When it comes to still images, the above poster basically has it right. I use an LCD (after 12 or so years of computers with CRT's) and I find it a welcome change. Admittedly I spend too much time on the computer and I find the LCD is a bit easier on my eyes, yet the colors seem to be a little more vivid as well. This may just be my experience, but I've noticed the same differences on other setups as well =)
LCDs are fine if you are working with CAD or word processors or spreadsheets. But when it comes to photography CRT is the way to go.
If you want to play video games etc. go LCD, if you want to do serious photgraphy CRT.
The newer LCDs like the Samsung 213T are very close to a CRT in quality and color balance. The only thing I get with my expensive Sony Artisan is black point adjustment and better shadow detail - but the price in $ and fuzzy text is almost not worth it.
You may note that there are almost no high end CRTs being made anymore, including SONY who discontinued the Artisan recently. My next monitor may be a LaCie or another Samsung as they just get better and better.
I recently purchased a Viewsonic vp930b. Currently, this model has the highest contrast ratio available on the market @ 1000:1. For photography, you need a very high contrast ratio for greyscaling. I am truely amazed with this monitor, I compared it to my CRT and it has better color rendition. When comparing images with light and shadow, the vp930b had much better detail.
andylaiphoto wrote:
The latest LaCie LCDs are rated just as good as top of the line CRTs and way better than most.
Rated in what way? For games? Cad? the Web? Black rendition? Color rendition? I've yet to hear of any LCD that was as good as a Sony Trinitron, but I'll check it out. Can you post a link? or refer to an article?
Thanks
I have a triple monitor setup. I use a Samsung CRT, a Samsung LCD (one year old), and a Wytech LCD (three years old).
I used to use just two displays - the two LCDs. I purchased a CRT about four months ago simply on the understanding they were more accurate.
I have to say, that I can't actually see the differences. The CRT I chose may not have been a good choice, because my LCD black levels are actually better! Any bright area on the CRT bleeds light into the surrounding area, decreasing overall black levels.
I have to say that I am happier with the LCDs. Prints done using proper color management are decent matches to all three of my displays.
I believe you could easilly get by using an LCD. In order for a CRT to truly shine, you should consider higher end models made with color sensitive tasks in mind. Don't do what I did - I just bought any old thing.
Home theatre enthusiasts claim that the latest high end LCD TVs are just as good as CRT or Plasma in terms of all areas of picture quality, including black levels and gamma.
That would seem to suggest that the technology would bleed down into dekstop LCD use. After all, there is much in common between an LCD tv and LCD monitor - almost everything except the size and tv tuner.
I use both LCD and CRT. On the typical CRTs, such as the $150 17 inches from well known brand names, I doubt you will see much of an improvement - if any - over modern LCD panels that are also aimed at regular use. Higher end CRTs, such as a Sony Artisan, will no doubt be superior.
Osai wrote:
Rated in what way? For games? Cad? the Web? Black rendition? Color rendition? I've yet to hear of any LCD that was as good as a Sony Trinitron, but I'll check it out. Can you post a link? or refer to an article?
Thanks
"Home theatre enthusiasts claim that the latest high end LCD TVs are just as good as CRT or Plasma in terms of all areas of picture quality, including black levels and gamma.".
I think about the only LCDs getting close to CRT balck levels and shadow detail are possibly the LCOS / SXRD ones just coming out, and that's "close, getting there, but not quite". That's assuming a properly calibrated high-quality CRT. They do have their drawbacks though, including distortion, and in the case of really top-end LCDs, maybe color accuracy.
BTW, LCDs can suck at video games because of their delay - fast action will tend to smear.
fencelinephoto wrote:
I recently purchased a Viewsonic vp930b. Currently, this model has the highest contrast ratio available on the market @ 1000:1. For photography, you need a very high contrast ratio for greyscaling. I am truely amazed with this monitor, I compared it to my CRT and it has better color rendition. When comparing images with light and shadow, the vp930b had much better detail.
One thing about LCD "specs" that you have to beware of is that the contrast ratio and refresh rates in specs are nearly meaningless. That is to say that the various manufacturers measure them differently. Much like the wattage rating on audio equipment and power supplies, you can not trust these numbers.
Also, the contrast ratio is soposed to be a comparison between the luminosity of absolute black and absolute white. Unfortunately this means that a very bright LCD which a high white point can have a high contrast ratio while not having good black points.
The good news is that since printers can't reproduce blacks as dark as what a CRT can display, the potential lack of deep shadows and shadow detail on an LCD is not that big of a deal.
With that in mind, my Samsung LCD has better black levels than my Samsung CRT. My Wytech LCD, however, is much worse.
The only way to really know what you are getting is to see it with your own eyes...
