A very professional deep dive based on a specific use case unlike the other RUclipsrs who reads off specs and just goes on a rant. Nicely Done! Thank you very much for this.
Seriously, HUGE kudos to you. What a professionally done review. You won't find a single other review of this monitor that talks about the points you listed with the depth that you treated them with. The only actually useful review I've seen of this display (and I've seen most of them, and they all have the same opinion). Also the only review that tackles it from the perspective of an actual professional who cares about real world results more than flaunting an apple product on their setup tour video. Thank you!
Really good information! I'm tired of every other reviewer endlessly repeating how the build quality makes them cream in their pants while they raise and lower the screen with one finger. How is that even relevant in day-to-day use? Now, what you are showing is actually the real functionality of the screen. Some real professional info, which is really missing from the "Oh! Look at that aluminium backside..." type of reviews. Thank you!
You’re a good ambassador for BenQ, for sure, and I don’t argue most of your points. For me, higher contrast and ability to see extremely fine details in high res photos is really useful for landscape and architectural photography, so I prefer the “Retina” pixel density and glossy glass finish. Also, having used iMacs and an iMac Pro with built in 5K displays for years, I really can’t go back to a low density display such as a 4K 27” or worse, 4K 32”. And oh, man, you’re right about the latest MacBook Pro displays!
Thanks! It is much appreciated your time on making this deep overview on the panel. Glad to see reviews for professional gear, done by actual professionals.
Thank you again for this explanation. I learn so much from your videos. I am upgrading my 2017 Imac (due to slow performance) to what I hope will be the Mac Studio m1max. My current iMac is a 21.5 inch screen with a resolution of 4096 x 2304. I am trying to decide between the Mac Studio monitor with a 5k resolution of 5120 x 2880 and the BenQ sw 271c with a 4k resolution of 3840 x 2160. I am leaning toward the BenQ for the reasons you explain in your video, but I'm wondering if I should get a monitor that has at least the same resolution I have now on the iMac. This would rule out the BenQ but this doesn't make sense to me because my iMac is now five years old and I would think the BenQ is as good. So would the BenQ have as good a monitor for photography as my current iMac? Would it look worse to me because I am used to a monitor with higher resolution?
Hi Deborah, thanks for the comment. So color wise as said in the video BenQ will be better suited for photography than a Mac. What I would recommend is this. Give BenQ a try and see what you think about it resolution wise. If you are good with it then keep it. If not you can always return it. Between 4K to 5K there's will be some differences and variation but if you are going to run the display at scaled resolution anyways then it you might now notice too much of a variation at all. Hope this help.
I'm not sure this is clear in the video. With Mac OS there is no performance hit using a 4k display at 1080x1920 or 2160x3840. It treats both these resolutions as native. The performance is only affected if you use a resolution between these two. These in-between resolutions show a warning in the display settings: "Using a scaled resolution may affect performance" The same is true using a 5k display running 2.7k. The advantage of a 4k 27" display running at 1080 vs a 5k display at 2.7k is the larger UI, which is easier to read. The advantage of a 5k 27" at 2.7k is more room for menus, but the downside is that the UI text is smaller and harder to read. I prefer 4k at 27". It's easier for me to read. I wish there were 5k 32" displays.
I know this is a late comment, but this came across my recommended and I just wanted to say your presentation style is very informative without being overly complex. The examples, definitions and comparisons are well-thought out and provide sufficient detail that is graspable without having to pause and perform a web search for an alternative explanation. Nicely done and I hope to catch up on all your other videos! Cheers!
Hello Art, thanks for the video. In general I agree with you but, as a photographer that prints his works a lot, I’ve found recently I’m perfectly fine with P3 Gamut, if color accuracy is ok. Will there be a video where you calibrate and evaluate Studio Display color accuracy? I’m really interested in it.
I am interested in seeing your your video on calibration of a Mac Studio display. I do print but not professionally. I am interested in reducing on the Apple display over saturation and contrast set to high so that when I do print it be what I saw on the monitor. Also, I print using LR and use the color profiles of Epson paper printed on a Epson Stylus Pro 3880. Also, I edit in Capture One 22. Capture One claims it is adjusting its program to the M1 chip. I wonder what will be the different color signatures of the software, printer, and Apple display? Thank your for your effort to explain the Apple system and how it compares with other systems.
ABOUT TIME!!!! a review about the specs that really matter. All these new machines with so much power for photographers and then a high priced monitor that does not show what you captured in the field and you have to transfer to paper!!!! The 32"BENQ is a better option for photographers!!! Thank you Art ...well done!!!
I’ve been obsessively watching reviews of the Apple Studio Display and was 100% convinced I would go with that, but you’ve given me pause. A very professional review and refreshingly finally geared to print photographers than video. Most reviews seem to be by those doing video. I’ve always wanted to work in an AdobeRGB workflow as I worked many years in print and I’m aware that the AdobeRGB profile is greater than sRGB. Your points are very astute. Yes, the Apple Studio Display is gorgeous and integrates into the Mac Studio series beautifully, but will it give the ideal results for your specific niche. Also appreciate your input on the matte finish or Nano technology. I spent time in an Apple Store recently shifting back and forth between the glossy finish and the Nano finish. I was really impressed by how glare-free the Nano finish is. Yes, the glossy looks fantastic and brilliant, but the matte finish is closer to what you can expect in print. Plus, I do a lot of close up editing. I think the eye strain difference from glare could be significant. Other reviewers say that the screen can get more dirty though. Well, I guess I’m going to have to go look at more of your videos to see the BENQ monitors.
Fantastic review ... best on RUclips. However, as a photographer i'm a little confused. Does this Apple Studio Display need proper calibration with hardware or just the in built software? What monitor calibration do you recommend? Does the calibration drift and change over time? Big thanks!
Build in software does not do calibration just reference mode. There are levels of control in the following order from fundamental to more accurate. Reference mode, fine-tuned calibration, software calibration. The latter 2 needs a hardware device. Recommended calibration is based on your workflow, but I would check out my video on reference mode for help on this. All display drift over time, LED are smaller drift but still does.
Thanks for the excellent review, Art. I print too but also prepare images for viewing on the web & I'd actually take the opposite point of view; I had a BenQ SW271C and its P3 coverage was incomplete to about the same degree that this Apple Studio Display is incomplete for Adobe RGB. That is to say, the BenQ only has 90% coverage of P3 and the Apple Studio Display only has 86% of AdobeRGB (according to calibration done by DPreview). Additionally, the BenQ can't be hardware calibrated to P3 without issues that are a dealbreaker (when I was trying to calibrate to P3, I believe you suggested I use software calibration instead of hardware to avoid those issues). I also think it's somewhat misleading to suggest the AdobeRGB colorspace is larger than the P3 color space-the truth as far as I can tell is that AdobeRGB has more blues/greens, but P3 has about equally more reds/yellows. So you sort of have to choose: do you want an AdobeRGB display OR a P3 display? ... unless you buy LGs pricey 27EP950, which has near-complete coverage of both (I had one of those too, but the build quality is terrible-I think Pixar uses those), or a UP2720Q also with a true 10-bit panel (unlike the BenQ & Apple) and near full coverage for both P3 & AdobeRGB, not sure about hardware calibration though. For me, if I have to choose, it makes more sense to have a P3 panel, since those extra reds/yellows are what my friends & family are going to see on their phones/tablets/laptops, so I'd like to see them when editing. Pretty much NO ONE will be viewing content on an AdobeRGB panel. When I print from a P3 display, the colors I'm missing on my P3 display show up in the print, so I can iterate by reprinting if there's really a problem with the blues/greens (which isn't too often) ... and the print is what I show friends/family or folks at the gallery, not the AdobeRGB panel. Again, almost NO ONE will ever see the image the way you see it on an AdobeRGB panel. Yes, it's closer to the final print, but in reality, a print will always look much different than the image on a screen (reflected vs illuminated light source, printer's gamut doesn't match AdobeRGB), and if you're printing at home on an Epson P900 or something, it's quick and easy and 100% accurate to proof small prints or sections of a print b/f making a final print, which I'd do even if I was using an AdobeRGB panel. I'm also one of those people who love sharp images, 5k @27 inches almost isn't enough for me. I had the 8k Dell UP3218K for a while & it was an absolute dream (also w/near full coverage for both AdobeRGB & P3), I think the PPI on that is 280 (compared to Apple's 218). You can view entire 24 mp images without scaling, the difference is night/day. Anyway, that monitor had issues w/image retention & is also pricey. I can't wait for a 32-inch OLED or mini led w/2000+ zones 8k display w/full AdobeRGB & P3 coverage, no compromises, we're almost there.
Excellent presentation as always, Art. As someone who recently moved from Windows to Mac, I come down squarely on the side of the way Windows handles resolution by scaling the interface without throwing away resolution. It's frustrating to have to choose between throwing away 75% of your resolution of a 4K monitor or dealing with tiny text. This is the one aspect of macOS that made me seriously second guess my switch. As it happens, I recently ordered an SW321C that should arrive in the next couple days. I've always had a question about monitors with presets for different gamuts. What exactly do these do? Do they take the native gamut of the monitor and "crop off" colors that fall outside of it, or do they somehow shift the native gamut around? As a printing photographer, I always felt like the best approach would be to display the complete gamut of the display rather than artificially limit it. If I want to see an image in a smaller gamut I could accomplish this in Photoshop. And I can proof to the particular paper I'm using there as well. What am I missing with these presets?
I hear you, this has been apple approach for close to a decade now, chances are, this is the way forward. About the display your thoughts is right and the Primary gamut for the SW321C is Adobe RGB and the same with hardware calibration as well, but you can calibrate using Panel Native for a slightly larger than Adobe RGB gamut. I would do a search on my channel for the color management video, many of them will answer your questions in further details as well. If you are looking for something specific and can't find it, just ask :D
As a photographer first above all else I was looking to buy the new Apple display to compliment the Apple Studio M1 Max but you have given me food for thought. With this video in mind, I started to look at a BenQ alternative, the photographer monitor with 32 inch, 4K Adobe RGB, namely the SW321C, which has a similar price point. My question put simply is this: I also have a RUclips channel and create films like your self. Would this BenQ monitor crossover to film editing for RUclips purposes?
Clear, fact-based, and I think objective: a really great discussion that makes me ponder my (realistic) personal needs. My reality is that matching the full AdobeRGB gamut has not been essential, because I’ve never experienced it, since all of my screens have been from Apple. I have no professional requirements to have “perfect” color, so what I don’t know isn’t hurting me. Other than price, is there some previous Apple display that is “better,” or is this Apple’s “state-of-the-art?”
Great review. It may stray outside what you normally cover, but for those of us that already chose the ASD and do photography and commercial printing, it would be nice to hear your recommendations on the best workflow settings to optimize everything since our Adobe RGB gamut is knee-capped. In other words, I currently shoot photos in Adobe RGB (RAW), open them in Photoshop with Adobe RGB profile embedded and after editing on ASD, either send to photo lab or commercial. CMYK press for printing. I used to have NEC monitors and understood that workflow, but still now sure I am getting the best experience possible out of my ASD workflow (like should I be embedding Adobe RGB still in my images? Setting ASD to D50 P3?, etc.).
Keep color tagged the same. The issue is that since the gamut does not exist, there's really not much to do with optimization. Just use reference - preset mode, white point fine-tune and possibly calibrate it that is all one can do.
Hi Art, another great in depth review. I think we are ready for Art University!! I do own a lower tier BenQ with only sRGB and Rec 709 coverage. I have calibrated it and I am happy with the color. However, I know that not having Adobe RGB gamut, I am not seeing some of the colors and shadow/highlight details. I am not interested in "good looking" Apple display. For me color accuracy and as you mentioned color gamut take much higher priority. I am pretty clear on gamut for photos but not too familiar with the coverage for color accurate video work. I will go back to your previous videos to learn more about video. Keep up the great work and thank you again.
The nano-texture glass is super nice. It's much better at rejecting reflections than any other display I've used (BenQ, Eizo, NEC). In my office, I find it is easier to preserve black levels by keeping direct light off of the nano-texture surface than it is to keep reflections off of other display types. I'm using an Eizo CS2740 now, and I miss the Nano-Texture iMac.
A question: What about the 4K vs 5K viewing experience. I’m not sure if you covered that. So much to take in. I’m wary of going 4K. I do a lot of detailed editing.
I have been using 4K for close to a decade now, and it has served me and continues to serve me well. Both 4K and 5K scale the resolution; the variation is that in the 27" display, 5K pixel per inch is above the 200 mark, which is more in line with Apple's "Retina" resolution. 4K comes close, but not entirely. This is a personal experience; some are ok with 4k, while others are against it, saying that images and text are soft. Like I said, it is more of a personal preference, really.
I think this thing is more appropriate for content consumption in bedrooms and dorms than anything, with solid speakers, good viewing experience, and video call capability. At the price point, it simply doesn’t compete with professional displays in what actually matters for work.
Thank you so much for your comprehensive informational video. You're so knowledgeable and I'm grateful for your review. I think I'm going with the BenQ SW271C. I shoot and edit in Adobe RGB for food packaging/print and web. Do you feel the BenQ SW271C is a good choice? Thanks again!
This is a great video presented with lots of in depth knowledge! What I'm getting is that the Apple Studio Display is not ideal because it's not an HDR display? I edit my photos in 16 bit Adobe RGB (1998) but then I downgrade them to 8 bit sRGB for printing and online display. As far as I know printers can't handle 16 bit RGB files. Before I post any photos I compare how they look on my MacBook Pro, my Pro Display XDR, on my iPhone and on my LG Ultrafine which I plan on replacing with the Studio Display. I looked at the nano texture displays and found them to look pretty dull. I also agree that True Tone is garbage and always turn it off.
