On Wednesday 24 March 2010 01:55:53 am Steffen wrote: > Am 24.03.2010 08:43, schrieb Pascal de Bruijn: > > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 1:04 AM, Steffen <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> There are indeed monitors with unequal RGB gain values from factory, > >> like the Eizo S2433. Whatever works best, I suppose. > >> > >> And there is a distinct advantage when working with the gain controls on > >> the monitor to achieve a starting point as close to the target as > >> possible. Most of the higher grade monitors have a 10 bit deep LUT. That > >> means, that unlike the 8 bit available through ordinary LUTs for the > >> software correction on the graphics card, changing values in the display > >> won't "throw away" as much information as a correction on the software > >> side would. I hope this is what the discussion was about, if not, I > >> apologize for my lazy reading habits ;-). > > > > Higher grade being 1000EUR+ :) ?? > > > > Anyway correcting in two places in theory degrades more, no matter how > > many bit the LUTs are... > > > > Regards, > > Pascal de Bruijn > > No, most PVA or IPS displays feature a LUT that is 10 bit deep. Only > most TN panels don't. So you don't have to sacrifice all your money in > order to get some bang for the buck. I wouldn't be surprised if the HP > LP2475w and the Dell U2410 also had such features. > > And in general terms, I would agree with your assessment. But not > necessarily this time: if you calibrate based solely on software > correction, especially if the deviation from the target is big, your > results WILL definatelly be worse. Because if you correct in hardware > first, 10 bits result in 1024 steps, compared to the 256 available steps > at 8 bit. So, you have more room to operate in without touching the last > 8 bit your graphics card will send to your display. > > I think this is definatelly preferable. > Also some very high end monitors have 12 bit internal LUTs. So for these monitors the advantages of using the internal LUTs is even bigger. Hal