Godfrey
Well-known member
I have a NEC PA241W side by side with a Thunderbolt 27" display here in the lab right now. I'm looking at my M9 raw files using LR 4.2 using two MacBook Pro 13" computers side by side, set up identically. I calibrated both displays to the same target settings, with the same calibration unit, and they're running on identical computers. The difference I can perceive in the display quality of my raw files is simply too small to be of any importance. I don't have any high-end printers here in the lab at the office, but I am pretty certain that the prints would look identical if printed from either system.
Perhaps it's the lack of a $50,000 technical camera. Perhaps the device driver and graphics adapter in the two MacBook Pros I'm using. Perhaps it's my eyesight. But I'm happy with what I see on the NEC, and can't see much difference between it and the same image on the Thunderbolt display.
That's my bottom line.
PS: My old favorite display, a 2006 generation Apple Cinema Display 23" like the one I worked on from 2006 to 2011, sitting on the shelf next to the workbench. So while I was writing this, I pulled it over and set it up on the MacBook Pro that was driving the Thunderbolt 27" display. Ran the calibration and then compared the same photos.
For sure, the NEC looks yards different from the old ACD23" ... I'll take the NEC in that comparison any time!
Which I think points out a significant issue: many people are upgrading from older displays like that to the latest generation. Few people have both a new Apple display AND a new NEC display on their desktop at the same time. ALL of the latest generation displays look crisper, more detailed, with better tonal qualities, dynamic range, etc., than any three to four year old display.
Makes you wonder how we did photography with film and darkroom for 150 years before digital cameras existed, eh?
Perhaps it's the lack of a $50,000 technical camera. Perhaps the device driver and graphics adapter in the two MacBook Pros I'm using. Perhaps it's my eyesight. But I'm happy with what I see on the NEC, and can't see much difference between it and the same image on the Thunderbolt display.
That's my bottom line.
PS: My old favorite display, a 2006 generation Apple Cinema Display 23" like the one I worked on from 2006 to 2011, sitting on the shelf next to the workbench. So while I was writing this, I pulled it over and set it up on the MacBook Pro that was driving the Thunderbolt 27" display. Ran the calibration and then compared the same photos.
For sure, the NEC looks yards different from the old ACD23" ... I'll take the NEC in that comparison any time!
Which I think points out a significant issue: many people are upgrading from older displays like that to the latest generation. Few people have both a new Apple display AND a new NEC display on their desktop at the same time. ALL of the latest generation displays look crisper, more detailed, with better tonal qualities, dynamic range, etc., than any three to four year old display.
Makes you wonder how we did photography with film and darkroom for 150 years before digital cameras existed, eh?