February 5, 2017 at 11:23 pm #41555
I recently received a Nov revision of the C24FG70 monitor, and the calibration sheet says 2.03 for Gamma. That’s pretty horrible, isn’t it? Should I send the screen back and hope for a better result? Would setting the monitor to Mode3 for Gamma correct it without any other visual issues?February 5, 2017 at 11:26 pm #41557
Yes that is indeed horrible. The variation is gamma on your unit compared to our sample is concerning. Does it say ‘ Gamma = 2.2 +/-10% ‘ for the ‘Spec’ column in the calibration sheet? Mode 3 on our unit did boost the gamma by around 0.2 and didn’t mess things up with regards to the curve (it was displaced but not scewed, if that makes sense). So in theory that might equate to ‘2.2’ on your unit, but it’s hard to say.February 5, 2017 at 11:45 pm #41558
Yep, 2.2 +/- 10%.
Here’s a pic: http://i.imgur.com/dpMaQwn.jpg
I could be mistaken, but the Grayscale Calibration looks a lil’ funky compared to your unit, too.February 6, 2017 at 5:00 pm #41561
I’m thinking my model has unusual levels of backlight bleed for a VA panel. I took some pictures, but they seem to be exaggerating the effect a bit as it’s not quite that noticeable in action, although it’s definitely there.
At least compared to the picture you guys took (https://pcmonitors.info/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/C24FG70-bleed.jpg) I’m either doing something horribly wrong with the camera, or my model is awful.February 6, 2017 at 6:24 pm #41562
Well yes, your pictures look massively over-exposed. Which is a common issue when users try to take images to show backlight bleed. And what purpose does it serve if it’s not an accurate representation? Just use something better and more accurate than a camera (your eyes) and decide whether, during your normal use, it’s an issue.
Having said that, our sample was rather good and I would expect a bit better than average. But I also doubt yours looks anywhere near as bad to the eye as it does in the photos. If you’re using a sensible brightness level, at least. If it bothers you during normal use, then use that as added ammunition to drive your desire to return based on the gamma issues as well. Otherwise just try to use the monitor and be happy.
P.S. I’ve merged your threads as I like to keep things together. These threads aren’t the sort that gather much traction unless they can become less specific (in this case it could be ‘quality control issues’). I have re-titled it. I do appreciate the feedback as well, it’s always disappointing to read about cases like this. And sadly I doubt you’ll be alone.February 9, 2017 at 3:26 pm #41581
Got a new c24fg70FQIXCI in my country (Russia). The model was made in december 2016(!). I cant see any purple or green spots. No freesync flickering (didnt tried it with impulsive scanning together). Could you help me analyse brochure about calibration? First that i can see, the gamma rating is not perfect, but could you tell me something about graphs? https://www.dropbox.com/s/88rokk2p58q9nx6/Scan_20170209_124734.jpg?dl=0February 9, 2017 at 3:27 pm #41583
So, i have managed to see purple trail in CSGO, but didn’t managed to see any artifacts on this picture on desktop (purple or dark green, but may be there’s some thing – it’s hard for my eyes to trace zoomed text on this picture, may be it’s some kind of bad ghosting).February 9, 2017 at 3:31 pm #41587
There’s nothing of concern on your calibration sheet. Gamma tracking is decent enough, closer to ‘2.2’ than anything and no worrying deviations reported elsewhere on the sheet. There is always going to be some degree of overshoot as covered in the review. What you describe is likely a minor case compared to what users were observing on earlier revisions, so if it doesn’t bother you be happy and stop looking for issues. And the motion clarity simply won’t be good enough to accurately read fast-moving text unless you’ve got the strobe backlight mode active (‘Fast’ or ‘Faster’ on the Samsung for ‘Response Time’). The same applies to even the fastest 144Hz models, the perceived blur is simply too great under normal sample and hold operation (i.e. without a strobe backlight mode) to clearly read moving rapidly moving text.February 9, 2017 at 5:49 pm #41589
Thank you very much for your response! I’m really happy with this monitor, because there is no other 144Hz 1080p monitor with freesync & anti-motion blur feature together. Finally, could you answer a few questions?
1.How do you think, is the .flux has any negative impact on performance of impulsive scanning or user’s health with turned on together?
2.Could you tell me something about contrast influence while using impulsive scanning? (Can we reach a lower strain while lowering contrast?)
3.What overall image quality do you like more, xg2401 or c24fg70 (except view angles)?February 9, 2017 at 6:43 pm #41590
1) F.lux simply changes what the GPU is outputting, it has no effect on the monitor itself
2) Not sure what you’re asking here, but it’s probably answered in the relevant section of the review.
3) If you read the respective reviews the answer to that is quite clear. The Samsung offers richer colour output, has superior contrast and superior colour consistency. The responsiveness is the only area where the ViewSonic has an advantage really.February 9, 2017 at 6:50 pm #41592
In the second question i meant lower eyes strain.February 9, 2017 at 7:03 pm #41593
Inducing flickering is hardly beneficial in that respect, so you have to be more specific. And it’s also mentioned in the review that the brightness is high unless you reduce contrast when ‘Impulsive Scanning’ is active. Which is hardly ideal, especially if you’re trying to reduce brightness significantly.February 10, 2017 at 6:10 am #41602
The reason why i ask this question is that i feel less strain on my eyes while reducing the contrast in fast response mode. The image feels more paled and less painful to watch. I use this mode at night tO play csgo and i am trying to find some way to reduce the negative impact on my eyes. Sorry for my English.February 10, 2017 at 7:58 am #41603
To be more specific. If i lower the brightness then flickering caused by PWM will increase negative impact on eyes, doesn’t it? So if .flux reduces brightness => it may cause worse impact on eyes. I have checked my old samsung hd2333:
1. Decreased brightness to 90 (with <90 it causes massive flickering appeared on a phone camera)
2. Sequentially set .flux color temp to 2700K, which led to massive flickering, increased as far as i lowered temp. (Strips have been thicker and darker on a phone camera).
Excuse me for spamming over and over again, i wish there could be an “edit” feature.February 10, 2017 at 12:32 pm #41604
The monitor doesn’t use PWM, so I don’t see your point. You can’t determine ‘levels of flickering’ using a camera because they automatically compensate for various different things including light levels and colour temperature. F.lux obviously changes the image and the camera will adjust its parameters, but it does not affect the backlight of the monitor or anything else on the monitor itself. It is all GPU-level change. The only possible exception to that is if ‘Dynamic Contrast’ or a similar feature is enabled on the monitor.
Some users do prefer lower contrast because it reduces the amount of time the eye spends accomodating to changing lighting conditions. It’s exactly how the ‘Eye Saver’ mode on the monitor works – refer to the review.
There is an edit feature, by the way, but you need to be quick (it’s locked after 60 minutes, as a spam prevention measure to stop people adding links or other content after I’ve checked a post).
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.