I was wanting to get myself a new monitor, and the two choices say they have 72% and 92% colour gamut. I asked on an art site and got insulted.
For a person that does webcomics and colour reproduction being important, does the 72% and 92% have that much actual difference? One of my friends told me it's mostly about printing and the 72% would be fine, but I just wanted to get confirmation.
Take this advice with a heaping of salt. I have no background in anything artistic and am in fact somewhat colour-blind. I'm simply fairly capable in the art of google-fu and spent a few minutes on your query.
From what I can gather, computer displays typically aren't so good at representing highly saturated colours, though the same can be said about typical printers. What is (supposedly) important is that what your monitor can accurately display overlaps with what your printer is capable of outputting. Going for something capable of displaying a large percentage of the colour gamut is a good way to cover your bases but isn't all that necessary if what you're printing covers a substantially smaller range of possibilities. Heck it may even be a poorer choice if it's showing something you aren't capable of reproducing in print, though something high end and designed for this sort of thing is likely adjustable to reproduce a smaller gamut for such purposes. It's not all just about a percentage either - even if your screen can display 92% of colours visible to humans (or at least the one's that aren't colour-blind) and you can print 92% of colours you may not get an identical representation since they may not be capable of the same 92%. So yeah, if you're focusing on print perhaps compare the exact colour gamut of the displays with whatever you're using to print, though the key word here may be webcomics. If you're distributing these things primarily over the internet then you're probably better off with an average display when it comes to colours because that's how most people are going to see it.
Also fuck those other guys.