# Recommendation for best monitor for photo editing



## eschurr

It's time to upgrade my five year-old 27" 1900 x 1200 Dell monitor and l'm looking for recommendations and thoughts.

I'm just an everyday photo guy with a Nikon D750 and a bunch of lenses and a overwhelming love of Lightroom.  I want a great monitor, but i'm not a pro (yet ). I'll spend up to $1,000 if i have to, but would love not to.

I found this very helpful article 

Things i'm wondering about:

-- size.  It seems that monitors larger than 27" are only wider, not taller (too bad!).  I certainly won't go smaller than 27".  what are the benefits of 32"? i've read some articles that suggested that one get a 27" monitor and put one (or two) 24" monitors beside it vertically (a software engineer in my office does this) and put Lightroom's menus/panels on them so the 27" monitor is used just for the photo.  this also means one could buy a great 27" monitor and one (or two) cheaper 24" monitors.

-- resolution.  2560 x 1440 resolution is the minimum requirement for a 27-inch monitor.  is something higher, like 4K, important?

-- refresh rate. I understand it's very important for gaming, but is it for Lightroom?

-- calibration. Some have it built in, but most don't.  I use a Spyder right now, and maybe that's fine?  Is there a benefit to built-in calibration?

-- gamut.  I shoot in sRGB because my photos are mostly displayed on my monitor, my HD TV, and other friend's monitors via the web. I don't print a lot.  I'm assuming 100% sRGB is good enough.

Anything else?  

Thanks for your thoughts.


----------



## clee01l

One monitor or two? I think the 2560X1440 27" monitors is sufficient however an Apple 5K might be optimum.  I'm not sure if there are other mfgs that do 5K but if so then they are worth a look.  I find that dual monitors are really useful for develop mode.  I keep the second screen open in one all the time.  So, hang on to the Dell.
You will probably need to upgrade to Win10 to manage higher resolutions as I don't think Win7 is quite up to the task. 

My second monitor is an ASUS PB278. It is IPS which is important unless there is more advanced technology better than IPS.  My research suggested the ASUS screen utilized the same materials as the Apple iMac that I have. 

sRGB is adequate but there are some wide gamut monitors that approach AdobeRGB.  If you find one it is worthy of consideration ONLY if you run a regular calibration on the device with a color calibration tool.


----------



## Conrad Chavez

eschurr said:


> -- size. It seems that monitors larger than 27" are only wider, not taller (too bad!). I certainly won't go smaller than 27". what are the benefits of 32"? i've read some articles that suggested that one get a 27" monitor and put one (or two) 24" monitors beside it vertically (a software engineer in my office does this) and put Lightroom's menus/panels on them so the 27" monitor is used just for the photo. this also means one could buy a great 27" monitor and one (or two) cheaper 24" monitors.


They might have been using Photoshop, where it’s common to put all the panels on a secondary display to free up the primary display to display only the image. In Lightroom, all of the tool panels (folder tree, color controls, metadata entry, print settings, etc.) are permanently attached to the primary editing window. You can't detach the tool panels.

It is possible to move the main Lightroom window and its panels to the second monitor, and then use Lightroom's Secondary Display feature to fill the main display with just the Loupe view, but there are some issues with doing it that way. I settle for keeping the main window and its panels on the primary display, and (usually) Grid view on the secondary display.

Whether there is a benefit of going over 27” is a personal preference. Some find 30” and higher too much area to take in at a close desktop viewing distance, they prefer two 27” or smaller. Others prefer one bigger display that keeps everything in one place, while taking up less desk space than two smaller displays.



eschurr said:


> -- resolution. 2560 x 1440 resolution is the minimum requirement for a 27-inch monitor. is something higher, like 4K, important?


2560 x 1440 is an established standard, nothing wrong with it. But all devices are moving toward Retina/HiDPI resolutions, led by smartphones and tablets but increasingly laptop displays and now desktop displays. So 4K is becoming more important if you want to see your images as your viewers do. To use a 4K display, your computer will need a graphics card that has enough power and video RAM to drive 4K with good performance, especially for Lightroom. Also, older OSs and some applications are not yet fully adapted to 4K so their controls and text may appear too small. If you’ve got the hardware and the software for 4K, then you might want to go for it.

One way to find out if you’d like 4K is to go to the nearest Apple Store and look at images on the 4K and 5K iMacs. You’ll probably know right away whether 4K is something you want. Some people are blown away, others aren’t.



eschurr said:


> -- refresh rate. I understand it's very important for gaming, but is it for Lightroom?


