Digital BW, The Print

Dear David,

My original term was stunning, where I added the term magic to compliment
your response. I am referring specifically to my DDC monitor's ability to
perform, and for the moment, I believe my calibrated DDC compliant monitor
adds significant value to my digital process, compared to a non DDC
compliant monitor. Unfortunately, I do not have several monitors to choose
from nor do I desire to be in that position, because incremental choices
would drive me crazy. Although, if I added several calibrated monitors to
the equation, whether the monitors were DDC compliant or not, I would
probably see which monitor I would never use, quickly.

That said, everyone has their own approach to determine what they might
consider acceptable, qualified by their own budget, purpose, and selective
calibration equipment, where I am no different, so I decided to compare
several calibrated non DDC monitors to two differently priced DDC EIZO
monitors, before I exercised my final purchase. I chose one EIZO over the
other monitors for several value added reasons, such as the monitor's
accuracy, the quality of the shadow detail, the monitor's uniformity, and a
price point I considered to be reasonable. The non DDC monitors looked
pleasant, but when I compared the final printed image to the calibrated DDC
EIZO; my choice became very clear.

Lastly, my new monitor adheres to the DDC protocol, compared to not,
allowing my calibration software to talk properly to the monitor during a
calibration event, which physically removes the quality of my video card,
and the associated video drivers from the calibration equation. I currently
have a new tool that adds value to my digital process, until this monitor
expires... :)

jim k



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]