Join 500,000+ Artists
Its' free and it takes less than 10 seconds!
I could use some qualified opinions here.
For illustration and design work that gets printed, what is your take on wide gamut monitors?
I'm having a hard time coming to conclusions on whether buying a wide gamut monitor instead of an sRGB monitor with a high quality panel would be worth the extra hassle. While it seems somewhat negligent of people working towards printed end-products, it almost seems to be the norm to stay within the realms or sRGB in terms of hardware. Any thoughts?
if you're working directly only for critical print output, the wide gamut monitor is right for you. but one thing to consider is that on wide gamut monitors sRGB emulation is very poor comparable with pro sRGB monitors. and i think you already know that images on WG monitors are very saturated in red and green. so sRGB monitors in that case more natural looking.
I would assume (maybe incorrectly) that most monitors already have a wider gamut than print CMYK. Even if you want work that will look great on other people's screens, if your gamut is wider than theirs aren't you including more information than most people will be able to see? It might be great if you can create beautiful and subtle effects happening in the shadows, but if no one can see them...
I'm sure there's a place for those kinds of displays, but for work destined for print it might be overkill.
Thanks for your replies. I don't exclusively work for critical print output. However, I want the monitor to be both future proof and up to illustration industry standards, so to speak. So my biggest inquiry here is, are there any such standards? For example, do some clients demand images to be delivered in AdobeRGB?
I'm aware wide gamut monitors can display wrong colors in a non-color-managed application/OS, but there seem to be some work-arounds at least for web browsing and movie playback. Of course, I would like to avoid this problem altogether... that's why I'm asking here. sRGB seems to be sufficient professionally and beneficial privately, but I want to make sure.
I know that some sources recommend Adobe RGB or other wide gamut spaces for print - but really this makes very little sense in practical terms.
sRGB is already much wider as a colour space than CMYK, and using an even wider gamut space such as Adobe RGB just makes conversions even harder, especially for illustration where you are creating colours from scratch (as opposed to capturing them from nature in photographs).
Using wide-gamut spaces for print has one very small advantage: namely it possible to get a little purer yellows and cyans (which are two colours in the CMYK gamut which are more saturated than in most RGB models), but every other colour becomes harder to convert. In fact in the majority of cases it's much better to work in the narrower gamut of sRGB which will lead to far fewer conversion problems.
Aside from all that, at the moment wide-gamut monitors are a pain to use (on Windows anyway, can't speak for the Mac) because they won't display the desktop, web or any other non-colour managed space correctly, and this is extremely frustrating in everyday use.
Thanks for clarifying. Now, if only decent sRGB monitors were more common these days! It seems almost all non-TN-panel monitors being released are wide gamut. Makes you wonder.