Author Topic: Single 30" or a pair of 22"? (Read 7564 times)

Graffoto · « **on:** September 07, 2009, 23:49 »

Hi All,

Well my trusty old CRT is showing signs of age. It is almost not reaching calibration brightness any longer. I expect to have to replace it before the year is out.

I currently run a dual monitor setup.
A Dell 20" LCD for tools and internet & the CRT for color critical editing work.
I really like the idea of a 30" monitor, it would get some clutter off my desk.
But I wonder if it is not smarter to get one of the slightly smaller LCD graphics monitors such as the NEC 26" LCD2690WUXi2 and continue to run a dual monitor set up?

Any thoughts on this?

Best,

Joseph

leaf · « **Reply #1 on:** September 08, 2009, 01:46 »

i have wondered about this too.

I really prefer a single monitor setup but haven't tried a dual setup very often. For those who like 2 monitors, what is the advantage of having 2 over one very large monitor.

I will be upgrading my monitor soon and am tempted to go with a 30"

cardmaverick · « **Reply #2 on:** September 08, 2009, 03:24 »

I used to work on a 30 inch flatscreen (a Dell monitor), and I really loved the sheer size for 100% photo editing, plenty of room for palates etc.. Currently I use a 21 inch Eizo monitor. As much as I liked the Dell size, I preferred a more high end/accurate monitor that was a bit smaller. One day I'll own a 30 inch Eizo.... *sigh*

Phil · « **Reply #3 on:** September 08, 2009, 05:20 »

I use two machines each with two 20" monitors at work and love it. I have a number of windows open can have mapping software full screen and excel on the other, or two word documents and have nice cut and paste, or word document I'm working on and articles open in the other, saves absolutely heaps of flicking between windows.

But at home i have 2 nec 21's and for photo work the 2nd monitor doesnt get used. I just dont to go between programs often enough, I find anything on the 2nd monitor a distraction (ie email, even things like bridge/lightroom) and tried spreading photoshop across the two and didnt like it (just bugged me visually and its a long way to move the mouse). With other commitments it will probably be early next year, but I will replace the two with the NEC 26" LCD2690WUXi2

melking · « **Reply #4 on:** September 08, 2009, 05:53 »

Personal I would go with the 2 monitors....I am running 3 monitors on my system right now!

gostwyck · « **Reply #5 on:** September 08, 2009, 06:11 »

Quote from: melking on September 08, 2009, 05:53

Personal I would go with the 2 monitors....I am running 3 monitors on my system right now!

Wow __ how do you do that?!

Obviously as a bloke I can't multi-task so I don't see the point in having more than one monitor. I can only look and concentrate on one thing at a time.

I can understand the idea of having more than one monitor if events are being updated in real time, like financial market traders for example ... but not for photography.

cardmaverick · « **Reply #6 on:** September 08, 2009, 09:28 »

Quote from: melking on September 08, 2009, 05:53

Personal I would go with the 2 monitors....I am running 3 monitors on my system right now!

My friend used to use 8 monitors in two big panel setups, 4 each. That was intense looking.

KB · « **Reply #7 on:** September 08, 2009, 09:57 »

Quote from: leaf on September 08, 2009, 01:46

For those who like 2 monitors, what is the advantage of having 2 over one very large monitor.

I will be upgrading my monitor soon and am tempted to go with a 30"

There are a few potential advantages of having 2 24" monitors instead of 1 30" monitor that I can think:
o Much more (virtual) desk space (3840x1200 vs 2560x1200 -- 50% more room horizontally).
o A larger pixel pitch makes the text larger and more readable for older eyes (0.27mm vs 0.25mm).
o Possibly price (I don't know current prices, but at one time 2 24" quality monitors cost less than one 30" monitor).

I just switched to a 2 monitor setup (a 24" and a 20"), but truthfully I haven't taken much advantage of it myself yet. As Phil posted, as funny as it may sound, it just feels like a lot of "work" to go from the extreme side of one monitor to the other extreme side of the other. Maybe I just need to get used to it.

As I'm sure everyone here already knows, the most important thing for photographer use is to avoid TN panel monitors. IPS is the best choice, but there's a very limited selection in affordably priced larger monitors. PVA would be the second best choice, but there, too, the selection is limited (or non-existent).

