Thinkpads Forum

Hi,

I'm a photographer and do a bit of photomanipulation on my computer. Its crucial that the computer has the correct color rendering.

Will a T61 WXGA+ screen be good for my use?


Best regards

no, The T61s no longer carry the FlexView types of prior machines. For serious photography you should be looking into an external monitor. The ones these days are low quality ones but some will say some are better than others. Samsung/LG/Phillips all make them i think but the quality is in the eye of the beholder.

Sux but that's just how it is. A cheap 19" would be better tha these monitors.

Thanks mate.

What laptop, ~14inch, would you suggest for working with photos, when I dont want a Mac?

propellen wrote:I dont want a Mac?

Macs use the same screens that PC laptops use.

pianowizard wrote: Macs use the same screens that PC laptops use.

Ok, but often the color rendering is different. At least on older Macs.

EDIT:
And i just dont like Macs.hehe.

I'm a photog as well shooting in RAW and processing in CAPTURE NX and then to PS CS3.

The requirements are a good speedy processor, lots of RAM, and a fast 7200 RPM hard drive.

You can configure your T61 for the above.

As for the best screen, since you don't choose which brand screen you get, I would calibrate with a good LCD calibrator from Getrag or Spyder.

I use a T60p with 15.4" WSGXA and the colors are adequate (it has a Philips LCD).

Good luck!

CJ

cj3209, thanks mate!
I actually didnt know about the LCD calibration software.

So, there is nothing agains me purchasing a T61 for image editing? (Using Win XP, 3GB ram and Spyder LCD calibration)

propellen wrote:cj3209, thanks mate!
I actually didnt know about the LCD calibration software.

So, there is nothing agains me purchasing a T61 for image editing? (using win XP ofcourse)

Not at all, a T61 with a 15.4" LCD is fine for image editing but do invest in a decent LCD calibrator.

As an aside on the older Flexview screens, when they were plentiful some years ago, many thought these screens were washed out and had funky colors. I used one and thought they were too dim to be useful in any image editing work. It's interesting that now that they are rare, people think of them as the best LCDs that thinkpads offered.

People are funny...

Good luck!
CJ

Much appreciated, mate!

i have a t61 wxga+ screen... and I would have to say that it's somewhat mediocre. the brightness is just lacking on this screen. i would say that a 15.4" in screen would me much more appropriate for photo editing.

Really, a macbook pro (with LED backlight) with Aperture 2.0 is probably the professional way to go for a laptop for serious photography.

but since you're not going to for a mac... how about one of those sony vaio laptops... they have really nice lcd screens.

Gotta have options and although I used to be an apple fanboy some years back, I just hated the sluggishness of my old 15" AL G4 Powerbook as well as PS CS and most other adobe applications on my PB.

I've never used Aperture but Adobe's Lightroom coupled with PS CS 3 is pretty slick.

Good luck!

CJ

cj3209 wrote:As an aside on the older Flexview screens, when they were plentiful some years ago, many thought these screens were washed out and had funky colors. I used one and thought they were too dim to be useful in any image editing work. It's interesting that now that they are rare, people think of them as the best LCDs that thinkpads offered.

People are funny...

Good luck!
CJ

Not hoping to sound like a "fan boy", but objectively it is the best LCD that was ever offered in thinkpads or maybe in any notebook whatsoever, in color chromaticity, contrast and viewing angles. At one point Dell offered what they marked as "Ultrasharp" in their notebooks which was actually ok too.
As to dimnes - people generally recommend no more than 150 cd/m^2 to avoid eye strain at the normal working distance, so i actually don't see the problem.
Sure an external LCD is better (except most TN).

I would advice against the 14" Widescreen T61 - the contrast ratio is about horrible 200:1 according to:
http://www.notebookcheck.com/Test-Lenov ... 131.0.html
If it was measured in the official way of measuring CR, it would be 184:1 but we're just lucky that they incorrectly choose the highest brightness and the lowest brightness as the reference.

Remember: no matter the backlighting tech. the chromaticity of laptop displays is generally not as good as desktop LCDs. LED won't help on those figures either. The problem is the raw panel itself.

yes.... i agree adobe lightroom is pretty slick.... i used it because i don't have a mac and can't go the aperture 2.0 route.

can i ask if you're shooting with a Canon or a Nikon?

i'm in the middle of deciding whether or not to sell my nikon d80 for a canon 40d or getting a nikon d300...

traderjoes wrote:yes.... i agree adobe lightroom is pretty slick.... i used it because i don't have a mac and can't go the aperture 2.0 route.

can i ask if you're shooting with a Canon or a Nikon?

i'm in the middle of deciding whether or not to sell my nikon d80 for a canon 40d or getting a nikon d300...

I use a Nikon D2x but if I had to start all over again, I'd go the Canon way. But, shhh...don't tell my friends...

In all seriousness, Canon is just simply ahead of Nikon, although Nikon's caught up a bit with their new FF cameras and some decent lenses.


CJ

Cool, thx for the recommend CJ. I kinda agree. I do like d80's ergonomics... but looking at the high ISO image quality (of JPEGs, I rarely shoot in RAW because I don't like to do any post processing) on dpreview.com and dcresource.com, you kinda have to admit the image quality of the canon 40d is still a bit better than the nikon d300 even. nikon's algorithm just blurs the images by default and you lose quite a bit of detail in the images... where as canon takes a different approach..... they preserve the details at the expense of showing a bit more chromatic noise...which can be corrected using something like noise ninja or neat image.

so the next question is... should i go 40D or looks for a used 5D and go all the way with a full frame?

We're going off topic but unless you need shooting speed and/or a zillion shots per second or primarily shoot telephoto, I would go FF. But that's because I was trained using the 'classic' lenses. In the old days, 35mm was considered a wide-angle lens. With the 1.5x factor of my D2x, a 35mm lens is basically a 'normal' 50mm - it just messes me up.

Everyone I know loves the 5D. I'd like to know when Canon is going to upgrade the 5D?

If a used 5D is available, I would look into it. A good Canon site is Fred Miranda's photo site: http://www.fredmiranda.com/ - I think you have to register though to post / respond to posts.

Good luck!

CJ

@ traderjoes and cj3209: please keep the discussion on-topic.   photography gear and software should be discussed in the off-topic forum.   thank you.

fwiw i'm a pro photog and CPS member so i might chime in if i see a good discussion going.

thanks for your cooperation.