Dell 2407WFP and 3007WFP LCD Comparison
by Jarred Walton on March 2, 2007 11:30 AM EST- Posted in
- Displays
Color Accuracy
Something far more important than contrast ratio or brightness is the accuracy of the colors that are produced. A bright display with a high contrast ratio could still have terrible color reproduction, and it's not always possible to correct this. Most people will simply "eyeball" the display output to try and determine what looks best, and there are various color charts available online that can help. Outside of image professionals, that is often sufficient, and most users will find that their eyes adapt to whatever display they use and it is only when doing side-by-side comparisons that differences become apparent.
Monaco Optix XR Pro was used to generate reports of color accuracy, after performing initial calibration using the software. 24 color patches are sent to the display with the colorimeter measuring the resulting values. The difference between what is requested and what the LCD actually shows is known as Delta E, with lower values being better. Any score less than one is basically "perfect" - the naked eye is not going to be able to tell the difference - and scores less than 2.0 are very nearly perfect. Ideally, you would want all of the tested colors to have a Delta E of less than 1.0, but almost no one is likely to have problems with anything scoring below 2.0. From 2.0 to 4.0, most people still won't notice the slight inaccuracies in the color palette, but when comparing displays side by side it might be noticeable -- multimedia professionals would prefer something a bit better. Anything above 4.0 begins to represent a more significant deviance, and numerous scores above 6.0 will almost certainly be noticeable by just about anyone using the display.
The problem with calibrating a display is that it doesn't help all applications. Specifically, the video overlay used when watching DVDs or other movies completely bypasses any color correction, so you are essentially stuck with the uncalibrated colors. It is possible to tweak things slightly on some LCDs using the OSD, but the amount of color correction that can be done via the OSD pales in comparison to color profiles, and on models like the Dell 3007WFP there is no option to adjust colors outside of software. Ideally, we would like to see video drivers begin to apply color profiles to the overlay output as well, but we're not sure how much work that would require -- or if it's even possible.
We'll start with the uncalibrated results, as that is closer to what many people will experience. We should also note that color accuracy can vary from panel to panel even within the same model, so the results we are reporting are only from looking at a single LCD.
Without any form of color correction, the color accuracy of all of these displays is pretty poor. The good news is, for a lot of people it won't matter all that much. As we mentioned before, your eyes and brain tend to adapt to whatever you see, and for a lot of people they might notice a difference between displays but they would have difficulty quantifying one as substantially better. Subjectively, the only display out of these four that was discernibly worse was the old 2405FPW. While our instruments are able to measure extremely small Delta E differences, anything less than 3.0 is usually good and up to around 6.0 is "good enough".
If the uncalibrated results are disconcerting, at least the good news is once you calibrate any of these displays you end up with very good results. Of the four displays we've looked at so far, the 3007WFP ends up having the best color accuracy. This could very well be attributed to the use of an S-IPS panel as opposed to the S-PVA panels used in the other three LCDs. Surprisingly, the 2405FPW still comes in second place once calibrated, although differences of a few tenths generally amount to splitting hairs. We should also note that the variation between calibration runs tends to be about 0.2, and over time you will need to adjust the color profile in order to maintain accurate colors. Basically, if having accurate colors is important to you, you will probably want to invest in some hardware to help out.
Update: Additional information on viewing angles and color calibration for print work with these displays is available in our Acer AL2216W review.
Something far more important than contrast ratio or brightness is the accuracy of the colors that are produced. A bright display with a high contrast ratio could still have terrible color reproduction, and it's not always possible to correct this. Most people will simply "eyeball" the display output to try and determine what looks best, and there are various color charts available online that can help. Outside of image professionals, that is often sufficient, and most users will find that their eyes adapt to whatever display they use and it is only when doing side-by-side comparisons that differences become apparent.
