Which to get - NEC PA series monitor or 4K monitor?

Joined
Feb 18, 2015
Messages
1,096
Location
New York State
The problem with those D50 5000°K lighting booths on which Offset Litho press operators depend, is that they use a discontinuous spectrum fluorescent light source and they actually make it very hard to judge colour-balance perfectly.

I have always tried to be "On-Press" when my jobs are being printed and I take a printed proof sheet out into the car park to judge it by real daylight before finally signing-off on the job!

25 years ago the high-end CRT Barco and ColorMatch monitors (which were the "industry standard") were calibrated for 50K and were run at 1.8 gamma.

They were indeed both dim and yellow by today's standards and it was very difficult to judge how blue phosphors would be replicated by magenta+cyan inks.
Also much printing stock is coated with optical Brighteners so the appearance of the printed piece looks very different under UV-containing daylight.

I think that most people now set their screens to D65 and 2.2 gamma.
 
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
6,239
Location
Meadville, PA
140 cd/m² is probably fine if you are only using the monitor for on-screen viewing and internet work but it is much too bright for print work because your printed results (both inkjet and offset litho) will always come out looking much darker than you expected.

100 cd/m² (or even slightly lower) would be a better setting if you print.

But do understand that the average Web-user will probably be running their monitor at its maximum brightness (160 cd/m² or brighter!) so your posted images will look much too bright and washed-out to those viewers. The ways in which others set their machines; and their choice of web browsers (most of them without any colour management capability!); is beyond our control.

I usually compromise and use 120 cd/m² for day to day work but I create, and save, a Spectrum profile for 100 cd/cd/m² as well so that I can switch to it on the fly as needed.

.....snipped here....
On my last monitor, 90 cd/m² is what I used because that allowed my prints to match what I saw. As I stated in my earlier post, I allowed SpectraViewII to run the calibration with a target of 140 cd/m² as that was its default setting. I was expecting to have to do it again at a lower setting. However, when I printed a test image on my Epson P800 using the approprite profile for the printer and paper, the print matched the monitor.

That is what I wanted. I want to edit an image in LR and PS and when I am finished print it. I want the print to look like it does on my screen (or at least as close as possible). That is what I have now. I was surprised to get it on the first attempt, and even more surprised to get it with a setting of 140 cd/m². But I did.

Bottom line is I don't care what the numbers are. I care that my prints match what I see on the screen... and for now they do.
 

Butlerkid

Cafe Ambassador
Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
20,932
Location
Rutledge, Tennessee
Real Name
Karen
On my last monitor, 90 cd/m² is what I used because that allowed my prints to match what I saw. As I stated in my earlier post, I allowed SpectraViewII to run the calibration with a target of 140 cd/m² as that was its default setting. I was expecting to have to do it again at a lower setting. However, when I printed a test image on my Epson P800 using the approprite profile for the printer and paper, the print matched the monitor.

That is what I wanted. I want to edit an image in LR and PS and when I am finished print it. I want the print to look like it does on my screen (or at least as close as possible). That is what I have now. I was surprised to get it on the first attempt, and even more surprised to get it with a setting of 140 cd/m². But I did.

Bottom line is I don't care what the numbers are. I care that my prints match what I see on the screen... and for now they do.
Sounds like you are liking your NEC! Congrats!
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
3,889
Location
UK
...I want to edit an image in LR and PS and when I am finished print it. I want the print to look like it does on my screen (or at least as close as possible). That is what I have now. I was surprised to get it on the first attempt, and even more surprised to get it with a setting of 140 cd/m². But I did.

Bottom line is I don't care what the numbers are. I care that my prints match what I see on the screen... and for now they do.
Good to hear that you are happy with your NEC.

No one should really be surprised at your figure of 140 cd/m2 and getting a print to screen match, 160 is not uncommon with bright print viewing.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom