Tell me about self-calibrating Eizo monitors

[philipus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've used an Apple Cinema Display HD 23" for the longest time which I calibrate - occasionally - with a Data Color Spyder 4 Studio. I am generally pleased with the monitor but the calibration is, to be honest, a bit of a hassle and I am not very diligent.

 

This has made me wonder if a self-calibrating monitor might be the way to go. I have heard good things about Eizo from members here and I would like to know more about how they are. 

 

I don't need a massive monitor or one with extreme resolution. I'm more interested in a monitor with calibration that is easy to use and gives consistent results. As I am entirely unfamiliar with Eizo I'm also wondering what the difference is between the FlexScan and ColorEdge lines? And what is the difference between the TN, IPS and LCD panels used?

 

Thank you in advance
Philip

[Exodies]

And while you're at it, could you please explain how a self calibrating monitor does it.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[zeitz]

FlexScan is a cheaper monitor.  ColorEdge is optimized for graphics users.

 

Don't worry about TN, IPS, or LCD.  Trust that Eizo has picked the best techology.

 

There are two levels of self calibration in the ColorEdge line-up.  The highest lever has a true spectrometer system built in.  The lower level (about $1000 cheaper as I recall) requires that the monitor first be calibrated with an external device; the monitor's device then maintains that calibration.  In either case you set the monitor "on-time' between calibration using Eizo's Color Navigator software.  I use 200 hours of on-time.  You then get a message to recalibrate after 200 hours.  To do the calibration, you simply turn off the monitor.  The small device pops down from the top edge of the bezel.  The color swatches come up.  There is no user involvement.  When the process is done, you simply turn the monitor back on.  Eizo monitors are so consistent across the screen that they can be calibrated at the edge, rather than in the center.

 

If you buy from a local value-added Eizo dealer, buy the lower level of calibration monitor because the dealer will come out to your location and fully re-calibrate the monitor once a year.  If you are on your own without dealer support, buy the more expensive version.

[tobey bilek]

Mine is 27" color edge, self calibrating.  I calibrated one time with my device,  and it recalibrate s  after a time I set in.  I think you get a choice of 50, 100,  200 hours.   A small "eye" pops down from the top and it warms up 30 min,  then  does calibration sequence.

 

My photo printer person is the most fussy I have encountered in 50 years,  AiPro Lab.com,  and Neil told me they use Eizo and recommended it to me.    They become an extension of my workflow.   

 

I allow it calibrate at night in a room with room darkening shades and all lights off.   I do critical color works under same conditions.

 

It has a nice matt screen, flips for portrait format, and is height adjustable.  Mine is hooked to a Mac Pro.

 

So far worth every penny.

 

$2000 at B&H.  2 day ship to Chicago and very well packaged.

 

Color edge series is made for photo work so Eizo tells me.   

[almoore]

I use a CG277 and I can't recommend it too highly. 

 

There are other very good monitors available, but what makes Eizo attractive if you're not a full on colour management geek is that they come with a range of pre-sets (editing, web, etc) that makes set-up incredibly easy and straightforward. They also come with an unusually comprehensive onsite warranty. 

 

Yes, they're expensive compared to most monitors, but they're more affordable than a new aspherical lens and will both save time and increase the level of control you have over the look of your images. If you've ever wondered why so many photographs you see posted online are hypersaturated and have blocked shadows it's in large part due to the success of the iMac - lovely computers but with monitors that are hideously bright and about as bad as it gets for editing. If you'd like any degree of nuance in your images, you can do it with an iMac but there's an awful lot of trial and error involved in taming its inherent crudeness. 

 

Eizo also provide a lot of online information on the most basic aspects of colour management:

 

http://www.eizoglobal.com/library/management/matching/

Edited July 9, 2016 by almoore

[philipus]

Thank you very much, this helps me a lot as I am unfamiliar with Eizo.

 

Did anyone of you move from 23/24" to 27"? I am wondering how much of a difference it will make for me. I'm using Photoshop, Bridge and Vuescan only. To be honest, so far I have never found 23" to be cramped.

 

And I'm wondering if the jump to the CG line with the built-in calibration sensor is worth it. Basically a 27" CX (without calibration but with correction sensor) costs about the same as the 24" CG.

 

I'm leaning towards 24" and looking at the 24" CG offerings there are three models, which appear oddly similar; these are the differences. 

