome to colour management hell. Before you edit any images make sure you use your calibrator. Also make sure any program you use to edit images is aware of the colour profile of your display or you'll produce things that look like garbage and won't realise it.

Some programs like Lightroom and Photoshop read the settings straight out of windows. Others like ACDSee Pro, and irfanview need you to specify which colour profile to use. It's up to you now to check every program understands colour management.

For browsers this is easy, you have one choice, Firefox, and you set it up you can either install this addon: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/color-management/ or go to about:config and edit the variables gfx.color_management.display_profile = Yourdisplayprofile.icc , and set gfx.color_management.mode = 1

I like it so far. I've still only had it a few days but so far I think it will do a good job.

I don't know how much the SpectraView cost since it was bundled with the monitor. B&H shows the Colorimeter and Software for $285. I got a blank image when I looked at the JPEG of the colorimeter you showed, but the one in the B&H link above is the one I got. I got the monitor, colorimeter, and software for $529 on sale at B&H.

I have been calibrating my Samsung monitor with a Spyder 3 so I'm aware of color management hell The great thing about the SpectraView combination is that I do absolutely nothing except start the software, put the colorimeter on the screen, and take it off when it's done. The software is capable of setting all of the monitor's values so it's completely automatic. I don't have to adjust a single thing on the monitor itself, just tell the software what color temperature I want it calibrated for and then sit back and let it work. It sure beats having to make tiny adjustments to RGB, contrast, brightness, etc. and then go back and do them again and again and again.

My only complaint with SpectraView, and it is slight, is that I can't control the name of the color profile. I've kept 5800K and 6500K profiles for my Samsung and swap between them from time to time. With SpectraView it decides what name to use, I think it's based on the embedded monitor serial number, and that's it. The good side to that is that I don't have to change the name in any software since it's always the same. The down side, which is minor, is that I can't have multiple color profiles for a monitor.

I use Nikon Capture NX2 and DxO Optics Pro 7 for editing. Both are color-managed so no problems there. I've got Windows 7 configured to use the proper color profile on both monitors so I have both NX2 and Optics Pro configured to use Windows color management which seems to work properly. The two monitors are slightly different, the NEC is a bit cooler even though they are both calibrated for 6500K.

As to a browser, I agree that Firefox is the only real choice. I've been using that exact same plugin for the past year or so I gave up on Internet Degrader years ago and wouldn't use it if Microsoft paid me. Firefox is, to me, the only real browser available.

Thank you for taking the time to provide so much useful information. It is much appreciated.

 

[SCraig]

Often manufacturers will call LED backlit displays simply LED Displays, prob to get some cross marketing from the true oLED display mystique.

I don't know how my LED backlit display arranges the backlighting, however I do know that my old iLamp had four CFL tubes running horizontally along the back of the monitor - i know this because I did take it apart. Not all monitors are constructed the same or have the same configurations in regard to backlighting.

That was what caused my original confusion with the monitors. I was under the impression that LED monitors provided the color illumination using LED's and it was only after I started this topic that I realized my mistake, thanks to those who pointed it out. I do agree that the confusion is most likely intentional on the part of the manufacturers.

 

[Garbz]

I got a blank image when I looked at the JPEG of the colorimeter you showed, but the one in the B&H link above is the one I got. I got the monitor, colorimeter, and software for $529 on sale at B&H.

Interesting. Thanks for the info. I have the i1 Display 2 puck which is the same as the one provided by NEC, I was asking because the i1 Display 2 has been discontinued and I didn't know if NEC switched to something else.

There's various levels of colour-management and there's various degrees of problems they introduce. Just a word of caution to not take it for granted If you came from a non-wide gamut monitor you may have always not loaded the colour profile in the applications you used and seen no real problem. Last time I used Capture NX2 it didn't read the monitor profile out of windows, but that was a long time ago so sounds like they fixed it In any case if the exported JPEG from any application looks consistent when you open in Firefox then you're all set

Also the reason that NEC doesn't provide you with different profiles is that it's not something that should be needed. Colour temperature should be set once to something consistent with the displays, the environment, and, if you're comparing to a print, the colour temperature of the lights illuminating the print. If you have a dark room (<70-90lx) and you don't compare to prints you should set the colour temperature as close as possible to native for your primary monitor. Your eyes will adjust to them. If you have overpowering lighting in the room set it to make the monitors look as close as white as possible (since your eyes will adjust to the room lighting rather than the monitor temperature).

