If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Calibartion of iMac 27" screen
Was looking today at an Apple iMac with 27" screen to replace my rather old
PC-Windows PX system. After getting a 1 hour very interesting explanation and demo I did ask how to calibarte the screen. I was really astonished by the anwer: "it is not possible due to the way the screen is build, not even with e.g I-1 sysytem" If this is correct, how can Apple claim to be better computer for photographers? Anyone in this ng that can confirm this? Dirk van Lut |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Calibartion of iMac 27" screen
In article , dirk van lut
wrote: Was looking today at an Apple iMac with 27" screen to replace my rather old PC-Windows PX system. After getting a 1 hour very interesting explanation and demo I did ask how to calibarte the screen. I was really astonished by the anwer: "it is not possible due to the way the screen is build, not even with e.g I-1 sysytem" If this is correct, how can Apple claim to be better computer for photographers? it's not correct and that person has no clue. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Calibartion of iMac 27" screen
nospam wrote:
In article , dirk van lut wrote: Was looking today at an Apple iMac with 27" screen to replace my rather old PC-Windows PX system. After getting a 1 hour very interesting explanation and demo I did ask how to calibarte the screen. I was really astonished by the anwer: "it is not possible due to the way the screen is build, not even with e.g I-1 sysytem" If this is correct, how can Apple claim to be better computer for photographers? it's not correct and that person has no clue. Some of the 27" Imac have bugs with screen flickering. You may want to google that and defer buying until they've got it sorted. The more recent Imac 24s also have an issue with screen brightness not being able to be set low enough for many users. (I)Macs aren't "better" for photographers WRT screens. Even the cinema displays are only average performers and not well featured for the price. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Calibartion of iMac 27" screen
On 2009-11-28 11:04:15 -0800, "dirk van lut" said:
Was looking today at an Apple iMac with 27" screen to replace my rather old PC-Windows PX system. After getting a 1 hour very interesting explanation and demo I did ask how to calibarte the screen. I was really astonished by the anwer: "it is not possible due to the way the screen is build, not even with e.g I-1 sysytem" If this is correct, how can Apple claim to be better computer for photographers? Anyone in this ng that can confirm this? Dirk van Lut There is an issue with the X-Rite I1 calibration software and at least some LED displays. It is an issue not only with the iMac, but with just about any monitor with an LED display. According to a thread on the Apple Discussions group, this was confirmed at an X-Rite training session about six weeks ago. However, the monitor can be calibrated, although it does not have as wide a brightness range as an LCD monitor. One person on the discussion group reported that a program called Shades will reduce the brightness of the monitor enough to make it work with your eye-1 software. http://discussions.apple.com/thread....42163&tstart=0 -- Waddling Eagle World Famous Flight Instructor |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Calibartion of iMac 27" screen
In message , dirk van lut
writes Was looking today at an Apple iMac with 27" screen to replace my rather old PC-Windows PX system. After getting a 1 hour very interesting explanation and demo I did ask how to calibarte the screen. I was really astonished by the anwer: "it is not possible due to the way the screen is build, not even with e.g I-1 sysytem" If this is correct, how can Apple claim to be better computer for photographers? The computer is a better system for photographers (this is partly a self fore filling prophecy... many photographers use them that the best photo Sw is available for them) however the top photographers and graphics people don't use MAC monitors where colour definition is important. They use different hi quality monitors. The iMACs that have a built in screen are the exception to this. I use a G5 with non Apple monitors. Though they are not the high end makes used by the top pro's -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Calibartion of iMac 27" screen
C J Campbell wrote:
On 2009-11-28 11:04:15 -0800, "dirk van lut" said: Was looking today at an Apple iMac with 27" screen to replace my rather old PC-Windows PX system. After getting a 1 hour very interesting explanation and demo I did ask how to calibarte the screen. I was really astonished by the anwer: "it is not possible due to the way the screen is build, not even with e.g I-1 sysytem" If this is correct, how can Apple claim to be better computer for photographers? Anyone in this ng that can confirm this? Dirk van Lut There is an issue with the X-Rite I1 calibration software and at least some LED displays. It is an issue not only with the iMac, but with just about any monitor with an LED display. According to a thread on the Apple Discussions group, this was confirmed at an X-Rite training session about six weeks ago. However, the monitor can be calibrated, although it does not have as wide a brightness range as an LCD monitor. One person on the discussion group reported that a program called Shades will reduce the brightness of the monitor enough to make it work with your eye-1 software. http://discussions.apple.com/thread....42163&tstart=0 "LED" displays /are/ LCD displays. Most just use "white" LEDs instead of cold cathode fluorescent tubes for backlighting. Premium "pro" LED backlit displays for graphic use R,G,and B LEDs, with the possibility to adjust each backlight colour channel level. RGB gain level setting on normal (including white LED backlit panels) is compromised by non-linear