HP LP2475w (Possible new IPS)

Mysterlee said:
Also, has anyone been able to compare this to a BenQ G/V2400W(D)? Is it noticeably better and is it worth the extra cost?
Click to expand...

Not able to directly compare, no, however both of those Benq models use a TN panel - draw from that what you will.
 
Mysterlee said:
Could some one please measure how high the top of this monitor is when adjusted to full stand height?

Also, has anyone been able to compare this to a BenQ G/V2400W(D)? Is it noticeably better and is it worth the extra cost?

Thanks
Click to expand...

Extra cost compared to what? It's less expensive than the HP LP245w and has fewer features.
 
You know what I mean, is the LP2475w noticeably better than the BenQ G/V2400W(D) and is it worth the extra cost? Don't be a pedant :p
 
Mysterlee said:
You know what I mean, is the LP2475w noticeably better than the BenQ G/V2400W(D) and is it worth the extra cost? Don't be a pedant :p
Click to expand...

No, I didn't know what you meant. Please don't make assumptions.

But to answer your question, I've not seen the BenQ but I've seen a video review of it on CNET (mentioned previously in this thread) and it's very cool looking and has a great display). But it's lacking in features (namely - other than tilt, it doesn't move).

The HP has all of the movable features (tilt, swivel, height as well as pivot). #1 for me is height adjustment. It's a must-have for me.
 
Mysterlee said:
You know what I mean, is the LP2475w noticeably better than the BenQ G/V2400W(D) and is it worth the extra cost? Don't be a pedant :p
Click to expand...

As I posted above, the Benq's both have TN panels, which many people regard as being inferior to IPS (which the HP uses).

The biggest drawbacks of TN are that it's 6bits per colour instead of 8 (so you can only *really* make just over 255,000 colours, they fake the rest with various hacks) and it has the worst viewing angles of all 3 mainstream technologies.
 
Lightning_Rider said:
I'm in Canada, so I bought it at the only place I've found that sells it... which is:

http://www.directdial.com/ca/shop/

They don't have that great of a return policy. That's why I'm really hoping I don't get a defective one. If I do I think I will just deal with HP directly.
Click to expand...

Man this company is crazy. Just last week they were selling the LCD for $688 CAD, but now they raise the price by $100. So much for even considering them.
 
Hello, would you please know if the Brightness option on this monitor is really brightness or is it backlight? The calibrator software is asking for that.
Also - can you advise how do I set path to my icc profile in Firefox 3?

Thank you for any help :)
 
I ordered my lp2475w today because there is no other monitor without wide gamut available except for the nec 2490 which isn't available in the Netherlands :(

Because my OS is Vista and I mainly use Adobe Creative Suite 3 and Firefox, I'm hoping this wide gamut thing isn't going to give me much trouble.

I'm going to pick it up tomorrow or the day after tomorrow, and i'll let you guys know how it's working out for me.

Can someone give me some advice about which colorimeter I can best get with this monitor? I was thinking about buying the DataColor Spyder 3 Pro because I can get it for a reasonable price.
 
mildante said:
Hello, would you please know if the Brightness option on this monitor is really brightness or is it backlight? The calibrator software is asking for that.
Also - can you advise how do I set path to my icc profile in Firefox 3?

Thank you for any help :)
Click to expand...

Backlight, as with most LCD's.
 
philjohn said:
Backlight, as with most LCD's.
Click to expand...

Excellent, thank you philjohn. I was not sure about that. This is my first LCD.

Also - what about that path to icc profile in Firefox3? Any ideas how to set it up? I am lost in all those options in about:config menu.
 
mildante said:
Excellent, thank you philjohn. I was not sure about that. This is my first LCD.

Also - what about that path to icc profile in Firefox3? Any ideas how to set it up? I am lost in all those options in about:config menu.
Click to expand...

Install this addon and it gives you a handy control panel (you need to go to "addons" and then "options" on the colour management entry once installed and firefox restarted).
 
mildante said:
Excellent, thank you philjohn. I was not sure about that. This is my first LCD.

Also - what about that path to icc profile in Firefox3? Any ideas how to set it up? I am lost in all those options in about:config menu.
Click to expand...

Why do you need to do that. If have a profile defined and active in windows it will use that one. Why would you want a different one for firefox?
 
deadman3000 said:
Because most applications ignore it.
Click to expand...

So? What has that to do with Firefox. Firefox doesn't ignore it. Setting this won't make other applications stop ignoring it.

For the few applications that actually do use the profile (Firefox and Photoshop) you generally want them to use the same profile.
 
Snowdog said:
So? What has that to do with Firefox. Firefox doesn't ignore it. Setting this won't make other applications stop ignoring it.

For the few applications that actually do use the profile (Firefox and Photoshop) you generally want them to use the same profile.
Click to expand...