Not the fact that they are not HDR, they do run scaled HDR 600. But it is not an ideal printing photography display because the coverage is only about 84% Adobe RGB and if one prints, this is not ideal, regardless of 8 vs 16 bit,
A question before I buy. I have a BenQ SW320 which I used with Windows as the only display. Worked great. Then I got a MacBookPro 1, the dual display mode is clunky. Now I’m planning to get a Mac Studio. I would like a dual display mode if it works better than the MacBook. I believe that an Apple display will integrate better with the Mac than a third party. I am a photographer, printing, both color and BW. 1. Am I right that with the Mac Studio, the Studio Display + the BenQ SW320 will work well together? 2. With a Studio Display, do I understand correctly that the Mac will enforce the P3 mode on the BenQ even if I calibrate the BenQ separately? 3. I understand the Studio Display cannot be calibrated to Adobe, P3 is the best we can do. Gaah! That’s not really a question, I just raises the question of color space vs. convenience.
1. Am I right that with the Mac Studio, the Studio Display + the BenQ SW320 will work well together? Yes, for the SW320 you just need a USB C to Display Port cable, you can use HDMI as well, however, I would deter you for using that - too many potential color and RGB range issues. 2. With a Studio Display, do I understand correctly that the Mac will enforce the P3 mode on the BenQ even if I calibrate the BenQ separately? Incorrect, Studio display will be P3, SW can be whatever gamut you set it to be. 3. I understand the Studio Display cannot be calibrated to Adobe, P3 is the best we can do. Gaah! That’s not really a question, I just raises the question of color space vs. convenience. Yes Studio display cannot do Adobe and it is more in the 85% range of Adobe.
What. you are saying about the Macbook Pro for HDR work is not true because without a Blackmagic or AJA output device you are not seeing true color space for video. You can't grade for high end work on any internal GUI display, no matter how high quality or calibrated it is.. its close but not for delivery to high end clients..
Agree to that, and fully aware, however, people find a way and if it comes close it is good enough for many. But if your client is high end then you should get proper equipment. It is a step in the right direction, even though it is not a complete one.
Really good review! Thank you! I have just ordered the Studio Display because I'm fine with the P3 gamut for web usage. I don't print (for the moment at least 😅)
What is the difference in the size of the UI on this display vs the 4K Benq 32” - I’m trying to figure out which one to buy and would prefer the Benq for overall features / performance but am nervous to get stuck with a tiny UI. If you ever had the time a comparison of screen shots of the two would be great. Thx for the info.
because you can scale the UI it won't be too small. Some perceived 4K scale to not as sharp but I don't have an issue with it. I would give BenQ 4K a go and if you don't like it, you can always bring it back
No, not by any stretch. It is not even in the same class as Eizo. Eizo and BenQ SW are hardware calibrated displays. these are software. ruclips.net/video/9hVfwW9LK8E/видео.html
thats good but you seem so concern about the gpu working harder, sony experia mobile devices have 4k screen so i dont think its a big deal for M1 to handle 5k or 6K
Seem and being concerned are 2 different things and it is just fact that Apple scales their displays by doubling the resolution so it is pushing the GPU harder. On Apple Silicon machines this is less of an issue.
for as long as can remember, since digital inception have always used Srgb, makes my workflow seamless for both web and print and NEVER has a client asked for Adobe RGB, never in a shoot brief has it stipulated Adobe RGB. working with a pro lab for tests of color gamut the trial was images processed in profoto, adobe RGB and Srgb and outputted to lab and printed on various paper types and non of the lab techs, nor the invited photographers could notice any difference. So although theoretically, Adobe RGB is bigger, we dont work in the theoretical world, and to have a more seamless workflow from capture to print or digital delivery Srgb work perfectly... great video as always....
One can argue it that way but you can't unseen what you have seen and you won't know what you're missing if you don't know it. And that is life. Some can, some can't but there's an argument for more and better. Each to their own, thanks for chiming in.
One more additional thought, yes clients may never asked for Adobe RGB in a photographer life span and that is ok. The point of choosing Adobe RGB is not so much for the client but rather the photographer - the creative in the equation. What the client get in the end from the creative using Adobe RGB, if the images should go to print is colors that can be shown on print now a days. A by product of the creative care and attention to deal, striving for the best, which to say, is relative and vary from one creative to another. I'm not trying to change minds here, there are many who use similar color workflow as described here and there are others who wants more and uses Adobe RGB.
@@ArtIsRight it cant be seen in a print the colour space difference, I meet people all the time that claim they can but in reality you cant, tech states it prints in a bigger space but visually looks no different. and let's not touch on CMYK as that's another can of worms. but I'm happy my workflow is seamless using Srgb all the way through to digital file delivery to the client, they can then do as they wish, and I'm happy knowing if they use on the web that they don't need to convert the files I have supplied. I tell my students it is like using a 100mp camera to a 25mp, one is theoretically better but there are other issues to consider when using the 100mp... sometimes less is more.
An important info dump. Thanks. Will run it a second time. Related: are they enhancing our images? Maybe the M1 iMac does so. I prefer to see what the camera did.
the images through the web cam is supposed to use the A13 Digital Signal Processing, and center stage. I won't show a demo of this but there are plenty of other videos that shows a sample. I'm sure that once Apple update this they will have a video showing the update as well.
Art: I plan on purchase the Mac Studio, either the M1 or M1 Ultra. I exclusive will use the system for photo editing using Lightroom Classic & Photoshop. At present I calibrate my monitor using X-Rited's X1 Pro 3. Did I understand your correctly if I purchase the Apple Studio Display my calibration will NOT be acceptable &/or possible with this display?
Not quite. You can calibrate these displays. However, the color gamut that these display will show is P3 and not Adobe RGB. Also I'll have a guides coming out about these display in the next week or so.
It depends on where that image goes, web is a for sure thing. As far as print is concern to clarify further, I am referring to photographer who print in house or through labs. Not catalog printing which is usually job done through company that has their own team managing this.
THANK YOU. VERY Helpful. I have been trying to decide between the SW321C, SW271C and the Apple studio display. I think your has made my decision for me (SW321C).
Hello, Karl. Im like you can’t decide between the SW271C and the Apple Studio Display, im a hobby photographer and web designer. Do you regretted with SW321C or ist everything fine ?
@@matejcerkez4911 No, except now I want two SW321C monitors! My photo semi-pro partner purchased the SW271C and loves it, but "wishes" he got the SW321C.
Having shared a couple of comments with you before, this must be the deepest dive yet on the Studio display from that perspective of a photographer, so really well done and thank you. For general and non-critical viewing, I will miss the “snap and contrast” of my 27” 5K iMac when it eventually departs my system but with the BenQ SW 271 already in place as that second monitor for critical photo editing, I won’t be adding a Studio display. Still leaning to add a SW321C, though admittedly I don’t seem to be quite “there” yet. Can’t seem to get quite there yet on my Studio ruminations either, though I think you’ve got further thoughts coming on the Ultra too?
what would be some possibilities for the 64gb of memory in the display do you think? Would any of them boost the performance of MacBook/studios connected to it or just the camera/speakers
Graphic off load could be part of it but I don't see that happening yet. I'm not sure, I would say Apple TV but there's no remote ;) Unless ifixit finds a bluetooth chip and Wifi inside
Hello, beautiful Review, I have a question, they will send me an Apple Studio Display very soon and the truth is I have not so modern equipment in terms of connectivity I have a Mac mini Late 2012 and a Mac Pro 2013 Trashcan and I don't know if a thunderbolt 3 to thunderbolt 2 converter can work for me I hope you can help me
Wow what a great video.. Im a photographer and i sometimes do some intense type required work at home. I think Studio display would be a waste of money. I would like to have dual screen. What monitor would you recommend...?
If you are a photographer I would look at BenQ SW display line up, they are hardware calibrated display created specifically for photography and all of them has 99% Adobe RGB coverage. Also most movies display at 24 FPS or 29.95 so 60 is more than adequate.
@@ArtIsRight thank you for your kind answer. I am currently using mbp m1 max. What about PD2725U or PD3220U model? I am debating between SW and PDs as theres price difference.
Those are great displays, you have to ask yourself, do you print your work or will you print in the future - especially inkjet prints. If so then SW for certain. If not then PD will do just fine.
Great video! The most technical yet concise and coherent video on the Apple Studio Display I've seen so far. Looking forward to your Apple Studio Display Calibration video. Keep up the good content!
I want a photographer/printers monitor that won't break the bank. I use apple computer. But am prepared to go outside this eco system. What would you recommend?
Thanks for a great review. I'm a photographer and professional printer for 25 years and have the same views. Apple is great, but is it the best tool for the job. About to upgrade to their "Studio" computer. Was wondering about their display. Now I know I'll probably look elsewhere. Any current recommendations with an Adobe 98 gamut? I work with many pro photographers using ProPhoto RGB and push Epson printers to their maximum with custom profiles, etc. On another topic, I just upgraded my phone from an iphone 11 to a 13 pro and can't stand the overprocessed color. There is no off! and it's hard to remove as many of the colors become crossed over. Ugh.
My recommendation would be BenQ SW line 99% Adobe RGB with hardware calibration. As far as ProPhoto goes, I can see why someone wants to work in that gamut, but there's no point really. It has been more than 10 years now since there were talks about ProPhoto but then the displays in the same time frame still sits at 99% Adobe RGB and if any changes is coming about it won't be coming in ProPhoto Space, it would be coming in P3 and Rec 2020 instead. As far as prints goes, on inkjet right now, I have not seen anything that exceed Adobe RGB all the way around, may be some peak here and there but very rare.
Hardware vs software calibration and color gamut coverage, SW will always have 99% Adobe RGB PD does not have this. Also this will explains the differences ruclips.net/video/9hVfwW9LK8E/видео.html and this ruclips.net/video/nKajHQh4eFE/видео.html
I know I am late to the party but I just got a new 2021 16” MBP M1 Max and am looking for actual user experience on the BenQ SW312C and the Apple Studio Display with the mat finish. I print about 10% of the time to a 24” Canon Pro-4000. I know ultimately the decision is personal but I see so many comments on the scaling issues of the Retina display MBP’s to 4K screens. How ‘bad’ is it? Meanwhile it’s difficult to argue with the 32” real estate, hardware profiles, and color accuracy of the BenQ. Then again the system integration, web cam functionality, seamless scaling etc of the Studio Display is difficult to ignore. Anybody with first hand experience got input?
but I see so many comments on the scaling issues of the Retina display MBP’s to 4K screens. How ‘bad’ is it? Over exaggerated based on various highly personal experiences. Each will have different feeling about this. I would tell you to give it a try out for yourself. I have been using 4k with Mac for close to a decade now. Lot of complaint video that get views but they are not neutral, and sadly on most of the them the supporting justification, sounds good, but they are about as legitimate as a flat earther argument. Meanwhile it’s difficult to argue with the 32” real estate, hardware profiles, and color accuracy of the BenQ. Then again the system integration, web cam functionality, seamless scaling etc of the Studio Display is difficult to ignore. Anybody with first hand experience got input? I tried both and they are both good in different ways. For me I print and I would prefer 99% Adobe RGB, when possible.
∆e is dependent on the display, each value will differ, calibration result pass and I'll leave it at that. I didn't use CalMan to run a pre calibration with factory value. Watch this for uniformity ruclips.net/video/f0dS629pPgE/видео.html Tolerances are ok. Light bleeding is ok as well
So i calibrate my macbook pro M1 display with xrite i1 and i realised that the display was more contrasty,so everything looked better but in reality contrast was off and needed to be fine tuned.I was wondering,did you find the same with studio display ? or is the studio display more accurate? Thanks artisright
I ended up choosing the Studio Display after much teeth nashing. In the end, after comparing my 27' iMac to my LG monitor (currently assigned to my Mac Studio), and running into the scaling problem, and realizing if I wanted to print more - I'd have to upgrade my printer (Epson 1430) along with the monitor. I have yet to justify a printer upgrade. But if I do, I'm wondering how a dual monitor set up on a Mac Studio would work. The Studio Display and a BenQ SW271C. Can I have the two monitors in two different colour spaces?
G'day Art ANOTHER STUNNING AND INFORMATIVE video mate. You have answered almost all of my questions about all displays. I like you, print my photos and also other graphical images. I know now the the studio is not for me. What are your thoughts on the Samsung 34-inch Wide Quad HD QLED Curved Monitor? Havagooday my friend. Greg
92% coverage on both DCI and Adobe RGB not that good. Curved panel not great for color management and calibration. Physic of light emission, you get convergence and cross contamination on measurement. It is not bad but it happened on these. If print I would look for displays that can show 99% Adobe RGB such as BenQ SW hardware calibrated display.
@@ArtIsRight thankyou Sir yes you are right ……. Currently using a studio display (apple) however a few weeks back I sold an old pd3200u, when I set it up to display to the buyer I felt a pang of oh dear!!!! I miss the 32” size :) So I am researching 32 inch monitors for photos, video and music in Logic pro, heres the thing…… the photos I printed so far edited on mac studio via studio display, out through canon pro 300 actually look quite decent So it isn’t like I need 32” just that side by side the bigger screen is more appealing to me personally, sat here now telling myself I do not NEED it and save a bunch of cash :)
Hi Art, great video. Quick question. I'm currently using Mac Studio with Studio Display. I mainly work with Premiere Pro and After Effects. Thinking of switching to PD3220U. Do you think PD3220U is a better choice in terms of color accuracies and screen real estate? Speaker and webcam are not my priority. Are there any other cons compared with Studio Display?