PeterChigmaroff · « **Reply #8 on:** September 08, 2009, 10:24 »

One 30" is my vote. It's what I use, it's plenty big enough for most apps

goldenangel · « **Reply #9 on:** September 08, 2009, 12:29 »

I have one 22" plus one 20" monitor. I like my dual monitor setup because I get to run all the "background" application on the second monitor while I can edit photos on the primary one. Sometimes I put my palettes and tools on the second monitor as well.

Graffoto · « **Reply #10 on:** September 08, 2009, 20:25 »

So far it appears that the responses are pretty evenly split between a dual screen set up vs a gigantic single screen.

One problem I have seen in the past with dual calibrated monitors: even if both monitors are the same brand and type, they never look quite identical.
BTW, these are Eizo monitors I am referring to.

I don't know if the variance comes from manufacturing tolerance or possibly the graphics card not really being up to the task of driving both monitors equally.

It begs the question though, which one is correct?

goldenangel · « **Reply #11 on:** September 08, 2009, 21:35 »

Quote from: nosaya on September 08, 2009, 20:25

I don't know if the variance comes from manufacturing tolerance or possibly the graphics card not really being up to the task of driving both monitors equally.

It begs the question though, which one is correct?

My guess is that, in the case of identical monitors, it should be the graphics card. usually, they have one VGA and one DVI output these days. One is analog and one is digital. The analog one brings some variation into it by definition.

lbarn · « **Reply #12 on:** September 08, 2009, 21:38 »

I use a 27" Dell and a 24" dell at work, and that 27" monitor provides a lot of workspace for digital mapping tasks, where I can use the 24" to display the tables and other window data. Before it was a 24 and a 19 which seems much smaller now. Some tasks really seem optimized for better production with dual monitors.

flashon · « **Reply #13 on:** November 04, 2009, 14:35 »

Also, don't forget you can color calibrate each monitor separately and assign each different profile. That will take care of some of the differences.

Kngkyle · « **Reply #14 on:** November 04, 2009, 16:02 »

I have dual 24 inch Dell S2409Ws. It's not one of their ultrasharp monitors or anything special and only cost me $170 each. I am not a super pro photographer and don't ever intend to be, so having an ultrasharp crystal clear super expensive monitor was not one of my top priorities. They do look 100% identical though. Perhaps the biggest drawback for me is that they are 1920x1080 and not 1920x1200. For the price though I couldn't be happier.

My input above is probably useless cause you lot need the higher end monitors. But I can offer 1 suggestion! If you are considering a Dell, I highly recommend you check out http://www.dell.com/outlet to see if they have what you are looking for. That is where Dell sells their returned/refurbished products and sometimes offer them at a great discount. My computer cost me about $1000 while it was listed new for about $1500 with the same specs. It took a couple days for a system with the specs I wanted to show up, but it was well worth the wait.

I now have 3 purchases from dell outlet and they all seem brand new to me and still have the warranty.

elvinstar · « **Reply #15 on:** November 04, 2009, 17:19 »

I've been running 2 monitors for about 5 years now and can't imagine living without it! I put all palettes on the second monitor and don't even bother to calibrate that one. Primary monitor is where photo editing takes place, so that's the only one that I have to worry about calibrating. As others have said, 2 monitors helps tons with copy/paste (as in keywording!) so that is another helpful feature.

Just my 2 cents.

pdesign · « **Reply #16 on:** November 04, 2009, 21:10 »

2 x 22" Samsung displays here and I´m really happy with it. Both are around 1.5 years old and I would never ever give away one of it, or work just with one, even if its 30".

As the prices fall like snow, i would get 2 x 24" at a lower price than i paid for the "old ones" (best price now 179 € for a Samsung), so my next setup will be 2 x 24". But honestly, a 30" looks pretty impressive, but if you sit in front of it, its like sitting in ROW #1 in an movie theatre. Does anyone really like this feeling? Not me!

And don´t forget the cost of a 30incher, no way to get one for less than 1200 €. I´d rather buy 3-4 24ers and spend the rest on a new, wider, desk

btw. a 12 year old 21" CRT is standing here next to my desk, weight is approx 35 kilos and you can pick it up here FOR FREE (no assistance provided to carry it to your car - promissed!)

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Single 30" or a pair of 22"? (Read 7564 times)

Graffoto

leaf

cardmaverick

Phil

melking

gostwyck

cardmaverick

KB

PeterChigmaroff

goldenangel

Graffoto

goldenangel

lbarn

flashon

Kngkyle

elvinstar

pdesign

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors