Sorted. I think one thing that really raises the profile of IPS monitors is the high resolution that usually accompanies them - there are hardly any TN monitors with 1920x1200 resolution, except for a few really big 28" ones with really bad vertical colour shift. Longweight put it perfectly for me: I think this is true of most people. Until Dell released their new 24" IPS monitor, there were hardly any relatively cheap WUXGA monitors readily available... nearly everything is 1080p these days, and as you go up in resolution, you also go up in panel quality. If they made 2560x1440 TN monitors for £300, do you think they would be a success? I do.
I do too. It would certainly add competition. I am surprised that true 8-bit or true 10-bit panels are used in the large monitor size market. Why not 6-bit + FRC? All I can think off, is that companies.. well more like panel manufacture sees as people needing more than 1080p, are mostly people who do some serious multitasking work, and they probably see that this market are more professionals, so everything is given on the monitor. I am sure that will quickly change the days Blu-Ray Plus or 2 (or wtv it will be called) when it will be introduced for XHD resolutions (2560 x 1440, or maybe higher.. who knows). But right now, I think the average consumer has in there head that 1080p is the max, or more then enough, or have no needs (and well, they usually don't, for most of them).
You should be ashamed of yourself - no spectators! Totally agree. Many people don't even know what 1080p is LOL.
I'm up to my ass in marking student work. Mr Goodbytes can hold the fort for a while. He's man enough for the job.
I was actually referring to semi-matte CCFL based TN displays, like the BenQ I own. Put it side by side with the U2311 and it just cannot produce the blacks that the BenQ can. I reckon it would have a black depth not far off PVA/MVA counterparts (ie, considerably better than IPS screens). I know in the past you have mentioned that to get great blacks you need to buy the best PVA screens that cost thousands for 24" etc - I disagree and believe TNs can now produce outstanding black depth and contrast. Like every forum . It does have a lot of people, however, who have experience with a bigger variety of displays than anyone could imagine, and who give fair descriptions of the different technologies. Theres a small and loud anti-IPS crowd who regularly discuss the things I mentioned, but I don't necessarily take those particular posters seriously . Yes, on blacks like I said. If they had A-TW polarisers in these IPS screens (special kind of additional film layer), it would largely fix the issue and you wouldn't see the annoying glow on blacks or dark colours. How minor an issue this is is subjective I suppose, but again its something your guide should mention imo. Yes, I know, I just wish they used a semi-matte coating instead of the aggressive one found on these Dell Ultrasharps and many other IPS displays. There's no need for that much AG coating when lighter coats sufficiently prevent reflections. I know I could get used to it very easily, but if I spend 1k on a monitor (like I may do on the 3011 next year) I dont want sparkly whites. I disagree somewhat here. If its one area where IPS displays appear to be lacking, its in the contrast department. Tftcentral mention it in their monitor guide page, where they say that the only real problem of the S-IPS technology traditionally was the low contrast ratio. Just look at this contrast ratio comparison chart from the Dell U2412M review: Displays like the BenQ EW2420 or the Samsung F2380 in that chart have nearly 3x higher contrast ratios than many of their IPS counterparts (read: contrast - I'm not saying they are better displays). That is a considerable difference. I also know that they are not TN, but my feeling is that many of the higher end TN screens have contrast ratios, and similarly black depth, that can surpass IPS displays, like tftcentral said in the quote I cited. My point is that once you experience a display that has excellent contrast and inky blacks, its really hard to go back to displays which are possibly lacking in this area. I find that in the U2311, for instance, it lacks considerably and games and movies on it dont feel as vibrant or punchy, and whenever I view a picture on it that has really dark shades (or the lagom black test), I always feel like I want more 'black'. Yes, its a low-end IPS, but I have seen nothing so far which makes me believe their higher end doesn't duffer from it also. Its just an area that I would like to see improved greatly, apparently the U2412M has significantly imrpoved contrast over the U2410, but I would be lying if I said I hadn't seen people already complaining that it also has poor contrast. Yes they may have improved in this regard, but even tftcentral admit that newer