Monitor for photo editing on Macbook?

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 22:43:06 +0100, android wrote:

In article ,
Eric Stevens wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 11:48:00 -0500, Davoud wrote:

MC:
A 24" monitor seems to be the sweet spot for 1920x1080 when it comes to
computer use. Anything larger I would be inclined to go 1440p or even
4k.

The 27" 5K iMac Retina is fabulous for both Photoshop and Final Cut Pro
X. Bright, sharp, excellent color.

"Excellent color"? Are it's colors and different from any other good
monitor? I thought these things were color managed.

What Davoud is referring to, you fdjhaiohfua is the the DCI-P3 Color
Space.

http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/another-new-color-space.html

http://tinyurl.com/o9oexx2

Damn!

I never knew that.

Thanks for the info, even though you have just made life more
difficult.

Ignorance was bliss.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:25:36 +1300, Eric Stevens
wrote:

Ignorance was bliss.

It still is. Trust me - it's the one subject I have in-depth knowledge
of.

Davoud:
The 27" 5K iMac Retina is fabulous for both Photoshop and Final Cut Pro
X. Bright, sharp, excellent color.

Eric Stevens:
"Excellent color"? Are it's colors and different from any other good
monitor? I thought these things were color managed.

I didn't mean any particular color space. I meant that the calibrated
monitor produces still images and HD videos that my clients
(Encyclopedia of Life, Maryland Biodiversity Project, numerous
educational institutions at all levels, conservation groups, a few
publishers, etc.) have all praised. They look great on any halfway
decent display on any platform. And that I get gorgeous prints from my
Canon I9500 printer that are as perfect a match to what I see on the
display as makes no difference.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

On 1/24/16 PDT 2:25 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-01-24 22:13:33 +0000, George Kerby said:
On 1/24/16 10:08 AM, in article , "PeterN"
wrote:

A 24" monitor seems to be the sweet spot for 1920x1080 when it comes to
computer use. Anything larger I would be inclined to go 1440p or even
4k.

All I can say is my 28' 4k is superb.



DAMN how do you get that thing in the HOUSE?!?

Have somebody else carry it sideways through the door.

Well, if it's the normal 16:9 aspect, it won't fit through the door,
either!

On 2016-01-25 05:50:46 +0000, John McWilliams said:

On 1/24/16 PDT 2:25 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-01-24 22:13:33 +0000, George Kerby said:
On 1/24/16 10:08 AM, in article , "PeterN"
wrote:

A 24" monitor seems to be the sweet spot for 1920x1080 when it comes to
computer use. Anything larger I would be inclined to go 1440p or even
4k.

All I can say is my 28' 4k is superb.

DAMN how do you get that thing in the HOUSE?!?

Have somebody else carry it sideways through the door.

Well, if it's the normal 16:9 aspect, it won't fit through the door, either!

Chainsaw might be required. In the worst case scenario, build the house
around that 24' display, or have it integrated as part of a loadbearing
wall.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article ,
Eric Stevens wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 22:43:06 +0100, android wrote:

In article ,
Eric Stevens wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 11:48:00 -0500, Davoud wrote:

MC:
A 24" monitor seems to be the sweet spot for 1920x1080 when it comes to
computer use. Anything larger I would be inclined to go 1440p or even
4k.

The 27" 5K iMac Retina is fabulous for both Photoshop and Final Cut Pro
X. Bright, sharp, excellent color.

"Excellent color"? Are it's colors and different from any other good
monitor? I thought these things were color managed.

What Davoud is referring to, you fdjhaiohfua is the the DCI-P3 Color
Space.

http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/another-new-color-space.html

http://tinyurl.com/o9oexx2

Damn!

I never knew that.

Thanks for the info, even though you have just made life more
difficult.

Ignorance was bliss.

Don't take it to court! ;-)
--
teleportation kills

In article 2016012422200564303-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

On 2016-01-25 05:50:46 +0000, John McWilliams said:

On 1/24/16 PDT 2:25 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-01-24 22:13:33 +0000, George Kerby said:
On 1/24/16 10:08 AM, in article , "PeterN"
wrote:

A 24" monitor seems to be the sweet spot for 1920x1080 when it comes to
computer use. Anything larger I would be inclined to go 1440p or even
4k.

All I can say is my 28' 4k is superb.

DAMN how do you get that thing in the HOUSE?!?

Have somebody else carry it sideways through the door.

Well, if it's the normal 16:9 aspect, it won't fit through the door, either!

Chainsaw might be required. In the worst case scenario, build the house
around that 24' display, or have it integrated as part of a loadbearing
wall.

Could be doable. If you enforce the frame...
--
teleportation kills

On 1/25/2016 1:47 AM, android wrote:


snip

Could be doable. If you enforce the frame...


Did you forget what the Duck did before retirement. Enforce the frame,
indeed. He would not tell you if he enforced any frames, at all.


--
PeterN

On 1/25/16 PDT 7:22 AM, PeterN wrote:
On 1/25/2016 1:47 AM, android wrote:

snip

Could be doable. If you enforce the frame...

Did you forget what the Duck did before retirement. Enforce the frame,
indeed. He would not tell you if he enforced any frames, at all.

All is needed is a little "re", followed by inforce.

On 1/25/2016 11:48 PM, John McWilliams wrote:
On 1/25/16 PDT 7:22 AM, PeterN wrote:
On 1/25/2016 1:47 AM, android wrote:

snip

Could be doable. If you enforce the frame...

Did you forget what the Duck did before retirement. Enforce the frame,
indeed. He would not tell you if he enforced any frames, at all.

All is needed is a little "re", followed by inforce.

Sometimes even a space can change the meaning. Think: acute dialysis
nurse; a cute dialysis nurse.



--
PeterN