• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Which screen?

Andrew Rodney

New member
The screen manufacturers.

Ignore them. Just as you should ignore years of some people telling you that you should always calibrate to 120cd/m2 with no information about print viewing, or those that say you should always use D65 or 6500K as if they were the same (they are not) without information about the print viewing.

Anyone that provides an Absolute value without taking the entire equation into account (how you will view prints, or the ambient light of the surround) is only providing partial and not useful info.

BTW, which screen manufacturers and where can I find this stated?
 

Jerome Marot

Well-known member
BTW, which screen manufacturers and where can I find this stated?

Eizo has been cited twice in this thread.

Sorry if I sound rude, but I would think that the screen manufacturer have ample knowledge of optimal viewing conditions. Yet, you state abruptly that 60cd/m2 is far too dark a room to view prints or use a screen, without any indication why we should believe this statement which apparently differs considerably from standard viewing practice. I would therefore advise anyone considering to buy a screen to take your statement with the usual pinch of salt and do some independent research.
 

Andrew Rodney

New member
Eizo has been cited twice in this thread.
Where on Eizo’s site is this a recommendation?

I would think that the screen manufacturer have ample knowledge of optimal viewing conditions.

You can think that. I’d prefer to see the recommendation from the manufacturers in context because it makes no sense at all. Its not even close to the very old ISO spec for display and print viewing based on CRT’s which produce vastly lower possible backlight intensity. So again, I want to read the full recommendations sited here for 60cd/m2 from Eizo or any other display manufacturer. Where would I find this?
 

Jerome Marot

Well-known member
Where on Eizo’s site is this a recommendation?

It is actually 80 or 100 cd/m2: http://www.eizo.com/global/iblick/spec/?id=CG221, bottom of the page, note 5:

For other monitors, the warranty period of the backlight is warranted only if they are used within the recommended brightness of up to and including 80 cd/m2 for the CG222W; 100 cd/m2 for the CG232, CG221 and CG211; 120 cd/m2 for the CG303W, CG301W, CG275W, CG245W, CG243W, CG241W and CG223W
 

Andrew Rodney

New member
It is actually 80 or 100 cd/m2: http://www.eizo.com/global/iblick/spec/?id=CG221, bottom of the page, note 5:

For other monitors, the warranty period of the backlight is warranted only if they are used within the recommended brightness of up to and including 80 cd/m2 for the CG222W; 100 cd/m2 for the CG232, CG221 and CG211; 120 cd/m2 for the CG303W, CG301W, CG275W, CG245W, CG243W, CG241W and CG223W

That’s not a recommendation, its a requirement for warranty (which sucks)! Its a better, higher value that been quoted above but silly. A better reality check on their site is in this PDF:

http://www.eizo.com/global/support/wp/pdf/wp_06-001A.pdf

Page 2. For whatever stupid reason, Eizo doesn’t allow us to copy, paste or print the PDF. Between this and their silly warranty (got to read the fine print), much higher cost than NEC, I wonder again why anyone would go there. Notice the TCO and ISO reference. One is a required setting of 150cd/m2 (presumably matched to a spec for print viewing) and ISO that defines a minimum but says 100cd/m2 or higher!

They further blow it by saying in terms of Contrast Ratio, higher is generally better. Wrong. Not for critical print to display matching where the best you may see from a glossy print is perhaps 300:1. They allow you to control this precisely, like NEC which is critical. But the recommendation that more is better is only to serve their marketing hype when providing such spec’s.
 

Jerome Marot

Well-known member
My reading of the end of page 2 of that particular pdf is rather that a room brightness around 80 cd/m2 is not aberrant to use a LCD or CRT monitor.

Room brightness isnt the issue, its the display backlight intensity that some are suggesting has to be a low as 60cd/m2 because Eizo (or presumably some other manufacturer) recommends it. I say that is nonsense.

In addition there is this:
http://www.babelcolor.com/main_level/RevisionHistory.htm
Spectral Tools - ISO 3664+ : Updated the requirements to those of ISO 3664:2009(E) (essentially, the expected display Luminance is now 160 cd/m2 instead of 100 cd/m2)
 
Top