Shouldn’t be very important for Lightroom specifically. However it is an area that can come up if you go 4K, because some graphics cards can do 4K at only 30 frames per second, which some people notice and dislike. If you go 4K your graphics card should support 4K at 60 fps.



eschurr said:


> -- calibration. Some have it built in, but most don't. I use a Spyder right now, and maybe that's fine? Is there a benefit to built-in calibration?


Displays can drift over time. Built-in calibration can work OK; the idea is that it tracks how the hardware changes over time and tries to compensate automatically.

Some of the nicer/more expensive displays like the NEC SpectraView series are calibrated very well at the factory and have built-in calibration that can keep it fairly accurate on its own. But if you want maximum accuracy, it is always better to run an external calibration device like your Spyder periodically.



eschurr said:


> — gamut. I shoot in sRGB because my photos are mostly displayed on my monitor, my HD TV, and other friend's monitors via the web. I don't print a lot. I'm assuming 100% sRGB is good enough.


sRGB should be enough then. For you, a calibrated sRGB display is much more important than a wide-gamut display.


----------



## eschurr

thanks to both of you for your helpful replies.

1. i didn't realize LR's panels couldn't be torn off; thanks for telling me!  It's not clear to me how each of you uses the secondary display -- to show grid view, but you leave the main screen in Loupe or Develop view?
2. I use a Windows 10 machine (i'm getting a Surface Book) so a Mac monitor won't work.  
3. any recommendations on particular 27" monitors (I know that's a lot to ask; there are many out there)


----------



## Conrad Chavez

1. Main display is usually set to Develop unless I'm organizing. Secondary display is usually set to Grid, but sometimes I set it to something else. Like Survey, when I want to compare the image I'm editing to another image it needs to be consistent with. By the way, you don't need a second monitor to try this out. Just choose Window > Secondary Display > Show; a second window will pop up and you can play around with it next to your main window.

2. Don't worry about this part. Macs plug into the same displays that PCs do. My Mac is connected to an NEC PA272W, which was recommended in the article you linked to earlier. A Surface Book has exactly the same video port that Mac laptops do, Mini DisplayPort, and that's the same port it's plugged into on my NEC display.

3. NEC PA series (SpectraView), Eizo, and the higher-end Dells. Possibly the ASUS PA series. That's not a complete list.


----------



## Replytoken

What exactly is wrong with your existing monitor that it needs to be replaced?  The questions in your OP do not seem to lead me to understand what specifically you are wanting your monitor to do, but it cannot at present.

A "great monitor" means different things to different people.  Is light uniformity important to you?  How about the monitor ratio?  Some folks have strong preferences for 16:10  over 16:9.  Do you want a monitor that has software that is compatible with your current Spyder?  Is the length of warranty important?  These are things you may want to consider beyond size (both resolution and screen measurement) and price.  They may not be important to you, but if you are going to drop up to $1k on a monitor, IMHO, you owe it to yourself to consider as many aspects/features of a monitor as possible.

Color gamut can be a whole other ball of wax.  There are more, and better, wide gamut choices today than in the past, but you need to understand the implications of working with Adobe RGB as well as sRGB.

There are a lot of choices at a lot of price points, and it can be easy to overbuy if you are on a budget and your needs are not highly specific.  Then again, you look at a monitor for a large amount of time, and a nice monitor can be quite enjoyable, just as a bad one can drive you crazy.

Good luck,

--Ken


----------



## eschurr

Conrad Chavez said:


> 1. Main display is usually set to Develop unless I'm organizing. Secondary display is usually set to Grid, but sometimes I set it to something else. Like Survey, when I want to compare the image I'm editing to another image it needs to be consistent with. By the way, you don't need a second monitor to try this out. Just choose Window > Secondary Display > Show; a second window will pop up and you can play around with it next to your main window.



this was a great suggestion -- thanks!  i can immediately see how it's helpful.  Now i *need* a second monitor.   



Conrad Chavez said:


> 2. Don't worry about this part. Macs plug into the same displays that PCs do. My Mac is connected to an NEC PA272W, which was recommended in the article you linked to earlier. A Surface Book has exactly the same video port that Mac laptops do, Mini DisplayPort, and that's the same port it's plugged into on my NEC display.



Wow. I didn't realize this was possible.  So i can use a Mac monitor on my Surface Book?  that's quite tempting.  [/QUOTE]



Conrad Chavez said:


> 3. NEC PA series (SpectraView), Eizo, and the higher-end Dells. Possibly the ASUS PA series. That's not a complete list.



