New NEC 2690 with issues?

[Bill Graham]

I posted this in the NEC2490/2690/Sean Reid/Luminous Landscape thread but it's not really pertinent to the discussion there so I thought I'd open a new thread:

" I just received the 2690 today, set it up and calibrated to 140cd/m2, native color temp with the i1d2 using the i1Match software. Even with Color Comp on I'm noticing a significant lightening of the corners when displaying a black image in a darkened room, pretty comparable to the Viewsonic VP930b I replaced with the 2690.

Is this normal/average/run-of-the-mill for this display? Or should I return it and ask for another?

Or should I wait for the SVII software and calibrate again? Will calibrating with the SVII help? Or any other suggestions?"

I've fiddled around with the advanced OSM controls today and profiled a couple of more times with no improvement. If I load my black.jpg image as the desktop I can still see lightening in the corners and a hot spot about a quarter of the way across the top of the screen form the top right corner. And this is with the normal room lighting I usually use for paperwork and photo editing.

Here are the OSM settings I'm using, calibrating to Gamma 2.2, 6500K, 140cd/m2 luminance:

Brightness:90.5
Contrast:61.7
Black Level:90
Low Bright Mode:On
Gamma Selection:2.2
Color Control:Native
Colorcomp:On
Colorcomp Level:3

I've changed colorcomp settings back and forth and they don't seem to make any significant difference.

I called NEC TS and they didn't seem to know much about the unit, said they'd do the advance replace thing if I wanted to pay for one-way shipment. Unless anyone has some suggestions or something I've missed, I'm going to return the unit to Amazon for an exchange.

Any input will be appreciated!

TIA,
Bill

 

[Murray Foote]

Bill

For what it's worth, my settings are:

Brightness 52.4%
Contrast 43.4%
Eco mode off
Auto brightness off
Auto luminance off
Low brightness mode off
Gamma 2.2
Colorcomp on
colorcomp level 5
color control 1; temperature custom; R171/ G215/ B255. I don't remember why, maybe it's the default for "1" or the consequence of profiling - but Native is "not adjustable" and you can't profile it with that

digital input

Profiled using Color Eyes Pro at D65, 115cd/m2 (which does sound remarkably low but the validation was OK - your new monitor may be perhaps much higher) Gamma = L* (I should be in the process of getting a copy of Spectraview II at the moment but the calibration and profile seems OK to me)

I've had mine a bit more than a year and I don't remember what research I did (apart from reading the LCD2690WUXi.pdf that I think came on the CD) or how I got to most of those settings.

Regards,
Murray

 

[Nill Toulme]

Murray there was a thread recently on LL regarding why calibrating to L* isn't really a good idea. You can probably search it out there. I was in the thread so that might held you find it.

Nill

 

[Will Hollingworth]

Here are the OSM settings I'm using, calibrating to Gamma 2.2, 6500K, 140cd/m2 luminance:

Brightness:90.5
Contrast:61.7
Black Level:90
Low Bright Mode:On
Gamma Selection:2.2
Color Control:Native
Colorcomp:On
Colorcomp Level:3

Using the SpectraView software will allow you to fully automate the calibration process. It seems a lot of your settings have not been adjusted to the optimal values for your application and you risk going around in circles.

1. Make sure you are using a DVI video connection, and not analog VGA.

2. Change the following settings:

Contrast: 50

Black Level: 50

Low Bright Mode: Off (you should be able to adjust the Brightness control down rather than setting this to ON)

Gamma Selection: 2.2

Color Control: Native (should be fairly close to D65 which is OK)

Colorcomp:On

Colorcomp Level:3

 

[Asher Kelman]

Will,

People may not recognize immediately who you are and with what authority you are able to bring to us understanding of computer monitors!

So could you introduce yourself in the forum for that! You are too important a resource to just slip in and give great answers!

Asher

 

[Bill Graham]

Murray and Will, thanks for the info. (Will, I am using DVI-D for the video connection)

I ran the Black level down to 50 and was able to profile with these settings using the i1d2 and i1Match 3:

Brightness:76.6
Contrast:54.6(this is where i1 indicated)
Black Level:50
Low Bright Mode:Off
Gamma Selection:2.2
Color Control:Native
Colorcomp:On
Colorcomp Level:3

After reducing the black level I've noticed I'm not seeing nearly as much difference when comparing the before and after results in i1Match. Indeed, it's hard to see any difference at all, which must mean I'm getting close to optimal in the OSM settings, right?

