a fresh question about LCD monitors

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Bill Johnson, Dec 17, 2003.

  1. Bill Johnson

    Bill Johnson Guest

    I am a long time user of conventional CRT monitors and am now
    considering buying an LCD monitor. As I am researching these, I am reading
    that a true 16 M color spectrum is not always possible, also there seems to
    be some question about contrast and brightness, which, in turn, leads to
    imperfect true-black and true-white.

    From a photography standpoint, are these monitors as good as CRT
    monitors for viewing photos?

    Any experience with different brands (I know this question can open a
    can of worms, but I have to ask)

    Thanks Bill
    Bill Johnson, Dec 17, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. I don't know about viewing the entire color spectrum, but LCDs can have
    very good brightness and contrast as well as good viewing angles.Depends
    on which model you're looking at.

    From my personal experiance as a very picky photo viewer, I prefer my
    LCD for veiwing photos to CRTs. The best LCDs now have 1600x1200
    resolution and appear much sharper than HI-res CRTs to my eye. Of cource
    these will set you back about $1,000 U.S. dollars

    ~just my 2 cents~
    Steven Thompson, Dec 17, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. Forgot to mention: I am using a 1280x1024, 19" Princeton LCD at the
    moment 600/1 contrast, good color (to my eyes), good viewing angles
    Steven Thompson, Dec 17, 2003
  4. Bill Johnson

    Rick Guest

    The answer to your question is an unequivocal NO.

    Unless you're willing to spend the better part of $3000 (or more),
    consumer grade LCDs have a contrast ratio roughly half that of
    midrange or high-end CRTs. The biggest issue is with near blacks.
    Because of their backlight technology, trying to edit images with
    lots of near-blacks on an LCD is usually an exercise in futility.

    The other drawback with LCDs is their resolution inflexibility.
    CRTs can be run at nearly any resolution without loss of image
    quality, while LCDs have a single "native" resolution. Any
    variance from that native resolution results in image degradation.

    LCDs do have their advantages (e.g. they're great for text work),
    but because color gamut is important for proper graphics editing
    you should stick with a CRT.

    Rick, Dec 17, 2003
  5. I think the answer is somewhere between the extremes of LCD is best to
    CRT is best. LCDs have improved a lot in a short time. They are good.
    Which is best I think will depend on where you are on the cost spectrum and
    where you are on the demand spectrum.

    If you are in the normal range of both, then LCDs are great. If you are
    high end demand and not high end price, I suggest sticking with CRT. If you
    have the money for the high end equipment there are very good models
    available in both types.

    Good Luck

    BTW I use a LCD, but I don't consider myself all that critical at this
    time. I consider photography as fun, not an occupation any more.
    Joseph Meehan, Dec 17, 2003
  6. Bill Johnson

    Rupert Guest

    Do what I did:

    I have two video cards, one computer, one desktop, two monitors.
    Viewsonic 19 inch on the left set at 1600x1200 and Samsung 19 inch LCD
    on the right set at 1280 x 1024. Its the best of both worlds!
    Rupert, Dec 17, 2003
  7. Bill Johnson

    RogM Guest

    LCDs have largely shed the bad reputation they've made for themselves,
    especially with respect to restricted viewing angles, color fidelity,
    resolution, brightness and contrast ratio. My ViewSonic VX2000 is at
    least the equal of any of the Trinitron units I've used--it has a
    native resolution of 1600X1200 and a contrast ratio of 600:1. It can
    be calibrated by any of several CRT/LCD cal devices, such as the
    Pantone ColorVision OptiCAL system. No flicker, easy on the eyes,
    absolute sharpness to the extreme corners--no, I'm not about to go
    back to CRTs any time soon.
    RogM, Dec 17, 2003
  8. Or get an ATI Radeon card. 2 monitors on one card, one can even be with
    the digital LCD interface.
    Povl H. Pedersen, Dec 17, 2003
  9. And the color does not change if you move your head up/down ?
    This is one of my gripes. Usuaully gets brigther when moving the
    hea just 3-5 inches.
    Povl H. Pedersen, Dec 17, 2003
  10. Bill Johnson

    Randy Rhine Guest

    A lot of cards these days have multi-monitor support. I think it's
    standard on the the Nvidia chipsets, though not all cards that use them
    have included the extra output ports.

    Randy Rhine, Dec 17, 2003
  11. Bill Johnson

    Drifter Guest

    I am a long time user of conventional CRT monitors and am now
    I'm running an ATI radeon 8500 pro and two JTX 17" LCD displays. I
    couldn't be happier and they were surprisingly easy to color match to
    my Epson C80 printer. Okay, maybe not an Ultra-Pro micro-calibrated
    setup but it gives me very nice display and output and didn't break
    the bank (I left breaking the bank to the 10D and an assortment of
    lenses <grin>).

    Drifter, Dec 18, 2003
  12. Bill Johnson

    Rupert Guest

    Yeah, that would probably be simpler, but my existing video card only
    had one output. Also, at least with video cards that don't have 128
    megs of memory or more, there can be some system slowdown if the video
    card is chugging along working to display on two monitors.
    Rupert, Dec 18, 2003
  13. Bill Johnson

    RogM Guest

    Yes, this was my major complaint when using an earlier LCD monitor
    (IBM 9416). Its restricted vertical viewing angle caused considerable
    color shift depending on where an object was seen on the screen,
    making color editing a nearly impossible chore. Fortunately this
    problem appears to have been addressed in the current crop of LCD
    RogM, Dec 18, 2003
  14. Bill Johnson

    RogM Guest

    I've experienced long-term stability problems with ATI cards
    (including two samples of the 8500) when using them with LCD monitors.
    This would show up as "creepie-crawlies" occurring at horizontal
    intervals across the screen, especially noticeable on text, and also
    unexpected changes in horizontal and vertical screen size. It must be
    that LCDs are more sensitive to synch rate drift. No problems such as
    this have been experienced with Matrox cards or other brands. Also
    wasn't very fond of the ATI fontset when displayed on LCDs. Of course
    RogM, Dec 18, 2003
  15. Bill Johnson

    Drifter Guest

    I had that on one monitor and not the other. Bumped the refresh rate
    up to 70hz (My LCD displays will accept 65, 70, and 75hz) and the
    issue vanished. I suppose I should have mentioned I'm using JTX V7s
    displays. I think they are actually made by Micron. I had bought one
    not expecting anything especially great but needing to replace my #2
    CRT (an ancient Nokia) that had died. I wound up liking it so much I
    bought a second one and dumped my Viewsonic 19" (admittedly, no spring
    chicken either). It's really nice having matched monitors now <grin>.

    Drifter, Dec 18, 2003
  16. Bill Johnson

    RogM Guest

    I tried changing the refresh rate from 60 to 70 and that fixed
    things...for a while. Then I had to go back to 60 and it was "fixed"
    again for a while. Finally it wasn't right at any refresh rate and I
    gave the damn card to my son (who uses a CRT) and got a Matrox.
    RogM, Dec 19, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.