The article seemed pretty positive on BenQ monitors, too.  I hadn't heard of them before.

Do you have the same type of monitor for your second monitor?  I was thinking of getting a really good one for my main monitor and a lesser one for the second monitor, but now i wonder if that would throw me off when working on them.


----------



## eschurr

Replytoken said:


> What exactly is wrong with your existing monitor that it needs to be replaced?  The questions in your OP do not seem to lead me to understand what specifically you are wanting your monitor to do, but it cannot at present.



Thanks. I just want a monitor that looks the best it can.  I say mine is five years old, but i really don't remember and it could be much older.  I've seen some newer monitors that look much better; higher resolution, etc.  Mac monitors always impress me, and i didn't realize i could use one with a Windows 10 machine.


----------



## Conrad Chavez

eschurr said:


> Wow. I didn't realize this was possible.  So i can use a Mac monitor on my Surface Book?  that's quite tempting.


That's not exactly what I said...I was saying that mass market displays can be plugged into a PC or Mac. Apple themselves make only one monitor these days, the Thunderbolt Display. It is getting old, not necessarily recommended even if you are a Mac user, and doesn't really work well with PCs.

The only other "Mac monitor" that might be plugged into a PC is the non-Retina iMac computer. Some of those can be used as a monitor through their Mini DisplayPort. But it's not a great idea to buy an entire iMac just to use it as a monitor. Buy a nice standalone monitor instead. (The Retina iMacs cannot be use as external displays.)



eschurr said:


> Do you have the same type of monitor for your second monitor?  I was thinking of getting a really good one for my main monitor and a lesser one for the second monitor, but now i wonder if that would throw me off when working on them.


My primary monitor is whichever one I have that's newer and better, and my secondary is always my older, not so good one. I don't care about them matching because I only do color-critical viewing on the primary monitor, the newer and more accurate one.

When I plug my laptop into the external display, I use the external as the big primary display, and the laptop (in your case the Surface Book) as the secondary display.


----------



## Replytoken

eschurr said:


> Thanks. I just want a monitor that looks the best it can.  I say mine is five years old, but i really don't remember and it could be much older.  I've seen some newer monitors that look much better; higher resolution, etc.  Mac monitors always impress me, and i didn't realize i could use one with a Windows 10 machine.



Be careful when looking at monitors in stores or on display.  They often crank up the brightness to make them look more appealing.  In reality, if you are correctly calibrating your monitor for color critical work, the monitor may look quite dull as the recommended setting is usually around 120 cd/m^2.  When you last calibrated, did you get any kind of adjusted read out your monitor?  Yes, monitor technology has improved a bit in recent years, but monitor life if often measured in hours of service rather than age.  And, some of the older monitors were built quite well.  Some of the earlier NEC MultiSync panels were built quite well, and while later generations did get newer technology, some of the parts were made to be more affordable.  Does your current monitor have an IPS panel?

--Ken


----------



## eschurr

Conrad Chavez said:


> That's not exactly what I said...I was saying that mass market displays can be plugged into a PC or Mac. Apple themselves make only one monitor these days, the Thunderbolt Display. It is getting old, not necessarily recommended even if you are a Mac user, and doesn't really work well with PCs.



OK, got it. I was quite surprised when i believed i could hook up a Mac monitor to my PC.  Guess i was wrong!



Conrad Chavez said:


> When I plug my laptop into the external display, I use the external as the big primary display, and the laptop (in your case the Surface Book) as the secondary display.



I'm thinking i will create a dedicated multi-monitor setup in which i have a dedicated main display and second display.  the Surface Book display is great but small.  when i work on photos i want a really super setup with a 27" main display and at least one or two other displays; a second display for Lightroom and another one for email, web, etc.  I know that's pretty over-done, but i just want it.


----------



## eschurr

Replytoken said:


> Does your current monitor have an IPS panel?



I don't know -- is there an easy way to determine?


----------



## Replytoken

eschurr said:


> I don't know -- is there an easy way to determine?



Monitor panels can generally be looked up on the web by monitor model number.  If you are not familiar with the differences between panel types, and assuming that your current panel is a TN, then any type of IPS panel is going to be a huge improvement.  There are a handful of Dell U series monitors that offer good performance at reasonable prices, and they can be calibrated to reasonably good output with a Spyder.  Again remember, screen size and resolution are independent of each other, so a bigger screen is not necessarily going to display more data unless it can display at a higher resolution (or is a different ratio like 16:10 vs. 16:9).  B&H has very useful search tools that will let you narrow down your choices based on a number of criteria.  See what is available to get an idea of what is currently being offered.  And I suspect that you might be best served with a monitor that is capable of 100% sRGB.

