New ASUS PG279Q 1440p 27" G-Sync IPS

[digitaldurandal]

I had zero issues with my Acer XB270HU. I think it was overhyped problems, you only see people with problems post on internet, never the % of good.

Reviewers noted issues with uniformity. So I don't think your supposition is correct this time.

 

[moonbogg]

I had zero issues with my Acer XB270HU. I think it was overhyped problems, you only see people with problems post on internet, never the % of good.

Do you still have it? If so I have a seriously OCD inspired favor to ask of you

 

[ocre]

Reviewers noted issues with uniformity. So I don't think your supposition is correct this time.

That sort of thing is panel specific, from one to the next. that is why every monitor needs its own calibration. You should also know that after calibrated, you are not done. Overtime the output will change not only as it ages but even when the room temp changes. The environmental factors play a big role.

The are tools such as x-rite that can go a long way in calibrating with amassing results. If reviewers are using tools and spectrometers, the results they get may not even be detectable by a person looking directly at the panel. These tools are for photography and used to find the best of the best color. We are talking about shades of colors so close, it needs a spectrometer to detect.

The fact that these gaming monitors can be calibrated to such high level, it is absolutely a plus. But it is a gaming monitor. Those still screens that are used to calibrate and to test colors, its nothing like gaming at 120hz where the image changes up to 144 times a second.
You can have a monitor have the best color and uniformity on these still images but how accurate will it be with 100 different images in a second?
See, these gaming monitors are not trying to be the best color and best still image reproduction, they are made to be as accurate as possible while changing states in a flash. It is a different world.

The best picture/color monitors are usually not good at fast transitions. These are total different worlds. There is a lot more to it but check out how overdrive works on a panel just for a small taste.

Another thing I want to say something about some of the tools and digital spectrometers that are set on the screen for calibration, they are looking at the pixels dead on. In a straight line, directly in front of them. If you are using the tool and have it on the screen in the lower left corner, a gamer with a 27" screen would need to bend down and put one eye directly in line with that corner to see that exact color. That is right, the angle of view has an effect on the color you will see. So, color uniformity is much more complicated. With a large screen, if you are gaming and aren't too far away, you have viewing angles. Think about that.

Depending on where, how far back you sit, the will be a difference. Its just unavoidable.

Basically, what I am saying is that it is not simple. Gaming monitors are built to be as accurate as possible while transitioning as fast as possible. Uniformity, colors, calabration depends not only on the environment but where you are setting. And the experience is subjective to e individual. Comparing a still images cannot tell you how accurate or pleasant constantly changing frames every 7ms. Today, spectrometers and color calibration tools just can't tell you how accurate your colors are on pixels changing at a rate of 7ms, and if they could......,i would think that gaming monitors would do pretty darn good there.

I think the question should be, how accurate are the colors in images changing that fast?

Gaming monitors are built mainly for one specific task, to make the gaming experience as awesome as it can be. I think the only way to measure how well it does that is to try it out. A person gaming on it, they ought to know. Especially if they have other monitors to compare it to. The spectrometer might say the color shift isn't all that good but the gamer setting back will see the images from his perspective, which may not seem off to them at all.

Gaming monitors side by side, a reviewer actually playing games on them, now that would make the best reviews.

 

[moonbogg]

That sort of thing is panel specific, from one to the next. that is why every monitor needs its own calibration. You should also know that after calibrated, you are not done. Overtime the output will change not only as it ages but even when the room temp changes. The environmental factors play a big role.

The are tools such as x-rite that can go a long way in calibrating with amassing results. If reviewers are using tools and spectrometers, the results they get may not even be detectable by a person looking directly at the panel. These tools are for photography and used to find the best of the best color. We are talking about shades of colors so close, it needs a spectrometer to detect.

The fact that these gaming monitors can be calibrated to such high level, it is absolutely a plus. But it is a gaming monitor. Those still screens that are used to calibrate and to test colors, its nothing like gaming at 120hz where the image changes up to 144 times a second.
You can have a monitor have the best color and uniformity on these still images but how accurate will it be with 100 different images in a second?
See, these gaming monitors are not trying to be the best color and best still image reproduction, they are made to be as accurate as possible while changing states in a flash. It is a different world.

The best picture/color monitors are usually not good at fast transitions. These are total different worlds. There is a lot more to it but check out how overdrive works on a panel just for a small taste.

Another thing I want to say something about some of the tools and digital spectrometers that are set on the screen for calibration, they are looking at the pixels dead on. In a straight line, directly in front of them. If you are using the tool and have it on the screen in the lower left corner, a gamer with a 27" screen would need to bend down and put one eye directly in line with that corner to see that exact color. That is right, the angle of view has an effect on the color you will see. So, color uniformity is much more complicated. With a large screen, if you are gaming and aren't too far away, you have viewing angles. Think about that.

Depending on where, how far back you sit, the will be a difference. Its just unavoidable.

Basically, what I am saying is that it is not simple. Gaming monitors are built to be as accurate as possible while transitioning as fast as possible. Uniformity, colors, calabration depends not only on the environment but where you are setting. And the experience is subjective to e individual. Comparing a still images cannot tell you how accurate or pleasant constantly changing frames every 7ms. Today, spectrometers and color calibration tools just can't tell you how accurate your colors are on pixels changing at a rate of 7ms, and if they could......,i would think that gaming monitors would do pretty darn good there.

I think the question should be, how accurate are the colors in images changing that fast?

Gaming monitors are built mainly for one specific task, to make the gaming experience as awesome as it can be. I think the only way to measure how well it does that is to try it out. A person gaming on it, they ought to know. Especially if they have other monitors to compare it to. The spectrometer might say the color shift isn't all that good but the gamer setting back will see the images from his perspective, which may not seem off to them at all.

Gaming monitors side by side, a reviewer actually playing games on them, now that would make the best reviews.

Look at this nasty uniformity. You don't need an instrument to tell the left gray bar is darker and has a yellow tint to it compared to the right. This is the Acer XB270HU that I have.
The uniformity issue here is caused by non uniform brightness. That means they either used a crappy diffuser, or assembled the thing cheaply and quickly and didn't care to make sure it was flat and parallel. That will cause shadowing, such as you see on this panel.

 

[ocre]

Yeah,
But I trust what you say way more than the picture. Your camera can only be so accurate and it has imaging processing, then there is my screen.......the ipad and its bias. Nothing is exact or perfect when recreated.

There is nothing better than real life, right in front of you. So what you say about it, that's more what I care about.

I never had one. Do you think they are all that bad? Why do some people say its fine?

 

[moonbogg]

Yeah,
But I trust what you say way more than the picture. Your camera can only be so accurate and it has imaging processing, then there is my screen.......the ipad and its bias. Nothing is exact or perfect when recreated.

There is nothing better than real life, right in front of you. So what you say about it, that's more what I care about.

I never had one. Do you think they are all that bad? Why do some people say its fine?

I don't think they are all that bad, but I am willing to bet most of them have the shadowing effect, but in a different pattern and to varying degrees. Its like if you shake a bed sheet and lay if flat, it will have different wrinkles each time. That's what is happening with this panel's diffuser and backlight consistency I suspect.
Most people don't notice it because they just don't pay attention, but once you see something like this, you are DOOMED to see it forever.