 

CG247

Brightness: 350 cd/m2

Contrast ratio: 1000:1

Response time 7.7 ms

Wide-gamut coverage: Adobe RGB: 99%, DCI-P3: 95%

 

CG247X and CG2420

Brightness: 400 cd/m2

Contrast ratio: 1500:1

 

Response time 10 ms

Wide Gamut Coverage Adobe RGB: 99%, DCI-P3: 98%

 

Are the differences in contrast and brightness so large as to be important? My workflow is not so exceptionally careful that the gamut coverage will make a difference.

 

Thank you for any further insights.

br

Philip

 

 

 

I use a CG277 and I can't recommend it too highly. 

 

There are other very good monitors available, but what makes Eizo attractive if you're not a full on colour management geek is that they come with a range of pre-sets (editing, web, etc) that makes set-up incredibly easy and straightforward. They also come with an unusually comprehensive onsite warranty. 

 

Yes, they're expensive compared to most monitors, but they're more affordable than a new aspherical lens and will both save time and increase the level of control you have over the look of your images. If you've ever wondered why so many photographs you see posted online are hypersaturated and have blocked shadows it's in large part due to the success of the iMac - lovely computers but with monitors that are hideously bright and about as bad as it gets for editing. If you'd like any degree of nuance in your images, you can do it with an iMac but there's an awful lot of trial and error involved in taming its inherent crudeness. 

 

Eizo also provide a lot of online information on the most basic aspects of colour management:

 

http://www.eizoglobal.com/library/management/matching/

 

 

Mine is 27" color edge, self calibrating.  I calibrated one time with my device,  and it recalibrate s  after a time I set in.  I think you get a choice of 50, 100,  200 hours.   A small "eye" pops down from the top and it warms up 30 min,  then  does calibration sequence.

 

My photo printer person is the most fussy I have encountered in 50 years,  AiPro Lab.com,  and Neil told me they use Eizo and recommended it to me.    They become an extension of my workflow.   

 

I allow it calibrate at night in a room with room darkening shades and all lights off.   I do critical color works under same conditions.

 

It has a nice matt screen, flips for portrait format, and is height adjustable.  Mine is hooked to a Mac Pro.

 

So far worth every penny.

 

$2000 at B&H.  2 day ship to Chicago and very well packaged.

 

Color edge series is made for photo work so Eizo tells me.   

 

 

FlexScan is a cheaper monitor.  ColorEdge is optimized for graphics users.

 

Don't worry about TN, IPS, or LCD.  Trust that Eizo has picked the best techology.

 

There are two levels of self calibration in the ColorEdge line-up.  The highest lever has a true spectrometer system built in.  The lower level (about $1000 cheaper as I recall) requires that the monitor first be calibrated with an external device; the monitor's device then maintains that calibration.  In either case you set the monitor "on-time' between calibration using Eizo's Color Navigator software.  I use 200 hours of on-time.  You then get a message to recalibrate after 200 hours.  To do the calibration, you simply turn off the monitor.  The small device pops down from the top edge of the bezel.  The color swatches come up.  There is no user involvement.  When the process is done, you simply turn the monitor back on.  Eizo monitors are so consistent across the screen that they can be calibrated at the edge, rather than in the center.

 

If you buy from a local value-added Eizo dealer, buy the lower level of calibration monitor because the dealer will come out to your location and fully re-calibrate the monitor once a year.  If you are on your own without dealer support, buy the more expensive version.

 

 

[almoore]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In terms of onscreen maximum image size (assuming you're working with 35mm format) there's very little difference between the 24 and 27 inch Eizos because their vertical dimensions are similar. The extra screen real estate comes horizontally, giving you more space for tool palettes. 

 

After years of wrestling with calibration, I find the cost of built in calibration entirely justifiable. The gulf between an Eizo ColorEdge and a Cinema Display is enormous, not just in terms of colour neutrality but particularly with regard to control over brightness and tonality. The well designed hood is also very effective. I'm sure the more affordable Eizo's without built in sensors are very similar in quality, so it all comes down to how much you value convenience. 

 

Regarding apparently similar models, I believe the X designation signifies a monitor that's configured with video in mind, so despite a higher price tag you'll gain little for stills. 

Edited July 11, 2016 by almoore

[philipus]

Thank you again Al. I work with both 35mm and 6x6 so I feel quite confident now that a 24 would be sufficient, especially since I intend to keep the ACD.

 

I like the idea of the hood. My computer is in an environment where I cannot easily control the light levels so the hood will definitely help. Having thought more about it, I am sure that it would be good to have a CG model with built-in calibration because it will do the work for me. It will then be easier for me to calibrate the ACD.

 

Thanks for explaining the X designation. Would you know how relevant the contrast ratio and brightness are? I would have thought that possibly the former is relevant to stills photo editing, but not so much the latter.

