The Samsung Synchmaster 970P is a 19 inch home/office model and is not specifically designated by Samsung as intended for pro graphics applications. That may be why you have not seen any commentary about its use by photographers.

Thanks David. One of the better reviews of this display was from Tom's Hardware. I found it after I posted my original question last night. They gave it very high marks for colour reproduction and rated it higher than the NEC 1980Fxi and Viewsonic VP930, both of which are supposed to be very good for photographic work.

My choice of which to buy is between these three so I was hoping someone may have already taken the plunge.

BobF,

The Samsung 970P appears to be the top of the line 19" Samsung monitor. Tom's Hardware may be a good site to look for information on general computing and gaming, but it doesn't address the needs of the color-critical user. For instance, while the Spring 2006 LCD monitor review includes a couple of NEC monitors, it doesn't include the better IPS monitors in the 90 Series, the best NEC monitors for color critical use.

Frans Waterlander

While I appreciate the time you took to respond Frans, I'd like to hear from people who've actually used the displays in question. You know I have little use for your theoretical ramblings. The Tom's Hardware reviews do, in fact, discuss colour gamut reproduction which is important in photo editing work.

By the "90 series" I assume you mean displays such as the 1990, 2090 and 2190. The 1980Fxi, as with these other displays is compatible with NEC's SpectraView II kit, which puts it in the class of displays NEC considers of sufficient quality for photo editing. Given NEC's position in the industry, I'd consider their view of the display to be fairly valid.

I checked the review at Tom's Hardware and although positive measurement and performance evaluation, the one critical consideration is what color controls are available to calibrate and adjust to a profiled state that supports photographic image reproduction. From using and testing Samsung's larger 244T and the similar but smaller 214T, both of those models can be adjusted, calibrated and profiled effectively to do precise color editing of photo images.

So I would suggest going to the Samsung site and compare the specifications between the 970P and 214T to see if the adjustment controls are comparable. The URL is:http://www.samsung.com/Products/Monitor/LCD_Digital/LS19VDPXHQXAA.asp

PS Even if someone does report having a Samsung 970P and likes it, how do you know if what they like is what you need?

BobF,

You're welcome! Tom's Hardware reviews include Delta E and gamut information, but they don't review monitors specifically aimed at the color critical segment. While the 1980FXi works with the SpectraView II calibrator tool, it is aimed at the financial market and is old technology with outdated circuitry and backlighting. You should look at the newer IPS versions of the NEC Series 90 monitors in 19, 20 and 21" sizes.

Frans Waterlander

Thanks David. I have done that much. The 970 does have the DDC adjustment capabilities that would be required.

You're right about what other people think about the monitor and that their opinions may not suit my needs. I'm not necessarily going to base my purchase decision on that alone. It's just one factor in the decision making process. I do have a question for you though: Since we agree that what one person thinks of a product may not be applicable to someone else needs why do you bother doing the product reviews and why should the readers pay any attention to them? Just having a little fun David, no offense intended.

Bob,

"Since we agree that what one person thinks of a product may not be applicable to someone else needs why do you bother doing the product reviews and why should the readers pay any attention to them?"

Fair enough question. My answer, and I think the answer some of my colleagues might also give you is: that although I am an individual like yourself, unlike most enthusiasts and even many professionals, I work with new products , two or three new ones each month, and this is a full-time occupation, an advantage most individuals do not have in working with so many different products (take LCD's for instance, I have thoroughly tested at least a dozen new LCD's for pro-graphics use in the last couple of years). Second I am not evaluating and describing from a position of personal, individual preference and use, but as objectively as possible on the basis of a consistent testing regimen specifically applied to find out what the product can and cannot accomplish. And third, but not final, these evaluations are augmented by over 30 years as a photo magazine journalist's cumulative experience, not just with hundreds and hundreds of different products, but also involving 1000's of exchanges with individual photographers, which has provided at least somewhat of an understanding of what photographers needs and requirements are relative to different kinds of products and interests. In other words I approach this as a dedicated full-time professional with no other agenda than to serve my readership with the best information I can acquire by my activities. My criteria for recommending a product or several is that I have tested and used that product or its equivalent and I have been able to make it work for me consistent with what should be expected relative to what the manufacturer intended. If I can't make a product work for me I don't recommend it and don't mention it voluntarily.