Matt vs Glossy - Best monitor for editing photo's

[kiwiphotography]

Hello,
I searched the forms and couldn't find much on it. I wanted to hear from other photographers what their preference for monitor was.
In my opinion, I always have thought that the glossy apple cinema displays were amazing in terms of viewing an image. But after researching a bit further, I came to find that a lot of photographers do not like these due to the glare and headaches and eye problems that can result from this after long period of editing.

It also seems, that like printing glossy, the contrast and saturation can be a bit more intense than with lustre or matt.

I want to have the best "affordable" possible editing experience and can already relate to the issues of having to stare at a screen for 6+ hours a day of editing.

It seems that a glossy screen might be the best for displaying a final image for your client, but maybe matt would be better to edit on - easier on eyes, no glare, consistent colors from different angles, and maybe more true to life rendering of colors and contrast.

Any thoughts? I'm on a La Cie CRT right now and need an upgrade! Looking to spend $500 or less (used is just fine) and as my monitor right now is maybe 6+ years old, most monitors over the past few years I'm guessing would be a huge upgrade.
Thanks!
M

[mrchile]

A lot depends on where your monitor is located.
I have mine in a spot where I don't get much sun, (North side of the house), and all electrical lighting is above and behind and off to the side of my "glossy" monitor.
I don't notice any difference in glare off of it or my previouse monitor which was more "matte".

[StanH]

You're right about the display vs. accuracy thing. Showing off photos often looks better on a glossy screen, but matte monitors won't make you fight your reflection all the time, which is a big plus.

That said, keeping your monitor calibrated will go a long way to improving the performance no matter what. I have a MacBook Pro with the glossy screen and I've got it looking pretty accurate. It's not always ideal because of the glare, but it's never crippled my ability to work.

[BobF]

While the contrast and saturation may be more intense on a monitor with a gloss screen, that's not necessarily what's desired.

Ideally you want to work with a calibrated and profiled monitor where the contrast adjustments are set based on what's 'ideal', not what might be a punchier look that a lot of people subjectively like.

Stan is absolutely right about the reflections. Trying to fight against reflections on a screen is awful. The higher contrast and saturation that can be achieved on a gloss monitor can also be harder on the eyes, which isn't a positive either. Go for a matte screen.

[WRon]

I absolutely agree with Stan and Bob; buy a matte screen. And, be sure to buy hardware and accompanying software to calibrate your monitor, especially if you plan to make prints from your photos. Even if you don't plan to make prints, calibration is necessary to ensure color accuracy. As for monitor brands, I've heard good things about the Dell Ultrasharp U2410, which sells for less than $500. Downside: Dell's support is truly bad. However, monitors are generally troublefree, so it may be one you may wish to consider.

[kiwiphotography]

Hi,
Thanks so much for your advice. I think honestly I would ideally like to get two....which may be affordable to do in the used range.
I was looking on craigslist and I came across these two that seemed like great buys and a huge upgrade from my current monitor...although not as good as current models of course.
I figured if these were good enough for high end photo editing 4-5 years ago, they should still do excellent jobs not.

Is there any way you could take a quick look at these two and give me your advice?
One is a slightly older monitor, yet cheaper...but it is matte and I would think would be the best option for my eyes and editing. ($250 23" Cinema HD Display)

http://orangecounty.craigslist.org/sys/3389167544.html

The other is a bit more expensive, a bit newer, and is the super bright (comparatively) and great looking monitor. It is glossy though and more expensive. ($350 24" LED Cinema Display)

http://orangecounty.craigslist.org/sys/3384416210.html


I'm thinking that I should get one of these now and then a year or two down the road, I can always get the other for even far cheaper.

They are both about as low in price as they say they will go and both are in my price range for a used monitor. I suppose I could go to $500 for a brand new, but seems like I should go for a used highest end slightly older model, than a brand new mid-range current one.
Or maybe you have a better suggestion?
Thanks so much for the advice!
Micah

[kiwiphotography]

Anybody have any thoughts about which monitor I should get?

http://orangecounty.craigslist.org/sys/3389167544.html

vs

http://orangecounty.craigslist.org/sys/3384416210.html

[BobF]

As far as I know, all Apple Cinema Displays have IPS panels. That's really the key to a monitor that is suitable for colour critical work. Between these two I'd go with the matte display. Having two monitors is a good idea. I have a two-monitor setup and love it. One thing to keep in mind is that the second monitor doesn't really need to be high quality. If you use one for the image and the second for Photoshop tools and palettes and/or Bridge then that second display doesn't have to be high quality because you won't be using it for anything truly critical.