|
|
|
|
pico23
Aug 10, 2006, 6:22 AM
Post #1 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
wondering what people have and why?
my monitor just went on the fritz after 8 years of dedicated service and 3 computers.
i was all set for a Dell Ultrasharp 20in widescreen which in case you were wondering is the EXACT same monitor as the Apple Cinema displays for about half the price (well not the same, missing the apple logo).
but whenever I read reviews I always get hung up on one thing "almost as good ______ as a CRT"
so I'm wondering what the advantages are of a LCD. i just got off the phone with my dad and he said " they are lighter" I said, true but I've moved my monitor about 12 times in 8 years so I can live with a few pounds. Then he said, "they use less power" to which i replied, if I was worried about power i wouldn't own a computer or a digital camera. Finally getting irritated with me he blurts out "they take up less space". I agreed but said I have a huge computer area that would look empty without a 21in CRT.
So can anyone be more convincing as to what the advantages of a LCD are. What I'm saying is can you convince me not to buy a 21in Apple Studio Display CRT by not using either the above issues. Cause right now I'm leaning CRT over that Dell Ultrasharp.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
omegaprime
Aug 10, 2006, 6:57 AM
Post #2 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2004
Posts: 308
|
Don't know about you, but LCD is easier on my eyes as compared to CRT.
Working in front of a computer every day, you tend to notice these things.
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Aug 10, 2006, 7:11 AM
Post #3 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
lcds are smaller, lighter, easier on your eyes and more energy efficient.
crts still have better graphics though.
the major fault of lcds is that they have only one 'optimal' resolution and they pretty much suck with different resolutions (you DO notice it when doing somehthing gpraphic-intensive) and are slower than CRTs (you see 'shadows' during fast movement; though better ones are catching up).
anyway, i have a 21" crt.
|
|
|
|
|
chanceboarder
Aug 10, 2006, 7:15 AM
Post #4 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 1348
|
In reply to: i was all set for a Dell Ultrasharp 20in widescreen which in case you were wondering is the EXACT same monitor as the Apple Cinema displays for about half the price (well not the same, missing the apple logo).
I don't work as a professional photographer and while I do sell my photographs on the side for some extra cash most all of my work is print stuff and I don't submit images to anyone who will be viewing them on a high end CRT monitor. I've found this monitor to be a great compromise between image quality and affordability (I paid under $400 for mine). For me price was the determining factor. If absolute image quality is need and you're submitting work to people who will be viewing your photographs on some of those higher end CRT's then you may want to go with the CRT over the LCD. But if it's not then I would recommend the LCD, saves you some cash and desk space, and the image quality, color, and sharpness is outstanding in my opinion.
It all comes down to what you want to do with your photographs in the end.
Hope this helps some.
Jason
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Aug 10, 2006, 7:35 AM
Post #5 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
The main advantage of an LCD is the size.
They do have better geometry and less flicker, though the flicker of CRTs wouldn't be a problem if more people knew how to change the refresh rate (in display properties). CRTs have better contrast and colour.
Almost everybody I know prefers LCDs, but if you ask them why they don't even have an objective decent reason. Personally I prefer the good flatscreen CRTs but my next purchase might be an LCD just so I have more space on my desk.
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Aug 10, 2006, 7:40 AM
Post #6 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
^^^^
The comments about LCDs being easier on the eyes is largely not true if the CRT is properly configured. Problem many people neglect to do this, thus CRTs have got a reputation they don't deserve.
|
|
|
|
|
omegaprime
Aug 10, 2006, 8:11 AM
Post #7 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2004
Posts: 308
|
In reply to: ^^^^ The comments about LCDs being easier on the eyes is largely not true if the CRT is properly configured. Problem many people neglect to do this, thus CRTs have got a reputation they don't deserve.
True.
The point is between getting it properly configured as compared to easy-on-the-eyes right out of the box, I rather get it right out of the box. Fiddling with the settings for some time to get it just right is not my idea of a good time.
Well, whatever rocks your world.. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
andypro
Aug 10, 2006, 8:55 AM
Post #8 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 23, 2003
Posts: 1077
|
I use CRT's, LCD's, and Plasmas on a daily basis, and each of them has thier own strenghts and weaknesses.
