It all depends on your OUTPUT GOALS!!!!!!! For many outputs that's good enough, for others, it's not good enough. You will never be able to "edit" / process, what a low bit video card & display will never be able to show.
If you can live with that, if your edits are only output to other displays, or low res prints & if you won't ever miss subtle color tonality & dynamic range & risk your edits looking like who knows what on someone else's high res, high bit, high quality display that could see a more full spectrum of colors or tones, then you will be fine. It will only EVER have a low 4 bit video card, so that, along with inferior resolution & pixel technology to desktop displays, it will never be able to show, therefore for you to edit, the full capability of your raw files. Well it all "depends" on what YOU mean by "editing" & what you expect your edited / processed output files to be used as.īottom line, for basic image work, it can be calibrated & useful, but it will ALWAYS be a crippled display & will NEVER show the entire gamut or colors or dynamic range & will likely not be great for panel uniformity of tone or color. MSI and Sager (there are others), offer uber laptops at better than Dell/Alienware prices (better innards too).
Other game oriented Windows vendors, e.g. I love Windows but if you want a laptop that hits a good balance between high resolution and heft you might want to look at a recent or current 15 inch Macbook Pro. "Portability" is directly related to your concept of heftitude. My son has a fully configured 17 inch gaming machine-probably identical Taiwanese parts, different vendor shell. The size and weight of the laptop, but I used to travel with a 17" Dell and it was OK a padded backpack for it is a big help. Yes, much like a desktop except the laptop displays I've seen don't have hardware color controls like most separate monitors do.Īny other drawbacks for using a 17.3" display for editing? There's a website that has info on many laptop displays' gamut (and other useful data).īut I don't know if this laptop screen can be color-corrected. The UHD displays often (not always) have wider color gamuts than FHD, but that's something I'd look into before buying. From reading on the net I believe the UHD screen would be a good choice, although I'm open to other opinions. I have a smaller laptop and tablet for daily tasks. The laptop would only be used for photo editing. Available in two screen types:įHD 1920 x 1080 or UHD 3840 x 2160. I'm spending more time away from home now days, and I'm considering a laptop for photo editing - PS & LR. MSI and Sager (there are others), offer uber laptops at better than Dell/Alienware prices (better innards too). I love Windows but if you want a laptop that hits a good balance between high resolution and heft you might want to look at a recent or current 15 inch Macbook Pro. Other game oriented Windows vendors, e.g. If your intent is to print you will find your way if you want to. These are not deal breakers but inescapable.Īs to calibration: its a laptop.
Most things scale fine but Windows is stuck with older bit mapped icons and there are older programs that do not use standard font scaling and so are problematic in 4k regardless of screen size. It will mean that the machine can drive an external 4k monitor should you choose to go that route.Īnyone contemplating a laptop sized 4k screen in Windows should audition the machine to see if they find scaling issues too onerous.
That will not be an advantage for image editing in my experience due to the limited screen real estate of even 17 inches. If you are determined to get it I would go for the 4k screen.
My son has a fully configured 17 inch gaming machine-probably identical Taiwanese parts, different vendor shell. Have you seen/lifted this thing? And its power brick? I bet Dell lists it weight, 10 pounds, sans power brick.