loboimages Loc: Texas

My computer monitor does not have adjustment features that allow me to make prints that match the monitor. I am looking for a monitor that is more useful for photography. I would appreciate any recommendations on monitoring brands that meet these requirements—many thanks.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

LG 27UP850-W 27” UHD (3840 x 2160) IPS Monitor

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=LG+27UP850-W+27”+UHD+%283840+x+2160%29+IPS+Monitor


Far more important than the monitor is monitor calibration and profiling with a hardware device and software (calibration kit from Datacolor or Calibrite).

Calibration and profiling are both guided by the software in the calibration kit. Calibration LINEARIZES the output of the monitor so it produces neutral gray at all levels between pure black and pure white. Profiling DESCRIBES the exact characteristics of your specific device to the operating system's color engine, so it can be matched with an international standard and all other properly calibrated devices (including photo labs).

Your monitor is the HUB of your color management strategy. If you can believe the monitor, your prints will look very close to your monitor image.

fredpnm Loc: Corrales, NM

Everyone swears by the benefit of calibrating their monitor(s) and I'm sure some get great results. I have two LG 32GN63T monitors and use the latest tools from Datacolor. In the end, neither monitor looks right (whites are very much off-white for example), and second the two monitors never look the same - I follow, to the letter, all instructions, and no matter what I do does the calibration result in useable displays. I like my manual adjustments better - and they match printed results better too.

I had the same issues with my two 27" Samsung monitors. Yes, it could be operator errors all around, but if using products like what Datacolor offers is supposed to make the process easier and more accurate, it isn't working for me.

From following others' efforts in calibrating monitors I have seen fair numbers with the same general final results as mine.

I wish everyone good luck in their efforts.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

You probably need someone with lab experience to walk you through it. It’s a system. All parts have to be tuned in unity.

My monitors match. My prints from my lab match as well as can be expected when comparing CMYK++ inkjet or CMY silver halide chromogenic prints with RGB monitors.

Nothing is ever perfect, but you can get multiple devices so close that you don’t need to care about the differences.

yssirk123 Loc: New Jersey

Check out BenQ monitors. The features to look for are hardware calibration (superior to using just software), 99% Adobe RGB, 100% sRGB, and 10-bit color depth. I use BenQ's Pallette Master software with a Datacolor SpyderX Pro colorimeter.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

I agree with Bill. The process needs to be completed properly. I have two 5k monitors, on a iMac PRO and one a LG, and they match each other AND prints (both made and purchased) exactly. I use an X-Rite device, and pay attention to color space, icc profiles and the exact paper used for printing (Red River). It takes some time the first time, until you fully understand the process, but its a snap after that! There's lots of information on the Red River Paper web site. Best of luck.

loboimages Loc: Texas

Burk photo,

Thank you for thoroughly explaining what I need to achieve quality printing in addition to the right monitor. I have a Spyder 5, but its service is limited without a computer with adjustment features, so a new computer is my first step. I have a lot to learn, but your information will significantly help.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

I prefer 5k monitors! YMMV! Best of luck.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

You might be able to use it. Give it a try. It creates a monitor profile which is applied to your monitor at startup. You don't need any physical controls. My monitors have NO physical controls either. Best of luck!

loboimages Loc: Texas

There is a professional photographer that lives close to me, so I will get in touch with him. Thanks again for your suggestions.

loboimages Loc: Texas

Thanks for your suggestions. I am getting a lot of information to help me resolve my problem. Yours will add to my learning.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

If I recall, you use iMacs, right? In that case, the calibration kit will tell you to:

>> Reset the monitor to factory settings,

>> Turn off all automatic controls for brightness (dim on battery for laptops),

>> Turn off night time color temperature adjustment (Night Shift), and

>> Turn off True Tone (color temperature auto adjustment for different ambient lighting).

>> Adjust the brightness manually to a specific level as measured by the calibration kit.

In other words, you turn off ALL automatic monitor controls.

Then the software runs its calibration and profiling steps and installs a profile that serves as both a LUT to linearize the monitor and a profile of the monitor's color characteristics. If you have multiple monitors, you start with the one you use as a main monitor and then run a routine to match the other(s) to that one.

It works great on my old iMac and my M1 MacBook Air. I can match my LG 27" and the Air, very closely.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Agreed. I get a perfect match on both. Don't know much about the OP's computer/age. Best of luck.

Hereford Loc: Palm Coast, FL

I currently use an aging late 2014 27" iMac with a Retina display. You are suggesting a 27" monitor that is only 3840 x 2160 resolution. My old iMac display is 5120 x 2880. Why would I not be better off with the higher resolution iMac display ????

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

I have a huge respect for that 5K iMac display. But for the money, at 27", a good 4K display is nearly indistinguishable from it. Since a large part of what I do is video, I need a 4K display. Would I like an Apple Studio Display or Pro Display XDR? Of course! But there is this economic concept of diminishing marginal returns on investment, and since I don't need true HDR or impressive aesthetics, and I'm not running a lab any longer, I'll spend my extra money on a new camera body or a new iPhone.

Honestly, I can't tell the difference except for the iMac having more real estate! They have the same aspect ratio. The newer display has a slightly wider (99% of P3) color gamut that matches my laptop's gamut within 2%. It meets minimum standards for HDR, although I never use more than 1/3 of that brightness for most work (It is set on 18 out of 100 right now!)

More is not always better. You're at 24 to 27 inches from either display, if you are seeing the whole screen. At that distance, the resolution difference is not discernible. Our eyes cannot see more than about 240 pixels per inch at a 13 inch viewing distance from an 8x10 print. We need 300 PPI or so to view a 5x7 from 9 inches. We need about 180 pixels per inch to view an 11x14 from its diagonal dimension, and about 160 pixels per inch to view a 16x20 from 26 inches. A 27" monitor has an effective resolution of about 163 PPI, and is 23.54 inches wide. So... at a 27" viewing distance, I'm not going to care. My eyes can't see all the detail that is there.

In actual use, the 27" 4K monitor has done exactly what I need it to do. If anything, the view on it from my desktop vantage point is at least slightly better than any other screen I own, and (with the exceptions mentioned above) that I have used.

I would choose a 10-bit monitor with a wider color gamut before I would spend money on additional screen real estate. In a photo lab or boutique print shop, I would choose one reference monitor with 10-bit color and 100% Adobe RGB color gamut capability, and use P3 monitors elsewhere for casual viewing. Likewise, I'd use a video reference monitor in a serious video editing bay, as the final arbiter of color during color grading. But I'd use a good 65" 4K TV during editing as the primary timeline monitor and for edit bay guests to view.