May I ask why you are thinking of switching? So here are a few things, if you got the Apple Studio Display (ASD) glossy then PD3220U (refer to as PD now for short) will have matted display so that is one advantage there. But if you prefer glossy then it might not be, depends. Aside from that ASD & PD have close to the same P3 coverage. Both can be calibrated but with ASD you should use the reference mode first. As far as resolution ASD is 5K where as PD is 4K, both of these have scaling but 5K 27" has a PPI higher than 200, where as the 4K sits as about 140-143 PPI, so some perceived this as blurry scaling, it all depends, I don't have issues with this but some do. Where as on the 5K it is sharp because of the PPI. As far as usability, you'll probably will not notice much variation between 4 and 5K real estate wise, other than the scaling and sharpness. Color accuracy wise, once calibrated they are going to be about the same. If you are not going to calibrate ASD might be a bit better because of Apple Color Tuning. Where the PD might be a bit saturated out of the box when linked up to Apple Silicon Computer. But if you calibrate they are going to come close. Uniformity wise, PD is going to be better than ASD. Hope this helps.
@@ArtIsRight thanks so much for the helpful info. Actually, there is only 1 reason I'm thinking of switching - bigger screen size. I'm not so worried about the sharpness. Just not sure I might lose out on other benefits from ASD (besides the webcam and good speaker).
Got cha, then I think the PD display from BenQ Might work well for you. One other thing that you will loose is the reference color mode build into Apple displays, but otherwise you are good!
Art, great reviww of this monitor. It is exactly what I figured (was concerned about) with the new displays, and in particular the ones on the laptops and iMacs from the past year or so. I said I was concerned on a forum and people attacked me for stating that the displays aren't necessarily ideal for photograhy purposes. Quick question... I work with B&W mostly, so I'm concerned about color a bit less, but I am much more concenred about being able to linearize and deal with the toe and shoulder response regions of the image, since that is often where the real magic is in a B&W image. What do you feel is a better solution for this specifically? I think I need to get a NEC or BenQ or move up to an Eizo to get better calibration capability to address this (I am currently using a NEC 27" PA271Q display that I am a bit less than satisfied with in combination with my 27" iMac Pro from 2020).
Thank you! And I am sadden that people resorts to attacks when you don't agree with them. The sad part is that most of those attack comments come from people who may not necessary know what they are talking about. NEC got taken over by Sharp and their pro display line now is one to maintaining the status quo meaning they are not really releasing any new models. You are better of with a BenQ or Eizo. With BenQ if you have strict requirement I would give it a go first and see how you like it or not. You can always return the display if it does not fit with your needs. If you are looking at the BenQ look at their SW line which are hardware calibrated displays for Pro Photography. I have so many guides on how to calibrate them that you can watch.
@@ArtIsRight Yes, that's what I was thinking... Thanks. I'll check out your other videos. When you run two monitors (and they aren't the same monitor, as is the case with my iMac Pro and the NEC display), do you attempt to calibrate them identically (which is basically impossible) or do you set one up as the "print" display and the other as the "video" or "online" display?
Very helpful video- wish I would have seen this before ordering the studio display a few weeks ago. I shoot with the Nikon D850, and don’t print often- primarily for online. However, I do sharpen my final images for printing in my final editing processes in the rare case that I decide to print. When it comes to deconvolution sharpening at 100% zoom, is there any difference between the Apple Studio Display and the BenQ PD2725U (the display I may get and use alongside) as far as being able to judge sharpness? I’m not sure if the studio displays 218 ppi makes it any easier to gauge critical sharpness when pixel peeping. Thanks 🙏
@@ArtIsRight yes i just bought the apple display. I've also notice that photoshop and camera raw,the new update,when using any mac..changed the colorspace automatically to displsy p3. Do u think automatic brightness on this display will work ok? Or shoild i change to 100 for example that i am usually using for web and video
If you are serious about color you would not use auto brightness or True Tone in editing. Otherwise you are editing to a moving target which is the worse thing that you can do.
@@ArtIsRight thanks. I dont use auto tune or auto brightness. But only with this particular display i found that auto brightness is spot on and stable..at least most of the time. I also had the 4.5k model but auto brightness was unstable and difficult to work with. Thanks for the advices. About lightroom should i use the standard photography preset p3 or should i change to photography preset p3 d65 ? In your tests which preset had better/lower delta E?
"I dont use auto tune or auto brightness. But only with this particular display i found that auto brightness is spot on and stable..at least most of the time." Because there's a Camera on the display and the display has a chip inside it that does all of the computation by passing the computer. "I also had the 4.5k model but auto brightness was unstable and difficult to work with." You mean the Pro Display XDR? "About lightroom should i use the standard photography preset p3 or should i change to photography preset p3 d65 ?" The same really just set the brightness at the level that you want. Default is 160 nits. Might be too much for some. "In your tests which preset had better/lower delta E?" Again it all comes down to brightness, not a lot of point looking at the ∆e, just a variation of brightness at the same gamut.
I have an older dual BenQ SW2700PT 27 Inch 2K monitor setup. I have been happy with it but was considering getting into a 4K+ monitor setup, especially since upgrading to the 14" MacBook Pro. I don't print as many photos any longer and the Apple is very expensive compared to the features found on the BenQ SW271C 4K monitor. I think you helped make my decision. I'll wait a bit longer before committing to an upgrade, but this certainly helped in a possible path and what to look for in a future monitor. This was a very well thought out, informative video. Thanks so much. I have enjoyed many of your videos that you have released. Thanks!
Color grading I would choose either BenQ PD for software calibration for SW for hardware calibration. I am recommending them because their hardware, calibration is good and provides the best value.
What are terrific review, Art. It must be said that you are very charitable to the Apple display, given its price point and limitations for printing photographers. I wanted to be wowed by the display, but unfortunately I remain underwhelmed, not simply because of the price but also the clunky design. The build quality clearly is excellent but clumsy implementations; such as the moving height adjustable stand, poor WebCam etc seem most un-apple-like. On a separate note, in a dual monitor ‘printing’ set up do you recommend choosing the same panel/brand for both displays?
You don't have to, if you don't you have to consider primary / secondary for color accuracy. If you have 2 of the same that becomes less of a consideration.
@@ArtIsRight Thanking you for taking the trouble to reply so promptly. I already have a 10 bit hardware calibrated Eizo monitor, but need to replace an ageing 5K 27 inch iMac when I get a new Mac Studio. I guess your reply means that I can do the colour critical work on the Eizo and use a cheaper monitor for the “regular work”, but are there any specific considerations when choosing a replacement?
@@ArtIsRight Thanks. I thought you might say that based on your recent video. I am keen to develop my printing and it makes sense to match the gamut of my best monitor which is 99% Adobe. BTW I think the niche for photographers who might wish to print is actually quite big, which reflects all the positive comments your channel receives. The difficulty for enthusiasts is feeling daunted by the workflow issues involved in getting colour accurate printing.
I feel pretty stupid, but after watching this video 3 times I'm still hopelessly confused about the scaling issue. In a nutshell, what is the best resolution setting for a 4k monitor on a Mac Studio to avoid performance issues? Is there a good 4k option or is 2k optimal?
That is not necessary the point covered in this video, at least the recommend part anyways. In short there are no performance penalty with these machines so choose whichever looks best for you.
Got cha, have you used a 2K display before? If you have and that works for you, then you are good to go. But the point is that either one will work just fine.
I have a very annoying, very very subtle green tint in the backlight of my BenQ SW271. Apple Retina has spoiled me. I don’t want to tolerate green tint. I would say the tint in the SW271 is equal to 05CC Green Shift, and it’s not correctable. It is inherent to the LCD backlight. My Apple retina does not have this problem.
Hello again, I’ve just received my Apple Studio Display and while I wait for your video about its color accuracy I want to try to calibrate it. My question is: do you know if its technology is RG-Phosphors (GB-LED) like the old 27” Retina iMac?
@@ArtIsRight thank you. I tried with both corrections (GB-LED and PFS Phosphors), and here what I found: CALIBRATION: put in reference mode Photography d65, customized at 120 cdm, fine tuned with ccProfiler latest version and i1Display Plus, luminance was way off (114 cdm) with both matrix corrections while white point was slighty off with GB-LED and perfect with PFS. (of course i resetted the fine tuning every time). PROFILATION: done 4 times (twice for every matrix correction, once setting native WPoint and other D65 in ccProfiler). With both matrix corrections I was able to obtain great color accuracy (everything
Apple Original profile is a dummy reference profile, it does not described the display in anyway at all. In my testing, GB-LED and WLED are about the same gamut wise. I didn't test PFS, those are predominantly laptop displays backlight. My test show that the gamut is about 98% P3 which is about right. The question is which P3 are you looking at DCI-P3 it is almost right on, 99%, but for Display P3, you are looking 97-98%, I am getting almost full gamut from my multiple test.
Email me your icc, I like to take a look, gamut showed in the video, demonstrate that I was able to get the high 90 percentile. So something must be going on with your end.
MPix uses sRGB color space. If I use Adobe RGB 98 and my printer is using sRGB will I be getting the right colors in prints? I have also had an issue with Capture One changing the colors when it converts my RAW files to JPG and I never could get a JPG to look like the RAW file I was working with. I got NO support from Capture One so I went back to Adobe Lightroom. I have no idea why my JPG files had different colors than my RAW files.
C1 uses the system color management module CMM, where as Adobe has their own color engine called ACE. That may be where the variation comes in. Color should be close but not a match especially when you translate from larger to smaller gamut, like your situation. Color from the prints would be right, it would come close but may be a bit saturated. You can always use PS or LRC to simulate paper - soft proof and compare with what you see on the print. Just remember that lighting use to view print is important as well.
Hi Art, I just posted this query against your previous review of the Studio Display, then I found this one. So apologies for the duplication, but my query sits better here. I am coming to this a bit late but as someone who has just upgraded from my 2012 27" iMac to the base Studio, plus Studio Display. I had high expectations for this combo but (as a photographer who likes to print images) have been disappointed thus far with the Display. I'm using it in the default P3-600 nits preset as it's the only one with which I can adjust the brightness - I like to operate my Apple displays at only 3/4 brightness to avoid overly dark prints. The Photography P3-D65 setting is WAY too bright. Anyway, I've tried printing with Fotospeed papers using their generic profiles - on my iMac these turn out okay, with a noticeable improvement when I use Custom profiles. With the Studio Display however, same images and same generic profiles - they come out way too warm, with a pinkish tone. I tried calibrating the Studio Display, it made no difference to the prints (nor was there any noticeable difference between the pre- and post screen colours). Whilst I note it's shortcomings for colour accuracy compared to the like of the BenQ.... wondering if I am missing something here with the Studio settings? I am still (just) within the return window for my new gear and I am seriously considering returning the Display. I would really miss the sleek style and the integrated webcam and speakers, but if it can't give me accurate (or even close to accurate) colour rendition in my prints, it's no good to me! Would really appreciate your thoughts/advice. Great channel, wish I'd discovered it sooner!
"I just posted this query against your previous review of the Studio Display, then I found this one. So apologies for the duplication, but my query sits better here." - No worries I removed the other post and will answer it here. "I am coming to this a bit late but as someone who has just upgraded from my 2012 27" iMac to the base Studio, plus Studio Display. I had high expectations for this combo but (as a photographer who likes to print images) have been disappointed thus far with the Display." - Keyword here is print, this is where things get a bit ambiguous "I'm using it in the default P3-600 nits preset as it's the only one with which I can adjust the brightness - I like to operate my Apple displays at only 3/4 brightness to avoid overly dark prints. The Photography P3-D65 setting is WAY too bright." - This is partly where the issues lies. With print you always want to use a fix brightness. Yes the default from Apple is too bright and you can create custom presets. Have a look at this playlist which include this video and other valuable resources ruclips.net/p/PLjlr8rlxl_q4nRmwT4jHxhkrUAzjYGH59 I do understand why some wants or light to change display brightness, but when it comes to prints you are better off fixed. If anything this video will help too ruclips.net/video/OcmeQgKspKQ/видео.html "Anyway, I've tried printing with Fotospeed papers using their generic profiles - on my iMac these turn out okay, with a noticeable improvement when I use Custom profiles. With the Studio Display however, same images and same generic profiles they come out way too warm, with a pinkish tone. I tried calibrating the Studio Display, it made no difference to the prints (nor was there any noticeable difference between the pre- and post screen colours)." - What light source are you using to view your prints, because that is as important as the display. Because the display is calibrate D65, I would recommend getting a 6500K light bulb to view your print with. Alternatively you can get an LED light bank as well, just know that the color temperature read out on the back of those LED light bank as not as accurate, meaning setting it at 6500K is not necessary going to give you 6500K color temp output. However, I would start with that. ruclips.net/video/bJUCDYpFtBc/видео.html "Whilst I note it's shortcomings for colour accuracy compared to the like of the BenQ.... wondering if I am missing something here with the Studio settings?" -I would not say these displays are not accurate, on the contrary, they're calibrated rather well from the factory. This said, P3 gamut and 80 something % Adobe RGB coverage does not help when it comes to printing. I would give my play list above a look because it is a comprehensive resources on the Studio Display. "I am still (just) within the return window for my new gear and I am seriously considering returning the Display. I would really miss the sleek style and the integrated webcam and speakers, but if it can't give me accurate (or even close to accurate) colour rendition in my prints, it's no good to me!" Simply enough, life is a USS Kobayashi Maru scenario, there's no perfect solution, rather one that we have to compromise, choose and prioritized what is import. In the case of this display, the design is great and colors can work and it is a whole package. And if these factors are important to you then yes, this is the one. But for printing color accuracy, it would depends. "Would really appreciate your thoughts/advice." Give the playlist and the various videos referenced here a look. If you have any follow up question just ask them :) "Great channel, wish I'd discovered it sooner!" -Thanks
@@ArtIsRight First of all Art, thank you so much for the prompt and detailed response. It is to your credit that, despite the fact that you have over 28k subscribers, you manage to respond to every single query, in fact, it's amazing. Secondly, it's confession time - this issue I was having was down to user error on my part, and not the fault of the Studio Display. It seems that when I was setting up the Studio and Studio Display initially, the system correctly identified my Canon Pro-300 printer and installed a default driver. I subsequently downloaded the latest software (including the latest driver) from the Canon website and installed them. Rather than overwriting the original driver installation, the printer was added again. So on my system there was Canon Pro-300 Series and Canon Pro-300 Series 2. The system identified the first printer as the default, and it was this basic Apple 'Airprint' driver that was being used to print my images - even though I was specifying certain paper profiles in Photoshop and Lightroom. I only noticed the dual printer setup when I decided to try to delete my printer completely and reinstall it. Sure enough, both LR and PS had been using that basic driver and, as soon as I switched to the 'Series 2', my prints were coming out fine. Thank you once again for the helpful advice, much appreciated!