variants of IPS, like H-IPS and so forth, have only a slightly improved contrast. If you watch a lot of movies, or play a lot of games on IPS displays, its something I have definitely noticed. It is oversaturated, but how much of an issue this is is again subjective. I dont expect you to . I would disagree, though, that they have only 'marginally' improved, but again those are subjective observations. The main problem with your guide is that it misses the fact that modern TN displays, with 6bit +FRC, can now properly display the full 16.7 million colour depth within the sRGB colour space, either through advancements in FRC technology or because they are effectively 8bit dsiplays (so they can adequately display the majority of the content on most peoples computers, without poor gradients and banding, but yes still being prone to colour shift issues because of the poorer viewing angles). And like I just mentioned, it's not absolutely clear that every TN display is 6bit +FRC; some TNs may actually have 8bit colour processing. Dont believe me? Read this article, again from tftcentral, about 6bit vs 8bit displays: Nowadays things aren't as clear cut. Many manufacturers including Samsung and BenQ for instance are listing some of their TN Film panels as offering 16.7 million colours. BenQ's tech support have confirmed that "The FP202W uses a TN panel with 8-bit drive giving full 16.77 million colours. Dithering only achieves 16.2 million colours." Samsung list many of their TN Film panels with 16.7 million colours as well, for instance their LTM190EX TN Film panel. And therefore: While it is hard to get any confirmed information from the manufacturers, it would seem that perhaps some modern TN Film panels now offer a full 8 bit colour depth, and perhaps negate the need for dithering technology. You don't absolutely know what these manufacturers are putting in their screens, so to say that 'all TN panels are 6-bit' is misleading - you're just making an educated guess seeing as TNs have typically been low budget affairs. But things change and technology progresses. I wouldnt be surprised if the latest TNs have 8bit processing. Regardless, even if it were true that every TN was only 6bit +FRC, its come to the point where you are hardly missing out, even by 'computer enthusiast' standards (in terms of colour reproduction, but in regards to viewing angles, inputs, stand, build quality then yes I am with you on IPS being much better). I dont see any noticeable banding on colours on the BenQ (at least on the majority of my pictures or what I view on my computer), and next to a U2311 I didnt think there is any colours that it can display that the TN can't (if anything Id now say the U2311 has worse colour reproduction because of its poor black depth). You make the claim that because of a 'colour processor', 6bit colour on a TN is worse than 6bit on an IPS, but you don't back up your claim and I havent seen it mentioned in reviews what exactly you are referring to. The point is that your guide makes it sound as if people with modern TN displays are vastly missing out in terms of colour reproduction (that it is 'night and day' between an IPS and TN screen), and will be seeing poor gradients and banding and what not. That just does not seem to be the case anymore, not only because of what reviewers are saying, but also through what I have seen, and what other people say on this forum - basically, you are too harsh on TNs imho (haha). The big catch, of course, is that TN displays are still hampered by a colour shift off angle, so for professionals or anyone doing colour critical work the vertical colour shift potentially negates these advances, but for most people it is not a huge issue. A fairer guide, imo, would mention that modern TNs have good colour reproduction, but poor vertical viewing angles, yet if you sit dead centre with the display you should be ok (yep the shift is always there, but its too slight to say it completely degrades the viewing experience for the majority of people). You may be thinking something along the lines of, '3lusive, with IPS screens coming down in price, and with you yourself admitting that they offer a better package (generally) for the consumer, why are you bothering to defend them?' Well,it's because I think many of your claims in your guide are not completely reflective of reality - eg, backlight leakage being worse on TNs (really? I would say it is bad on all displays regardless of display type), OR when you say TNs are not very sharp (I'd say they are just as sharp as other displays). And the colour reproduction claims and so forth. I don't doubt that you want people to have the best experience, and have done well providing a guide for people, I just don't agree with all of your claims, and have got bored of hearing 'TN trash' ect, when in reality they don't make that bad displays .