response of the LCD "pixels" to signal voltage, and colour cast of the white backlight. Some can still be very good, and RGB LED backlit graphic displays are still very expensive. There's no real advantage to white LEDs over CCFL, in spectrum of "white" light, in consistency of colour over time, in life expectancy, and very little advantage in power saving. There may be some advantage in warm up time. Main advantage is that they allow thin monitors. "Shades" and similar programs are a stop-gap measure, compressing the 256 levels per channel to less is reducing colour/dynamic range and probably increasing chance of posterisation/banding. If Apple has borked the 27" Imac as badly or worse than the later silver coloured 24" Imacs, as indicated in the link to the thread you post, then for use for photography, I strongly suggest that the OP avoids that model. ~200 cd/m2 minimum white level is too high for print-matching. That was about the minimum level users reported with the iMac 24". Someone at Apple needs a good poke in the eye for trading on their past probably deserved reputation for quality for graphics use, to turn out crippled dross for the mass-market. Reviews for iMacs should be viewed with a skeptical eye, there's a lot of fanboyism out there. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Calibartion of iMac 27" screen
dirk van lut wrote:
Was looking today at an Apple iMac with 27" screen to replace my rather old PC-Windows PX system. After getting a 1 hour very interesting explanation and demo I did ask how to calibarte the screen. I was really astonished by the anwer: "it is not possible due to the way the screen is build, not even with e.g I-1 sysytem" If this is correct, how can Apple claim to be better computer for photographers? I calibrated my 24" iMac (LED backlit) screen using a Spyder. However, having previously calibrated using the Apple method, the difference between out-of-the-box-factory, manual and Spyder calibration was for all intents too slim to really matter. Room lighting and the colour of my shirt probably have more effect on the image than the deltas. Where did you get that answer? From a person or a manual? The reality is that the video card drives the screen according to chosen profiles. That is what is changed in calibration, in effect, so yes, the screen can indeed be calibrated to your needs. (the screen itself may be unaffected, but it has no knowledge about what is being thrown at it). I do hope you're driving it DVI, IAC. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Calibartion of iMac 27" screen
Me wrote:
nospam wrote: In article , dirk van lut wrote: Was looking today at an Apple iMac with 27" screen to replace my rather old PC-Windows PX system. After getting a 1 hour very interesting explanation and demo I did ask how to calibarte the screen. I was really astonished by the anwer: "it is not possible due to the way the screen is build, not even with e.g I-1 sysytem" If this is correct, how can Apple claim to be better computer for photographers? it's not correct and that person has no clue. Some of the 27" Imac have bugs with screen flickering. You may want to google that and defer buying until they've got it sorted. The more recent Imac 24s also have an issue with screen brightness not being able to be set low enough for many users. (I)Macs aren't "better" for photographers WRT screens. Even the cinema displays are only average performers and not well featured for the price. iMac displays are certainly better than most screens sold with PC's. Way. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Calibartion of iMac 27" screen
In article , Me
wrote: (I)Macs aren't "better" for photographers WRT screens. Even the cinema displays are only average performers and not well featured for the price. they're actually very good displays. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Calibartion of iMac 27" screen
In article , Me
wrote: There's no real advantage to white LEDs over CCFL, in spectrum of "white" light, in consistency of colour over time, in life expectancy, and very little advantage in power saving. There may be some advantage in warm up time. Main advantage is that they allow thin monitors. there definitely is an advantage. led backlighting is brighter, lasts longer, doesn't fade and is better for the environment. "Shades" and similar programs are a stop-gap measure, compressing the 256 levels per channel to less is reducing colour/dynamic range and probably increasing chance of posterisation/banding. shades is a hack, and one that's not needed. If Apple has borked the 27" Imac as badly or worse than the later silver coloured 24" Imacs, as indicated in the link to the thread you post, then for use for photography, I strongly suggest that the OP avoids that model. that's bad advice. the lcd panel in the 27" imac is very, very good. ~200 cd/m2 minimum white level is too high for print-matching. That was about the minimum level users reported with the iMac 24". it's not that big of a deal. Someone at Apple needs a good poke in the eye for trading on their past probably deserved reputation for quality for graphics use, to turn out crippled dross for the mass-market. Reviews for iMacs should be viewed with a skeptical eye, there's a lot of fanboyism out there. and anti-fanboism as well. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"Corset-Boi" Bob "Lionel Lauer" Larter has grown a "pair" and returned to AUK................ | \The Great One\ | Digital Photography | 0 | July 14th 09 12:04 AM |
Is there a decent point and shoot with image stabilization and a 3" screen for $150.00?. | Ted[_2_] | Digital Photography | 1 | April 2nd 07 07:41 AM |
Canon "Black Screen" | Big John | Digital Photography | 5 | November 30th 06 10:23 PM |
GET A IMAC G5 AND OTHER ITEMS FOR ONLY $40.00 | J.may | Digital Photography | 0 | March 13th 05 05:55 AM |
New imac g5 | ed | Digital Photography | 19 | September 8th 04 12:31 PM |