I would like to ask your help, regarding color profiles in OSX. I have a Mac Mini M1 and an ASUS PA329C display attached to it over HDMI. The display have several color profile options, like DCI-P3 Mode, what I prefer as a videographer. Is it correct if I choose the Display P3 color profile on the OS if I want to use it for accurate color grading, or you have other preferences? Thanks!
Not quite, reference profile should never be used for display. If you don't have a calibrator you are better off using the default generic profile from macOS.
@@ArtIsRight Thanks! So which profile sholud I use on both the Display and the OS? Setting are on the Display: 100% sRGB, 100% REC709, 100% Adobe RGB, 98% DCI-P3 and 84% REC 2020. The display was tested with a calibrator and there wasn't really any advantage with custum values according to the factory calibration. Thanks!
Hi Art, I also have a studio display here. I wanted to calibrate this with an X-rite i1Display profiler. I can't, maybe because I don't have a USB to Thunderbolt hub. But can it be adjusted with the i1Profiler program? I can give my iMac a color profile with that program. That doesn't work on my Studio Display.
Guide coming, the process would be similar to this ruclips.net/video/bqF_SQWv8x0/видео.html use GB-LED as the back light and you are good to go. Otherwise the video should be out in about a week or less.
@@ArtIsRight Thanks! It worked. Only it is annoying that my iMac from 2019 (5K) is not the same color as the Studio Display. I use the Studio Display as a second screen. I have to wait until June for my Mac Studio and a second Studio Display. But now I can't get my iMac the same color. What is that about? Both calibrated via ccProfiler and i1 Display pro.
@@ArtIsRight OK. quite difficult. My iMac seems warmer/yellower than the Studio Display. That annoys me haha. Hopefully if I use 2x a studio display they will match. Now it seems like I'm doing something wrong.
Do you know whether there will be a successor of the SW321c with better contrast? I‘m just about to buy a new monitor for image editing. The SW321c is really nice, but I don‘t like its contrast „capabilities“…
@@ArtIsRight May I ask you one more question: If I pick the BenQ SW321c or any other monitor that can display Adobe RGB, which consumer printer can actually print those colors? Is the Epson SC-P900 capable of printing Adobe RGB colors? Or is it only for the very professional and expensive printers? I‘m asking because you often emphasize this relationship between Adobe RGB and printing.
It is not the printer but rather the ink and paper combination and there are many of them that starts to exceed Adobe RGB in certain color areas. This won't be for all colors. P900 can print with some paper combinations some color tones that are in the Adobe RGB range. And P900 is a pro printer ;) Also regarding the contrast I would give SW321C a try out first, it is a really great display and you can still get blacks out of the display. If you get it from BenQ and you don't like it or it does not fit your workflow then you can return it. But I'll tell you the matte coating on the BenQ SW321C is something that you can't really get in another display right now, beside the Apple with Nano texture etching, but then you won't have high Adobe RGB coverage.
@@ArtIsRight thank you very much for your elaborated answer. I really appreciate it. And I might change my mind and give the SW321C a try. It basically does have one feature I really am curious about: The Printing Sync. However, I‘m not sure whether it‘s more of a gimmick and not being followed up by newly supported printers (what about the epson SC P900 for instance?). If BenQ keeps on improving/extending this feature, it‘s really something that can attract people like me.
Je ne parle pas anglais, malheureusement. Du coup le monsieur de la video recommande quel écran pour la photographie pour avoir une fidélité dans les couleurs? Si quelqu’un peux me répondre, je remercierai. Car malgré Google traducteur c’est ne pas évident a comprendre.
Si vous voulez de bonnes couleurs pour la photographie, je recommanderais les écrans BenQ SW qui ont une capacité de calibrage matériel. Si vous n'en avez pas besoin et que vous aimez toujours les belles couleurs, je recommanderais la ligne BenQ PD qui sont des écrans créés pour les créateurs de contenu et les concepteurs. Je vérifierais également la chaîne de mon collègue. Sa chaîne est en français et il est une bonne ressource pour aider. www.youtube.com/@LaPhotoAvenue
@@ArtIsRight Bonsoir Art. Je vous remercie de votre réponse en plus en français 🙏🏽 merci beaucoup. Je vais commencer a regarder les series de écrans que vous m’avez conseillé. Aussi jeter un coup d’oeil sur la chaine RUclips de votre collègue.
Thank you for a very well done comparison of the P3 vs Adobe RGB color space in these displays. Could you address (or point me toward your previous comments) on the occasional external screen flicker on my SW271C when connected to my M1 16” MBP? HDMI connection has improved it over the Display Port cable, but I still experience the flicker every so often. Thanks for your knowledge base!
Yes that flickering issue. Not sure what is going on there. Based on my testing it had not occurred. Also your display have USB C to USB C, have you tried that yet?
Buying a high-end photography monitor and only using it to edit photos for Facebook and Instagram is like buying a Ferarri and never taking it to a track or exceeding the speed limit. Unless you are "calibrating" your monitor to another CONTROLLABLE output like a professional photo printing service or high end ink jet, it's is largely pointless because in web publishing, there is no controlling the output device settings or quality. Factory settings on mid-tier monitors is very good as-is. There are also so many other variables to color/sharpness perception than anything relating to the monitor that are ultimately not controllable.
I had an LG UltraFine 5K display which is similar to this Studio display it was a great monitor for anything else other than editing pictures. And I was really unhappy with the output I got whenever I printed my photos. I sold it and got a Benq SW271. It's really a good monitor for photographers. I wouldn't personally recommend editing pictures in a P3 wide colour gamut if you are a professional photographer. Very informative video. I would like it more if it was shorter :)
Thank you. shorter would be good but all these needs to be said, you can cut things out but then I would have part 2 and 3. always something to consider.
Felt a little too much like he’s trying to talk down the Apple in favor of the sponsor, particularly around the point of dpi considering that barely any manufacturer bothers with high dpi, same as they all cheap out on build quality. Don’t know why these manufacturers don’t just release some 22” monitors if they want to stick to 4k for cost reasons. It really is kind of easy to tick some boxes that would bring in more customers looking to a studio display. Keep resolution at retina level dpi, put it in an enclosure that doesn’t let it’s cheap frumpiness hang out shamelessly, don’t scream extreme gamer, Don’t brand it too much and put the labels out of sight, glass front panel since plastic ones scratch too easily when cleaning. The fact that Apple won’t allow inputs for anything but thunderbolt means a huge potential advantage for an OEM willing to show that Apple doesn’t have a monopoly on the world’s aluminum supply. Microsoft was showing promise for a second in this regard. The argument about pushing the graphics card too hard when scaling or using high dpi doesn’t apply as much to Mpro/max chips w/ specialized display engines as much as intel macs and pc’s. Chances seem pretty low that a studio or pro display user is going to be running a mac old enough to struggle that badly since most probably upgrade their computer before thinking about buying a fancy display. Also, the M1 mac mini runs even the 6k pro display scaled just fine. This bias is really apparent when he says that even though M1 runs high res fine, wouldn’t one be better running low res natively without a true reason why.
The fact that you view a fair review this way is astonishing. Not trying to please anyone just stating fact for pro printing workflow. Thanks for watching
It's amazing just how bad the apple studio display reviews are! Yours was super informative and not only do you cover the photography perspective but I think you did a good job at also speaking to other types of users who have different color needs.
I appreciate that! It is not a bad display by any means. I think that people just have super high expectations of Apple and think that they are always going to deliver the moon and stars. However, when they only got the moon, they are upset. But yet we still got the moon and not nothing. :D
@@ArtIsRight yes it was crazy how much misinformation there is as well! Think I may end up getting one- I'm mostly digital design and I enjoy photography on the side as a hobby. I don't print at all unless its personal and I just do some trial and error. Though I think I may upgrade to nano texture based off your rec. I really like the matte texture on my 4k dell and can still look at MBP display for glossy reference. Hopefully they have both setup at the apple store to take a gander at.
Having just installed mine, I switched it to photography p3 profile, but does anyone else notice how incredible bright the screen then becomes? It locks the brightness level, but even with lights in the office, it seems very bright and actually painful to work with, if you need to browse the web in between editing. Has anyone else noticed this?
@@ArtIsRight looking forward to that. I updated the firmware for the monitor, and it has fixed the issue. It's still quite bright, but not an issue now. Be great to see your custom preset guide!
It has not thing to do with firmware. 160 is bright, just create a custom preset mode and bring that value down the process is similar to this ruclips.net/video/bqF_SQWv8x0/видео.html
@@ArtIsRight Thank you. I will look into this, and your other videos. Briefly, can you confirm colour calibration using an external device is a good idea on the Studio Display? Or is the built in profile good enough without the need for any external calibration process? Thank you
there are always going to be variation. Apple will tell you that it is good and within the tolerate range they deemed acceptable. But it may not be if you are color critical. Also you have to understand that with these reference modes or not, these are at the end consumer displays with some pro use because things bleed over and permeate.
Notable mention: This display has automatic pivot detection. If you turn it by 90°, MacOS will automatically flip it to portrait mode. No settings or drivers required. Pretty neat. Of course this only works with a VESA mount.
A very professional deep dive based on a specific use case unlike the other RUclipsrs who reads off specs and just goes on a rant. Nicely Done! Thank you very much for this.
Thank you!
Agreed
36 minute review on a monitor and I am 100% here for it!
Thank you and there's a lot to cover substance wise :D
Seriously, HUGE kudos to you. What a professionally done review. You won't find a single other review of this monitor that talks about the points you listed with the depth that you treated them with. The only actually useful review I've seen of this display (and I've seen most of them, and they all have the same opinion). Also the only review that tackles it from the perspective of an actual professional who cares about real world results more than flaunting an apple product on their setup tour video. Thank you!
Thank you!
Really good information! I'm tired of every other reviewer endlessly repeating how the build quality makes them cream in their pants while they raise and lower the screen with one finger. How is that even relevant in day-to-day use? Now, what you are showing is actually the real functionality of the screen. Some real professional info, which is really missing from the "Oh! Look at that aluminium backside..." type of reviews. Thank you!
Thank You!
You’re a good ambassador for BenQ, for sure, and I don’t argue most of your points. For me, higher contrast and ability to see extremely fine details in high res photos is really useful for landscape and architectural photography, so I prefer the “Retina” pixel density and glossy glass finish. Also, having used iMacs and an iMac Pro with built in 5K displays for years, I really can’t go back to a low density display such as a 4K 27” or worse, 4K 32”. And oh, man, you’re right about the latest MacBook Pro displays!
👍🏼
Finally a real pro review for a 'pro' monitor. There is a reason EIZO are the most used monitors in studios
Thank you. I will add with deep pocket and there's now BenQ that offer a better value and democratized pro photographers display.
Thanks! It is much appreciated your time on making this deep overview on the panel. Glad to see reviews for professional gear, done by actual professionals.
Much appreciated!
Thank you again for this explanation. I learn so much from your videos. I am upgrading my 2017 Imac (due to slow performance) to what I hope will be the Mac Studio m1max. My current iMac is a 21.5 inch screen with a resolution of 4096 x 2304. I am trying to decide between the Mac Studio monitor with a 5k resolution of 5120 x 2880 and the BenQ sw 271c with a 4k resolution of 3840 x 2160. I am leaning toward the BenQ for the reasons you explain in your video, but I'm wondering if I should get a monitor that has at least the same resolution I have now on the iMac. This would rule out the BenQ but this doesn't make sense to me because my iMac is now five years old and I would think the BenQ is as good. So would the BenQ have as good a monitor for photography as my current iMac? Would it look worse to me because I am used to a monitor with higher resolution?
Hi Deborah, thanks for the comment. So color wise as said in the video BenQ will be better suited for photography than a Mac. What I would recommend is this. Give BenQ a try and see what you think about it resolution wise. If you are good with it then keep it. If not you can always return it. Between 4K to 5K there's will be some differences and variation but if you are going to run the display at scaled resolution anyways then it you might now notice too much of a variation at all. Hope this help.
I'm not sure this is clear in the video. With Mac OS there is no performance hit using a 4k display at 1080x1920 or 2160x3840. It treats both these resolutions as native. The performance is only affected if you use a resolution between these two. These in-between resolutions show a warning in the display settings: "Using a scaled resolution may affect performance" The same is true using a 5k display running 2.7k. The advantage of a 4k 27" display running at 1080 vs a 5k display at 2.7k is the larger UI, which is easier to read. The advantage of a 5k 27" at 2.7k is more room for menus, but the downside is that the UI text is smaller and harder to read. I prefer 4k at 27". It's easier for me to read. I wish there were 5k 32" displays.
No there is not in the OS, but in the photo app like LRC there is. Thanks for adding further clarification to the point, much appreciated!
I know this is a late comment, but this came across my recommended and I just wanted to say your presentation style is very informative without being overly complex.
The examples, definitions and comparisons are well-thought out and provide sufficient detail that is graspable without having to pause and perform a web search for an alternative explanation.
Nicely done and I hope to catch up on all your other videos!
Cheers!
Thank you!
What an excellent, insightful, honest, and substantive review. Very helpful in making an informed decision!
Glad it was helpful!