It is true at at large angle, on full black, there you can see a contrast shift, and it a down side of IPS panel. I'll definitely add that. But TN panels, have back light bleeding visible on black.. so while IPS panels give you contrast shift on angles,, at least you don't see back light bleeding in front of you. And you can't say it doesn't have back light bleeding. It's 100% evident. Some TN panels might be better than others... but IPS panels, even at budget IPS panel, don't have some, except a contrast shift on all 4 corners, which is less and less the higher you pay your monitor, pretty much. Now, on your quote, I disagree with you, well... before I start, as I explained, there is a always exceptions out there. The idea of the post was to simplify and generalize things of the moment of the article was written. So expect down 3 year down the line, many things will be wrong... I'll for sure try to update it. Ok so, here is the thing. I don't know your BenQ (btw, isn't a MVA?). So I can say fluff here (I can't start buying every monitor that exists). But I just want to say.. that too much contrast, is also very bad. Does it round very light gray to white, and dark grays to black? If so, then it failed, the monitor might have ink black.. but the contrast is wrong, it's too high. So there is that to consider. Also, I don't want to say that IPS panel has worst contrast, because the Dell U2312, U2412, (and others form different brands) and so on, all have better contrast from their previous versions Also, for your U2311, The Dell U series is VERY bright screen. Mine (well U2410) is set at 0% brightness, it's that bright. Sure if I set my monitor to 100%, then things doesn't looks as nice. For my home setup, 0% brightness is perfect for me, higher hurt my eyes, during noon and later. And as I said, check reviews. The idea of this guide, is to know about these popular technologies, and get a feeling to what to expect, so that people who looks for a monitor, can start looking for a monitor technology that fits better their needs. It's not hard code. Sure, I could have written like every site, on the web, explain on how exactly each monitor technology works. But that would be useless, as their is countless of these on the web and they are all say about the same thing, depending on when it was written. Remember, it's a guide.. not detailed peer-reviewed article. Everything is subjective in these kind of stuff. The idea of the guide is to help poeple point in the right direction. Well, my laptop, and the TN desktop panel I had, setup in my room, all didn't have such aggressive matte, but in the morning, even at 100% brightness, I don't see my screen... the U2410 has no problem at 30-40% brightness, when the sun hit my monitor. So it has market. But it's good to see that this aggressive coating is starting to disappear and offer more choices to consumers... I as getting worried for a moment. Yup, back light position as mentioned. I disagree that the U2410 has a lower contrast ratio as the U2311 presented in the chart. I saw both side-by-side. I can think that the U2410 had a problem as it was revision A00. That aside, we can see that the U2412 has an above average contrast ratio. Correct, the BenQ that we see on the list is an MVA panel and the Samsung one is a cPVA panel. As I said, a TN panel MIGHT has what it looks like great blacks, but it can be that the contrast is overly set. You must also understand, that after a certain point, for us (non-pro's), there is such a thing as "good enough" point where the contrast ratio is high enough, where we see a nice enough black to enjoy it, and have a great computer experience. Yup I agree, but I don't on TN as much. IPS strength is providing a best overall experience as a whole. It's not perfect in all sides. But I won't say "Jack of all trades, master at none", as it's not true, and that applies for every panel. Hmm I'll definitely add that as a note. Nope, it might be "good enough" for you, but simulating the color is never as good as the real thing. This also means that an 6-bit IPS panel with FRC even with a color processor, doesn't match a true 8-bit panel (assuming both a calibrated, and both have a color processor, and using digital input that ensure color accuracy like DVI or Display Port). TN panels today, are still 6-bit panel. They might improved their circuit table of pre-defined color range, but as long as TN panels are still aimed at the low end and average consumer market, that won't change anytime soon. Heck even high-end TN panel, don't even try (or it could be, as I don't know, that it's really a TN technology limitation where based on how the crystal liquid turn, might not allow true 16.7 million colors. But I am just assuming. this article, again from tftcentral, about 6bit vs 8bit displays:[/quote] This is old post. I can start talking about slim CRT's which was coming.. but didn't make it, due to the LCD. No manufacture will say it can't display 16.7 million colors. It is clear cut, because they are no 8-bit TN panel (or at least none in the open consumer market). 