Wide gamut overload!

P

psyside

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,243
Ok will they ever stop to make them? can't understand how come no company understand
that the most of advanced users actually hate wide gamut aren't they reading forums ffs!

The oversaturation is ok (maybe) but its not all about that! the picture is like you
look at image with red sticket on it.The new monitor presented by Philiphs 240PW9EB
is also wide gamut :mad:



Some examples

http://www.zanzig.com/blogpix/m00905argb.jpg

http://xtknight.50webs.com/lcd26/images/ccfl_compare.jpg

http://img14.imageshack.us/i/230lwx.jpg/
 
Not only that. I'd naturally tried to do away with the wide-gamut effect as much as possible in the monitor OSD. What I didn't think of was that I'd at the same time of course would ruin the image in color-managed applications.

The result:
http://www.bahnhof.se/wb895093/wgf.jpg

That is a pure grey (no color what so ever) image being displaced.

The same happened when I got images of my fathers 'new' car. Ah, grey - I thought. Dragging it to my non-wide-gamut display showed me that it really was metallic-blue.
 
Monitors aren't being marketed for advanced users, they are being marketed for clueless people who have no idea what gamut is and think "bigger = better". It's obviously working :)
 
So with the cancelled LG standard gamut IPS and the now discontinued NEC 24WMGX3 are there any non-TN 24" standard gamut monitors left?
 
What exactly is wrong with wide-gamut, especially if your production or usage is restricted to Computer Systems and the Internet? (rhetorical)

The way I see it, standard gamut monitors only hit about 92-97% (max) of Adobe's color spectrum; whereas the wide-gamut's are capable of hitting 102-105%(max).

The problem you're describing sounds like a faulty color management system ( a la XP or previous) deferring RAW images to sRGB when your profile is running Adobe RGB.

Maybe if sRGB wasn't considered the standard/defacto color profile for the web-- and on non-modern OSes-- then everything would be peachy.
 
There's two main issues:

1) They have a higher range of colours but normally use the same number of bits. You still get 256 values for green/blue/red, but the green/blue/red saturation that is normally at 255 is now at 205 (random example) because values above 205 are the new "wide gamut" colours. Thus, you actually get lower colour resolution than on normal gamut monitors as there is more difference between the darkest and lightest colour but the number of colours is the same (205 values in the "normal gamut" colour range rather than 255).

2) Unless you're using a colour-aware software, everything will be oversaturated. Imagine a normal program wanting to output a colour that on a normal gamut monitor would be 255 green, 0 red and 0 blue. That colour on a wide-gamut monitor (assuming the same example as above) is actually meant to be 205 green, 0 red and 0 blue. The application doesn't know this though so it just outputs 255 green, 0 red and 0 blue as normal. This corresponds to a much more saturated colour on the wide gamut monitor so that's what you see. Colour-aware applications should make the correct adjustments based on the colour profile of your monitor but so far, there are few applications that can do this and even if they do, you still end up with the lower colour resolution as in problem 1.

The only way to properly ensure compatibility with normal gamut programs/sources/images and extend the gamut range at the same time is to simply increase the number of bits to 10, 12 or more bits per colour. Then, the first 8 bits can be the same as on normal gamut monitors and the rest can be for the new wide-gamut colours, which can be used by software that can handle such colours. Otherwise you're always going to have problems until/unless everything becomes properly colour aware.

So basically, wide-gamut is just a headache unless you're specifically working with photos that are encoded using wide-gamut or you don't mind oversaturated colours. That is why I chose a normal gamut monitor - when it comes time to replace it, I'm sure wide-gamut will be far more evolved and there should be some sort of standards for it.
 
Well i said one time ill say again the overstarutation is not always big problem
the red like looking is !! even of green is more greener or blue or w/e
its not so bad but its like you got red sticker on your whole panel and you look
trough it really frustrating.The pictures above show exactly what im talking about.
 
It has been discussed many times.

One of the solutions is for reviewers to finally acknowledge the problem and point it out in monitor reviews. So manufacturers woudl reflect it.

Or come to hardforum.com, where people can be recommended a non-wide gamut monitor :)

Some time ago it seemed the full R+G+B LED backlight like in HP LP2480zx can be a solution, but so far the market moves the opposite way, i.e. cheaper CCFL and cheaper "edge LED" :(
 
Biges said:
...One of the solutions is for reviewers to finally acknowledge the problem and point it out in monitor reviews. So manufacturers woudl reflect it....
Click to expand...

Sadly most reviewers are clueless. Monitors are probably most poorly reviewed piece of hardware.

The flip side is MS could solve the problem right now by implementing simple color awareness at the OS level with sRGB as the default unless an image is tagged with another profile.

Hopefully within the next 10 all monitors will exceed the human range and the datapath will be wide enough for scRGB and we can put this issue to rest for good.:D
 
Luthorcrow said:
Sadly most reviewers are clueless. Monitors are probably most poorly reviewed piece of hardware.

The flip side is MS could solve the problem right now by implementing simple color awareness at the OS level with sRGB as the default unless an image is tagged with another profile.

Hopefully within the next 10 all monitors will exceed the human range and the datapath will be wide enough for scRGB and we can put this issue to rest for good.:D
Click to expand...

Often reviwers concentrate too much on the technology. They measure the colour space, backlight homogenity and other "crap", but they fail to mention the actual experience with the monitor like wide gamut = too saturated colours, users beware! A prime example is prad.de .
 
this is why I don't understand how people give the TN LG 227 such great reviews. It is wide gamut and looks like like ass.
 
Luthorcrow said:
Sadly most reviewers are clueless. Monitors are probably most poorly reviewed piece of hardware.

The flip side is MS could solve the problem right now by implementing simple color awareness at the OS level with sRGB as the default unless an image is tagged with another profile.

Hopefully within the next 10 all monitors will exceed the human range and the datapath will be wide enough for scRGB and we can put this issue to rest for good.:D
Click to expand...


Most of us are clueless, it would be interesting to take a poll on the number of people viewing this thread or on the display forum in general that had any clue what the issues were with wide gamut before DragonQ illuminated the issues.

I sure as hell didn't. And frankly, why would we? That is the kind of special knowledge the lay person just does not know. And the DragonQ's of the world are not so common as to reach critical mass to let enough people know the difference to matter.
 
Am I the only one who can't see that much difference on the photos (on my old laptop screen)? I mean, it seems like I wouldn't be able that there is a difference unless I saw the two side by side. Even then, it's hard to say which one definitely looks better.
 
j0j081 said:
this is why I don't understand how people give the TN LG 227 such great reviews. It is wide gamut and looks like like ass.
Click to expand...

It gets "great" reviews based on its low lag, ideal for FPS gaming. Not for colors/looks.
 
tybert7 said:
Most of us are clueless, it would be interesting to take a poll on the number of people viewing this thread or on the display forum in general that had any clue what the issues were with wide gamut before DragonQ illuminated the issues.

I sure as hell didn't. And frankly, why would we? That is the kind of special knowledge the lay person just does not know. And the DragonQ's of the world are not so common as to reach critical mass to let enough people know the difference to matter.
Click to expand...

This is a kind of knowledge people aquire after installing their super-extra new 22"-26" LCD (dumping their old heavy CRT or small LCD) and after a while of admiring the new size and reducing the brightness by 90% they say: "Hey, why are reds THAT intense, where can I tone it down?"

:)

Anyway, you can create such poll in a different branch of the forum, like the one dedicated to CPUs or so. (and post link here ;) )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top