Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by Oscar, Oct 10, 2003.

  1. Oscar

    Oscar Guest

    Sorry if this topic has been covered before...if so, steer me in the right
    direction. I have PS on a laptop and want to use a desktop monitor. Which
    type is better for editing photographs, LCD or CRT? I have a TFT screen on
    my laptop and the color saturation changes with the position of the screen.
    Thanks for your help,
    Oscar, Oct 10, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. CRT's (large, flat) generally still 'rule' in this respect but some LCD's
    are pretty highly regarded now by the graphics working pro's I know. Neovo's
    and the very expensive Apple Macs seem popular - for the very reason that
    they have a wide angle of view available with no luminosity (saturation)

    Simon Stanmore, Oct 10, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. Oscar

    Bowser- Guest

    CRT. No contest. Just watch those refresh rates...
    Bowser-, Oct 10, 2003
  4. Oscar

    steve Guest

    I spent a small fortune on a Sony TFT display about a year ago and
    have not regretted it. The refresh rate and resolution is better than
    most CRT displays. It does not have a viewing angle problem throughout
    my normal movement range which is about 30%. I can't think of any
    reason to look at a monitor from a greater angle. The huge advantage
    of TFT displays are the saving in desk space.

    steve, Oct 10, 2003
  5. CRTs are the choice of pros. LCDs are like the digital vs film debate.
    LCDs lack the contrast, resolution, color saturation of CRTs.
    drhowarddrfinedrhoward, Oct 10, 2003
  6. Every TFT I've looked at was not as sharp as the best CRTs in the same size.
    But I've not looked at Sonys that cost "a small fortune." I have a severe
    space problem that a TFT would go a long way to alleviating, but the
    cost/benefit ratio has to be in line...
    Skip Middleton, Oct 10, 2003
  7. Oscar

    ThomasH Guest

    Well, I would trade the "desk space" for a better color gamut without hesitation!

    The matter of fact is that we do not know how good the LCD screens
    match the color gamut of the CRT's. We know meanwhile that LCD screen
    does not have the large durability as we have suspected. Especially
    the blue pixels fade away at a larger rate than the phosphor in
    the olle big bulky CRT's. Texas Instruments has recently contracted
    a 7*24 (around the clock) test of LCD screens, but they are partisan.
    They would like everybody to use DLP technology instead!

    We also know from PC World report that LCD screen manufacturers
    are in a bitter competition to each other, what made them lie about
    contrast values and other performance parameters. NEC even filed
    a law suite against Viewsonic!

    We really need some serious lab tests of LCD in a well established
    test environment.

    ThomasH, Oct 11, 2003
  8. Oscar

    Loren Coe Guest

    today at the post office the gal said their IBM <>12" displays have been
    online for 5yrs w/one of five failing (early, bad focus?). that's nothing
    about color, but it does sound encouraging. i _think_ they are color.
    i bit on the technology this week, based on a post in rcm (damn, Usenet
    is supposed to be free ;-). the 17" Viewsonic is 95% of a 19" crt and
    359 buks at Costco, does 1280x1084, great horz view angle, more than you
    need. vertical is improved but distant 2nd to a crt. --Loren
    Loren Coe, Oct 11, 2003
  9. Oscar

    Charlie D Guest

    There are flat panels and there are flat panels.
    The one on my iBook and my friend's 17" iMac suffer from the viewing
    angle problem.
    My 22" Apple Cinema Display doesn't. I can be at an extreme angle and
    the colors are fine.
    It may not pass a Pantone test, but on all calibration protocalls I've
    run I can see all the differences from lightest to darkest and all the
    other stuff I'm supposed to see.
    Using ColorSync, my prints look just like what I see on the screen.
    From what I hear Samsung makes the Apple displays.
    I'm done with flickering, hot, noisy, hair raising CRTs.
    Charlie D, Oct 11, 2003
  10. Oscar

    jjs Guest

    That means absolutely nothing. They use a couple colors and they aren't
    significant to their work. May as well be ACII terminals with the extra 16
    bits doing special characters.
    jjs, Oct 11, 2003
  11. Oscar

    Uni Guest


    No harmful radiation.
    Less degradation of image quality.
    No warm up time.
    Longer life.
    Less energy consumption.
    Etc., etc., etc..