Good luck,

--Ken


----------



## Bob_B

fwiw: Last week I read an interesting review of BenQ's new monitor. (https://luminous-landscape.com/benq-sw2700pt-27-inch-adobe-rgb-monitor-review/) Very good price v. quality + features. Compared favorably (at 10% the cost) to an Eizo, with some reservations. You may want to explore this possibility.


----------



## Replytoken

Bob_B said:


> fwiw: Last week I read an interesting review of BenQ's new monitor. (https://luminous-landscape.com/benq-sw2700pt-27-inch-adobe-rgb-monitor-review/) Very good price v. quality + features. Compared favorably (at 10% the cost) to an Eizo, with some reservations. You may want to explore this possibility.




LuLa has now inplemented its paywall.

--Ken


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

I use one 24" monitor vertically and one 27" monitor horizontally, and like it quite a lot.  When doing a final review I put the loupe on the vertical and the single library display on the wide (i.e. same thing basically) and hide the panels.  Then as I go through vertical shots are huge on the vertical panel, and horizontal shots are huge on the horizontal, and it makes for a nice preview.  But I don't think I could ever go back to having one monitor.

I'd probably have a third but it would block my view of the TV.  :blush:

I'm a big fan of the NEC Spectraview calibrated monitors.  They are not the best known, but I think good value.


----------



## eschurr

Replytoken said:


> Monitor panels can generally be looked up on the web by monitor model number.  If you are not familiar with the differences between panel types, and assuming that your current panel is a TN, then any type of IPS panel is going to be a huge improvement.



My monitor is a Dell LCD W2707.  I think it was the first 27" monitor Dell made.  From what i can tell it uses a Samsung LTM270M1 S-PVA panel -- is that a type of IPS panel?


----------



## eschurr

Bob_B said:


> fwiw: Last week I read an interesting review of BenQ's new monitor. (https://luminous-landscape.com/benq-sw2700pt-27-inch-adobe-rgb-monitor-review/) Very good price v. quality + features. Compared favorably (at 10% the cost) to an Eizo, with some reservations. You may want to explore this possibility.



thanks.  Great article.  I keep hearing about BenQ monitors.  This article caught my eye, too.  http://pc4u.org/best-monitor-for-photo-editing-and-photography/


----------



## eschurr

Ferguson said:


> I use one 24" monitor vertically and one 27" monitor horizontally, and like it quite a lot.  When doing a final review I put the loupe on the vertical and the single library display on the wide (i.e. same thing basically) and hide the panels.  Then as I go through vertical shots are huge on the vertical panel, and horizontal shots are huge on the horizontal, and it makes for a nice preview.  But I don't think I could ever go back to having one monitor..



ha! so you basically use monitor to have a good look at your verticals and another to really see your horizontals?


----------



## Replytoken

eschurr said:


> My monitor is a Dell LCD W2707.  I think it was the first 27" monitor Dell made.  From what i can tell it uses a Samsung LTM270M1 S-PVA panel -- is that a type of IPS panel?



No. S-PVA is somewhat of a higher quality TN-type panel that Samsung and others often use.  Here are two articles that help explain some of the technologies:  LCD Panel Types Explored - PC Monitors  and TFT Central . There are some high end PVA panels, but I suspect that you will be most happy with an IPS panel as the manufacturers (LG being the biggest) offer a lot of IQ even in base models.  NEC uses a lot of IPS panels, and Apple used them for years in their large display monitors.  So, if you saw an Apple display and liked what you saw, that is what an IPS panel can do.  Unless you are in a hurry, do your research on possible candidates.  There are some good review sites that will tell you a lot about various popular models.

Good luck,

--Ken


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

eschurr said:


> ha! so you basically use monitor to have a good look at your verticals and another to really see your horizontals?



Yes, among other things.  I also find the vertical better for reading manuals and other page-formatted material, as those tend to still be (+/-) in an 8.5x11 format and fit better vertical.  It's also better for editing letters (same reason). 

The wide screen is better for programming either with lots of panels across or just wide lines, and better for Lightroom's main window since the panels are not tear-off, and you always need some amount of space on both sides for folders, develop, etc.  So a REALLY wide panel is best for that.

