what makes a 'good' monitor?

Right now I just have my laptop monitor which i HATE because if the angle is off a little bit its too dark or bright. So I was going to ask for a new monitor for Christmas but then realized i dont know jack about them- what 'specs' should I look at/ ask for in a monitor?

Maybe I should tell you what I am looking for in a monitor- I'm going to be using Lightroom and Photoshop, I dont make money off my images- im a photog. student, so it doesnt have to be top notch, just something better than my laptops 15" screen and 'good enough' to use LR and PS.

any input is appreciated.

Holy cow, for the past today this question has been eating my head. I have no clue about what good "specs" are on a good monitor

All I know is when I see pictures on apple, they look amazing. When I see pictures on a samsung LCD, they are nice but the apple looks better.

What is exactly the difference and how can they put down into numbers so I can better find an LCD to buy? That's my question

Bookmarked and looking forward to answers.

Short answer: TN panels are cheap and nasty, PVA (or MVA) panels are good, IPS panels are great. Check the panel type of any monitors you're considering by visiting this site.

Slightly longer answer: TN panels have fast response times and nuclear brightness, and are great for gamers and general users. Not so great for imaging. PVA and IPS panels are much better, but correspondingly more expensive.

My answer: Don't think that you have to spend a lot to get satisfaction. I know a lot of people are using TN monitors quite happily, because they suited their budget, and they are satisfied with the colour reproduction. The biggest thing to look out for, like you yourself mentioned, is viewing angle. Make sure you get a monitor that's good enough to let you move your head a bit without screwing up the colour.

Having said that, if you can afford it, go for a PVA or IPS monitor. The HP2475 and Dell2408 are two well-regarded monitors for good prices.

When you're budgeting for a monitor, make sure you allow enough to buy a calibrator. They're not too expensive, and will give you peace of mind.

bad karma wrote in post #6877077
All I know is when I see pictures on apple, they look amazing. When I see pictures on a samsung LCD, they are nice but the apple looks better.

All depends on whether you're comparing Apples to apples. (Woohoo! I've wanted to use that joke for ages!) What I mean is, if both monitors are uncalibrated, the Apple will probably look better. Calibrated, very little difference.

thanks for the answers guys, this site rocks. i found this thread in the computers section- https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=611410 which has some helpful information including this link to very good monitor reviews- http://www.prad.de/en/​monitore/reviews.html

i have decided on the HP w2207, good luck to ya bad karma- should check out that review site it helped me make my decision.

Damo, thank you very much, that was excessively helpful! I appreciate you taking the time to write all that out!

EMART49 wrote in post #6876586
Right now I just have my laptop monitor which i HATE because if the angle is off a little bit its too dark or bright. So I was going to ask for a new monitor for Christmas but then realized i dont know jack about them- what 'specs' should I look at/ ask for in a monitor?

Maybe I should tell you what I am looking for in a monitor- I'm going to be using Lightroom and Photoshop, I dont make money off my images- im a photog. student, so it doesnt have to be top notch, just something better than my laptops 15" screen and 'good enough' to use LR and PS.

any input is appreciated.

i can't even guage critical sharpness with my laptop. my buddy is a computer guy. he does most of his pictures on his laptop.

i showed him my NEC IPS monitor (20wwmgx2) the other day and he flipped out. he said it looked back lit and he was amazed by the detail. and now he's on the hunt for a similar LCD.

i'll never use a cheap or so-so monitor again .

ed rader

Nothing ever looked truly sharp on my older (2002) Toshiba laptop. I know that stuff I posted on the web back then turned out to be oversharpened.

I'm sure I've thrown perfectly good images away because I thought they were slightly OOF.

Damo77 wrote in post #6877383
if both monitors are uncalibrated, the Apple will probably look better. Calibrated, very little difference.

Im going to strongly disagree with this just based on my personal experience. I had two Samsung monitors that were the same model number bought at the same time etc. I could not for the life of me even get them to match each other no less match the color profile I was going for. These were both TN panels and are great for gaming and general use etc, but for color correction and editing they were terrible. I calibrated them multiple times and they were just never right. A fellow photographer friend of mine had the same two purchased at a different time from a different place and had the same issues.

