Monitors, CRT of flat screen?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by nobody, Mar 20, 2005.

  1. nobody

    nobody Guest

    I went to the Apple shop and saw their new display monitors, 23inches and
    even 30 inches. Conventional wisdom, at least so far, has been that for
    digital photo work CRT are better, even much better. But would this apply
    also to the new Mac displays just mentioned? For one thing, they costs so
    much more than a pro CRT, that in theory at least should be at least as good
    as a CRT. Thanks in advance for any comments.
    Nobody
    nobody, Mar 20, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. nobody

    bmoag Guest

    If you believe that the MAC OS is superior to Windows then you will believe
    that MAC LCD panels are superior to anything made for a Wintel machine. This
    is despite the fact that latencies, color ramps etc on these MAC panels are
    no better than average and sell at ultra-premium prices.

    Personally I would rather believe in Geroge Bush, WMDs and a Republican
    congress that backs a war policy that does not bother to count the number of
    dead Iraquis but wants to pass special legislation to keep a brain dead
    anorexic on a feeding tube.
    bmoag, Mar 20, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. nobody

    George Kerby Guest

    On 3/20/05 10:47 AM, in article
    zOh%d.12311$, "bmoag"
    <> wrote:

    > If you believe that the MAC OS is superior to Windows then you will believe
    > that MAC LCD panels are superior to anything made for a Wintel machine. This
    > is despite the fact that latencies, color ramps etc on these MAC panels are
    > no better than average and sell at ultra-premium prices.
    >
    > Personally I would rather believe in Geroge Bush, WMDs and a Republican
    > congress that backs a war policy that does not bother to count the number of
    > dead Iraquis but wants to pass special legislation to keep a brain dead
    > anorexic on a feeding tube.
    >
    >

    On ALL counts: A.F.I. Thanks for the useless info. NOT!


    _______________________________________________________________________________
    Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
    <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
    George Kerby, Mar 20, 2005
    #3
  4. In article <zOh%d.12311$>, bmoag
    <> wrote:

    > If you believe that the MAC OS is superior to Windows then you will believe
    > that MAC LCD panels are superior to anything made for a Wintel machine. This
    > is despite the fact that latencies, color ramps etc on these MAC panels are
    > no better than average and sell at ultra-premium prices.


    Oooo, don't YOU have some axes to grind... no one asked about OS's, or
    if Apple-supplied displays are better than Wintel-vendor supplied
    units. Feeling a little insecure? <GRIN>

    Back to reality. Neither Apple nor Dell, nor any other computer
    supplier makes LCD displays. So theoretically, any vendor should be
    able to supply the "best" LCD. The computer manufacturer DOES dictate
    his own acceptance standards, and supplies calibration software and
    such. Better displays generally cost more, but linking quality to
    price across disparate product lines is a sucker bet.

    The finest CRT displays still have a noticeable edge over similarly
    high-end LCD's The Apple Studio displays are perhaps in the 80th or
    90th percentile of LCDs, and are priced accordingly. But their
    reproduction can be bested by a good CRT; the LaCie Electron blue being
    a standout example.

    Now of course it's pretty hard to find a 23" CRT, let alone a 30"; and
    CRT's consume MUCH more energy and space. It all depends on your
    budget, standards, and goals.

    Executive summary: Apple Studio Displays, are very, very, good for
    LCD's but a $799.00 CRT will kick their butts in some respects.
    Scott Schuckert, Mar 20, 2005
    #4
  5. nobody

    leo Guest

    nobody wrote:
    > I went to the Apple shop and saw their new display monitors, 23inches and
    > even 30 inches. Conventional wisdom, at least so far, has been that for
    > digital photo work CRT are better, even much better. But would this apply
    > also to the new Mac displays just mentioned? For one thing, they costs so
    > much more than a pro CRT, that in theory at least should be at least as good
    > as a CRT. Thanks in advance for any comments.
    > Nobody
    >



    I heard the HP version is cheaper. They are using the same Philips-LP
    LCD anyway. If I had to buy one today, I think I'd get Sony or HP's 23"
    version but I possibly be money strap and would seriously considered
    Dell's 20" (1600x1200).

    LCD is still not as good as CRT in some ways; ghosting, no deep black
    and slight color shift, but it doesn't make sense to buy a CRT anymore.
    Sinice I still have a Sony Trinitron 21" CRT so I got a small 15" LCD
    for another PC and wait for LCD panel to mature a bit.
    leo, Mar 20, 2005
    #5
  6. nobody

    RSD99 Guest

    Actually ... his first paragraph was pretty much "right on."




