Displays Looking for a display mainly for movies (more info inside)

You've hot linked to the image, which Lagom do not allow. Please post a URL and I'll check it on my Eizo.


It's OK, I looked that URL and it's just the Lagom gradient image.

Ok... first of all, that's a bitmapped image, and you'll only really be able to use this if viewed at the native resolution of the image. Zoom in and you'll get banding. Basically it's a grey scale, and there are only 256 levels of grey (black to white) you can have per pixel. This is how a 24bit image is made up (8 bits per red, green and blue). Even though you may have windows set to 32bit, your display is only 24bit as most video cards except high end Quadra cards etc have a 8 bit output (24 bit RGB). So zooming into a 8 bit grey bitmapped image will eventually show you the steps between the 256 levels of grey. If it was the monitor doing this, the "bars" or steps in that image would not zoom in like that.. they would change in random ways as you zoomed in.

The only way to truly test this is to make a true linear gradient in Illustrator and zoom into that, as this will not be a bitmap, it will be a vector, and the image will effectively be redrawn each time you zoom in and the gradient will always be at "native res" for want of a better term.


Another thing to note with a screen of any calibre is that ANY adjustment of the image at the driver stage with almost all consumer grade GPUs (not via the OSD) will introduce banding on gradients... this includes profiling the screen with a colorimeter. The only screens that can have their colour or gamma adjusted with a colorimeter without adding artefacts is one with a programmable hardware LUT... and only them if you do it at the hardware level. Your GPU output is 8 bit as previously stated, so if you adjust the gamma for instance, you may be squeezing, for arguments sake red level 124 to 128 together, and then expanding 221 to 225 apart... in other words you are messing with the gamma curve.... as there are only 256 levels per pixel to play with, expanding or contracting this curve response at software level introduces banding, as you have effectively expanded or contracted the levels needed to beyond 256. Only genuine 10 bit or higher GPU outputs can stand adjustment at software level without banding. Having said this, you will only see banding on linear gradients. Linear gradients do not happen in nature, nor will you see them in photographs, or movies. You'll only see it if you go into photoshop (or any other bitmap based graphics application) and create a gradient from 0 to 255. If I had a screen without a hardware LUT I would still software profile it, as accurate colours are more important than linear gradients for my work. Only a true 10bit or higher GPU output will allow you to make software adjustments without banding


This is why most monitor reviews are basically crap. Hardly anyone understands the issues associated with displays. Others on here like Goodbytes have much wider knowledge than I on what monitors are available, their features and price and warranties etc, but when it comes to the mechanics of colour workflow I'd be willing to bet that no one on here has my experience. I've been a professional photographer for decades, and I've worked on a consultancy basis for some very high profile clients, including Holborn Studios in London, one of the largest commercial photography studios in Europe. I've worked along side consultants from Eizo on many occasions when developing digital imaging workflow for many projects for new studios and artists. Others may know more about the inner workings of GPUs etc... and for that I defer to the greater knowledge of the gurus of Bit Tech reviewers, and others on here, but the nuts and bolts of managing colour workflow? Not many people have the experience I do. I'm not showing off, I'm just trying to reassure you that there's nothing wrong with your screen.

If you zoom into that bitmapped image from Lagom you will eventually see the steps between grey levels as it is not being redrawn when you zoom in like a vector would.

If you make any adjustments to the image at the software level on ANY display you will introduce artefacts on a gradient. The only way to avoid this is a screen with a programmable 10bit or higher hardware look up table.

You're taking this WAY too obsessively now. If you are happy with the gradient image at it's intended size, then be happy Stop staring at mathematically linear gradients! Load up some high resolution photos and enjoy your new screen!

 

Didn't actually read the whole thread, but I'd like to propose the new LG IPS277 if it's going to be used for mainly watching movies. But please be aware that the 1.2 mm bezel is a lie.

 

only 16:9 so not when using it as a computer monitor and not watching media. Plus, 27" at 1080P is an awful pixel pitch, and will be crap as a desktop monitor. As a TV, probably great, but then again if the OP wanted a TV, he should have got a TV. He wants a great monitor that is also great at playing media. He also specifically asked for 16:10.

..plus... he's already got the HP screen... and it's a great screen.

 

Shame on me for not reading the entire thread.

I'm a major advocate of 16:10 myself, but it seemed that the OP was most interested in watching movies on it. This coupled with the fact that many 16:10 monitors (including the U2412M) have issues with scaling 16:9 content led me to recommend the IPS277.

Alas, it's a moot point considering the ZR2440W was already purchased.

 

Yep.. I assumed that's was the case

 

Make sure it's IPS you get - they're so much better for films and stuff.

Check reviews though, as light bleeding from the sides can ruin films

 

He already has the monitor, and he has an IPS panel. We made sure that's not a TN.

 

Actually, IPS is not best for watching movies. Why do you think the vast majority of LCD TVs are VA panels? The fact is though.. we don't really have a choice these days. Didn't we go through all this in post #3?

 

It is sad to see VA panels disappearing on the computer market. I always thought they would remain in the professional line. I wonder why they are dumping them?

 

Because people are generally sheep, and think that IPS is better.. period, whereas it's in reality, it's only better at some things. Economics also: It's cheaper now due to the demand the sheep create.


It's the same with 16:9 edging 16:10 out of the market. People actually think it's better because they've been told it is... and end up coming out with crap like "there are no black bars when watching movies", which is patently not true, because movies aren't made in 16:9 either. What's the problem with black bars anyway... they're black... same as your bezel probably. Total ass hats.

People are generally quite stupid.

 

:/
So sad. I think people didn't get the message properly. IPS is better.. than TN. I have recently seen a good PVA in action (not professional), and man.. blacks are stunningly black! Like black ink. No wonder Pookeyhead you didn't like the U2410 for your needs. I am sure if PVA picked up, more energy would have been made to make them faster, as IPS did several years ago, and would be welcome for most in gaming, and people who wishes deep blacks.

 

Just a quick input to share my experience: after one and a half year I may say that the HP ZR2440W is fantastic! I'm very satisfied with the purchase. By default maybe it is a little bit brighter, so for browsing, professional work, office etc I get down a lil bit brigthness. About movies & games, I return to the default brigthness and in games like fallout 3 at night (with proper ambient light in the room and proper in-game settings) or movies like Sin City, Drive, etc (movies with rich darker scenes / high contrast) the monitor just shines

Thanks again GoodBytes, Pookey, etc I'm very satisfied