![us-img%5C13037_resource[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/ueSeiYD.jpg "us-img%5C13037_resource[1].jpg")
What's a good monitor for editing photos? Mainly in lightroom, I'm currently using a cheap samsung 1920x1080 and it feels a little claustrophobic, I'm looking for a 4k monitor. I've read about the BenQ BL2711U and it seems a decent price (~£500 britfag coins). Not looking to spend over £700. Only complaints I can find about it are some dead pixels but if I get it from Amazon it should be fine?
I do photography with models and gels, colour is slightly important but I don't want to get excessive. Do you need one of those gay expensive colour matching thingy shits for this shit?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2014:10:31 10:52:58 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 4996 Image Height 3208
>>2790573
Bumping, because I am planning on building a rig for video editing and am a noob. Doesn't necessarily have to be 4k, but how important is color accuracy in monitors for editing. As important as good monitors for audio mixing?(I come from an audio recording hobby).
>>2790573
Something with a wide gamut, and IPS (not TN)
Don't worry too much about it unless you're doing commercial printing. No matter how accurate your monitor is, and no matter how perfectly you get your colors and contrast, I'm going to look at it on my $200 acer monitor that's never been in the same room as calibration. Most of your viewers will not have calibration, and those who do, will have profiles that are very different from yours.
>>2790591
Agree, color accuracy doesn't mean much unless you print a lot. It's meaningless when everyone is viewing it on uncalibrated consumer TN panels, phone or tablet screens. Most displays will come pre-calibrated in some way, and I haven't had to touch the calibration since I got mine a year and a half ago. I also own a BenQ.
That said, once you get an IPS display with truer color accuracy, wider gamut and larger viewing angles you'll never want a typical TN display again.
>>2790627
It doesn't even mean much if you print a lot. You're still going to have to test print and adjust your workflow to account for differences in the printing process. No matter how"accurate" the colors on your monitor are, you're still talking about moving from additive color mixing to subtractive, and there are differences between most every printer and "accurate" color, not to mention how things like finish and paper choice affect the end result.
The way to ensure your color is to test samples across the media you intend on displaying in (if digital check on multiple monitors), then adjust. No middle process can eliminate this.
>>2790666
>>2790666
>I don't need to purchase a separate calibration tool for this monitor do I?
If you want it calibrated correctly, yes, you do.
>>2790669
Which really doesn't matter, so the answer is no, you don't need to buy anything extra
>>2790669
How necessary is that though? Like previous posts suggest- it doesn't matter TOO much since a lot of people will be viewing on consumer monitors and I'm not a massive pro nor am i doing prints~ but I'm concerned about the original state it will arrive in - uncalibrated- does that mean it will look like dogshit or is it pretty much fine-ish?
>>2790671
Just go through the setup by eye. Then compare photos on it to your cell phone. That'll be good enough.
>>2790671
Not particularly necessary. I'm the one who told you why it's pretty lame. But if you want calibration, you'll have to buy it separately (worth mentioning (sort of) because some high end screens come with internal calibration tools, and this unit does not)
Were I you, I'd wait to try to find a used Spyder Express on ebay somewhere for less than $75, buy it, use it once, and then sell it for $80.
>>2790707
Congratulations! It's a good feeling. Hope you can do some good work with it!