Frankly it took me a few weeks to really get used to it, it just looked odd, and the wrong windows would open up there, but now I would find it hard to go back.  Plus it takes less desk space.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

I'll add two cautions for dual monitors.

One is that wide gamuts can be hard to get working right with sRGB limits on one monitor, at least I failed miserably and set my wide gamut monitor to sRGB (sort of a color lobotomy) to make things work well together.  This is likely my failing, but I did try for quite some time with no success.

And people often find if they have one monitor that is substantially higher DPI (not resolution, DPI) than the other, that fonts are unreadably small on one, or if you adjust, way too large on the other.  Not just fonts but controls, etc. It may be you can adjust this, I know later windows had split DPI support, but I've read of people complaining about this on Windows 10, which could mean it is marginal support, or could mean they didn't hit the right buttons.   Certainly the easiest path is if the DPI's (not resolution but DPI) is vaguely similar.  70% of one is not bad, but 30% can be for example.  I don't know how Apple handles it but think the OP is on windows.


----------



## clee01l

Ferguson said:


> I'll add two cautions for dual monitors...
> And people often find if they have one monitor that is substantially higher DPI (not resolution, DPI) than the other, that fonts are unreadably small on one, or if you adjust, way too large on the other.  Not just fonts but controls, etc. It may be you can adjust this, I know later windows had split DPI support, but I've read of people complaining about this on Windows 10, which could mean it is marginal support, or could mean they didn't hit the right buttons.


I don't think Win10 offers split DPI support.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

clee01l said:


> I don't think Win10 offers split DPI support.



Maybe that's the wrong term (but I thought not), right click on an open part of the desktop, go to display settings, and the slider bar there affects only the screen which is selected at the time.

I've tried it but am not using it so I cannot comment on how comprehensive its support is.


----------



## aldin

The Dell Ultra Sharp was a fine monitor and should serve you well


----------



## aldin

Look at here


----------



## fsuscotsman

I've got a BenQ monitor that I just bought. It's a 32 inch version and I am really impressed. I moved up from a 24 inch screen and the difference is HUGE!! Literally! Having more windows, side by side, without them getting to the point that I needed a magnifying glass has been a wonderful improvement to my 60+ year old eyes.


----------



## mcasan

iMac 5k 27" or one of the new LG 5K monitors if you have a new MacBook with USC-C TB3 ports.


----------



## clee01l

seanmiller said:


> 1080p resolution monitor will do the job.


While the answer to that is yes, 1080p is fast becoming obsolete as a standard.


----------



## steven 77

clee01l said:


> I don't think Win10 offers split DPI support.


 I think Dell UP3216Q is a good monitor.


----------



## tspear

I have anew BenQ SW320. So far so good, better than my older Mac screens (2014 Mac Book Pro or 2013 ACD)

Tom

Sent from my LG-TP260 using Tapatalk


----------



## Katy Melo

Thanks for the great info! What about bigger screens ? 
I’m using my TV in the living room for my desktop display and want to change it with a pro level photo editing screen but also want to watch TV on it . Are there any good options on the market regardless of the price?


----------



## clee01l

Welcome to the forum.  Conventional High Definition  TV  (HDTV). usually does not exceed 1920×1080p.  Modern laptop computers use a Hi-DPI or retina configuration providing a much higher resolution (a 15in MBP is 2880x1800 pixels).   A 27" iMac has a resolution of 5120 x 2880 pixels.   This is often called a 5K display.   There are 5K computer displays made by most other name brand monitor manufactures.  And Windows is now HiDPI  aware so that you can connect a HiDPI display to any computer and get a high definition image.   There are also 4K and 5K  monitors for broadcast TV.  
On the assumption that you get your TV via a cable box. you really do not need a TV capable of receiving over the air broadcasts.  Any monitor with an HDMI port will accept your Cable TV signals.


----------



## Bob_B

FWIW: Dustin Abbott recently reviewed the BenQ SW271 monitor. The review is on youtube at:


----------



## stevevp

Bob_B said:


> FWIW: Dustin Abbott recently reviewed the BenQ SW271 monitor.



Doesn't that need a 10-bit pro video card to drive it?