Hello Art, thanks for the video. In general I agree with you but, as a photographer that prints his works a lot, I’ve found recently I’m perfectly fine with P3 Gamut, if color accuracy is ok. Will there be a video where you calibrate and evaluate Studio Display color accuracy? I’m really interested in it.
That is what I said if something works for you don't let me convince you otherwise. And yes the video will come soon.
I am interested in seeing your your video on calibration of a Mac Studio display. I do print but not professionally. I am interested in reducing on the Apple display over saturation and contrast set to high so that when I do print it be what I saw on the monitor.
Also, I print using LR and use the color profiles of Epson paper printed on a Epson Stylus Pro 3880.
Also, I edit in Capture One 22. Capture One claims it is adjusting its program to the M1 chip. I wonder what will be the different color signatures of the software, printer, and Apple display?
Thank your for your effort to explain the Apple system and how it compares with other systems.
ABOUT TIME!!!! a review about the specs that really matter. All these new machines with so much power for photographers and then a high priced monitor that does not show what you captured in the field and you have to transfer to paper!!!! The 32"BENQ is a better option for photographers!!! Thank you Art ...well done!!!
Thank you!
I’ve been obsessively watching reviews of the Apple Studio Display and was 100% convinced I would go with that, but you’ve given me pause. A very professional review and refreshingly finally geared to print photographers than video. Most reviews seem to be by those doing video. I’ve always wanted to work in an AdobeRGB workflow as I worked many years in print and I’m aware that the AdobeRGB profile is greater than sRGB. Your points are very astute. Yes, the Apple Studio Display is gorgeous and integrates into the Mac Studio series beautifully, but will it give the ideal results for your specific niche. Also appreciate your input on the matte finish or Nano technology. I spent time in an Apple Store recently shifting back and forth between the glossy finish and the Nano finish. I was really impressed by how glare-free the Nano finish is. Yes, the glossy looks fantastic and brilliant, but the matte finish is closer to what you can expect in print. Plus, I do a lot of close up editing. I think the eye strain difference from glare could be significant. Other reviewers say that the screen can get more dirty though. Well, I guess I’m going to have to go look at more of your videos to see the BENQ monitors.
Thank you!
Fantastic review ... best on RUclips. However, as a photographer i'm a little confused. Does this Apple Studio Display need proper calibration with hardware or just the in built software? What monitor calibration do you recommend? Does the calibration drift and change over time? Big thanks!
Build in software does not do calibration just reference mode. There are levels of control in the following order from fundamental to more accurate. Reference mode, fine-tuned calibration, software calibration. The latter 2 needs a hardware device. Recommended calibration is based on your workflow, but I would check out my video on reference mode for help on this. All display drift over time, LED are smaller drift but still does.
by far the most phd level review of this display I've seen
Thank you!
Interesting video.
But the scaling topic with the tables is verrry confusing, even for me being familiar with the issue.
You're welcome.
Thanks for the excellent review, Art. I print too but also prepare images for viewing on the web & I'd actually take the opposite point of view; I had a BenQ SW271C and its P3 coverage was incomplete to about the same degree that this Apple Studio Display is incomplete for Adobe RGB. That is to say, the BenQ only has 90% coverage of P3 and the Apple Studio Display only has 86% of AdobeRGB (according to calibration done by DPreview). Additionally, the BenQ can't be hardware calibrated to P3 without issues that are a dealbreaker (when I was trying to calibrate to P3, I believe you suggested I use software calibration instead of hardware to avoid those issues). I also think it's somewhat misleading to suggest the AdobeRGB colorspace is larger than the P3 color space-the truth as far as I can tell is that AdobeRGB has more blues/greens, but P3 has about equally more reds/yellows. So you sort of have to choose: do you want an AdobeRGB display OR a P3 display? ... unless you buy LGs pricey 27EP950, which has near-complete coverage of both (I had one of those too, but the build quality is terrible-I think Pixar uses those), or a UP2720Q also with a true 10-bit panel (unlike the BenQ & Apple) and near full coverage for both P3 & AdobeRGB, not sure about hardware calibration though. For me, if I have to choose, it makes more sense to have a P3 panel, since those extra reds/yellows are what my friends & family are going to see on their phones/tablets/laptops, so I'd like to see them when editing. Pretty much NO ONE will be viewing content on an AdobeRGB panel. When I print from a P3 display, the colors I'm missing on my P3 display show up in the print, so I can iterate by reprinting if there's really a problem with the blues/greens (which isn't too often) ... and the print is what I show friends/family or folks at the gallery, not the AdobeRGB panel. Again, almost NO ONE will ever see the image the way you see it on an AdobeRGB panel. Yes, it's closer to the final print, but in reality, a print will always look much different than the image on a screen (reflected vs illuminated light source, printer's gamut doesn't match AdobeRGB), and if you're printing at home on an Epson P900 or something, it's quick and easy and 100% accurate to proof small prints or sections of a print b/f making a final print, which I'd do even if I was using an AdobeRGB panel. I'm also one of those people who love sharp images, 5k @27 inches almost isn't enough for me. I had the 8k Dell UP3218K for a while & it was an absolute dream (also w/near full coverage for both AdobeRGB & P3), I think the PPI on that is 280 (compared to Apple's 218). You can view entire 24 mp images without scaling, the difference is night/day. Anyway, that monitor had issues w/image retention & is also pricey. I can't wait for a 32-inch OLED or mini led w/2000+ zones 8k display w/full AdobeRGB & P3 coverage, no compromises, we're almost there.
👍🏼
Excellent presentation as always, Art. As someone who recently moved from Windows to Mac, I come down squarely on the side of the way Windows handles resolution by scaling the interface without throwing away resolution. It's frustrating to have to choose between throwing away 75% of your resolution of a 4K monitor or dealing with tiny text. This is the one aspect of macOS that made me seriously second guess my switch.
As it happens, I recently ordered an SW321C that should arrive in the next couple days. I've always had a question about monitors with presets for different gamuts. What exactly do these do? Do they take the native gamut of the monitor and "crop off" colors that fall outside of it, or do they somehow shift the native gamut around? As a printing photographer, I always felt like the best approach would be to display the complete gamut of the display rather than artificially limit it. If I want to see an image in a smaller gamut I could accomplish this in Photoshop. And I can proof to the particular paper I'm using there as well. What am I missing with these presets?
I hear you, this has been apple approach for close to a decade now, chances are, this is the way forward.
About the display your thoughts is right and the Primary gamut for the SW321C is Adobe RGB and the same with hardware calibration as well, but you can calibrate using Panel Native for a slightly larger than Adobe RGB gamut. I would do a search on my channel for the color management video, many of them will answer your questions in further details as well. If you are looking for something specific and can't find it, just ask :D
As a photographer first above all else I was looking to buy the new Apple display to compliment the Apple Studio M1 Max but you have given me food for thought. With this video in mind, I started to look at a BenQ alternative, the photographer monitor with 32 inch, 4K Adobe RGB, namely the SW321C, which has a similar price point. My question put simply is this: I also have a RUclips channel and create films like your self. Would this BenQ monitor crossover to film editing for RUclips purposes?
Yes, I edit all of my RUclips video on BenQ. They are 99% Adobe RGB which covers 100% REC 709 just fine. :D
@@ArtIsRight thank you
Hi Simon, love your content. Did you end up getting the SW321C?
@@iKeto_gal thanks 🙏 Yes I did.
Hello Art, I just bought the Canon Pro300 printer. Will the BenQ PD322OU be good enough for printing?
It will do ok, are you printing for photography, if so then I would consider SW line
I print with a Epson with a 13 colour pallet. I have never seen a monitor that can show it accurately. I loved your review. Thank you so much/
You're welcome
Clear, fact-based, and I think objective: a really great discussion that makes me ponder my (realistic) personal needs. My reality is that matching the full AdobeRGB gamut has not been essential, because I’ve never experienced it, since all of my screens have been from Apple. I have no professional requirements to have “perfect” color, so what I don’t know isn’t hurting me. Other than price, is there some previous Apple display that is “better,” or is this Apple’s “state-of-the-art?”
I would say this display is good for what it is and you'll never miss what you don't have so if you don't need Adobe RGB go for it.
Great review. It may stray outside what you normally cover, but for those of us that already chose the ASD and do photography and commercial printing, it would be nice to hear your recommendations on the best workflow settings to optimize everything since our Adobe RGB gamut is knee-capped. In other words, I currently shoot photos in Adobe RGB (RAW), open them in Photoshop with Adobe RGB profile embedded and after editing on ASD, either send to photo lab or commercial. CMYK press for printing. I used to have NEC monitors and understood that workflow, but still now sure I am getting the best experience possible out of my ASD workflow (like should I be embedding Adobe RGB still in my images? Setting ASD to D50 P3?, etc.).
Keep color tagged the same. The issue is that since the gamut does not exist, there's really not much to do with optimization. Just use reference - preset mode, white point fine-tune and possibly calibrate it that is all one can do.
Hi Art, another great in depth review. I think we are ready for Art University!! I do own a lower tier BenQ with only sRGB and Rec 709 coverage. I have calibrated it and I am happy with the color. However, I know that not having Adobe RGB gamut, I am not seeing some of the colors and shadow/highlight details. I am not interested in "good looking" Apple display. For me color accuracy and as you mentioned color gamut take much higher priority. I am pretty clear on gamut for photos but not too familiar with the coverage for color accurate video work. I will go back to your previous videos to learn more about video. Keep up the great work and thank you again.
Anytime Boris!
The nano-texture glass is super nice. It's much better at rejecting reflections than any other display I've used (BenQ, Eizo, NEC). In my office, I find it is easier to preserve black levels by keeping direct light off of the nano-texture surface than it is to keep reflections off of other display types. I'm using an Eizo CS2740 now, and I miss the Nano-Texture iMac.
I would look at BenQ SW321C it is like that.
A question: What about the 4K vs 5K viewing experience. I’m not sure if you covered that. So much to take in. I’m wary of going 4K. I do a lot of detailed editing.
I have been using 4K for close to a decade now, and it has served me and continues to serve me well. Both 4K and 5K scale the resolution; the variation is that in the 27" display, 5K pixel per inch is above the 200 mark, which is more in line with Apple's "Retina" resolution. 4K comes close, but not entirely. This is a personal experience; some are ok with 4k, while others are against it, saying that images and text are soft. Like I said, it is more of a personal preference, really.
What a thoughtful review! So much detailed, useful information. The best RUclips review of a product I have ever seen.
Wow, thank you!
Do we need Adobe rgb if the print lab is operating with srgb?
No but that depends on the prints that you are making as well. If you are doing inkjet then definitely Adobe RGB.
Pls. What is the measurement from the table/desktop up to the bottom of the Studio Display?
~ 4.75 inches
@@krzysztofk6796 Thank you !
Thanks for the answer. I have't even measured it
I think this thing is more appropriate for content consumption in bedrooms and dorms than anything, with solid speakers, good viewing experience, and video call capability. At the price point, it simply doesn’t compete with professional displays in what actually matters for work.
Ditto!
Thank you so much for your comprehensive informational video. You're so knowledgeable and I'm grateful for your review. I think I'm going with the BenQ SW271C. I shoot and edit in Adobe RGB for food packaging/print and web. Do you feel the BenQ SW271C is a good choice? Thanks again!
Yes I think so and you're welcome
May i ask what brightness you set for video? do you recomend 100 for apple studio display?
Thanks Artls! you are the best!
Yes 80-120 is the range, your choice based on workflow.
This is a great video presented with lots of in depth knowledge! What I'm getting is that the Apple Studio Display is not ideal because it's not an HDR display? I edit my photos in 16 bit Adobe RGB (1998) but then I downgrade them to 8 bit sRGB for printing and online display. As far as I know printers can't handle 16 bit RGB files. Before I post any photos I compare how they look on my MacBook Pro, my Pro Display XDR, on my iPhone and on my LG Ultrafine which I plan on replacing with the Studio Display. I looked at the nano texture displays and found them to look pretty dull. I also agree that True Tone is garbage and always turn it off.
Not the fact that they are not HDR, they do run scaled HDR 600. But it is not an ideal printing photography display because the coverage is only about 84% Adobe RGB and if one prints, this is not ideal, regardless of 8 vs 16 bit,
A question before I buy. I have a BenQ SW320 which I used with Windows as the only display. Worked great. Then I got a MacBookPro 1, the dual display mode is clunky. Now I’m planning to get a Mac Studio. I would like a dual display mode if it works better than the MacBook. I believe that an Apple display will integrate better with the Mac than a third party. I am a photographer, printing, both color and BW.
1. Am I right that with the Mac Studio, the Studio Display + the BenQ SW320 will work well together?
2. With a Studio Display, do I understand correctly that the Mac will enforce the P3 mode on the BenQ even if I calibrate the BenQ separately?
3. I understand the Studio Display cannot be calibrated to Adobe, P3 is the best we can do. Gaah! That’s not really a question, I just raises the question of color space vs. convenience.
1. Am I right that with the Mac Studio, the Studio Display + the BenQ SW320 will work well together? Yes, for the SW320 you just need a USB C to Display Port cable, you can use HDMI as well, however, I would deter you for using that - too many potential color and RGB range issues.
2. With a Studio Display, do I understand correctly that the Mac will enforce the P3 mode on the BenQ even if I calibrate the BenQ separately? Incorrect, Studio display will be P3, SW can be whatever gamut you set it to be.
3. I understand the Studio Display cannot be calibrated to Adobe, P3 is the best we can do. Gaah! That’s not really a question, I just raises the question of color space vs. convenience. Yes Studio display cannot do Adobe and it is more in the 85% range of Adobe.
@@ArtIsRight Thank you. Given #2, I can live with #3.
What. you are saying about the Macbook Pro for HDR work is not true because without a Blackmagic or AJA output device you are not seeing true color space for video. You can't grade for high end work on any internal GUI display, no matter how high quality or calibrated it is.. its close but not for delivery to high end clients..