Monaco Optix XR Pro was used to generate reports of color accuracy, after performing initial calibration using the software. 24 color patches are sent to the display with the colorimeter measuring the resulting values. The difference between what is requested and what the LCD actually shows is known as Delta E, with lower values being better. Any score less than one is basically "perfect" - the naked eye is not going to be able to tell the difference - and scores less than 2.0 are very nearly perfect. Ideally, you would want all of the tested colors to have a Delta E of less than 1.0, but almost no one is likely to have problems with anything scoring below 2.0. From 2.0 to 4.0, most people still won't notice the slight inaccuracies in the color palette, but when comparing displays side by side it might be noticeable -- multimedia professionals would prefer something a bit better. Anything above 4.0 begins to represent a more significant deviance, and numerous scores above 6.0 will almost certainly be noticeable by just about anyone using the display.
The problem with calibrating a display is that it doesn't help all applications. Specifically, the video overlay used when watching DVDs or other movies completely bypasses any color correction, so you are essentially stuck with the uncalibrated colors. It is possible to tweak things slightly on some LCDs using the OSD, but the amount of color correction that can be done via the OSD pales in comparison to color profiles, and on models like the Dell 3007WFP there is no option to adjust colors outside of software. Ideally, we would like to see video drivers begin to apply color profiles to the overlay output as well, but we're not sure how much work that would require -- or if it's even possible.
We'll start with the uncalibrated results, as that is closer to what many people will experience. We should also note that color accuracy can vary from panel to panel even within the same model, so the results we are reporting are only from looking at a single LCD.
Without any form of color correction, the color accuracy of all of these displays is pretty poor. The good news is, for a lot of people it won't matter all that much. As we mentioned before, your eyes and brain tend to adapt to whatever you see, and for a lot of people they might notice a difference between displays but they would have difficulty quantifying one as substantially better. Subjectively, the only display out of these four that was discernibly worse was the old 2405FPW. While our instruments are able to measure extremely small Delta E differences, anything less than 3.0 is usually good and up to around 6.0 is "good enough".
If the uncalibrated results are disconcerting, at least the good news is once you calibrate any of these displays you end up with very good results. Of the four displays we've looked at so far, the 3007WFP ends up having the best color accuracy. This could very well be attributed to the use of an S-IPS panel as opposed to the S-PVA panels used in the other three LCDs. Surprisingly, the 2405FPW still comes in second place once calibrated, although differences of a few tenths generally amount to splitting hairs. We should also note that the variation between calibration runs tends to be about 0.2, and over time you will need to adjust the color profile in order to maintain accurate colors. Basically, if having accurate colors is important to you, you will probably want to invest in some hardware to help out.
Update: Additional information on viewing angles and color calibration for print work with these displays is available in our Acer AL2216W review.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
62 Comments
View All Comments
JarredWalton - Friday, March 2, 2007 - link
Noticing motion blur is one thing; being bothered by it will vary by individual. You mentioned Titan's Quest... I played that for over 100 hours without ever being bothered by motion blur. Are the item names clearly readable while running around? Not necessarily, but I can make them out well enough, and the names are secondary to the attributes, so I always ended up checking out items in my inventory.As for that video link... if my picture of a picture was a bad representation of what it's like using a display in person - and I feel it is, even with a decent SLR and a tripod - a handheld camcorder floating around recording a display is ten times worse. Are we supposed to be judging the quality of the display output or the quality of the camcorder and its ability to record LCD screen content? Or maybe the ability of the cameraman to give a reasonable representation of the LCD content? Because it seems to me that it's focused *much* more on the latter two than on the LCD itself. You can see the camera adjusting brightness/contrast on the fly depending on how much light its getting.
Basically, I agree that motion blur can bother people. It doesn't bother me... at all. What I see when playing games just blends together into relatively smooth gameplay, and a delay of a few hundredths of a second is short enough that my old and decrepit eyes don't care. That's why I repeatedly recommend people try out a display in person, because what you get via a review online or in a magazine is a poor substitute for hands on experience. As I state on page 5:
"Most of us don't have a problem with the slight image smearing that occurs on these LCDs, and the camera actually makes it look a lot worse than what we experience in person -- we may have simply captured two frames for all we know -- but this is something that will vary by individual. If you know you are bothered by image smearing, try out a display in person to see if it's suitable for your needs."