----------



## bobbabe

This is a great thread-thank you. Was trying to learn the best settings for a 27"iMac Retina display. There are 14 options from "iMac" to sRGB IEC61966-2.1.  What would you suggest for Lightroom use? Ok, anyone answers, after checking "Show profiles for this display only" the options are iMac, iMac Calibrated and iMac Calibrated-2" a bit more limiting. Any suggestions? Thank you-


----------



## Replytoken

bobbabe said:


> This is a great thread-thank you. Was trying to learn the best settings for a 27"iMac Retina display. There are 14 options from "iMac" to sRGB IEC61966-2.1.  What would you suggest for Lightroom use? Ok, anyone answers, after checking "Show profiles for this display only" the options are iMac, iMac Calibrated and iMac Calibrated-2" a bit more limiting. Any suggestions? Thank you-


I do not own an iMac so can you tell me if the Calibrated option is one that you created or one that came with the monitor?  Calibration software usually allows you to name the calibration when the puck is finished.

--Ken


----------



## bobbabe

I did not calibrate. That is just one of the three options so i suppose I'd have to calibrate then name. I was just wondering what setting  REGB,SRGB ,Adobe works best with LIghtroom .


----------



## clee01l

bobbabe said:


> What would you suggest for Lightroom use? Ok, anyone answers, after checking "Show profiles for this display only" the options are iMac, iMac Calibrated and iMac Calibrated-2"


Lightroom uses ProPhotoRGB  for a working color profile.  Apple's current displays can display a larger envelop than ProPhotoRGB.  Set the display to "Display P3"  to get the most colors that your display can produce.   In terms of the largest gamut available , " Display P3" is the largest, Some monitors can approach "wide-gamut RGB" , Next in area covered would be ProPhotoRGB, then Adobe RGB, then the smallest envelop sRGB.

Your destination media should determine at the color profile used for the files exported.


----------



## Johan Elzenga

clee01l said:


> Apple's current displays can display a larger envelop than ProPhotoRGB


Huh? I assume you mean *can't*. There is no display in the world that can show all the colors of ProPhotoRGB and there never will be, because ProPhotoRGB even has some colors outside of the human vision. That doesn't really matter however, because your camera can't produce these colors either.


----------



## clee01l

Johan Elzenga said:


> Huh? I assume you mean *can't*. There is no display in the world that can show all the colors of ProPhotoRGB and there never will be, because ProPhotoRGB even has some colors outside of the human vision. That doesn't really matter however, because your camera can't produce these colors either.


. Yes you are right,  trying to post from memory rather than example



https://creativepro.com/how-do-p3-displays-affect-your-workflow/


----------



## LouieSherwin

bobbabe said:


> I did not calibrate. That is just one of the three options so i suppose I'd have to calibrate then name. I was just wondering what setting  REGB,SRGB ,Adobe works best with LIghtroom .



The good news is you have a wonderful wide gamut monitor for editing and viewing you images in Lightroom. So don't artificially limit your self.

For editing and viewing in Lightroom you should always calibrate any monitor to it's native gamut. Setting it to anything else is simply restricting what you can see on the monitor. There are only few specific use cases where you might want to do otherwise.

With a correctly calibrated monitor the color management system (CMS) built in to the OS will seamlessly handle all the color translations necessary including if and when want to export to be viewed on the WEB. This is the point where you want to export the image(s) in the sRGB colorspace for optimal viewing by the millions of mostly uncalibrated displays. 

-louie


----------



## dbump

I think the more recent Dell UltraSharp monitors are worth a look.  They offer very decent quality/value.
Re: 4K, one thing to keep in mind is that your eye can't resolve the difference beyond a specific distance from the screen, depending on the size of the screen, and your eye.  For a 27" screen, that range is 2-3 feet of viewing distance--again, depending on your eyes.  If you happen to live near a MicroCenter, they often have a great selection of display models of the same size but different resolutions (also quite decent prices, if you find one you like!).  For my eyes, I didn't see a difference between the QHD and 4K on two Dell 27" ultrasharp monitors, side-by-side, with the notable exception of the price tags.  I do think 2560x1440 would be a very nice addition to your existing monitor.  The 16:10 aspect ratio of your current monitor doesn't seem to be popular any more, which is too bad.  It's really nice for editing, where you have tools around an image of a different aspect ratio.  I think that's why you're seeing monitors that are wider but not taller.


----------



## Paul_DS256

eschurr said:


> I don't print a lot


A related question. I have a ASUS ProArt and Epson XP-15000 Printer. I'm very happy with this setup since my prints represent what I see on the monitor. Is there a consideration of a better monitor which shows more color than a printer can reproduce or is that what Soft  Proofing covers? I guess this also talks to what the monitor shows and what technology you will exhibit on.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

Paul_DS256 said:


> A related question. I have a ASUS ProArt and Epson XP-15000 Printer. I'm very happy with this setup since my prints represent what I see on the monitor. Is there a consideration of a better monitor which shows more color than a printer can reproduce or is that what Soft  Proofing covers? I guess this also talks to what the monitor shows and what technology you will exhibit on.