Agree to that, and fully aware, however, people find a way and if it comes close it is good enough for many. But if your client is high end then you should get proper equipment. It is a step in the right direction, even though it is not a complete one.
Really good review! Thank you! I have just ordered the Studio Display because I'm fine with the P3 gamut for web usage. I don't print (for the moment at least 😅)
Enjoy!
Great to explanation on the color gamut range differences on the two monitors.
Thank!
What is the difference in the size of the UI on this display vs the 4K Benq 32” - I’m trying to figure out which one to buy and would prefer the Benq for overall features / performance but am nervous to get stuck with a tiny UI.
If you ever had the time a comparison of screen shots of the two would be great.
Thx for the info.
because you can scale the UI it won't be too small. Some perceived 4K scale to not as sharp but I don't have an issue with it. I would give BenQ 4K a go and if you don't like it, you can always bring it back
is it better than Eizo CG for re-touching and printing job?
No, not by any stretch. It is not even in the same class as Eizo. Eizo and BenQ SW are hardware calibrated displays. these are software. ruclips.net/video/9hVfwW9LK8E/видео.html
thats good but you seem so concern about the gpu working harder, sony experia mobile devices have 4k screen so i dont think its a big deal for M1 to handle 5k or 6K
Seem and being concerned are 2 different things and it is just fact that Apple scales their displays by doubling the resolution so it is pushing the GPU harder. On Apple Silicon machines this is less of an issue.
for as long as can remember, since digital inception have always used Srgb, makes my workflow seamless for both web and print and NEVER has a client asked for Adobe RGB, never in a shoot brief has it stipulated Adobe RGB. working with a pro lab for tests of color gamut the trial was images processed in profoto, adobe RGB and Srgb and outputted to lab and printed on various paper types and non of the lab techs, nor the invited photographers could notice any difference. So although theoretically, Adobe RGB is bigger, we dont work in the theoretical world, and to have a more seamless workflow from capture to print or digital delivery Srgb work perfectly... great video as always....
One can argue it that way but you can't unseen what you have seen and you won't know what you're missing if you don't know it. And that is life. Some can, some can't but there's an argument for more and better. Each to their own, thanks for chiming in.
One more additional thought, yes clients may never asked for Adobe RGB in a photographer life span and that is ok. The point of choosing Adobe RGB is not so much for the client but rather the photographer - the creative in the equation. What the client get in the end from the creative using Adobe RGB, if the images should go to print is colors that can be shown on print now a days. A by product of the creative care and attention to deal, striving for the best, which to say, is relative and vary from one creative to another. I'm not trying to change minds here, there are many who use similar color workflow as described here and there are others who wants more and uses Adobe RGB.
@@ArtIsRight it cant be seen in a print the colour space difference, I meet people all the time that claim they can but in reality you cant, tech states it prints in a bigger space but visually looks no different. and let's not touch on CMYK as that's another can of worms. but I'm happy my workflow is seamless using Srgb all the way through to digital file delivery to the client, they can then do as they wish, and I'm happy knowing if they use on the web that they don't need to convert the files I have supplied. I tell my students it is like using a 100mp camera to a 25mp, one is theoretically better but there are other issues to consider when using the 100mp... sometimes less is more.
An important info dump. Thanks. Will run it a second time.
Related: are they enhancing our images?
Maybe the M1 iMac does so. I prefer to see what the camera did.
the images through the web cam is supposed to use the A13 Digital Signal Processing, and center stage. I won't show a demo of this but there are plenty of other videos that shows a sample. I'm sure that once Apple update this they will have a video showing the update as well.
Art: I plan on purchase the Mac Studio, either the M1 or M1 Ultra. I exclusive will use the system for photo editing using Lightroom Classic & Photoshop. At present I calibrate my monitor using X-Rited's X1 Pro 3. Did I understand your correctly if I purchase the Apple Studio Display my calibration will NOT be acceptable &/or possible with this display?
Not quite. You can calibrate these displays. However, the color gamut that these display will show is P3 and not Adobe RGB. Also I'll have a guides coming out about these display in the next week or so.
I can't get my screen right for photography
ok
Is product photography fall into to “print” or web?
It depends on where that image goes, web is a for sure thing. As far as print is concern to clarify further, I am referring to photographer who print in house or through labs. Not catalog printing which is usually job done through company that has their own team managing this.
THANK YOU. VERY Helpful. I have been trying to decide between the SW321C, SW271C and the Apple studio display. I think your has made my decision for me (SW321C).
You are welcome!
Hello, Karl.
Im like you can’t decide between the SW271C and the Apple Studio Display, im a hobby photographer and web designer.
Do you regretted with SW321C or ist everything fine ?
@@matejcerkez4911 No, except now I want two SW321C monitors! My photo semi-pro partner purchased the SW271C and loves it, but "wishes" he got the SW321C.
Having shared a couple of comments with you before, this must be the deepest dive yet on the Studio display from that perspective of a photographer, so really well done and thank you. For general and non-critical viewing, I will miss the “snap and contrast” of my 27” 5K iMac when it eventually departs my system but with the BenQ SW 271 already in place as that second monitor for critical photo editing, I won’t be adding a Studio display. Still leaning to add a SW321C, though admittedly I don’t seem to be quite “there” yet. Can’t seem to get quite there yet on my Studio ruminations either, though I think you’ve got further thoughts coming on the Ultra too?
I hear you, I wish BenQ have the ultimate 5K 99% Adobe RGB hardware calibrated display ;) I just have the ultra review out. It is mind blown.
what would be some possibilities for the 64gb of memory in the display do you think? Would any of them boost the performance of MacBook/studios connected to it or just the camera/speakers
Graphic off load could be part of it but I don't see that happening yet. I'm not sure, I would say Apple TV but there's no remote ;) Unless ifixit finds a bluetooth chip and Wifi inside
Hello, beautiful Review, I have a question, they will send me an Apple Studio Display very soon and the truth is I have not so modern equipment in terms of connectivity I have a Mac mini Late 2012 and a Mac Pro 2013 Trashcan and I don't know if a thunderbolt 3 to thunderbolt 2 converter can work for me I hope you can help me
use Mini Display Port to USB C or HDMI out to USB C, either should work with Apple Studio Display
@@ArtIsRight Thank you very much for your prompt response 😀
I do wonder why you chose the 32’ BenQ to compare to the Apple display, instead of the 27’ of the same model??
You can choose the 27" Model, I have just been testing the 32" model. Choice is yours.
Wow what a great video.. Im a photographer and i sometimes do some intense type required work at home. I think Studio display would be a waste of money. I would like to have dual screen. What monitor would you recommend...?
Also would watching a movie on 60hz monitor be a problem?
If you are a photographer I would look at BenQ SW display line up, they are hardware calibrated display created specifically for photography and all of them has 99% Adobe RGB coverage.
Also most movies display at 24 FPS or 29.95 so 60 is more than adequate.
@@ArtIsRight thank you for your kind answer. I am currently using mbp m1 max. What about PD2725U or PD3220U model? I am debating between SW and PDs as theres price difference.
Those are great displays, you have to ask yourself, do you print your work or will you print in the future - especially inkjet prints. If so then SW for certain. If not then PD will do just fine.
@@ArtIsRight Thank you sir!!! You made it so clear : ))
Great video! The most technical yet concise and coherent video on the Apple Studio Display I've seen so far. Looking forward to your Apple Studio Display Calibration video. Keep up the good content!
That is coming soon
I want a photographer/printers monitor that won't break the bank. I use apple computer. But am prepared to go outside this eco system. What would you recommend?
If you print I recommend BenQ SW line displays. If you don't need the hardware calibration feature, I would choose their PD line.
Thanks for a great review. I'm a photographer and professional printer for 25 years and have the same views. Apple is great, but is it the best tool for the job. About to upgrade to their "Studio" computer. Was wondering about their display. Now I know I'll probably look elsewhere. Any current recommendations with an Adobe 98 gamut? I work with many pro photographers using ProPhoto RGB and push Epson printers to their maximum with custom profiles, etc. On another topic, I just upgraded my phone from an iphone 11 to a 13 pro and can't stand the overprocessed color. There is no off! and it's hard to remove as many of the colors become crossed over. Ugh.
My recommendation would be BenQ SW line 99% Adobe RGB with hardware calibration. As far as ProPhoto goes, I can see why someone wants to work in that gamut, but there's no point really. It has been more than 10 years now since there were talks about ProPhoto but then the displays in the same time frame still sits at 99% Adobe RGB and if any changes is coming about it won't be coming in ProPhoto Space, it would be coming in P3 and Rec 2020 instead. As far as prints goes, on inkjet right now, I have not seen anything that exceed Adobe RGB all the way around, may be some peak here and there but very rare.
Thoughts on MacOS scaling for something like LG's "5k2k" (5120x2160) ? Would there still be fuzzy text if you try a scaled resolution?
Will be similar to 4K, pixel density is below 200 PPI for 5K2K. It usually sits around 163 PPI for the 34" Model.
what difference between benq sw and pd series?
Hardware vs software calibration and color gamut coverage, SW will always have 99% Adobe RGB PD does not have this. Also this will explains the differences ruclips.net/video/9hVfwW9LK8E/видео.html and this ruclips.net/video/nKajHQh4eFE/видео.html
I know I am late to the party but I just got a new 2021 16” MBP M1 Max and am looking for actual user experience on the BenQ SW312C and the Apple Studio Display with the mat finish. I print about 10% of the time to a 24” Canon Pro-4000. I know ultimately the decision is personal but I see so many comments on the scaling issues of the Retina display MBP’s to 4K screens. How ‘bad’ is it? Meanwhile it’s difficult to argue with the 32” real estate, hardware profiles, and color accuracy of the BenQ. Then again the system integration, web cam functionality, seamless scaling etc of the Studio Display is difficult to ignore.
Anybody with first hand experience got input?
but I see so many comments on the scaling issues of the Retina display MBP’s to 4K screens. How ‘bad’ is it?
Over exaggerated based on various highly personal experiences. Each will have different feeling about this. I would tell you to give it a try out for yourself. I have been using 4k with Mac for close to a decade now. Lot of complaint video that get views but they are not neutral, and sadly on most of the them the supporting justification, sounds good, but they are about as legitimate as a flat earther argument.
Meanwhile it’s difficult to argue with the 32” real estate, hardware profiles, and color accuracy of the BenQ. Then again the system integration, web cam functionality, seamless scaling etc of the Studio Display is difficult to ignore.
Anybody with first hand experience got input?
I tried both and they are both good in different ways. For me I print and I would prefer 99% Adobe RGB, when possible.
I have to 2nd other comments. Your review and insights are on another level. Thanks so much.
Thank You!
What are the ∆e figures on this Apple display? Display uniformity on all the 9 squares? How tight are tolerances? Light bleeding at the edges?
∆e is dependent on the display, each value will differ, calibration result pass and I'll leave it at that. I didn't use CalMan to run a pre calibration with factory value. Watch this for uniformity ruclips.net/video/f0dS629pPgE/видео.html Tolerances are ok. Light bleeding is ok as well
So i calibrate my macbook pro M1 display with xrite i1 and i realised that the display was more contrasty,so everything looked better but in reality contrast was off and needed to be fine tuned.I was wondering,did you find the same with studio display ? or is the studio display more accurate?
Thanks artisright
I found there were some color temp changes with the Studio Display. Also at this point I don't recommend calibrating any XDR displays just yet.
Hi, are you going to make a video about calibrating the new Studio Display with te i1 Profiler from X-rite?
yes should be coming in a week
@@ArtIsRight Thanks! I'm looking forward to it! great work!
Can you please compare Benq PD3220U more closely with Apple Studio Display?
I'll see what I can do....
I ended up choosing the Studio Display after much teeth nashing. In the end, after comparing my 27' iMac to my LG monitor (currently assigned to my Mac Studio), and running into the scaling problem, and realizing if I wanted to print more - I'd have to upgrade my printer (Epson 1430) along with the monitor. I have yet to justify a printer upgrade.
But if I do, I'm wondering how a dual monitor set up on a Mac Studio would work. The Studio Display and a BenQ SW271C. Can I have the two monitors in two different colour spaces?
Yes it will work
G'day Art
ANOTHER STUNNING AND INFORMATIVE video mate.
You have answered almost all of my questions about all displays.
I like you, print my photos and also other graphical images.
I know now the the studio is not for me.
What are your thoughts on the Samsung 34-inch Wide Quad HD QLED Curved Monitor?
Havagooday my friend.
Greg
92% coverage on both DCI and Adobe RGB not that good. Curved panel not great for color management and calibration. Physic of light emission, you get convergence and cross contamination on measurement. It is not bad but it happened on these. If print I would look for displays that can show 99% Adobe RGB such as BenQ SW hardware calibrated display.
@@ArtIsRight thank you Art for a quick and in-depth answer.
Hello Art, can you make any comment on a new 32 inch sw display??? Is there one due out soon??? Isvit worth waiting a bit to buy a 32 inch?
I am not aware of BenQ unannounced products. And here's the thing if you need one now or soon I would get it :) It is still a great display!
@@ArtIsRight thankyou Sir yes you are right ……. Currently using a studio display (apple) however a few weeks back I sold an old pd3200u, when I set it up to display to the buyer I felt a pang of oh dear!!!! I miss the 32” size :) So I am researching 32 inch monitors for photos, video and music in Logic pro, heres the thing…… the photos I printed so far edited on mac studio via studio display, out through canon pro 300 actually look quite decent So it isn’t like I need 32” just that side by side the bigger screen is more appealing to me personally, sat here now telling myself I do not NEED it and save a bunch of cash :)
I hear you!
Nice video. Have you ever tried an Eizo as a color monitor?
Yes I have and for the price, BenQ Ambassador or not I would rather get a BenQ, better value proposition.
