AdobeRGB has a much larger gamut than sRGB. Even if we can’t control the gamut on the Nixeus VUE 30, moving to a larger gamut target should result in smaller errors overall. If this improves things this might work well for those doing color work, as they may want the larger gamut anyway. For normal use like gaming or web browsing, very few applications use AdobeRGB so it won’t be improved.

  Post-Calibration, 200 cd/m2 Post-Calibration, 80 cd/m2
White Level (cd/m2) 199.7718 81.959
Black Level (cd/m2) 0.3455 0.1473
Contrast Ratio 578:1 566:1
Gamma (Average) 2.1975 2.351
Color Temperature (missing) 6521K
Grayscale dE2000 0.8217 0.8328
Color Checker dE2000 1.3821 1.5443
Saturations dE2000 1.5282 1.6211

Besides the gamut, I left every target the same as with our sRGB calibration. As we can see, we get far, far better results for the color than we did before. The performance for the 80 cd/m2 target has also improved a lot with the grayscale. That shouldn’t have been affected, but it could be a better calibration run, as sometimes the software does better than other times. The visible difference with an average dE2000 of 1.33 vs. 0.83 for the grayscale is pretty minimal and hardly noticeable in real life.

The big change is the colors. While Red still falls outside of the AdobeRGB gamut, Green, Cyan and Yellow all line up nearly perfectly now. Magenta is still affected by the Red, but even those two colors are much closer to accurate than before. A quick look at the saturations table shows that the dE2000 stays below 3, or the visible error level, for every color except for highly saturated Red and Magenta. The 96-point Color Checker chart shows the same results, with those highly saturated red shades providing the only errors that really fall into the unacceptable realm.

One key chart to look at that I’ll pull out here separate from the gallery is the Delta Color Error on the Color Checker chart. As you can see, the Red shades are highly affected by an over-abundance of color here. If I were to pull out the other charts that break down the individual color errors, Delta Luminance and Delta Hue, you would see that those errors are virtually non-existent. The issue is that red has too much saturation, but the light level and the tint on it is correct.

Moving to the AdobeRGB target really improved the performance of the Nixeus VUE 30, but that isn’t without a caveat or two. Most people don’t use AdobeRGB color, and most applications don’t support the larger gamut. For those applications you are still going to see overly saturated colors on a regular basis and this won’t correct them. However, for people that can use AdobeRGB, color accuracy might be more important to them than it would be for someone that doesn’t use it.

If you are only gaming or doing general office productivity on this display, you might not care about the over-saturated gamut. If you are going to be doing photo work you certainly would, and hence this AdobeRGB target might solve your issues. If you want to have accurate colors on the Nixeus, this is the only way you can really get there, and you’ll likely know if this will work for you.

sRGB Measurements Display Uniformity
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • cheinonen - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    I'm finishing up a review of a 27" Monoprice display now that should run next week.
  • blackoctagon - Thursday, August 22, 2013 - link

    What about the overclockable 27-inch IPS screens, Chris? They can be sourced locally (from US) these days so no need to acquire one from Korea anymore. God knows there's been enough obsession about them during the past 12-18 months...and yet we still don't have truly professional reviews of them
  • repoman27 - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    Can we please stop the silly trend of referring to all displays as [vertical resolution] & "p"? The resolutions and aspect ratios of computer displays are not governed by the ATSC or DVB, and none of these panels are intended to be driven in an interlaced mode. At best the "p" just sits there conveying no useful information, at worst it causes the writer to omit actually useful information.

    [horizontal resolution] & "x" & [vertical resolution] is better, and likely preferable to the rather forgettable initialisms such as "WQXGA". If you are talking about a display with an ATSC or DVB defined resolution and want to use the "p" nomenclature, at least include the maximum refresh rate, since this will definitely be a concern with the initial wave of UHDTV panels.
  • blackoctagon - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    You're right of course, but typing 1440p is a lot quicker than 2560X1440. Not to mention the fact that pretty much everyone knows (or should know) what 1080p/1440p/1600p is shorthand for in the context of computer monitors.
  • piroroadkill - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    I agree.

    The p is totally hopeless information. Pointless trend. Even worse, when people have described 1920x1200 tablets as "1080p" or "Full HD". I don't want a 1920x1080 screen necessarily, but a 1920x1200 one is a more compelling ratio.
  • Impulses - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    Alluding to the new Nexus 7 there? I had a chuckle when I saw Google use both terms on the official Play store page, right alongside the 1920x1200 listed res. It's like the average consumer can't even be counted on to remember more than one number anymore or even assume larger = better (probably why 4K has emerged as a label, anything more technically accurate would just go in one ear and out the other).
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, August 21, 2013 - link

    4k emerged as a term years ago in high end professional video circles because all but one of the resolutions used were 4096 pixels across; the aspect ratio was varied solely by changing the vertical resolution. From there it just trickled down; we geeks read about it on gadget blogs/etc and lusted after stuff that would support it while costing less than our homes and gradually popularized it as the next big thing. Meanwhile, and unsurprisingly the TV people settled on the slightly smaller quadHD standard since it has less implementation/back compatability issues.
  • blackoctagon - Thursday, August 22, 2013 - link

    I think you're being overly fussy. Even John Carmack casually uses the 'p' when describing the resolution of non-TV displays (just heard him do so on the QuakeCon keynote)
  • 7beauties - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    Since this is an IPS panel, it probably goes without saying that its refresh rate is just 60Hz. The response time of 7ms is borderline if you're a gamer. What's most disappointing to me is that it has CCFL backlighting, making the display heavier, hotter, thicker, and less power efficient. Most current LCD's use the newer LED backlighting, so this is the LCD equivalent of paying luxury price for a car that's carburetered. I'll hold out for when OLED's take hold and become affordable. Thank you.
  • DanNeely - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    Except for the most expensive sort, LED backlighting cannot match a *good* CCFL for color gamut. While the lack of an sRGB mode limits the VUE 30 somewhat their backlight choice indicates they're going for the pro market where color accuracy is more important than the equivalent of an hours pay/year in extra power use or an increase in thickness that no one but a silly fanboi would care about.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now