The following explanation is absolutely 100% true for all brands of screens - I have an Eizo CG242W & before I purchased it I was considering some of the Quato screens & I've read all of their white papers & documentation regarding this subject.
The reason Quato suggest to calibrate the screen to 5800K is because when any screen is set to a WP of 5000K, the appearance is very yellow & somewhat 'dingy' looking, especially when compared next to a viewing cabinet with a 5000K light source. Research was done on many people & it was found that when the WP of the screen was set to about 5800K, this gave by far the best visual match to a white sheet of paper in a 5000K viewing cabinet. This is even more obvious when the screen luminance is around 100-120cdm, not the ridiculous 160cdm specified by the ISO spec. And this can be very easily tested if one has a colorimeter or spectrophotometer & a hardware calibration screen. Set the screen to 5000K or D50 WP & it really looks far too yellow - not a good visual match to a 5000K viewing booth at all. Set the screen WP around 5800K though, and the visual match is greatly improved. You can try this on a non-hardware calibration screen but obviously the WP will not be anywhere near as accurate.
Anyway, hope that clears up any misunderstanding you had about the quality of Quato screens & a basic insight into softproofing with hardware calibration screens. So don't give up on Quato just yet, they certainly have some fantastic screens in their range & with their top-end models are definitely the equal to just about any Eizo/NEC/etc hardware calibration screen.
Calibrated monitor, then inkjet print.
The holy grail of digital printing is to be able to get the image that you print to appear as close as possible to what your screen displays. The first ingredient in this quest is to ensure that your screen is properly profiled. This was once a mysterious and expensive prospect, but now most experienced photographers understand that they need to buy a colorimeter for a hundred dollars or so, and profile their screen on a regular basis.
Of course the second step is to print using accurate profiles. These may be available from your printer or paper maker. Preferably you should have custom profiles made for your printer, your paper and your inks. Unless you frequently switch papers this isn't terribly expensive to have done. There are quite a few services online that will do this for you. The best profiles though are likely ones that you make yourself, but this requires spending at least $1,000 and involves the purchase of a spectrophotometer and accompanying software. For anyone using different printers and testing new papers as they come out, this ultimately ends up not being that big an expense.
Regardless of where the profiles come from though, using them is a must for any serious printing.
But, even with a proper profile for your particular screen, as well as printer / paper / ink combinations, many photographers are often disappointed with the results. What appears on screen simply doesn't match what is seen on the print, especially with regard to colour intensity and saturation.
There is a solution, and it's known as soft proofing.
Soft proofing is simply a mechanism that allows you to view on your computer monitor what your print will look like when it is on paper. A specific paper. That paper and ink combination has been defined by the profile that you or someone else has made for your printer / paper and ink combination. When a printer profile is made the colour of the paper is one of the factors that is figured into the profile, because the spectrophotometer is reading the combination of the ink, and the paper that lies beneath it.
here is full article for soft proofing:
[URL="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/soft-proofing.shtml"]Understanding Soft Proofing[/URL]
and some tips for Soft Proofing: [URL="http://www.multiupload.com/VMNDN07MHJ"]here[/URL]
Better digital proof best color/EFI/GMG and EPSON9800.
Well said, JimmyB. liminous landscape is a great site for photographers to learn something.
For more great info and techniques (and general inspiration) try John Paul Caponigro's site:
Very useful lessons at: www.johnpaulcaponigro.com/downloads/technique/technique.php
including excellent soft proofing techniques.
Sign up for the newsletter - well worth it.
I would always go for an Eizo monitor but they are of course expensive.
Best is Eizo...
but look this list u can find some for u.
Just to add another reading suggestion: [URL="http://www.fogra.org/index.php?menuid=231&downloadid=103&reporeid=0"]http://www.fogra.org/index.php?menuid=231&downloadid=103&reporeid=0[/URL]
That's really good lecture.
And it's also in German. For those who need it.
And another interesting one: [URL="http://artimaging.rit.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Hard-copy-v-soft-copy-paper.pdf"]http://artimaging.rit.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Hard-copy-v-soft-copy-paper.pdf[/URL]
I use LaCie Electron 22 Blue IV. I have not had the opportunity to compare the EIZO and LaCie. I read a few reviews of monitors. The authors write that monitors the LaCie reliable. This is the essential quality of the fact that CRT monitors are no longer produced.
use NEC SpectraView (10-bit LUT)
For proofing colors, NEC and Eizo monitors are probably the best.