If your going to do alot of serious high frame rate gaming, or anything with high speed video, I'd go with a CRT.
If you need sharp clear picitures, use an LCD.
If your friggin rich and want the best of both worlds, go with a plasma:twisted:
I personally own three laptops allw ith LCD's obviously, and two 21" CRT's, and in all honesty I'd rather have big LCD's and ditch my CRT's. LCD's are nice and light, leave lotsa desk space, use less power for the most part (not always!!) and are much much sharper than a CRT.
Bad thigns about them are cost, resolution quirks (you generally can get very high native resolutions on CRT's, and interpolated resolutions look better on CRT's), and the fact that they ghost/flicker and you cant do anything about it, unlike a CRT.
|
|
|
|
|
devkrev
Aug 10, 2006, 12:10 PM
Post #9 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 28, 2004
Posts: 933
|
I can't believe no one has mentioned this...
LCD monitors LOOK cooler.
In movies, the way you know the villain has an awesome computer is because it has an LCD monitor.
They also make your computer work better, kinda like wearing Prana and climbing.
dev
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Aug 10, 2006, 1:11 PM
Post #10 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
For the past 10 years or so, I haven't used anything but the high Mhz, .21 pitch Sony Trinitron CRT's with stabilization wires, because I'm a graphic artist, not a gamer...
I'm currently on my 2nd 19" Sony G-410, and have used a couple 17" units branded as Hitatchi. As for laptops; I went w/ Toshiba, because they have the best laptop display on the market.
|
|
|
|
|
keinangst
Aug 10, 2006, 1:35 PM
Post #11 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 1, 2003
Posts: 1408
|
The more I use LCDs, the more I love CRTs. Unfortunately, decent consumer-level CRTs are getting harder to find amid all the "cool-looking LCDs". I think LCDs are terrific for an office setting where space is probably at a premium. But apart from space and power consumption, I see no reason to use an LCD at all.
Three things that haven't been mentioned: CRTs have far better black levels (generally), don't have dead pixels to deal with, and have at least twice the usable life based on most estimates.
In an alternate reality where people weren't hung up on looks, I'm convinced we'd see better and cheaper CRTs everywhere. The next cool technology is great, but sometimes tried-and-true 70-year-old tech has an advantage.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Aug 11, 2006, 1:15 AM
Post #12 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
Thanks for all the great post. It was actually a pretty informed group citing both sides but definitely leaning towards CRT's. Personally, I'm going with the 21in Apple CRT with trinitron tube.
I've always felt CRT's were still superior and while I'd buy into LCDs (i have a Laptop and pocket PC) I don't as of yet see a advantage to justify the price.
And unlike film vs. digital where at least there are major pros and cons to each, the plethora of well cared for and high quality used CRT's makes the $350 price difference way to easy to go with a CRT.
The $350 I save can go towards my next disposable digital SLR body or towards half of a nice lens. Either way I'm going with at least one more CRT. In a few years we'll revisit this, or CRT's will be impossible to find making my choice very simple.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Aug 11, 2006, 5:56 AM
Post #13 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
LCD is better on your eyes but CRT is 100 times better for graphic view but it kills your eyes over time.
if you want expert advice on CRT, get a viewsonic PF 815 or 220 series or
SGI/SUN SONY flat 21" like SUN 5410,or 5411 same as Dell P1111 or HP all made by sony but sold under IBM, Dell HP and Sun.
LCD, Fujitsu is #1 in LCD but what model not sure.
|
|
|
|
|
djnibs
Aug 11, 2006, 6:44 AM
Post #14 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 11, 2002
Posts: 464
|
I had a 17" Philips CRT. I switched to a Acer AL1716 LCD Monitor and imediatly fell in Love. LCDs are brighter and more crisp that CRTs. I have recently added a second LCD. So i am running dual 17" monitors right now. Its increbidle. Highly recommend getting an lcd!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
fluxus
Aug 11, 2006, 8:51 PM
Post #15 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2003
Posts: 947
|
I look at CTRs and LCDs every day in a professional environment. I can see no advantages to LCDs in the areas that matter to me. Primarily how accurately the monitor represent an image. LCDs are noisy as all hell and have issues when it comes to corrrectly representing the tonal and hue values of an image, even after being calbrated. Even the best LCDs that Panasonic showed at NAB this year still have a long way to go.
