While posting an image the other day, the image button, Mona Lisa, made me think of Da Vinci. What if the greatest painter in history was limited to painting his masterpieces on stone tablets with sticks and leaves?
Ok, stupid analogy, but it got me thinking about 14 bit vs 8 bit, and how it gives us a much better "canvas" to capture our images. But what's the point if you're editing your beautiful, 14 bit raw videos on a Macintosh Color Classic?
I've been shooting raw 600D (1152x480 rez) videos for the past week while on vacation and editing them on my 3 year old, 13" MacBook. Got home and watched them all on the 27" iMac I usually do my editing on, and was pleasantly surprised to see the amount of detail and clarity they retain, even after being stretched across a 2560x1440 display.
Ok, to the point. What are your experiences with different displays, namely their color reproduction, bit depth, resolution, calibration, etc.? Best and worst experiences? Tips, advice, yada yada.
Ezio (http://www.eizo.com.au/products/coloredge/cg276/index.html) monitors are renowned for their color reproduction and accuracy.
I've got a cheap POS Asus that is terrible in the blacks. But my LG Led TV measures very accurate after calibration, that I use to proof check.
Seems like an extremely overlooked topic, but I would think it's just as important as having a great d/a and audio monitors when mixing/mastering music.
Hmm, maybe this is why I see some "professional" photographers with greenish skin tones and overexposed pictures.