I ended up getting a 23" Apple Cinema Display ( got a killer deal on it ) and it was night and day. the non calibrated ACD was 10x better than the fully calibrated Samsungs when side by side.

Now Im not saying you have to get an Apple display, like I said I got a ridiculous deal on it, but I would say there is a HUGE difference in any TN panel vs a IPS panel. I can look at this thing from any angle even standing up and I dont get color or shadow casts etc.

My advise to the Original Poster, is if you cannot afford a good IPS panel, save your money until you can or you are going to have the same issues that you have on your laptop. Just be patient or you will be wasting your money on a bigger version of what you already have.

Just my two cents.

Be careful out there not all monitors are perfect. The only ones that come close are NEC. Many S-IPS panels have "white glow"(the newer NEC's have a polarizer for this), which can give worse color viewing angles than TN panels. Many new LCD's are also wide gamut, which are great for Photoshop and Firefox(and other color aware programs), but nothing else. Windows and OS X handle broad, OS based color management poorly, so even calibrating won't get the wide gamut to non-over saturated levels in non-color managed applications.


The only thing really wrong with TN is viewing angles(with vertical being the worst). 6 bit color dithered with Hi-frc is indistinguishable from 8 bit. TN's have great response times, low input lag and razor sharp text. If you are going to go IPS, go for the Nec 2409 standard RGB which is an amazing monitor(and $1110).

This is a nice thread that talks about that NEC compared to a cheap 17 inch TN panel:

http://hardforum.com/s​howthread.php?t=133862​2

Apple vs NEC vs Samsung. The Samsungs (cheaper ones) I could never get them to calibrate correctly. Same with the Apple. But then both are limited gamut monitors when compared to the Adobe RGB space. Now the NEC (2690wuxi2) was worlds above both of them when it comes to color accuracy, amount of adobe rgb space covered, etc.

I had the 23 apple cinema display and had it side by side with the NEC2690wuxi2. Not even close. Reds and blues were much deeper and more accurately rendered with the NEC. Makes me wonder why I spend 899 for the ACD when the NEC could have been had for a couple hundred more.

I never could get the ACD to calibrate out accurately. Very frustrating. With the NEC, it was all automated with a Monaco Optix XR and Spectraview II software. No user intervention necessary (only to type in white points, brightness, etc). Takes about 20 minutes to cal out the NEC, but geez...awesome.

Sold my acd23 on fleabay. Good resale value.

PM01 wrote in post #8930291
I never could get the ACD to calibrate out accurately. Very frustrating. With the NEC, it was all automated with a Monaco Optix XR and Spectraview II software. No user intervention necessary (only to type in white points, brightness, etc). Takes about 20 minutes to cal out the NEC, but geez...awesome.

We have to consider "The Law of Diminishing Returns". Sure, I'd like to have an NEC or Eizo, but have a restrictive budget which precludes spending $1,000+. Thankfully, there are more monitors today in the $500 USD price range, with wide gamut, internal 10-12 bit LUTs and DDC capability. The Dell U2410 is a prime example of a monitor delivering 90% of the NEC's performance, for less than half the price.

ChasP505 wrote in post #8930417
We have to consider "The Law of Diminishing Returns". Sure, I'd like to have an NEC or Eizo, but have a restrictive budget which precludes spending $1,000+. Thankfully, there are more monitors today in the $500 USD price range, with wide gamut, internal 10-12 bit LUTs and DDC capability. The Dell U2410 is a prime example of a monitor delivering 90% of the NEC's performance, for less than half the price.

Don't forget the NEC P221W. 22 inch screen with most of the goodies. About 400 dollars.

PM01 wrote in post #8931549
Don't forget the NEC P221W. 22 inch screen with most of the goodies. About 400 dollars.

This is what I own. Bought it primarily for the built in 10 bit LUT. Love this feature as windows is known to "drop" the LUT if loaded into the graphics card. This way, no worries!