So I do not have to set the path to it in FF3? It's just I have read here somewhere that it is possible to set the path manualy.
 
mildante said:
So I do not have to set the path to it in FF3? It's just I have read here somewhere that it is possible to set the path manualy.
Click to expand...

Yes if your profile is set in windows, it will automatically be used if you simply turn on color management. No need to set a path.

gfx.color_management.enabled;true

Then you are in business.
 
This monitor doesn't scale 16:9 480p as 16:9, it still thinks it's 4:3 formatted. Specifically, the signal from my Wii won't stretch horizontally. Is this a common shortcoming of all monitor scalers, or just something lacking here?
 
HotdogStorm said:
This monitor doesn't scale 16:9 480p as 16:9, it still thinks it's 4:3 formatted. Specifically, the signal from my Wii won't stretch horizontally. Is this a common shortcoming of all monitor scalers, or just something lacking here?
Click to expand...


That is because it is 4:3 formatted. Wii doesn't really output 16:9, it outputs 4:3 with an anamorphic squeeze, counting on the TV/Monitor to do an unsqueeze. So it is not surprising this doesn't come out exactly right. Set your monitor on full and that should be good enough.

I blame the Wii in this case. Though my NEC could probably do it. On top of Full/Off/Aspect, the NEC has custom where you can control how much scaling you want.
 
Oh I definitely know it's the Wii's fault and not true 16:9, but I thought it sent something in the sync info saying to treat it that way. Unfortunately no scaling option will do it, but I plan on picking up a TV at some point anyway.
 
It's not the Wii's fault that the monitor can't handle an industry standard resolution properly. The Wii outputs 480p, which is a 3:2 resolution that should be displayed as either 16:9 or 4:3. It can be set to 16:9 or 4:3. The problem is this monitor is stupid and treats 480p as 3:2 like many other stupid monitors, so it's never right. I don't know why so many monitors include HDMI and component inputs and then don't handle 480p correctly.

The NEC can scale it properly with custom scaling, but since they got that right, they had to screw something else up, like having a line of tearing travel slowly up the screen from time to time.
 
I had a nice surprise waiting for me at home.

I'll be taking screenshots comparing my old HP w2207 with the HP LP2475w. The colors just seem to *pop* off the IPS even though the w2207 has a glossy screen.

Also, holy batman brightness. Talk about after image retention I thought I was seeing gray men. And the colors as talked about here do seem to be very saturated especially the reds.

Now to find a settings here that work for this screen. :cool:
 
ToastyX said:
I don't know why so many monitors include HDMI and component inputs and then don't handle 480p correctly.
Click to expand...
Especially since a "lesser" TV will do it just fine. It's treating it as 4:3, no different than composite inputs in terms of size and aspect. I'm not too broken up if this is par for the course, but it is a shame.
 
Pixelated Taco said:
The colors just seem to *pop* off the IPS even though the w2207 has a glossy screen.
Click to expand...

I've found it to look similar to my old glossy TN in terms of colour vibrancy and "pop", yes - was a bit worried it would look dull after a glossy monitor, but I guess the superior panel technology makes up for that. The reds are very red though; someone on another forum suggested turning down the red gain to 30 in HP Display Assistant (RGB section, 4th slider down), which does alleviate that a little.
 
Pixelated Taco said:
I had a nice surprise waiting for me at home.

I'll be taking screenshots comparing my old HP w2207 with the HP LP2475w. The colors just seem to *pop* off the IPS even though the w2207 has a glossy screen.

Also, holy batman brightness. Talk about after image retention I thought I was seeing gray men. And the colors as talked about here do seem to be very saturated especially the reds.

Now to find a settings here that work for this screen. :cool:
Click to expand...

There's a decent enough Spyder 3 calibration posted a load of pages back.
 
Snowdog said:
Yes if your profile is set in windows, it will automatically be used if you simply turn on color management. No need to set a path.

gfx.color_management.enabled;true

Then you are in business.
Click to expand...

Well, I have the color management enabled in Firefox3 but it displays the photo edited in Photoshop differently then Photoshop. It is desaturated. So I guess it is not using the same icc profile. Someone was speaking here about setting that profile in Firefox manually so I am still convinced that it might help. Also when I assign my calibrated icc profile to the photo in Photoshop, the exif in Xnview says the colorspace is unknown.
 
HotdogStorm said:
Especially since a "lesser" TV will do it just fine. It's treating it as 4:3, no different than composite inputs in terms of size and aspect. I'm not too broken up if this is par for the course, but it is a shame.
Click to expand...

I have seen the same complaint about TVs as well. Ones with controls have to be set to FULL. Sound familiar?

If the wii is your primary concern, look for a 16:9 monitor, that way when you put it on full it will react the same as a TV.

On a 16:10 panel to scale the Wii correctly requires customs scaling because to get the correct aspect you have to scale different amounts in both axis, while maintaining black bars in one axis. It is only common sense that this doesn't work. They would need "Wii" mode or custom scaling to get it scaled correctly on a 16:10 monitor.