    LCD is the way to go.

    Uni, Oct 11, 2003
  12. Oscar

    Eastburn Guest

    I have one and really like the use of the desk now.

    It runs cooler and has better contrast.

    WOn't x-ray you some day either.

    I got the Princeton and so far pleased to have it on computer.

    Martin 1280 x 1084 is just fine for me!
    Eastburn, Oct 11, 2003
  13. On thing to be aware of is that many LCD monitors cannot be calibrated so
    they match industry-standard
    colour, brightness etc. I keep hearing that calibration is crucial to
    producing what you expect from your
    digital images. I don't have enough experience to know yet (I'm using
    uncalibrated CRTs), but thought it
    was worth a mention.
    Steve Marshall, Oct 11, 2003
  14. Oscar

    Xalinai Guest

    Some expensive desktop TFTs are as reliable regarding colors as the
    average CRT.

    I have not seen a notebook LCD acceptable for professional work.

    If your workspace allows for a CRT, go, buy one.

    Xalinai, Oct 11, 2003
  15. Oscar

    Tom Elliott Guest

    My service bureau here in Miami says LCDs are not up to the exactness of the
    CRTs, however I went to the recent Photoshop convention held here and saw
    the Apple HD screen side by side with an Ink Jet print under one of those
    controlled light boxes for comparing the screen with hard copy and WOW! My
    CRT is calibrated with my Epson 1200 and my service bureau so I am a happy
    camper. I would really like to own the 23" HD monitor by Apple (they sell
    conversion cables to use with a PC) but it is a little pricey for me so far.
    I guess I could return it if it was too far off but the demo at the
    convention made me stop and think about it.
    Tom Elliott, Oct 11, 2003
  16. Oscar

    Loren Coe Guest

    it would be nice, but do you have any for these
    life/degredation claims?

    wrt power, surprisingly my VL1715 Viewsonic (lcd) lists it as
    2w-standby/44w-on. i don't feel heat anywhere, anytime, but it
    is getting only lite use, so far. but a 19" crt is not much over
    50w when on. imho, the 44w is bogus, too hi. --Loren
    Loren Coe, Oct 11, 2003
  17. Oscar

    Don Stauffer Guest

    Yes, the problem you mention is one of the drawbacks to LCD screens.
    While LCD monitors are getting much better, I think a good CRT still is

    BTW, one of the things that gets me is that sometimes the testing
    methods on LCD monitors state things like contrast higher than they
    really deliver in practical use. But then, I am also critical on some
    of the methods used to test CRT monitors, for that matter. The result
    is that not all CRT monitors are equal, certainly not an earthshattering
    claim. The point is, if photo editing is going to be an important use
    of your computer, it is a good idea to shop carefully for a monitor. Go
    to a place where you can see it in operation and fool with brightness,
    contrast, color settings, etc. Does it have options for calibration,
    Don Stauffer, Oct 11, 2003
  18. Oscar

    Uni Guest

    LCD's are the wave of the future. Soon, there will be no more CRT's.
    The ONLY reason people purchase CRT's, these days, is because they can
    purchase them for less.

    but do you have any for these
    Look at your wristwatch. That's enough proof.
    We must consider power factor, too.


    Uni, Oct 11, 2003
  19. Oscar

    Uni Guest

    Tap the front of your CRT with a hammer and tap a LCD with one, too.
    Then see which one still works.


    Uni, Oct 11, 2003
  20. Oscar

    Uni Guest

    CRT's are analog devices. LCD's are digital. Too many phase related
    error problems with DA convertors, when using analog.


    LCDs are like the digital vs film debate.
    Uni, Oct 11, 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.