Zebo - Friday, March 2, 2007 - link
I have no idea how you guys can't see the color shifting in those PVA's. Every PVA I have tried has had it 1905, 2405 Gateway 24 & 21 etc Color Shifing so bad, viewing straight on, one eye can actualky see something different than the other eye (because the eyes are at different angles) it gave me a headache.Viewing angles on all PVA's suck thats just a fact that other people don't notice will never change my mind compared to an IPS or CRT it's night and day difference.
Heres a good shot of what I mean
http://img108.imageshack.us/img108/9021/dell2007wf...">http://img108.imageshack.us/img108/9021/dell2007wf...
JarredWalton - Friday, March 2, 2007 - link
PVA viewing angles are worse than some of the alternatives, but really how often do you *not* view the display head on? I seriously doubt that I'm ever more than 20 degrees away from a direct frontal view, and probable within 10 degrees in most cases. If that's not how you work with your PC, then other panels might be preferable. I've just never had any real concerns with viewing angles on the 24" LCDs I've tried. Laptop LCDs on the other hand... some of those are absolutely terrible, to the point where moving your head 6" can make the display almost illegible. That too is getting better, thankfully.Zebo - Saturday, March 3, 2007 - link
I view them straight on and they eyes see something different in each due to gamma/color shift. Look, even IPS isnt 178 degrees (or 90:P) like they advertise and starts to fade get shifty at around 35-45 degrees off center but PVA is literally about 5-10 - that's enough on a widescreen to be well over 5-10 degrees at the horizontal edges. Vertical color shift is evident raising my head only about 6" from about 20" away which is the difference between sitting up the chair vs. leaning back, a common position shift for a person using thier PC all day. Horizontal color shift is everywhere from 2-3 ft away. Every PVA panel has exhibited this problem and I know I'm sensitive to it as many don't notice but OTOH many do. TN lappy? don't get me started I just spent two miserable weeks in hotel with one.JarredWalton - Saturday, March 3, 2007 - link
My future laptop reviews are going to be running these sort of color tests and such as well. Of the few laptops I've tried so far, only the ASUS G2P was "good" in my opinion. Most others are a case of "I think I can live with it...." The problem is that unlike desktop LCDs, laptop LCDs frequently aren't bright enough. They focus more on conserving battery life, and while that might be good when they're unplugged, I'd just as soon forget about battery life when plugged in if it gives a better quality display result.timmiser - Friday, March 2, 2007 - link
The idea of getting 7 more inches for $400 less by going the route of a 37" HDTV 1080p is more appealing to me. That would be big screen gaming and spreadsheet work that would be awesome! I think it would be great if AT did a comparison between those two monitors just because they have such a different approach.I would like to see how the 37" 1920x1080 resolution looks compared to the Dell 3007 native resolution. One complaint I have is that the text gets smaller when the monitor gets bigger due to the extreme resolution for the Dell. The text should stay the same or get a little bigger when going to such a big screen in my opinion.
For an extra $100, I can get a 37" 1080p HDTV with a digital tuner which would be cool to switch to an HDTV broadcast on the fly.
Deusfaux - Friday, March 2, 2007 - link
I find it weird the 3007-HC (high color) isn't mentioned, as it's been announced and some people have been able to order it over the phone. It's the 3007 but with a little bit faster response time and better color reproduction (92% of the gamut vs 70-some% on the older 3007).JarredWalton - Friday, March 2, 2007 - link
When we can get one for comparison we'll see how it fares; right now Dell still seems to be shipping more of the "old" revision, and in testing we didn't have any complaints about the quality of the colors (once calibrated). We are trying to get other LCDs to compare with the current Dell offerings, though, so stay tuned....ViRGE - Friday, March 2, 2007 - link
Is Dell actually committed to keeping the 3007 an IPS panel? After the shenanigans that was the launch of the 2007, I'm afraid they'll jump ship to PVA/MVA as soon as they can, while all the reviews still reference the IPS panel.JarredWalton - Friday, March 2, 2007 - link
There are rumors that the new HC panel revision is going to switch to a different type of panel, but for now they're still IPS as far as we're aware. Hopefully they stay that way, but if they change and quality drops, we'll do our best to cover the situation.