Very comprehensive review! Thank you !
You're welcome!
In my opinion Apple could offer as an extra a display calibrated for photography. In the same way you can choose more ram or a bigger SSD.
they don't focus on photo only video
Hi Art, great video. Quick question. I'm currently using Mac Studio with Studio Display. I mainly work with Premiere Pro and After Effects. Thinking of switching to PD3220U. Do you think PD3220U is a better choice in terms of color accuracies and screen real estate? Speaker and webcam are not my priority. Are there any other cons compared with Studio Display?
May I ask why you are thinking of switching? So here are a few things, if you got the Apple Studio Display (ASD) glossy then PD3220U (refer to as PD now for short) will have matted display so that is one advantage there. But if you prefer glossy then it might not be, depends. Aside from that ASD & PD have close to the same P3 coverage. Both can be calibrated but with ASD you should use the reference mode first. As far as resolution ASD is 5K where as PD is 4K, both of these have scaling but 5K 27" has a PPI higher than 200, where as the 4K sits as about 140-143 PPI, so some perceived this as blurry scaling, it all depends, I don't have issues with this but some do. Where as on the 5K it is sharp because of the PPI. As far as usability, you'll probably will not notice much variation between 4 and 5K real estate wise, other than the scaling and sharpness. Color accuracy wise, once calibrated they are going to be about the same. If you are not going to calibrate ASD might be a bit better because of Apple Color Tuning. Where the PD might be a bit saturated out of the box when linked up to Apple Silicon Computer. But if you calibrate they are going to come close. Uniformity wise, PD is going to be better than ASD. Hope this helps.
@@ArtIsRight thanks so much for the helpful info. Actually, there is only 1 reason I'm thinking of switching - bigger screen size. I'm not so worried about the sharpness. Just not sure I might lose out on other benefits from ASD (besides the webcam and good speaker).
Got cha, then I think the PD display from BenQ Might work well for you. One other thing that you will loose is the reference color mode build into Apple displays, but otherwise you are good!
@@ArtIsRight great! This is really helpful in my decision-making.
Exactly what I did: going for an Eizo ColorEdge instead. Thanks for confirming my own judgement on what Apple has on offer here.
Or BenQ SW line!
Art, great reviww of this monitor. It is exactly what I figured (was concerned about) with the new displays, and in particular the ones on the laptops and iMacs from the past year or so. I said I was concerned on a forum and people attacked me for stating that the displays aren't necessarily ideal for photograhy purposes.
Quick question... I work with B&W mostly, so I'm concerned about color a bit less, but I am much more concenred about being able to linearize and deal with the toe and shoulder response regions of the image, since that is often where the real magic is in a B&W image. What do you feel is a better solution for this specifically? I think I need to get a NEC or BenQ or move up to an Eizo to get better calibration capability to address this (I am currently using a NEC 27" PA271Q display that I am a bit less than satisfied with in combination with my 27" iMac Pro from 2020).
Thank you! And I am sadden that people resorts to attacks when you don't agree with them. The sad part is that most of those attack comments come from people who may not necessary know what they are talking about.
NEC got taken over by Sharp and their pro display line now is one to maintaining the status quo meaning they are not really releasing any new models. You are better of with a BenQ or Eizo. With BenQ if you have strict requirement I would give it a go first and see how you like it or not. You can always return the display if it does not fit with your needs. If you are looking at the BenQ look at their SW line which are hardware calibrated displays for Pro Photography. I have so many guides on how to calibrate them that you can watch.
@@ArtIsRight Yes, that's what I was thinking... Thanks. I'll check out your other videos.
When you run two monitors (and they aren't the same monitor, as is the case with my iMac Pro and the NEC display), do you attempt to calibrate them identically (which is basically impossible) or do you set one up as the "print" display and the other as the "video" or "online" display?
I would do the latter and know that they will never match. :)
@@ArtIsRight Yes, exactly what OI was thinking. Thanks.
Very helpful video- wish I would have seen this before ordering the studio display a few weeks ago. I shoot with the Nikon D850, and don’t print often- primarily for online. However, I do sharpen my final images for printing in my final editing processes in the rare case that I decide to print. When it comes to deconvolution sharpening at 100% zoom, is there any difference between the Apple Studio Display and the BenQ PD2725U (the display I may get and use alongside) as far as being able to judge sharpness? I’m not sure if the studio displays 218 ppi makes it any easier to gauge critical sharpness when pixel peeping. Thanks 🙏
It will work just fine and if you don't like it, you have 14 days retune policy. Thank you for the comment.
Thanks so much legend !! Literally the only tutorial that actually WORKED!
You're welcome!
Hi Arti what color space do you suggest for photoshop? the standard ,change to srgb or the photography?
Thanks
on Apple Studio Display? ruclips.net/video/bJuruNqxiP4/видео.html
@@ArtIsRight yes i just bought the apple display. I've also notice that photoshop and camera raw,the new update,when using any mac..changed the colorspace automatically to displsy p3.
Do u think automatic brightness on this display will work ok? Or shoild i change to 100 for example that i am usually using for web and video
If you are serious about color you would not use auto brightness or True Tone in editing. Otherwise you are editing to a moving target which is the worse thing that you can do.
@@ArtIsRight thanks. I dont use auto tune or auto brightness. But only with this particular display i found that auto brightness is spot on and stable..at least most of the time.
I also had the 4.5k model but auto brightness was unstable and difficult to work with.
Thanks for the advices. About lightroom should i use the standard photography preset p3 or should i change to photography preset p3 d65 ?
In your tests which preset had better/lower delta E?
"I dont use auto tune or auto brightness. But only with this particular display i found that auto brightness is spot on and stable..at least most of the time."
Because there's a Camera on the display and the display has a chip inside it that does all of the computation by passing the computer.
"I also had the 4.5k model but auto brightness was unstable and difficult to work with."
You mean the Pro Display XDR?
"About lightroom should i use the standard photography preset p3 or should i change to photography preset p3 d65 ?"
The same really just set the brightness at the level that you want. Default is 160 nits. Might be too much for some.
"In your tests which preset had better/lower delta E?" Again it all comes down to brightness, not a lot of point looking at the ∆e, just a variation of brightness at the same gamut.
I have an older dual BenQ SW2700PT 27 Inch 2K monitor setup. I have been happy with it but was considering getting into a 4K+ monitor setup, especially since upgrading to the 14" MacBook Pro. I don't print as many photos any longer and the Apple is very expensive compared to the features found on the BenQ SW271C 4K monitor. I think you helped make my decision. I'll wait a bit longer before committing to an upgrade, but this certainly helped in a possible path and what to look for in a future monitor. This was a very well thought out, informative video. Thanks so much. I have enjoyed many of your videos that you have released. Thanks!
thank you!
Just wondering if you'd recommend options (Diff Brands) for Editing (4k+)/ Color Grading monitors, for Pro use, for Mac - 27-32" ? Thanks
Color grading I would choose either BenQ PD for software calibration for SW for hardware calibration. I am recommending them because their hardware, calibration is good and provides the best value.
What are terrific review, Art. It must be said that you are very charitable to the Apple display, given its price point and limitations for printing photographers. I wanted to be wowed by the display, but unfortunately I remain underwhelmed, not simply because of the price but also the clunky design. The build quality clearly is excellent but clumsy implementations; such as the moving height adjustable stand, poor WebCam etc seem most un-apple-like.
On a separate note, in a dual monitor ‘printing’ set up do you recommend choosing the same panel/brand for both displays?
You don't have to, if you don't you have to consider primary / secondary for color accuracy. If you have 2 of the same that becomes less of a consideration.
@@ArtIsRight Thanking you for taking the trouble to reply so promptly. I already have a 10 bit hardware calibrated Eizo monitor, but need to replace an ageing 5K 27 inch iMac when I get a new Mac Studio. I guess your reply means that I can do the colour critical work on the Eizo and use a cheaper monitor for the “regular work”, but are there any specific considerations when choosing a replacement?
I would look at color gamut, if you want 99% Adobe RGB to match what you have then choose that, otherwise you are good.
@@ArtIsRight Thanks. I thought you might say that based on your recent video. I am keen to develop my printing and it makes sense to match the gamut of my best monitor which is 99% Adobe. BTW I think the niche for photographers who might wish to print is actually quite big, which reflects all the positive comments your channel receives. The difficulty for enthusiasts is feeling daunted by the workflow issues involved in getting colour accurate printing.
I feel pretty stupid, but after watching this video 3 times I'm still hopelessly confused about the scaling issue. In a nutshell, what is the best resolution setting for a 4k monitor on a Mac Studio to avoid performance issues? Is there a good 4k option or is 2k optimal?
That is not necessary the point covered in this video, at least the recommend part anyways. In short there are no performance penalty with these machines so choose whichever looks best for you.
@@ArtIsRight I'm getting a Mac Studio this summer and agonizing over monitor choice. Mainly photo editing/soft proofing for printing.
Got cha, have you used a 2K display before? If you have and that works for you, then you are good to go. But the point is that either one will work just fine.
@@ArtIsRight thanks for replying, Art. I’m used to 4k on a Windows PC for several years, and might not be happy with 2k.
Ah if you are used to that then I would choose 4K. 2K will be a step back and you will notice it.
I have a very annoying, very very subtle green tint in the backlight of my BenQ SW271. Apple Retina has spoiled me. I don’t want to tolerate green tint. I would say the tint in the SW271 is equal to 05CC Green Shift, and it’s not correctable. It is inherent to the LCD backlight. My Apple retina does not have this problem.
👍🏼
Hello again, I’ve just received my Apple Studio Display and while I wait for your video about its color accuracy I want to try to calibrate it. My question is: do you know if its technology is RG-Phosphors (GB-LED) like the old 27” Retina iMac?
Yes, and put the display into a reference mode first.
@@ArtIsRight thank you. I tried with both corrections (GB-LED and PFS Phosphors), and here what I found:
CALIBRATION: put in reference mode Photography d65, customized at 120 cdm, fine tuned with ccProfiler latest version and i1Display Plus, luminance was way off (114 cdm) with both matrix corrections while white point was slighty off with GB-LED and perfect with PFS. (of course i resetted the fine tuning every time).
PROFILATION: done 4 times (twice for every matrix correction, once setting native WPoint and other D65 in ccProfiler). With both matrix corrections I was able to obtain great color accuracy (everything
Apple Original profile is a dummy reference profile, it does not described the display in anyway at all. In my testing, GB-LED and WLED are about the same gamut wise. I didn't test PFS, those are predominantly laptop displays backlight. My test show that the gamut is about 98% P3 which is about right. The question is which P3 are you looking at DCI-P3 it is almost right on, 99%, but for Display P3, you are looking 97-98%, I am getting almost full gamut from my multiple test.
@@ArtIsRight thanks for the response. I compared the obtained gamut (with ccProfiler GB-LED) with Display P3 and it seems 80% or less.
Email me your icc, I like to take a look, gamut showed in the video, demonstrate that I was able to get the high 90 percentile. So something must be going on with your end.
MPix uses sRGB color space. If I use Adobe RGB 98 and my printer is using sRGB will I be getting the right colors in prints? I have also had an issue with Capture One changing the colors when it converts my RAW files to JPG and I never could get a JPG to look like the RAW file I was working with. I got NO support from Capture One so I went back to Adobe Lightroom. I have no idea why my JPG files had different colors than my RAW files.
C1 uses the system color management module CMM, where as Adobe has their own color engine called ACE. That may be where the variation comes in. Color should be close but not a match especially when you translate from larger to smaller gamut, like your situation. Color from the prints would be right, it would come close but may be a bit saturated. You can always use PS or LRC to simulate paper - soft proof and compare with what you see on the print. Just remember that lighting use to view print is important as well.
Hi Art, I just posted this query against your previous review of the Studio Display, then I found this one. So apologies for the duplication, but my query sits better here.
I am coming to this a bit late but as someone who has just upgraded from my 2012 27" iMac to the base Studio, plus Studio Display. I had high expectations for this combo but (as a photographer who likes to print images) have been disappointed thus far with the Display. I'm using it in the default P3-600 nits preset as it's the only one with which I can adjust the brightness - I like to operate my Apple displays at only 3/4 brightness to avoid overly dark prints. The Photography P3-D65 setting is WAY too bright.
Anyway, I've tried printing with Fotospeed papers using their generic profiles - on my iMac these turn out okay, with a noticeable improvement when I use Custom profiles. With the Studio Display however, same images and same generic profiles - they come out way too warm, with a pinkish tone. I tried calibrating the Studio Display, it made no difference to the prints (nor was there any noticeable difference between the pre- and post screen colours).
Whilst I note it's shortcomings for colour accuracy compared to the like of the BenQ.... wondering if I am missing something here with the Studio settings?
I am still (just) within the return window for my new gear and I am seriously considering returning the Display. I would really miss the sleek style and the integrated webcam and speakers, but if it can't give me accurate (or even close to accurate) colour rendition in my prints, it's no good to me!
Would really appreciate your thoughts/advice.
Great channel, wish I'd discovered it sooner!
"I just posted this query against your previous review of the Studio Display, then I found this one. So apologies for the duplication, but my query sits better here."
- No worries I removed the other post and will answer it here.
"I am coming to this a bit late but as someone who has just upgraded from my 2012 27" iMac to the base Studio, plus Studio Display. I had high expectations for this combo but (as a photographer who likes to print images) have been disappointed thus far with the Display."
- Keyword here is print, this is where things get a bit ambiguous
"I'm using it in the default P3-600 nits preset as it's the only one with which I can adjust the brightness - I like to operate my Apple displays at only 3/4 brightness to avoid overly dark prints. The Photography P3-D65 setting is WAY too bright."
