@hark requested that I put something together discussing monitors relative to photo editing. This started when another member, MinnBen was having a problem with miss matched colors.
First let me say this is can be a very complex discussion with even more opinions. My intention is to keep it relatively simple so that people can understand it without it turning into a over the heads of many conversation about little nuances of this that or the other thing. So what comes after this follows the KISS model - keep it simple stupid.
First, Mac's - Those that know me know that I have no love for Apple, BUT credit is due for the monitors they buy build use, whatever it is. Their color display is awesome and reliable as a general rule. However, it's not like that comes cheap. Apple products do carry a premium price tag and their monitors are top notch and very much the standard for many a pro or semi-pro photographer.
Now, lets get into PC monitors. Computer monitors can be had for as cheap as $80 at times. The adage you get what you pay for is very true with monitors. Keeping it simple, the internet and web browsers work off of a color model of sRGB. This is a range of colors generally accepted as a standard for video games, web colors, general stuff. To put a numerical value to sRGB for the purpose of discussion we will assign a range of 10 - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. This represents the full range of colors available in sRGB. However, not every monitor can display this full range. Cheaper monitors tend to display less than the full range. My one computer display, calibrated with a Spyder Pro calibrator, tweaks the software to correctly display colors and give an analysis of how many of the range of 10 colors in sRGB it can display. Here is that graphic and then I will explain further.
This graphic is saying that after tweaking my display to correct color, in the sRGB color range my monitor can only display 79% of the sRGB color range, another better monitor I have rates higher - but it cost more. Using our KISS number range of 1-10 I'm only seeing 8 of the 10 colors. This means that when editing a photo shot in sRGB my MONITOR is not showing me all of the color range in the sRGB color range.
The other setting you commonly have in a camera is AdobeRGB. To assign a value, we will say that AdobeRGB has a color range of 100 - 1, 2, 3,... 100. This color range is far greater than sRGB and if you want to capture a greater range of color with the sutle transitions in color and tone then AdobeRGB is great, but if your monitor can't display it then your color range problem is further exacerbated. Looking at the same monitor relative to AdobeRGB is the graphic that follows.
This graphic is telling us that my monitor can only display 59% of the AdobeRGB color range. On our KISS number scale of 100, my monitor can display 60 of the 100 colors and can not display 40 of the 100. This leaves quite a bit of color lost. Factor in the accuracy of color production in combination with the limits on what the monitor can display and things can get really ugly.
What monitor do I need? What a loaded question that can spark huge amounts of debate. If you are showing your images only on the web or the place you are having images printed are using sRGB as a color profile then there is no need to invest in a wide gamut 100% AdobeRGB capable monitor. In this situation you would strive to find a monitor that ideally is 100% sRGB.
Taking your color range up a notch, wanting a fuller range of color, opens a whole new set of issues. AdobeRGB has this broader range of color but you get what you pay for to own a 100% AdobeRGB monitor. It is not unusual to pay north of $500 for this kind of monitor. But another problem presents itself. To take advantage of this greater color you need to print the image and you need a printer or print resource that works in this color range. As for the web, it doesn't display AdobeRGB so it has to be converted to sRGB. Translation, colors are being stripped from the image when going from AdobeRGB to sRGB and then you have the limitation of how much can your monitor display.
Conclusion...
If your images will be displayed on the internet or printed through an outlet using sRGB as their color profile then research and invest in a monitor as close to 100% of sRGB as you can.
If you're of the opinion that I don't care how much effort or dollars it costs, I want full AdobeRGB prints then do your research for a monitor that can display 100% AdobeRGB and a print source that works with this profile.
A final note, shooting in a AdobeRGB and posting them to the web, which operates in sRGB, can have really negative effects because there is a good bit lost in translation and the web will assign a best guess.
I hope this helps and that member don't try to over-complicate this for general consumption. If you really want to get into it deeper then do your research. It is easy to get lost in the complexity of it all. I spent many months researching this to wrap my brain around it all before selecting a wide gamut 100% AdobeRGB monitor. It can be a lot to digest, but knowing that my color reproduction matches my screen is worth it to me before I turn images over to a client.