 

br

Philip

 

In terms of onscreen maximum image size (assuming you're working with 35mm format) there's very little difference between the 24 and 27 inch Eizos because their vertical dimensions are similar. The extra screen real estate comes horizontally, giving you more space for tool palettes. 

 

After years of wrestling with calibration, I find the cost of built in calibration entirely justifiable. The gulf between an Eizo ColorEdge and a Cinema Display is enormous, not just in terms of colour neutrality but particularly with regard to control over brightness and tonality. The well designed hood is also very effective. I'm sure the more affordable Eizo's without built in sensors are very similar in quality, so it all comes down to how much you value convenience. 

 

Regarding apparently similar models, I believe the X designation signifies a monitor that's configured with video in mind, so despite a higher price tag you'll gain little for stills. 

[almoore]

Would you know how relevant the contrast ratio and brightness are? I would have thought that possibly the former is relevant to stills photo editing, but not so much the latter.

 

I believe the most recent generation of Eizos claim to have blacker blacks, which I'm guessing would account for a higher contrast ratio, but any Eizo from the last few years will show more tonal separation than an Apple display. When it comes to brightness, you're going to be working within the range of 80 to 120cd/m2, so it really doesn't matter how high they go.

 

This is very basic, but might be helpful:

 

http://nativedigital.co.uk/site/2013/07/creating-calibration-targets-with-eizo-colornavigator/

Edited July 12, 2016 by almoore

[Richardgb]

A couple of years ago I plumped for the cheaper end of the Eizo range and bought a CS240 (24-inch image diagonal). No self-calibration (I use an external X-Rite i1Pro - there are online videos, both independent and X-Rite to show you how it's done).

 

As previous posters have said, using a proper monitor, suitably calibrated, is a revelation and gives peace of mind.

[tobey bilek]

Thank you very much, this helps me a lot as I am unfamiliar with Eizo.

 

Did anyone of you move from 23/24" to 27"? I am wondering how much of a difference it will make for me. I'm using Photoshop, Bridge and Vuescan only. To be honest, so far I have never found 23" to be cramped.

 

And I'm wondering if the jump to the CG line with the built-in calibration sensor is worth it. Basically a 27" CX (without calibration but with correction sensor) costs about the same as the 24" CG.

 

I'm leaning towards 24" and looking at the 24" CG offerings there are three models, which appear oddly similar; these are the differences. 

 

CG247

Brightness: 350 cd/m2

Contrast ratio: 1000:1

Response time 7.7 ms

Wide-gamut coverage: Adobe RGB: 99%, DCI-P3: 95%

 

CG247X and CG2420

Brightness: 400 cd/m2

Contrast ratio: 1500:1

 

Response time 10 ms

Wide Gamut Coverage Adobe RGB: 99%, DCI-P3: 98%

 

Are the differences in contrast and brightness so large as to be important? My workflow is not so exceptionally careful that the gamut coverage will make a difference.

 

Thank you for any further insights.

br

Philip

 

 

 

I send out files for print and they print what I send,  no adjustments.   Cost is half that way.   Lab uses Eizo so I do.  We match up precisely.  

 

If you print your own or post to web, this is not important.  

 

iMac is nice,  but too bright.   You are supposed to use 180 candles or the prints come out too dark.   After a certain point,  I want and need perfection.   It is like an enlarging lens, buy a good one because every photo goes thru it.

[philipus]

Thank you very much for the further replies. And Al thank you for the link. That is a helpful site. 

 

Now the monitor hunt begins.

 

Br

Philip

 

I believe the most recent generation of Eizos claim to have blacker blacks, which I'm guessing would account for a higher contrast ratio, but any Eizo from the last few years will show more tonal separation than an Apple display. When it comes to brightness, you're going to be working within the range of 80 to 120cd/m2, so it really doesn't matter how high they go.

 

This is very basic, but might be helpful:

 

http://nativedigital.co.uk/site/2013/07/creating-calibration-targets-with-eizo-colornavigator/

[Jeff S]

If you display your prints and want a fully calibrated workflow, then the next search might be for a viewing booth (to match both your monitor and display lighting conditions, which may also require some attention).  It all depends on how critical and fussy one wants to be.

 

Conversely, if you're on a budget, the other line of monitors worth considering is NEC....the ones with built-in SpectraView software.  Capable machines.

 

Of course none of these equipment enhancements will do nearly as much toward making better prints as having a good eye and judgment when making print editing and processing decisions....as always....even in the darkroom days.  Weston did pretty well with a light bulb.  

 

Jeff