At least in theory a wide monitor plus soft proofing gives you more ability to see what a printer can print if the printer can render colors outside the sRGB gamut.  But most printers and soft proofing is pretty far from perfect and I would think this would mostly be lost in the details.  Since a printed page is viewed by reflected light, and a screen by projected light, they are inherently different.  But yes, a wide monitor has more ability to display soft proofing than a narrow.


----------



## Paul_DS256

eschurr said:


> my photos are mostly displayed on my monitor, my HD TV, and other friend's monitors via the web. I don't print a lot


It took me a day to refine my thought. It seems to me that there is a correlation between the quality of the monitor needed and how you will present your pictures. For example, for the OP,  it sounds like the lowest common denominator here is presenting on the web. In mind it's printing.

I'm reminded of the early days of radio where engineers would do a final mix of a song based on how it sounded on a single typical speaker found in an automobile. It didn't matter how good it sounded from the actual studio recording but what the audience was using to listen to it.

I've also heard rumors about people with Retina displays being disappointed with comparative prints.

Is there an issue here of diminishing returns on monitor quality  based on chosen presentation medium?


----------



## Replytoken

Paul_DS256 said:


> It took me a day to refine my thought. It seems to me that there is a correlation between the quality of the monitor needed and how you will present your pictures. For example, for the OP,  it sounds like the lowest common denominator here is presenting on the web. In mind it's printing.
> 
> I'm reminded of the early days of radio where engineers would do a final mix of a song based on how it sounded on a single typical speaker found in an automobile. It didn't matter how good it sounded from the actual studio recording but what the audience was using to listen to it.
> 
> I've also heard rumors about people with Retina displays being disappointed with comparative prints.
> 
> Is there an issue here of diminishing returns on monitor quality  based on chosen presentation medium?


I am reminded of the words, "the more I learn the less I know".  It is a matter of personal expectations and understanding the limits of display medium.  What is important to you and how much effort do you want to put into attempting to get the results that you wish to achieve?  I appreciate a good monitor screen and a good print, but I am also aware that much of the world looks at images on their phones for maybe a few seconds at most.  I can control how my images should look, but I cannot control how others view them, so I try not to drive myself crazy about it.

Good luck,

--Ken


----------



## SaraLH

I have two Dell Ultra Sharp monitors, an older 24" and a year-old 27". Both IPS panels have AdobeRGB on board and can be calibrated. The 24" has held up for 10 years now, so I really have gotten a good value for my money.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson

Replytoken said:


> What is important to you and how much effort do you want to put into attempting to get the results that you wish to achieve?


One thing I've learned but still refuse to readily accept is this: There is no "right". 

I have taken runs at this variously with white balance as well as color calibration with MacBeth charts.  Every attempt to say "ok, I may like what it looks like, but is it correct, is it accurate" gets met with a lot of very scientific and I am sure well reasons idea why my question is not meaningful.  That is is inadequately constrained.

Starting in physics, then engineering and math, I have trouble accepting there is no objective "accurate" answer.

But a lot of very smart people have gotten me to the point that I do really believe that:  

- Find something you like the looks of, 
- Validate it by showing a few others (some photographers and some not) who will give you honest opinions

Loop back if your friends say "yuck".  Then move on.


----------



## Littlefield

Paul_DS256 said:


> A related question. I have a ASUS ProArt and Epson XP-15000 Printer. I'm very happy with this setup since my prints represent what I see on the monitor. Is there a consideration of a better monitor which shows more color than a printer can reproduce or is that what Soft  Proofing covers? I guess this also talks to what the monitor shows and what technology you will exhibit on.


Paul,  just  ordered XP - 15000 from B&H. I have LR standalone last ver. 6.14. Will I be able to see Epson generic paper profiles under other and use LR for printing not printer mang  with LR6.14 and this Epson printer ? Curious if you used this printer with LR 6.14 and were able to print this way in LR with it ?
Guess the good news is though I can just upgrade to the lastest LR Classic ver. and be able to see them all under spool color by clicking other and use LR to print  control color like I did on my old Epson 1400. That baby lasted about 10 years and power plant just went out on me. LOL Thanks .
Don


----------



## Paul_DS256

Littlefield said:


> Will I be able to see Epson generic paper profiles under other and use LR for printing not printer mang with LR6.14 and this Epson printer ?