Here's an article I found that will take this up a little bit more technically.
https://fstoppers.com/pictures/adobergb-vs-srgb-3167
First let me say this is can be a very complex discussion with even more opinions. My intention is to keep it relatively simple so that people can understand it without it turning into a over the heads of many conversation about little nuances of this that or the other thing. So what comes after this follows the KISS model - keep it simple stupid.
First, Mac's - Those that know me know that I have no love for Apple, BUT credit is due for the monitors they buy build use, whatever it is. Their color display is awesome and reliable as a general rule. However, it's not like that comes cheap. Apple products do carry a premium price tag and their monitors are top notch and very much the standard for many a pro or semi-pro photographer.
Now, lets get into PC monitors. Computer monitors can be had for as cheap as $80 at times. The adage you get what you pay for is very true with monitors. Keeping it simple, the internet and web browsers work off of a color model of sRGB. This is a range of colors generally accepted as a standard for video games, web colors, general stuff. To put a numerical value to sRGB for the purpose of discussion we will assign a range of 10 - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. This represents the full range of colors available in sRGB. However, not every monitor can display this full range. Cheaper monitors tend to display less than the full range. My one computer display, calibrated with a Spyder Pro calibrator, tweaks the software to correctly display colors and give an analysis of how many of the range of 10 colors in sRGB it can display. Here is that graphic and then I will explain further.
This graphic is saying that after tweaking my display to correct color, in the sRGB color range my monitor can only display 79% of the sRGB color range, another better monitor I have rates higher - but it cost more. Using our KISS number range of 1-10 I'm only seeing 8 of the 10 colors. This means that when editing a photo shot in sRGB my MONITOR is not showing me all of the color range in the sRGB color range.
The other setting you commonly have in a camera is AdobeRGB. To assign a value, we will say that AdobeRGB has a color range of 100 - 1, 2, 3,... 100. This color range is far greater than sRGB and if you want to capture a greater range of color with the sutle transitions in color and tone then AdobeRGB is great, but if your monitor can't display it then your color range problem is further exacerbated. Looking at the same monitor relative to AdobeRGB is the graphic that follows.
This graphic is telling us that my monitor can only display 59% of the AdobeRGB color range. On our KISS number scale of 100, my monitor can display 60 of the 100 colors and can not display 40 of the 100. This leaves quite a bit of color lost. Factor in the accuracy of color production in combination with the limits on what the monitor can display and things can get really ugly.
What monitor do I need? What a loaded question that can spark huge amounts of debate. If you are showing your images only on the web or the place you are having images printed are using sRGB as a color profile then there is no need to invest in a wide gamut 100% AdobeRGB capable monitor. In this situation you would strive to find a monitor that ideally is 100% sRGB.
Taking your color range up a notch, wanting a fuller range of color, opens a whole new set of issues. AdobeRGB has this broader range of color but you get what you pay for to own a 100% AdobeRGB monitor. It is not unusual to pay north of $500 for this kind of monitor. But another problem presents itself. To take advantage of this greater color you need to print the image and you need a printer or print resource that works in this color range. As for the web, it doesn't display AdobeRGB so it has to be converted to sRGB. Translation, colors are being stripped from the image when going from AdobeRGB to sRGB and then you have the limitation of how much can your monitor display.
Conclusion...
If your images will be displayed on the internet or printed through an outlet using sRGB as their color profile then research and invest in a monitor as close to 100% of sRGB as you can.
If you're of the opinion that I don't care how much effort or dollars it costs, I want full AdobeRGB prints then do your research for a monitor that can display 100% AdobeRGB and a print source that works with this profile.
A final note, shooting in a AdobeRGB and posting them to the web, which operates in sRGB, can have really negative effects because there is a good bit lost in translation and the web will assign a best guess.
I hope this helps and that member don't try to over-complicate this for general consumption. If you really want to get into it deeper then do your research. It is easy to get lost in the complexity of it all. I spent many months researching this to wrap my brain around it all before selecting a wide gamut 100% AdobeRGB monitor. It can be a lot to digest, but knowing that my color reproduction matches my screen is worth it to me before I turn images over to a client.
Here's an article I found that will take this up a little bit more technically.
https://fstoppers.com/pictures/adobergb-vs-srgb-3167
Last edited:
