How Bad is 59.8% sRGB?

[Guest]

Reviews for a certain laptop have said the model has 59.8 sRGB coverage. The current monitor I use (Samsung px2370) claims to have 100% coverage, so I'm wondering how 59.8% coverage will compare. Will I notice the difference?

My primary use of this laptop will not be editing photos, but if I were to edit a few pictures here or there, or watch movies, etc., will I notice the poor coverage, or is it something I shouldn't worry about?

 

[basroil]

59.8% sRGB is absolute shit, even simple web-browsing will be affected by that! Don't get anything less than 80%, and avoid anything less than 95% unless absolutely necessary.

 

[Guest]

59.8% sRGB is absolute shit, even simple web-browsing will be affected by that! Don't get anything less than 80%, and avoid anything less than 95% unless absolutely necessary.

Point taken! Thanks for the input.

 

[kaiteck]

Where do you find 59.8% sRGB...

 

[Guest]

Where do you find 59.8% sRGB...

I was reading this review of the Lenovo Ideapad 500 and saw this video of the Lenovo Ideapad 510s.

The review claims that the "unacceptable" sRGB coverage is only relevant for professionals.

 

[kaiteck]

Where do you find 59.8% sRGB...

I was reading this review of the Lenovo Ideapad 500 and saw this video of the Lenovo Ideapad 510s.

The review claims that the "unacceptable" sRGB coverage is only relevant for professionals.

No, what the review is trying to say is that AdobeRGB scale is only relevant for professionals.
Anything below 100% sRGB is going to affect all consumers since web contents supports 100% sRGB.

Anything above 100% sRGB, is going to be using AdobeRGB/NTSC scale where is only relevant for photo editors.

 

[basroil]

No, what the review is trying to say is that AdobeRGB scale is only relevant for professionals.
Anything below 100% sRGB is going to affect all consumers since web contents supports 100% sRGB.

Anything above 100% sRGB, is going to be using AdobeRGB/NTSC scale where is only relevant for photo editors.

Yup, that's exactly how it should be, though true 100% is difficult to achieve, usually 95% plus is expected, and most monitors offer 99%. Except of course that NTSC coverage is not quite the same space as sRGB and some monitors that support 100% NTSC don't support 100% sRGB. About 72% of the NTSC area overlaps the sRGB area, so if it says 99% sRGB and 72% NTSC, it's a mostly acceptable monitor. AdobeRGB is a superset of sRGB so that's fine to compare though, anything above 100% sRGB will be reflected in aRGB.

http://www.eizo.com/library/basics/lcd_monitor_color_gamut/ has a pretty thorough explanation

 

[demoth]

Anything above 65% is fine and I would actually recommend the LG 32MA68HY-P 32-Inch IPS Monitor for budget MMO/RPG gamers who want a big and beautiful screen even though it is a new release with only 72% sRGB and you may see some rough edges from a foot away since it is only 1080p and huge. This is because it is retailing UNDER $200 and will look noticeably nicer than the previously $400 27 inch TN panels many gamers are using from a few years ago. Unless you are photo editing or doing something you need exact color reproduction on, it won't matter much. However, if spending 300+ on something under 34 inches, you should expect 100%. Having said that, under 60% would be a problem for me.

 

[basroil]

Anything above 65% is fine and I would actually recommend the LG 32MA68HY-P 32-Inch IPS Monitor for budget MMO/RPG gamers who want a big and beautiful screen even though it is a new release with only 72% sRGB and you may see some rough edges from a foot away since it is only 1080p and huge. This is because it is retailing UNDER $200 and will look noticeably nicer than the previously $400 27 inch TN panels many gamers are using from a few years ago. Unless you are photo editing or doing something you need exact color reproduction on, it won't matter much. However, if spending 300+ on something under 34 inches, you should expect 100%. Having said that, under 60% would be a problem for me.

For ~$130 you can buy 24" Asus and LG monitors with near 100% sRGB... paying $200 for 72% is an absolute ripoff!

 

[demoth]

LoL. Whatever. I could never game on a 24" screen long term (anymore) nor could I stand the bezel bar in a multi-screen setup in immersive RPGs. We are talking about a 32" IPS monitor under $200. It's like saying, 'My Yugo came with a Bluetooth stereo system and I paid $1,000 less than you're Lexus. You got ripped dude.'

 

[kaiteck]

LoL. Whatever. I could never game on a 24" screen long term (anymore) nor could I stand the bezel bar in a multi-screen setup in immersive RPGs. We are talking about a 32" IPS monitor under $200. It's like saying, 'My Yugo came with a Bluetooth stereo system and I paid $1,000 less than you're Lexus. You got ripped dude.'

There is 32" IPS with 95+% sRGB under $200.

Edit: I think there's a typo in LG official website. It should be 72% NTSC not sRGB. If its 72% sRGB, it can't be ips panel.

 

[basroil]

LoL. Whatever. I could never game on a 24" screen long term (anymore) nor could I stand the bezel bar in a multi-screen setup in immersive RPGs. We are talking about a 32" IPS monitor under $200. It's like saying, 'My Yugo came with a Bluetooth stereo system and I paid $1,000 less than you're Lexus. You got ripped dude.'

There is 32" IPS with 100% sRGB under $200.

Not like anyone really gives a shit about a 32" 1080p display that ISN'T used as a TV. The original post was about a laptop, so constant clamoring over 32" screens is pointless!