Photos look as good as ever but I'm still getting the backlight bleeding in the corners(Colorcomp still doesn't seem to have much effect) and I've noticed that if I stand up and view from 20-30 degrees or so off both axises I can see a definite magenta cast running from upper left to lower right(standing above and to the right). So I went ahead and asked for a replacement. Nice thing about Amazon, if an item's defective they don't charge you for return shipping. NEC would have done the Advance Replacement under warranty, but they wouldn't have assured I would receive a new unit and I'd be out-of-pocket for one-way shipping.

Other than that, this monitor is fantastic! With my other monitors, I'd see colors in the prints that weren't on the display, now it's the other way around. I've been comparing older prints and, while the levels are very close, I'm seeing nuances of color on the display I don't see in the older prints. So now I've got a lot of images to go back to and soft-proof and hard-proof again, but I don't mind. If I can get my prints to look as good as the display it'll be well worth the effort!

THIS BABY ROCKS!!!! I am absolutely amazed, this display cost less than any of my go-to zooms(not to mention camera bodies) and I can see in a couple of days that it will make a very significant difference in the final output, my prints(which is what I see every day and hope to sell). All the money I've spent on cameras, lenses, printers, paper and ink, the time and effort in posting, proofing and printing and now I'm finally getting around to being able to see what I've been producing..... and what I was missing. Well, just damn! I wish I'd gotten this display a year ago.... But hindsight is always 20/20 and I need glasses just to read the morning news.

Enough rambling, thanks again to all for their time and advice. I'll get this sorted out eventually but it's great to have someone else that's been down the path help point the way.

Bill

 

[Asher Kelman]

Bill,

There are a lot of fine monitors on the market. How come you chose the rather than a competing Eizo or Lacie? What's the path that got you to actually order one and not another?

Asher

 

[Bill Graham]

Asher, I couldn't afford a top-line Eizo, some research indicated that the Lacies were just re-branded NEC's and there were a lot of very good posts on the 2690 here and in other forums. Besides, the Dog raved about it! Others can argue with Andrew about color management and displays, I won't even pretend to have the knowledge/background/experience.

I've recently been catching up on the Inside Digital Photography podcasts and John Paul Caponigro had very good things to say about the NEC monitor as well. When folks like Andrew and JP agree on a piece of gear, who am I to argue? And it's very affordable, especially when compared to pro-level Nikon glass or Stylus Pro printers..... I was spending a lot of time and effort in printing, finding surprises in the prints(both good and bad) that I never saw in the monitor, so I figured it was time to upgrade.

All in all, it seemed a very good bang-for-the-buck piece of gear and I figured if I was going to be selling prints for more than my old monitor cost, my customers deserved it.

You should get one! Now!

Bill

 

[Murray Foote]

Murray there was a thread recently on LL regarding why calibrating to L* isn't really a good idea. You can probably search it out there. I was in the thread so that might held you find it.
Nill

Thanks Nill

I found it, I've bookmarked it and I'll go back and reread it when I'm somewhat less tired.

I'm using Gamma target = L* with ColorEyes Pro because that is their recommended setting. They say in their instructions that though 2.2 has become a standard, 1.8 provides less highlight detail, 2.2 provides less shadow detail and L* gives a better tonal range. By the thread you mentioned, Andrew Rodney might not agree. Alternatively, maybe the Coloreyes software is more biased towards L*.

I guess I should experiment and see whether I can tell the difference, including with Spectravie II should I soon receive it.

Regards,
Murray

 

[Bill Graham]

OK, the SVII software arrived Friday and I ran the profile for the internal LUT's. Results are a lot better, still a little backlight showing even at ColorComp 5, but a great improvement overall.

Monitor settings after profiling:

Brightness:11.4
Contrast:50
Black Level:128
Low Bright Mode:Off
Gamma SelectionRG
Color ControlRG
Colorcomp:On
Colorcomp Level:5

Screenshots from SVII:

I'm happy with the results at these settings but if anyone has suggestions as to target or settings I'd appreciate any advice.

Thanx to all for your help,
Bill

 

[Nill Toulme]

The only thing I'd mention is that 140 cd/m² is fairly bright. If you're working in a very bright environment (lots of windows in daytime, or typical office lighting) it might be fine to match your prints. If not, or if your prints come out appearing dark in comparison to your monitor, you might try a lower setting, or alternatively increasing your workroom ambient lighting (or viewbox lighting if that's what you do). I work in a fairly dim to dark environment, and profile/calibrate my 2090uxi at 85 cd/m².

That works well for printing, but tends to make my images a little bright for web viewing. One of the many nice things about Spectraview II is that it lets you make, load and save multiple monitor calibrations/profiles. I'm thinking perhaps I need to profile one way for processing web images, and another (my current settings) for printing.

Interesting... I just noticed that Spectraview II's default "Photo Editing" target settings match yours exactly — D65/2.2/140 — while the "Print Standard" target is D50/1.8/80(!).

Nill