It is the fault of the Wii for it's screwy anamorphic 4:3 mode.

Can't you just put your monitor in full stretch mode. You get a bit more vertical stretch than accurate, but it shouldn't be that much of a bother. If you are not a zealot you should get used to it in 5 minutes.
 
mildante said:
Well, I have the color management enabled in Firefox3 but it displays the photo edited in Photoshop differently then Photoshop. It is desaturated. So I guess it is not using the same icc profile. Someone was speaking here about setting that profile in Firefox manually so I am still convinced that it might help. Also when I assign my calibrated icc profile to the photo in Photoshop, the exif in Xnview says the colorspace is unknown.
Click to expand...

Odd. When I had a wide gamut panel (got rid of it because windows color management sucks) and a profile active, I tested looking at images in photoshop and firefox, they looked the same, maybe your embeded profile is causing a double effect.

If you see an image on the web does this still happen. Look at it with firefox, then download and look at it in photoshop. Same or different?
 
Snowdog said:
Odd. When I had a wide gamut panel (got rid of it because windows color management sucks) and a profile active, I tested looking at images in photoshop and firefox, they looked the same, maybe your embeded profile is causing a double effect.

If you see an image on the web does this still happen. Look at it with firefox, then download and look at it in photoshop. Same or different?
Click to expand...

Hm, I downloaded the image and it is displayed differently in Photoshop. I believe it is because when I uploaded it on the web, the color space was changed from my profile to sRGB by the web where I uploaded it to. They shrink the size of the photo and they do not preserve the ICC profile. I am disappointed. This color management thing is causing more trouble than benefit :(
 
Generally speaking you should upload web images converted to sRGB without a profile since most people will interpret them that way anyway.

Yes color management is a PITA which is why I always advocate sRGB monitors unless someone really needs wide gamut and they already know who they are.
 
Snowdog said:
Can't you just put your monitor in full stretch mode. You get a bit more vertical stretch than accurate, but it shouldn't be that much of a bother. If you are not a zealot you should get used to it in 5 minutes.
Click to expand...
I don't think you read my post right. Regardless of scaling chosen it treats it as 4:3 with bars on the sides. Not only is there a ton of horizontal compression but it also stretches the vertical a bit more, nobody could get used to that regardless of zealotry. It's really not that big a deal since I can run it in 4:3 and it's still a ton crisper than composite, I just wasn't expecting it to be a problem.
 
Interesting I would have expect full to pull it full wide even if does think it is 4:3. That is what full is for, filling the screen completely. If I feed 4:3 to my NEC and put on full, it has no black bars anywhere. Mind you it is fairly distorted at this level.

I thought all monitors worked this way on full.
 
Allright, I have ordered this monitor, should arrive in couple of days I hope. I have come to conclusion that its useless to agonize over this widegamut thing until I see it for myself. Perhaps I end up liking its overpowered colors, who knows. And if it ends up something I dislike but nothing disastorous, I have plans for upgrading (or more like sidestepping, its not that big upgrade.Nvidia just has problems with older games that I love and they refuse to fix it) to ATI HD4870 anyway, which also allows me tone down saturation for bit more (subjectively) natural colors.
 
philjohn said:
There's a decent enough Spyder 3 calibration posted a load of pages back.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the heads up Phil. I'll try it out and see if it'll cut down the adjusting time. Also it seems that my screen also has the cleartype problem. Makes it really hard to read as the letters look fuzzy but in clone mode with the HP w2207 you can really tell the difference. I tried to adjust the cleartype problems with the cleartype program but it seems to only go so far.

When I get off work I'll try to see if I can't adjust it a bit more to make it easier on the eyes..

I have 7 days to return the screen if I'm not satisfied with it.
 
Pixelated Taco said:
Thanks for the heads up Phil. I'll try it out and see if it'll cut down the adjusting time. Also it seems that my screen also has the cleartype problem. Makes it really hard to read as the letters look fuzzy but in clone mode with the HP w2207 you can really tell the difference. I tried to adjust the cleartype problems with the cleartype program but it seems to only go so far.
Click to expand...

Is the w2207 a different resolution than the HP? Won't that put one of the screens in non-native resolution if you put them in clone mode? Not only that but the w2207 will have fatter pixels...
 
Snowdog said:
Is the w2207 a different resolution than the HP? Won't that put one of the screens in non-native resolution if you put them in clone mode? Not only that but the w2207 will have fatter pixels...
Click to expand...

Sorry about that I had both screen in clone mode to test lag and color reproduction but I switched them to extension mode in the ATI CCC later. Both are at their native resolutions, the w2207 is at 1680x1050 and the LP2475w is at 1920x1200. The text just isn't as sharp as stated before compared to the w2207.

There is this fuzzy look to them and it strains the eyes. I was thinking about applying the color profile that Phil mentioned and hopefully some change in the contrast/brightness will make text bearable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top