    "George Kerby" <> wrote in message
    news:BE631189.13DBB%...
    >
    >
    >
    > On 3/20/05 10:47 AM, in article
    > zOh%d.12311$, "bmoag"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > > If you believe that the MAC OS is superior to Windows then you will

    believe
    > > that MAC LCD panels are superior to anything made for a Wintel machine.

    This
    > > is despite the fact that latencies, color ramps etc on these MAC panels

    are
    > > no better than average and sell at ultra-premium prices.
    > >
    > > Personally I would rather believe in Geroge Bush, WMDs and a Republican
    > > congress that backs a war policy that does not bother to count the

    number of
    > > dead Iraquis but wants to pass special legislation to keep a brain dead
    > > anorexic on a feeding tube.
    > >
    > >

    > On ALL counts: A.F.I. Thanks for the useless info. NOT!
    >
    >
    >

    ___________________________________________________________________________
    ____
    > Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -

    http://www.uncensored-news.com
    > <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source

    <><><><><><><><>
    >
    RSD99, Mar 20, 2005
    #6
  7. nobody

    Diane Wilson Guest

    In article <0ej%d.548$>,
    says...
    > nobody wrote:
    > > I went to the Apple shop and saw their new display monitors, 23inches and
    > > even 30 inches. Conventional wisdom, at least so far, has been that for
    > > digital photo work CRT are better, even much better. But would this apply
    > > also to the new Mac displays just mentioned? For one thing, they costs so
    > > much more than a pro CRT, that in theory at least should be at least as good
    > > as a CRT. Thanks in advance for any comments.
    > > Nobody
    > >

    >
    >
    > I heard the HP version is cheaper. They are using the same Philips-LP
    > LCD anyway. If I had to buy one today, I think I'd get Sony or HP's 23"
    > version but I possibly be money strap and would seriously considered
    > Dell's 20" (1600x1200).
    >
    > LCD is still not as good as CRT in some ways; ghosting, no deep black
    > and slight color shift, but it doesn't make sense to buy a CRT anymore.
    > Sinice I still have a Sony Trinitron 21" CRT so I got a small 15" LCD
    > for another PC and wait for LCD panel to mature a bit.
    >


    I recently ditched my Sony 21" Trinitron for a ViewSonic VX2000 (20",
    1600x1200). The VX2000 is the best LCD I've ever seen, although I haven't
    spent extensive time in front of the Apple displays. It is far brighter
    and sharper than the Sony G520 CRT it replaced. Contrast is very good,
    too.

    Color is better than any LCD I've seen; the yellow daffodils I shot in
    the front yard (using a D70) are just as yellow on-screen. Yellow is
    a hard color for LCDs; they have to be good at both red and green to make
    it work.

    Ghosting seems to be dependent on the video card. I get ghosting with
    my Dell laptops (using NVIDIA GeForce display adapters). With my home-built
    desktop machine, using a Matrox G550, there is no ghosting at all.
    All of these are with analog video input; I haven't tried digital
    video input yet. (First I need to find a digital KVM switch!)

    I can't vouch for professional-quality color calibration, but as an
    amateur, I'm extremely pleased with this monitor. As far as
    calibration goes, ViewSonic does do color calibration in terms of
    color temperature; not all LCDs will do that.

    The price is down to $693 (US) on Amazon, which beats the heck out
    of Apple.

    Diane
    Diane Wilson, Mar 20, 2005
    #7
  8. nobody

    rafe bustin Guest

    On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 19:30:48 GMT, Diane Wilson <>
    wrote:


    >I recently ditched my Sony 21" Trinitron for a ViewSonic VX2000 (20",
    >1600x1200). The VX2000 is the best LCD I've ever seen, although I haven't
    >spent extensive time in front of the Apple displays. It is far brighter
    >and sharper than the Sony G520 CRT it replaced. Contrast is very good,
    >too.
    >
    >Color is better than any LCD I've seen; the yellow daffodils I shot in
    >the front yard (using a D70) are just as yellow on-screen. Yellow is
    >a hard color for LCDs; they have to be good at both red and green to make
    >it work.
    >
    >Ghosting seems to be dependent on the video card. I get ghosting with
    >my Dell laptops (using NVIDIA GeForce display adapters). With my home-built
    >desktop machine, using a Matrox G550, there is no ghosting at all.
    >All of these are with analog video input; I haven't tried digital
    >video input yet. (First I need to find a digital KVM switch!)
    >
    >I can't vouch for professional-quality color calibration, but as an
    >amateur, I'm extremely pleased with this monitor. As far as
    >calibration goes, ViewSonic does do color calibration in terms of
    >color temperature; not all LCDs will do that.
    >
    >The price is down to $693 (US) on Amazon, which beats the heck out
    >of Apple.



