NEC EA294WMi Review
by Chris Heinonen on February 10, 2014 6:00 AM ESTAll calibration measurements are done using SpectraCal’s CalMAN 5.1.2 software with a custom workflow. Measurements are done using a C6 colorimeter that is first profiled against an i1Pro spectrometer to ensure accurate results. There are two sets of targets we use. Pre-calibration and our first calibration aim for 200 cd/m^2 with an sRGB gamut and a gamma of 2.2. This is a common real-world setting for a display. The final target changes the light level target to 80 cd/m^2 and the gamma curve to the tougher sRGB standard.
The EA294WMi features a number of preset modes. On my sample they all ran a bit warm with the 6500K setting measuring closer to 6100K. Using the 7000K preset gave me a color temperature that was closer to the 6503K ideal value. It still runs a bit warm, at 6413K, but that is very close to 6503K for not being calibrated.
If you look at the charts you’ll see that the color temperature, while having the correct value, is excessively green. There is a large push that grows worse as the intensity increases. This is why just looking at the raw temperature value is really pointless, as you can get to 6503K without having an ideal balance of red, green and blue. Looking at the individual RGB breakdown can show you the actual accuracy of the color temperature.
Pre-Calibration |
Post-Calibration, 200 cd/m^2 |
Post-Calibration, 80 cd/m^2 |
|
White Level (cd/m^2) | 201.85 | 198.96 | 82.427 |
Black Level (cd/m^2) | 0.2024 | 0.2061 | 0.0867 |
Contrast Ratio | 997:1 | 965:1 | 951:1 |
Gamma (Average) | 2.1847 | 2.1959 | 2.493 |
Color Temperature | 6419K | 6580K | 6476K |
Grayscale dE2000 | 5.9004 | 0.6941 | 0.922 |
Color Checker dE2000 | 4.1192 | 1.1519 | 1.2513 |
Saturations dE2000 | 3.6287 | 1.1265 | 1.1144 |
The gamma is good overall and tracks close to the 2.2 target value. It has a little bit of a rise at the top and bottom, but the deviation is fairly small overall. As you see in the Grayscale dE2000 values, the incorrect RGB balance shows up as very visible errors with an average dE2000 that approaches 6.0.
Color accuracy is a bit better than the grayscale. The saturations dE2000 average is 3.6 and the color checker average dE2000 is 4.1. However the more saturated reds are over-saturated which leads to skin tones having a slightly sunburnt look. Blue is a bit under-saturated and cyan has an incorrect tint. These overall numbers are good but issues are still visible on screen.
Post-calibration the 200 cd/m^2 target improves a lot. The gamma tracks perfectly and so does the RGB balance. Our average grayscale dE2000 is an invisible 0.69 after calibration. Colors improve with the tint of cyan being correct now. The EA294WMi lacks the internal LUT of NEC's professional monitors but the performance still improves. The main remaining flaw comes from yellow being over-saturated which pushes it and some orange shades above the visible error limit of 3.0 dE2000. Both the color dE2000 averages are very good in the end.
When we target 80 cd/m^2 and the sRGB gamma curve our results are virtually identical. For these tests I bumped up the number of points that CalMAN samples to the maximum possible and will do this on future reviews as well. We see that the RGB response is very level across all measured values and the gamma tracks almost perfectly. The CIE chart for saturations is harder to make out as there are too many targets, but we see that the color error gets higher as the saturation percentage increases. Yellow and Green are the worse offenders here, as we expected from the CIE charts, while the other colors are all close to 2.0 or below.
Overall the post-calibration performance is impressive. The pre-calibration numbers are not great due to the poor white balance and so for ideal viewing you will want to calibrate it. Other displays offer a better out-of-box experience than the NEC.
37 Comments
View All Comments
FractinJex - Monday, February 10, 2014 - link
Ever since moving to 1440p sometime back I wont go back 1080p...is just old now..the only trhing imo holding back 1440p from being mainstream is the fact that you need a HPU to use it as the intel igpu is crap and same witht he amd....keep hearing about 4k this and that yet most don't even understand those craphole panels only do 30hz lol people are skipping and thinking they can go straight to 1080p to 4k over the next year or two.....nope not gonna happen get yourself a good 1440p Korean pnael or even two and be set...don't wait for crappy slow manufactuare to release some overpriced non sense like Asus is doing with the 1440p AOG crapy TN panels and ripping everyone a new one lol 1080p trash
jaydee - Monday, February 10, 2014 - link
Almost twice the cost of the under-rated AOC Q2963OMhttp://www.amazon.com/AOC-29-inch-IPS-Q2963PM-21/d...
haikuginger - Monday, February 10, 2014 - link
You mixed up the contrast ratio chart- it's 989:1 at max brightness, and 838:1 at minimum brightness, not the other way around.surt - Monday, February 10, 2014 - link
Where are the LESS wide-aspect displays? I want a nice 16:12 3200x2400 display.ShieTar - Tuesday, February 18, 2014 - link
16:12 is 4:3. Thats not less wide, its legacy.Hrel - Monday, February 10, 2014 - link
We don't need wider displays. We need Hollywood to stop making things wider for NO FUCKING REASON AT ALL!!!!! If you can't fit the shot in a 16:9 frame back up, or stop sucking so hard at your profession.extide - Monday, February 10, 2014 - link
The sad part is, if you notice, in basically anything shot wide (or super wide) the 'important stuff' is all within a 4:3 box in the center, so it can still be viewed on a 4:3 screen properly. Ever notice when you watch the news on widescreen, the news logos in the corner aren't in the far corners, they are in a bit? That is because they are at the edges of where a 4:3 screen would be! So the edge space is all basically wasted!kyuu - Monday, February 10, 2014 - link
There's actually a very good reason movies are shot in widescreen resolutions. It's the same reason people generally do multi-monitor setups that extend horizontally, rather than stacking two or three monitors vertically. Think about it.A 21:9 monitor like this is a great alternative for a multi-monitor setup for those who don't want to deal with the headaches and bezels.
tim851 - Tuesday, February 11, 2014 - link
Amen!For years, people put two 1280x1024 monitors next to each other. Then 1080p screens show up and it becomes a fucking meme to pretend you're a "professional" who can't work with anything less than 1200p.
So 1440p becomes affordable and people still play this frickin' meme, because 16x9 is the "Devil's AR".
cheinonen - Monday, February 10, 2014 - link
Except 16:9 was picked as a compromise aspect ratio for everything. Academy Ratio (1.37:1) content can fit windowboxed, Scope content(2.39:1) can fit letterboxed, and flat (1.85:1) content will fit almost perfectly. 16:9 wan't created to eliminate choice in aspect ratios, but to provide a good format for all of them. I shouldn't foget 70mm (2.20:1) in here either.Also, I'd like to let artists pick how they want to present things. If they want to use Academy, or Scope, or Flat, that's their choice. The idea that they don't know what they're doing by shooting scope is just laughable as well.