Unless you have some other crazy application that requires you to change colour temperature?

I know the phosphors did not physically overlap, the color spectrum reproduced indeed does, making a more continuous viewable spectrum.

A more continuously viewable spectrum means poor colours. The key here is the colour gamut is defined by the relative amplitudes of the peaks of colour and how little overlap there is with adjacent peaks. Two screens which both conform to the sRGB gamut (which is 99.9% of all LCDs and CRTs on the market) have incredibly similar spectral output from each of the red green and blue filters. This is how they get their defined gamut. A wide gamut monitor on the other hand has less overlap, and an OLED screen has effectively zero. The ability to generate colours is made up of a triangle between the 3 primary points. The closer these points lie to the edge the more of the visible colour spectrum can be reproduced. With 3 points we can cover nearly all of the space between red green and blue, with an inability to produce only a pure cyan.

The spectrum of CRTs and LCDs are essentially the same.
The spectrum of CRTs and sRGB LCDs are both piss poor in terms of ability to produce the visible spectrum.
There are more, affordable, wide gamut LCDs, and LCDs can also be made as a wider gamut then CRTs, so I'm not sure why you think this is a good point for CRTs.

 

[unpopular]

^^ yep. don't forget that this is a composite system. if you maximized so-called overlap, you'd have a monochromatic, b/w monitor. More overlap means less reproducible color, not more.

 

[SCraig]

Interesting. Thanks for the info. I have the i1 Display 2 puck which is the same as the one provided by NEC, I was asking because the i1 Display 2 has been discontinued and I didn't know if NEC switched to something else.

There's various levels of colour-management and there's various degrees of problems they introduce. Just a word of caution to not take it for granted If you came from a non-wide gamut monitor you may have always not loaded the colour profile in the applications you used and seen no real problem. Last time I used Capture NX2 it didn't read the monitor profile out of windows, but that was a long time ago so sounds like they fixed it In any case if the exported JPEG from any application looks consistent when you open in Firefox then you're all set

Also the reason that NEC doesn't provide you with different profiles is that it's not something that should be needed. Colour temperature should be set once to something consistent with the displays, the environment, and, if you're comparing to a print, the colour temperature of the lights illuminating the print. If you have a dark room (<70-90lx) and you don't compare to prints you should set the colour temperature as close as possible to native for your primary monitor. Your eyes will adjust to them. If you have overpowering lighting in the room set it to make the monitors look as close as white as possible (since your eyes will adjust to the room lighting rather than the monitor temperature).

Unless you have some other crazy application that requires you to change colour temperature?

Thanks for the information. I really appreciate it.

I generally try to watch applications that are capable of color management to make sure they use the proper profile, but I probably miss from time to time. As a matter of fact I just checked NX2 after reading your comment and it does NOT indicate that it will use the Windows profile as I thought. I had it set to my Samsung monitor so I changed it. DxO Optics Pro does have a "Use current profile for the display" checkbox so I guess that's the one I was thinking of. Anyway they are both set up correctly now.

Both my Spyder that I use on my Samsung and the i1 for my NEC recommend 6500K so that's what I have both monitors calibrated to. There is a slight difference between the two but not really as much as I expected. I can split an image so that it shows on both monitors and the Samsung is just slightly cooler than the NEC. Not enough difference that I'm going to worry about it. I'm planning on using the new NEC for photo editing anyway so I just don't want to see a huge difference in color when I move a window from one monitor to the other.

I'll take your advice and just leave things set the way they are. I don't have anything that requires changing color temperature so there's really no reason to change.

Again, thanks for the help.

 

[Garbz]

Well there is still one reason to change. By forcing a colour temperature that is not native onto a monitor which doesn't have something fancy like an internal 12bit colour lookup table, you actually end up retarding the output of your video card slightly. The closer your screen is to native white balance the better it will perform.

- If you have a lot of natural light in the room stick with 6500k
- If you have a dark room I suggest that you try calibrating to 5500k, this will be closer to native for your LCDs and they may match each other better. Remember when you initially calibrate they will look a bit yellow but give it a minute or two for your eyes to adjust.

The 6500k recommendation is a throwback to the CRT days which had colour temperature naturally that high. Personally I calibrate my monitor by measuring the native white balance which will likely have a significant Delta E (green or purple cast) and calibrate back to whatever the default white balance was. It probably makes little difference, but I take the view of why not let your gear perform as best it can .