    Yellow is actually one of the strong areas in the
    gamut of most LCDs, while blues and greens are weaker
    (compared to CRTs.)

    I've also made the switch to LCD recently, with no
    regrets. Using a Matrox G450. The sharpness is
    spectacular. The LCD is a 21" Samsung 213T
    with a native res of 1600x1200. Under $700 now.

    No problem calibrating it with a Gretag Eye-One.

    In absolute terms, the CRT has a slightly
    wider gamut, but the LCD is much more
    pleasant to work with overall.


    rafe b.
    http://www.terrapinphoto.com
    rafe bustin, Mar 20, 2005
    #8
  9. nobody

    Ray Fischer Guest

    nobody <> wrote:
    >I went to the Apple shop and saw their new display monitors, 23inches and
    >even 30 inches. Conventional wisdom, at least so far, has been that for
    >digital photo work CRT are better, even much better. But would this apply
    >also to the new Mac displays just mentioned?


    Yes. It's not just the manufacturer but the technology used. LCDs
    shift color and brightness as the viewing angle changes. Some more
    than others. CRTs don't.

    > For one thing, they costs so
    >much more than a pro CRT, that in theory at least should be at least as good
    >as a CRT.


    No, it means that they're harder to make. For display that's 1280x1024
    there are some 4 million little LCD units, each with it's own
    controlling transister. If one is bad then you get a spot on the
    screen.

    With CRTs there's one tube, a grid of RGB phosphors printed on the glass,
    a shadow mask, and electron guns. Small failures don't have big
    results.

    --
    Ray Fischer
    Ray Fischer, Mar 20, 2005
    #9
  10. nobody

    Rob Guest

    RSD99 wrote:

    > Actually ... his first paragraph was pretty much "right on."
    >
    >
    >

    The 23" panel is made by Samsung.

    r
    Rob, Mar 21, 2005
    #10
  11. nobody

    leo Guest

    Rob wrote:
    > RSD99 wrote:
    >
    >> Actually ... his first paragraph was pretty much "right on."
    >>
    >>
    >>

    > The 23" panel is made by Samsung.
    >
    > r



    It should be Philips/LG.
    leo, Mar 21, 2005
    #11
  12. Ray Fischer wrote:
    []
    > No, it means that they're harder to make. For display that's
    > 1280x1024 there are some 4 million little LCD units, each with it's
    > own controlling transister. If one is bad then you get a spot on the
    > screen.
    >
    > With CRTs there's one tube, a grid of RGB phosphors printed on the
    > glass, a shadow mask, and electron guns. Small failures don't have
    > big results.


    Whilst LCDs are indeed harder to make, the Dell 19 inch monitor I just
    replaced with an LCD had a missing set of pixels, one dark pixel
    effectively. The LCD does not.

    Cheers,
    David
    David J Taylor, Mar 21, 2005
    #12
  13. nobody

    Sheldon Guest

    I've been told that the better LCDs are as good as a CRT now. However, you
    do get more of a viewing angle with a CRT, and you can flip a CRT to many
    resolutions without losing any quality in the image. Most LDCs have a
    "native" resolution and don't look so hot when you use any other resolution.
    If you're like me, the resolution you use for digital imaging may be too
    high for word processing. So, if you like to flip around like I do just get
    a decent "flat screen" CRT.


    "nobody" <> wrote in message
    news:BE63130A.D06%...
    >I went to the Apple shop and saw their new display monitors, 23inches and
    > even 30 inches. Conventional wisdom, at least so far, has been that for
    > digital photo work CRT are better, even much better. But would this apply
    > also to the new Mac displays just mentioned? For one thing, they costs so
    > much more than a pro CRT, that in theory at least should be at least as
    > good
    > as a CRT. Thanks in advance for any comments.
    > Nobody
    >
    Sheldon, Mar 22, 2005
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. IRISH1EAR

    wntd: soft cases for lcd flat screen monitors ?

    IRISH1EAR, Jul 25, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    346
    IRISH1EAR
    Jul 25, 2003
  2. zjunglejim

    Flat screen vs Emac screen vs $300 crt for photoshop use

    zjunglejim, Nov 4, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    767
    zjunglejim
    Nov 4, 2003
  3. Martin

    Re: Are LCD Monitors Brigter than CRT Monitors

    Martin, Sep 8, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    538
    Martin
    Sep 8, 2004
  4. Mxsmanic
    Replies:
    39
    Views:
    848
  5. Mrs BeebleBrock

    cleaning flat-screen monitors

    Mrs BeebleBrock, Mar 15, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    774
    MarkH
    Mar 16, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page