Hi Don. My understanding, and I will let the guru's correct me if I'm wrong, is that the profiling for monitors is separate from the profiles used in printing. That means if you should be calibrating your monitor to get a profile to load into your monitor's video if you are not doing so already.  I use a Spyder 4 for screen calibrating.  The monitor and printer will cover different colour gamuts with some overlapping and some exclusions.

When you install the XP-15000, the profiles for the Epson printers are automatically loaded and available to programs like LR. The only thing I've had to do is guess at matching some of the names of the profile to the paper name. Epson used abbreviations in the profiles.

Where profiles meet in LR (I believe)  is in soft proofing where LR attempts to show you what your print will look like on the monitor. I don't use this at the moment since I find the print matches very close to the screen rendering. There is also the different between the reflective nature of prints versus the colour generation light source of a monitor. Couple that with colour management gamut transformation from screen to print profiles and some changes are expected.

In terms of printing, I would not suspect you would have any problems with a newer problem like the XP-15000. When I made the jump from LR6 to LR Classic I did have problems with my older Epson 1400. LR for some reason did not process the pictures properly. I had to hand off colour management to the printer itself rather than letting LR manage colour management.


----------



## Littlefield

Thanks, Paul. Yea, to be clear was only talking about the generic Epson ICC paper profiles that are required to select in LR under other in LR 6.14 print mode to let LR manage colors. Think they are stored in C:\Windows\System32\Spool\drivers\color
As far as monitor  I have a HP LP2475w and will have to calibrate it with my Xrite i1display Pro and that will be fun with the new 
Epson XP-15000. LOL
Don


----------



## LouieSherwin

Littlefield said:


> Will I be able to see Epson generic paper profiles under other and use LR for printing not printer mang with LR6.14 and this Epson printer ?



This is primarily a function of your OS and having the correct print driver software installed.  Then in Lightroom you will need to make them visible by adding them to Lightroom's internal profile list. 

You do this while in the Print module, Print Job tab, Color Management, Profile pull down menu. Open that and at the bottom there is an option "Other". select that and you will get a dialog taking you to a list of all the profiles that Lightroom can see. After installing the correct driver you can than select which paper options you want to use. 

They will then be always included in the Profile: pull down menu.

-louie


----------



## Paul_DS256

Littlefield said:


> generic Epson ICC paper profiles that are required to select in LR under other in LR 6.14


These should have been automatically loaded when you installed the driver and software for the 15000. 



Littlefield said:


> I have a HP LP2475w and will have to calibrate it with my Xrite i1display Pro and that will be fun with the new
> Epson XP-15000


There is no coorelation between calibrating your HO monitor using Xrite with your print. They are separate profiles.


----------



## Littlefield

LouieSherwin said:


> This is primarily a function of your OS and having the correct print driver software installed.  Then in Lightroom you will need to make them visible by adding them to Lightroom's internal profile list.
> 
> You do this while in the Print module, Print Job tab, Color Management, Profile pull down menu. Open that and at the bottom there is an option "Other". select that and you will get a dialog taking you to a list of all the profiles that Lightroom can see. After installing the correct driver you can than select which paper options you want to use.
> 
> They will then be always included in the Profile: pull down menu.
> 
> -louie


Thanks, Louie. Yea,  I always got better results with my Epson 1400 letting Lightroom do color management not the printer. Some reviews of the XP 15000 said they could not print with LR so thought it strange.
Don


----------



## Paul_DS256

Littlefield said:


> I always got better results with my Epson 1400 letting Lightroom do color management not the printer. Some reviews of the XP 15000 said they could not print with LR so thought it strange.


I had problems when I upgraded from LR6 to LR Classic. LR no longer worked with profiles properly. I had to let the 1400 manage colour. I now have an XP 15000 and have no problems with LR Classic managing colour


----------



## Littlefield

I am very happy with the  Epson XP 15000. Printed great richer colors than my old  Epson 1400 and profiles installed correctly on C drive.
Might check out Red River now but this printer matched on Epson UP Glossy paper perfect to my  old HP LP2474w wide gamut monitor.
Don


----------



## Paul_DS256

Littlefield said:


> I am very happy with the Epson XP 15000


Me to. Great picture BTW.


----------



## Littlefield

Thanks, Paul.
Don


----------