16.2 million colors monitor has been long gone, advancement in FRC, including the price of making the circuit system color table (to know how to imitate a color) cheaper. It's been ages that 16.2 million colors don't exists. All I can say, is that this article was right... not anymore. Like my guide... one day it will be wrong. For the 8-bit panel part.. I await your proof by contradiction. Remember, the monitor must be available for the wide public and can't costs a superbly high amount, the same way, as this guide exclude pro-level monitors as only a hand full of people here can afford them. You have to remember, that I already ditch and trash IPS monitor. I don't follow a: IPS = best monitor in the world. They are several IPS monitors that are too slow, some are so slow, that when you move a window, you see the 6-bit + FRC in action on the window boarders as you drag the window downward, when looking up close. Some monitors only have brightness level as options? Do I recommend them. NO! I always look a monitor as a full item. I don't focus only on panel. It can have one of the best panel, but if it's glossy, cheap plastic, no OSD menu, non adjustable stand... VGA only... and so on... I don't recommend it. I look the monitor as a whole. Colors are more than just blacks. i think you are used to wrong colors, and think that is the right color. I am sorry that you are not satisfied with your Dell U2311H, you are definitely the first on this forum. Why didn't you return the monitor? All reviews I read, all said that the U2311H didn't have the same amazing color of the Dell U2410 with it's per-calibrated colors, but were close. Plus with feedback here, and other forums. I think, that you think that the colors of the U2311H are wrong, because either you prefer (for some reason) the BenQ colors, which is most likely wrong (that is fine), or you look only at black depth too much. I think that you prefer oversaturated colors, cartoonish vision, over nice color accuracy. That is perfectly fine. I am not criticizing you, I am just guessing why you don't like it. Someone at work, has their contrast level of the monitor set at 95% monitor. Everything is too white, and too black. You can say in a funny, and a it exaggerated way.. the monitor turned monochrome. And I ask that person, why does she have the monitor set that way. The person said, that this is how she like it, she honestly don't like anything else.. that is what she got used to it, that is what she like.. Text is for sure easier to read, from what I saw. I am not saying that you are that crazy.. but it make me think that sometimes people like wrong stuff. I do know that many audio enthusiast, prefer an imperfect sound then a perfect one, as it's too cold, and a warmer tone sounds better. I guess I have to have such open mind. Color processor != exact colors. All it means is that it can produce better colors. It all comes down to your monitor settings and monitor color profile loaded in the OS. If company decides to sale a monitor that matches EIZO high-end monitors in specs... heck it might even use the exact same panel and technology, but decide that the "standard" color profile, has no red... well the colors will suck. What it means is that the U2311 can achieve better colors then a monitor without one. I can't prove anything as I don't have several thousand dollar color calibrators. I am sorry, but I don't buy the TFTclaims on color calibration very much. Why? Look at the graph.. where are the 16.7 million color bars? It only shows a hand full of colors. A monitor MIGHT be producing these colors perfectly (based on a 200$ calibrator (BTW, if someone one wonders, that's very low end models, better than nothing, for sure.. but it's no professional stuff), which they use), but how about the rest? maybe these colors are part of the 262,144 (6-bit) that a monitor can produce. But it does not mean that the monitor produces wonderful correct colors. Too harsh on TN... most likely... My original post was a lot more harsh... I'll try and adjust it. But don't expect me saying that all monitor is perfect, we are all special, and everything is nice, we all win. Well I proudly disagree with you. As for the sharpeness.. rotate your screen into portarit mode, and tell windows to rotate the display. Now look at your screen, and compare it with your IPS. now you should see more the impact. While not everyone rotate their screen. When you work with a lot of text weather your programming, or typing essays... it gets easier to the eye. Personally that is something that bugged me when passing from my CRT to a LCD monitor (TN). I can't work on a laptop for long period of time, just because of that. It used to be perfect fine before, but once I got used to better... now it's harder.
While this is certainly not an English class (have you never seen the inside of one?), it is a forum where we rely on the English language to communicate. I could help if you want. Perhaps we could start by discussing the difference between the words "opinion" and "fact"; you could also just rename this thread, "All of GoodBites Opinions about Monitors". I'm just having some fun with you now and I hope you don't take offense. You do however have a tendency to ramble on and on and assert your opinions as if they are fact.
You spelled GoodBytes wrong. And I've corrected some grammar for you. /english lesson On topic, most of what GoodBytes says IS fact. It's interspersed with opinion which is quite easy to pick out so it's hardly misleading. Yes he (not the only one though) may be too harsh on TN panels but he has changed the OP to be more fair. This thread was stickied for a reason, and the reason was not so you could mouth of at GoodBytes and basically tell him he's wrong about everything and should learn English. Maybe you should learn English before pointing out other people's mistakes.