- This is partly where the issues lies. With print you always want to use a fix brightness. Yes the default from Apple is too bright and you can create custom presets. Have a look at this playlist which include this video and other valuable resources ruclips.net/p/PLjlr8rlxl_q4nRmwT4jHxhkrUAzjYGH59
I do understand why some wants or light to change display brightness, but when it comes to prints you are better off fixed.
If anything this video will help too ruclips.net/video/OcmeQgKspKQ/видео.html
"Anyway, I've tried printing with Fotospeed papers using their generic profiles - on my iMac these turn out okay, with a noticeable improvement when I use Custom profiles. With the Studio Display however, same images and same generic profiles they come out way too warm, with a pinkish tone. I tried calibrating the Studio Display, it made no difference to the prints (nor was there any noticeable difference between the pre- and post screen colours)."
- What light source are you using to view your prints, because that is as important as the display. Because the display is calibrate D65, I would recommend getting a 6500K light bulb to view your print with. Alternatively you can get an LED light bank as well, just know that the color temperature read out on the back of those LED light bank as not as accurate, meaning setting it at 6500K is not necessary going to give you 6500K color temp output. However, I would start with that.
ruclips.net/video/bJUCDYpFtBc/видео.html
"Whilst I note it's shortcomings for colour accuracy compared to the like of the BenQ.... wondering if I am missing something here with the Studio settings?"
-I would not say these displays are not accurate, on the contrary, they're calibrated rather well from the factory. This said, P3 gamut and 80 something % Adobe RGB coverage does not help when it comes to printing. I would give my play list above a look because it is a comprehensive resources on the Studio Display.
"I am still (just) within the return window for my new gear and I am seriously considering returning the Display. I would really miss the sleek style and the integrated webcam and speakers, but if it can't give me accurate (or even close to accurate) colour rendition in my prints, it's no good to me!"
Simply enough, life is a USS Kobayashi Maru scenario, there's no perfect solution, rather one that we have to compromise, choose and prioritized what is import. In the case of this display, the design is great and colors can work and it is a whole package. And if these factors are important to you then yes, this is the one. But for printing color accuracy, it would depends.
"Would really appreciate your thoughts/advice."
Give the playlist and the various videos referenced here a look. If you have any follow up question just ask them :)
"Great channel, wish I'd discovered it sooner!"
-Thanks
@@ArtIsRight First of all Art, thank you so much for the prompt and detailed response. It is to your credit that, despite the fact that you have over 28k subscribers, you manage to respond to every single query, in fact, it's amazing.
Secondly, it's confession time - this issue I was having was down to user error on my part, and not the fault of the Studio Display.
It seems that when I was setting up the Studio and Studio Display initially, the system correctly identified my Canon Pro-300 printer and installed a default driver. I subsequently downloaded the latest software (including the latest driver) from the Canon website and installed them. Rather than overwriting the original driver installation, the printer was added again. So on my system there was Canon Pro-300 Series and Canon Pro-300 Series 2. The system identified the first printer as the default, and it was this basic Apple 'Airprint' driver that was being used to print my images - even though I was specifying certain paper profiles in Photoshop and Lightroom.
I only noticed the dual printer setup when I decided to try to delete my printer completely and reinstall it. Sure enough, both LR and PS had been using that basic driver and, as soon as I switched to the 'Series 2', my prints were coming out fine.
Thank you once again for the helpful advice, much appreciated!
😀 glad it's resolved.
Great video thanks 🙏
Thank you!
I would like to ask your help, regarding color profiles in OSX. I have a Mac Mini M1 and an ASUS PA329C display attached to it over HDMI. The display have several color profile options, like DCI-P3 Mode, what I prefer as a videographer. Is it correct if I choose the Display P3 color profile on the OS if I want to use it for accurate color grading, or you have other preferences? Thanks!
Not quite, reference profile should never be used for display. If you don't have a calibrator you are better off using the default generic profile from macOS.
@@ArtIsRight Thanks! So which profile sholud I use on both the Display and the OS? Setting are on the Display: 100% sRGB, 100% REC709, 100% Adobe RGB, 98% DCI-P3 and 84% REC 2020. The display was tested with a calibrator and there wasn't really any advantage with custum values according to the factory calibration. Thanks!
again not quite, you should custom calibrate your display because of the following ruclips.net/video/TObByJau2EE/видео.html
Great video! You just helped me decide to not go for the Studio Display.
Thank you!
Hi Art, I also have a studio display here. I wanted to calibrate this with an X-rite i1Display profiler. I can't, maybe because I don't have a USB to Thunderbolt hub. But can it be adjusted with the i1Profiler program? I can give my iMac a color profile with that program. That doesn't work on my Studio Display.
Guide coming, the process would be similar to this ruclips.net/video/bqF_SQWv8x0/видео.html use GB-LED as the back light and you are good to go. Otherwise the video should be out in about a week or less.
@@ArtIsRight Thank you! Really nice!
@@ArtIsRight Thanks! It worked. Only it is annoying that my iMac from 2019 (5K) is not the same color as the Studio Display. I use the Studio Display as a second screen. I have to wait until June for my Mac Studio and a second Studio Display.
But now I can't get my iMac the same color. What is that about? Both calibrated via ccProfiler and i1 Display pro.
They won't match entirely, nothing will. Studio display to studio display should be closer. But still.
@@ArtIsRight OK. quite difficult. My iMac seems warmer/yellower than the Studio Display. That annoys me haha. Hopefully if I use 2x a studio display they will match. Now it seems like I'm doing something wrong.
Do you know whether there will be a successor of the SW321c with better contrast? I‘m just about to buy a new monitor for image editing. The SW321c is really nice, but I don‘t like its contrast „capabilities“…
I am unaware of BenQ unannounced product, their product road map is not something they shared with me.
@@ArtIsRight Thanks for your quick reply. I appreciate it! I will probably have to pick the EIZO then.
@@ArtIsRight May I ask you one more question: If I pick the BenQ SW321c or any other monitor that can display Adobe RGB, which consumer printer can actually print those colors? Is the Epson SC-P900 capable of printing Adobe RGB colors? Or is it only for the very professional and expensive printers? I‘m asking because you often emphasize this relationship between Adobe RGB and printing.
It is not the printer but rather the ink and paper combination and there are many of them that starts to exceed Adobe RGB in certain color areas. This won't be for all colors. P900 can print with some paper combinations some color tones that are in the Adobe RGB range. And P900 is a pro printer ;) Also regarding the contrast I would give SW321C a try out first, it is a really great display and you can still get blacks out of the display. If you get it from BenQ and you don't like it or it does not fit your workflow then you can return it. But I'll tell you the matte coating on the BenQ SW321C is something that you can't really get in another display right now, beside the Apple with Nano texture etching, but then you won't have high Adobe RGB coverage.
@@ArtIsRight thank you very much for your elaborated answer. I really appreciate it. And I might change my mind and give the SW321C a try. It basically does have one feature I really am curious about: The Printing Sync. However, I‘m not sure whether it‘s more of a gimmick and not being followed up by newly supported printers (what about the epson SC P900 for instance?). If BenQ keeps on improving/extending this feature, it‘s really something that can attract people like me.
Je ne parle pas anglais, malheureusement. Du coup le monsieur de la video recommande quel écran pour la photographie pour avoir une fidélité dans les couleurs?
Si quelqu’un peux me répondre, je remercierai.
Car malgré Google traducteur c’est ne pas évident a comprendre.
Si vous voulez de bonnes couleurs pour la photographie, je recommanderais les écrans BenQ SW qui ont une capacité de calibrage matériel. Si vous n'en avez pas besoin et que vous aimez toujours les belles couleurs, je recommanderais la ligne BenQ PD qui sont des écrans créés pour les créateurs de contenu et les concepteurs.
Je vérifierais également la chaîne de mon collègue. Sa chaîne est en français et il est une bonne ressource pour aider.
www.youtube.com/@LaPhotoAvenue
@@ArtIsRight Bonsoir Art. Je vous remercie de votre réponse en plus en français 🙏🏽 merci beaucoup.
Je vais commencer a regarder les series de écrans que vous m’avez conseillé. Aussi jeter un coup d’oeil sur la chaine RUclips de votre collègue.
De Rien :)
Thank you for a very well done comparison of the P3 vs Adobe RGB color space in these displays. Could you address (or point me toward your previous comments) on the occasional external screen flicker on my SW271C when connected to my M1 16” MBP? HDMI connection has improved it over the Display Port cable, but I still experience the flicker every so often. Thanks for your knowledge base!
Yes that flickering issue. Not sure what is going on there. Based on my testing it had not occurred. Also your display have USB C to USB C, have you tried that yet?
@@ArtIsRight i have tried all the combinations… hoping for a fix from Apple someday. Thank you for your videos!!
I would give BenQ support a call and see what they advise or can do to help. Perhaps a firmware update option, if there is a new firmware.
Very good run through. I agree with your conclusion.
Thank you!
Vincent Teoh should be aware of you: in this review you got great points presentation. Kudos man.
Thank you!
Excellent review! Thank you.
Glad it was helpful!
Buying a high-end photography monitor and only using it to edit photos for Facebook and Instagram is like buying a Ferarri and never taking it to a track or exceeding the speed limit. Unless you are "calibrating" your monitor to another CONTROLLABLE output like a professional photo printing service or high end ink jet, it's is largely pointless because in web publishing, there is no controlling the output device settings or quality. Factory settings on mid-tier monitors is very good as-is. There are also so many other variables to color/sharpness perception than anything relating to the monitor that are ultimately not controllable.
Ditto like what I said.
I had an LG UltraFine 5K display which is similar to this Studio display it was a great monitor for anything else other than editing pictures. And I was really unhappy with the output I got whenever I printed my photos. I sold it and got a Benq SW271. It's really a good monitor for photographers. I wouldn't personally recommend editing pictures in a P3 wide colour gamut if you are a professional photographer.
Very informative video. I would like it more if it was shorter :)
Thank you. shorter would be good but all these needs to be said, you can cut things out but then I would have part 2 and 3. always something to consider.
Felt a little too much like he’s trying to talk down the Apple in favor of the sponsor, particularly around the point of dpi considering that barely any manufacturer bothers with high dpi, same as they all cheap out on build quality. Don’t know why these manufacturers don’t just release some 22” monitors if they want to stick to 4k for cost reasons. It really is kind of easy to tick some boxes that would bring in more customers looking to a studio display. Keep resolution at retina level dpi, put it in an enclosure that doesn’t let it’s cheap frumpiness hang out shamelessly, don’t scream extreme gamer, Don’t brand it too much and put the labels out of sight, glass front panel since plastic ones scratch too easily when cleaning. The fact that Apple won’t allow inputs for anything but thunderbolt means a huge potential advantage for an OEM willing to show that Apple doesn’t have a monopoly on the world’s aluminum supply. Microsoft was showing promise for a second in this regard.
The argument about pushing the graphics card too hard when scaling or using high dpi doesn’t apply as much to Mpro/max chips w/ specialized display engines as much as intel macs and pc’s. Chances seem pretty low that a studio or pro display user is going to be running a mac old enough to struggle that badly since most probably upgrade their computer before thinking about buying a fancy display. Also, the M1 mac mini runs even the 6k pro display scaled just fine. This bias is really apparent when he says that even though M1 runs high res fine, wouldn’t one be better running low res natively without a true reason why.
The fact that you view a fair review this way is astonishing. Not trying to please anyone just stating fact for pro printing workflow. Thanks for watching
It's amazing just how bad the apple studio display reviews are! Yours was super informative and not only do you cover the photography perspective but I think you did a good job at also speaking to other types of users who have different color needs.
I appreciate that! It is not a bad display by any means. I think that people just have super high expectations of Apple and think that they are always going to deliver the moon and stars. However, when they only got the moon, they are upset. But yet we still got the moon and not nothing. :D
@@ArtIsRight yes it was crazy how much misinformation there is as well! Think I may end up getting one- I'm mostly digital design and I enjoy photography on the side as a hobby. I don't print at all unless its personal and I just do some trial and error. Though I think I may upgrade to nano texture based off your rec. I really like the matte texture on my 4k dell and can still look at MBP display for glossy reference. Hopefully they have both setup at the apple store to take a gander at.
Yes nano texture for sure. Some Apple store will have both coating on display some don't, it just all depends.
Is it possible for a firmware update to bring the monitor up to ADOBE RGB?
Having just installed mine, I switched it to photography p3 profile, but does anyone else notice how incredible bright the screen then becomes? It locks the brightness level, but even with lights in the office, it seems very bright and actually painful to work with, if you need to browse the web in between editing. Has anyone else noticed this?
It is 160 nits. Just create a custom preset mode for pro work. Guide coming sometime this week
@@ArtIsRight looking forward to that. I updated the firmware for the monitor, and it has fixed the issue. It's still quite bright, but not an issue now. Be great to see your custom preset guide!
It has not thing to do with firmware. 160 is bright, just create a custom preset mode and bring that value down the process is similar to this ruclips.net/video/bqF_SQWv8x0/видео.html
@@ArtIsRight Thank you. I will look into this, and your other videos. Briefly, can you confirm colour calibration using an external device is a good idea on the Studio Display? Or is the built in profile good enough without the need for any external calibration process? Thank you
there are always going to be variation. Apple will tell you that it is good and within the tolerate range they deemed acceptable. But it may not be if you are color critical. Also you have to understand that with these reference modes or not, these are at the end consumer displays with some pro use because things bleed over and permeate.
Notable mention: This display has automatic pivot detection. If you turn it by 90°, MacOS will automatically flip it to portrait mode. No settings or drivers required. Pretty neat.
Of course this only works with a VESA mount.
Right one of those hard to test features. Other displays have function too with software installed on the OS.
@@ArtIsRight Right. I never saw/hear it mentioned. So I was pretty surprised it works.
Got cha
Excellent review, exactly what I needed to know. And, you chose the BenQ I was thinking of purchasing😃🖥
PD or SW line depending on what you do.