|
|
|
|
|
buckforester
Aug 21, 2006, 10:51 PM
Post #16 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 25, 2005
Posts: 15
|
I just bought the latest greatest super duper flipper dipper Dell computer with a Dell Ultrasharp 20" widescreen monitor. My primary purpose is photo editing and having the monitor image look like my print image. The computer itself is fantastic, and the monitor is great for doing anything BUT photo editing. For editing photos it completely sucks. Yes, I even calibrate with a ColorVision Spyder2 Pro. I was leary of switching from my beloved (but small) CRT to a LCD, but hey, everyone's doing it. Now I can't wait to get rid of my LCD fast enough and buy a reconditioned large CRT. The problem is the LCD is so bright, it's just how they are lit from the back. Great for certain things, but not for photo editing. I've fiddled with all the adjustments many times and the range of brightness/contrast just can't be perfected for photos. At least not on mine. In the meantime I'm hooking up my old 17" CRT monitor to my new Dell. In my opinion, at this stage in technology, CRTs still rule for serious high-end photo editing. I know Bob Cornelis, who Photoshop's my images and owns Color Folio, and has taught alongside Galen Rowell, still much prefers CRT's over LCD's. But, there are plenty of people who edit photos on a serious level who are happy with LCDs, so it's just my opinion.
Buck Forester
http://www.flickr.com/photos/buckforester/
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Aug 22, 2006, 12:44 AM
Post #17 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
In reply to: I just bought the latest greatest super duper flipper dipper Dell computer with a Dell Ultrasharp 20" widescreen monitor. My primary purpose is photo editing and having the monitor image look like my print image. The computer itself is fantastic, and the monitor is great for doing anything BUT photo editing. For editing photos it completely sucks. Yes, I even calibrate with a ColorVision Spyder2 Pro. I was leary of switching from my beloved (but small) CRT to a LCD, but hey, everyone's doing it. Now I can't wait to get rid of my LCD fast enough and buy a reconditioned large CRT. The problem is the LCD is so bright, it's just how they are lit from the back. Great for certain things, but not for photo editing. I've fiddled with all the adjustments many times and the range of brightness/contrast just can't be perfected for photos. At least not on mine. In the meantime I'm hooking up my old 17" CRT monitor to my new Dell. In my opinion, at this stage in technology, CRTs still rule for serious high-end photo editing. I know Bob Cornelis, who Photoshop's my images and owns Color Folio, and has taught alongside Galen Rowell, buys refurbished CRT monitors in bulk instead of going with the new LCDs. Oh well, I knew better. But, there are plenty of people who edit photos on a serious level who are happy with LCDs, so it's just my opinion. Buck Forester http://www.flickr.com/photos/buckforester/
Nice post buck, I'm always amazed by your shots and level headed approach to technology.
Nothing really to add other then, your ultra sharp is the same as the double priced Apple Cinema displays which are considered to be the best according to various reviews by photographers. So if your not happy with the Ultra Sharp you probably won't find anything in LCD that works for you right now.
I'm perfectly happy with the new (used) 21in Apple I just got. However, it's not PC compatible (despite reports that say otherwise) so you need a spyder/huey and a high end graphics card to make it work. So far though I love it now that its calibrated.
|
|
|
|
|
rgbscan
Aug 22, 2006, 2:23 AM
Post #18 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 8, 2003
Posts: 106
|
Keep in mind with a LCD that you generally have to have 6-10 dead/stuck pixels before you can return it. And if you're outside the warranty timeframe forget about it. Even one is maddening. Check the warranty and return policy on this before you commit.
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
craftedpacket
Aug 22, 2006, 4:24 AM
Post #19 of 19
(2607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 187
|
The main draw back to LCD's is their refresh rate compaired to a CRT. If your interested in gaming or video and you want an LCD you want to look for 8ms response time or less. Anything greater then that and you can end up with ghosting images.
I use a dell 19inch flat screen with a 4ms reponse time, and have not had any issues with fast moving video or games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
