For our pre-calibration measurements we target 200 cd/m2 of light output, the sRGB gamut, and a gamma of 2.2. On the VUE 30 there are color temperature settings you can use for the grayscale and the warm setting was found to produce the most accurate image.

I’m also going to approach this review differently than before. The charts for all these measurements will be available in individual galleries. There is a table at the top of the page that summarizes the pre and post calibration measurements to easily see how well the monitor does before and after calibration. This should make it easier to read, and allow me to better focus commentary about the monitor performance on the areas that need it.

  Pre-Calibration Post-Calibration,
200 cd/m2
Post-Calibration,
80 cd/m2
White Level 201.78 195.562 77.6183
Black Level 0.3214 0.3197 0.1388
Contrast Ratio 628:1 612:1 559:1
Gamma (Average) 2.2552 2.2406 2.5132
Color Temperature 6657K 6593K 6452K
Grayscale dE2000 4.0657 0.7705 1.3304
Color Checker dE2000 5.7431 4.0627 4.3305
Saturations dE2000 4.6853 3.7814 4.1323

The major improvement that we see is for the grayscale and gamma. On our 200 cd/m2 target calibration, those both come out nearly perfect. There is a small gamma spike at 95% but nothing really bad at all. The overall dE2000 is so low as to be unseen. When targeting 80 cd/m2 and the sRGB gamma curve, the Nixeus doesn’t perform quite as well. The gamma has a little more variation and the dE2000 is somewhat higher, though still very low. The loss of contrast ratio is the larger issue here.

Both grayscale results highly improve upon the original, which is slightly warm and has a very large error level as you approach peak white. The problem with the Nixeus VUE 30 lies with color reproduction. The errors for both the 96-point color checker and the saturations measurements improve, but not by a huge degree. Most of that improvement can be tied back to the grayscale improving since those numbers are a large part of these later tests. The default 6-point gamut chart is dropped here as the saturations chart covers that, and that dE2000 average is too heavily impacted by the grayscale data.

What we see is a wildly oversaturated gamut where green, cyan, red, yellow and magenta all fall far outside of the sRGB gamut boundary. With Green even the 60% saturation value is outside the sRGB gamut, which leads to very over-saturated colors. Even post-calibration we see that green dE2000 errors are past 5 from 40% on, and approaching a dE2000 of 10 by 100%. Aside from a few select colors in the Color Checker pattern, and the grayscale, almost all the colors have a large visible error.

The Nixeus lacks an internal LUT to fix this, and only so much can be done through the video card. A large gamut is nice, but just like with an OLED smartphone, we don’t want that gamut to be wildly oversaturated and push the color way outside of their boundaries. For any sort of color-critical work, or even just browsing photographs, the wild gamut of the VUE 30 will likely be a bad choice for those people after accurate colors. If you like a big, punchy image, you’ll probably like it.

Since we can’t control this gamut, perhaps using AdobeRGB as a target will lead to a better result? I decided to give it a try and see if that improves things at all, or if it was still an issue.

Brightness and Contrast AdobeRGB Calibration
POST A COMMENT

95 Comments

View All Comments

  • cheinonen - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    I'm finishing up a review of a 27" Monoprice display now that should run next week. Reply
  • blackoctagon - Thursday, August 22, 2013 - link

    What about the overclockable 27-inch IPS screens, Chris? They can be sourced locally (from US) these days so no need to acquire one from Korea anymore. God knows there's been enough obsession about them during the past 12-18 months...and yet we still don't have truly professional reviews of them Reply
  • repoman27 - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    Can we please stop the silly trend of referring to all displays as [vertical resolution] & "p"? The resolutions and aspect ratios of computer displays are not governed by the ATSC or DVB, and none of these panels are intended to be driven in an interlaced mode. At best the "p" just sits there conveying no useful information, at worst it causes the writer to omit actually useful information.

    [horizontal resolution] & "x" & [vertical resolution] is better, and likely preferable to the rather forgettable initialisms such as "WQXGA". If you are talking about a display with an ATSC or DVB defined resolution and want to use the "p" nomenclature, at least include the maximum refresh rate, since this will definitely be a concern with the initial wave of UHDTV panels.
    Reply
  • blackoctagon - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    You're right of course, but typing 1440p is a lot quicker than 2560X1440. Not to mention the fact that pretty much everyone knows (or should know) what 1080p/1440p/1600p is shorthand for in the context of computer monitors. Reply
  • piroroadkill - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    I agree.

    The p is totally hopeless information. Pointless trend. Even worse, when people have described 1920x1200 tablets as "1080p" or "Full HD". I don't want a 1920x1080 screen necessarily, but a 1920x1200 one is a more compelling ratio.
    Reply
  • Impulses - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    Alluding to the new Nexus 7 there? I had a chuckle when I saw Google use both terms on the official Play store page, right alongside the 1920x1200 listed res. It's like the average consumer can't even be counted on to remember more than one number anymore or even assume larger = better (probably why 4K has emerged as a label, anything more technically accurate would just go in one ear and out the other). Reply
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, August 21, 2013 - link

    4k emerged as a term years ago in high end professional video circles because all but one of the resolutions used were 4096 pixels across; the aspect ratio was varied solely by changing the vertical resolution. From there it just trickled down; we geeks read about it on gadget blogs/etc and lusted after stuff that would support it while costing less than our homes and gradually popularized it as the next big thing. Meanwhile, and unsurprisingly the TV people settled on the slightly smaller quadHD standard since it has less implementation/back compatability issues. Reply
  • blackoctagon - Thursday, August 22, 2013 - link

    I think you're being overly fussy. Even John Carmack casually uses the 'p' when describing the resolution of non-TV displays (just heard him do so on the QuakeCon keynote) Reply
  • 7beauties - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    Since this is an IPS panel, it probably goes without saying that its refresh rate is just 60Hz. The response time of 7ms is borderline if you're a gamer. What's most disappointing to me is that it has CCFL backlighting, making the display heavier, hotter, thicker, and less power efficient. Most current LCD's use the newer LED backlighting, so this is the LCD equivalent of paying luxury price for a car that's carburetered. I'll hold out for when OLED's take hold and become affordable. Thank you. Reply
  • DanNeely - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    Except for the most expensive sort, LED backlighting cannot match a *good* CCFL for color gamut. While the lack of an sRGB mode limits the VUE 30 somewhat their backlight choice indicates they're going for the pro market where color accuracy is more important than the equivalent of an hours pay/year in extra power use or an increase in thickness that no one but a silly fanboi would care about. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now