I appreciate you pointing out the missing "to" in my post. Perhaps you didn't see the humor in the spelling of my other, "mistake." On the other hand, perhaps the joke went over your head. As for his "facts" . . It really doesn't matter what percentage of facts he tells compared to opinions. The important thing is that he continually asserts opinions as if they were fact. This forum has singled him out as the authority on this subject which only compounds this issue further.
I think some people here are jealous and trying to be bullies. Nit picking anything I say to try to make a fight, and I am annoyed by this.. that is why I have to type novels.. and repeat stuff like 'check reviews', 'generalization', under line the fact that what I am about to say is an opinion, and so on and so forth. If you have a problem identifying what is fact and what is opinion, and that I am not an encyclopedia, where 500 people reviewed what was mentioned to ensure the least amount of bias (and even then), than I don't know what to say. My typos and skipped words in some of my sentences should be the least of your concerns, in such situation. The internet doesn't stop between the walls of this forum. If you think that my facts aren't facts, I welcome your facts. And I said before, if I am wrong, I'll be glad to correct myself, and apologies. So far, no one came with with solid facts (recent of course, to consider the current technological evolution/development of current technologies) to the table. I am not challenging anyone, but if you think I am wrong, saying that I am wrong with no support, is not being helpful. I have never claim that I am a master of monitors. People tend to listen to me, simply because I know a little more than most people here, I watch and see what is coming up, and pay careful attention on new reviews. That is all.
Nice discussion and you have made some nice points. No need to be a grammar nazi or have a crack at Goodbytes language though, makes you look like an arse. There is a reason people are fond of him, and that is because he is consistently helpful and has helped a lot of people on all sorts of things (I am not thinking about monitors here).
Great post thanks, although I confess I can only spot a 'better' monitor when it's sat side by side for with another to allow comparison - I am actively resisting a triple monitor setup......... *deep breaths*
Goodbytes - I totally appreciate what you are saying. I'm seriously considering getting a U3011 and when reading the tftcentral review I came across this, which surprised me: Your thoughts? Might be worth putting this in your recommendation for the U3011 and U2711.
Hmm yes... I have not seen one review that identify the U2711, U3011 as 8-bit with A-FRC like the U2410 is. And the price is around other 10-bit panels (which also are simply identified as 10-bit only). Could Dell screw us over... possibly. But considering that to get 10-bit colors output you need specific conditions, (10-bit colored design software, GPU, GPU drivers), it's not like games, movies, web browser, and about anything beside working with high quality pictures or medical, medical diagnostic, surgery usages. (you don't want those monitor with price tags, for medical/surgery purposes.. as asking for the price, means you can't afford them).
Yeah having a 10-bit panel is just the tip of the iceberg. Speaking of true 10-bit monitors, I was always under the impression that they are a good bit more expensive even than the prosumer monitors like U2711, U3011, ZR30W etc, eg NEC and Eizo 10-bit monitors are over £1K for 27" and prices start at about £1500 for 30". I think it's all marketing tbh - many of the prosumer monitors are said to "produce 10-bit colour" and it wouldn't surprise me if they smooth this out and treat it as a 10-bit panel to attract custom (which it clearly does).
They are also better monitors (and you have the name). To be honest, it's not. For fun I got PhotoShop CS5 trial, and set everything up for 10-bit colors (if I did it right. I did discover that you seam to can output 10-bit color via DVI at 1920x1200.. then AGAIN, I might not have it done it right). And I notice gradients being smoother (so I guess I done it right). Although, you can't save the image file as any format without dropping colors.
What I mean is that I'm all for 10-bit colour, but it doesn't look like any of the most expensive prosumer screens actually have true 10-bit panels. The ones that support wide gamut are often marketed as having 10-bit colour rather than true 10-bit panels, so there's some obvious ambiguity there. I suspect the purported 10-bit ZR30W is in fact also 8-bit with A-FRC, but that's not to say that it is substandard in any way - even if the U3011 is 8-bit with A-FRC, I'll get it in a heartbeat. The main attraction for me with the U3011 is the OSD which none of the other prosumer 30" screens can compete with. The anti-glare coating simply cannot be worse than what's on my NECs.
