| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/03/2004 03:12:30 AM · #1 |
Probably an old topic but I couldn't find a thread...
As a home office through work I have a coice of either a 19" 1280x1024 HP LCD monitor (f1904) or a 22" 1600 x 1200 HP CRT monitor (P1230). The 22" CRT is slightly more cash although not much so it's not an issue.
I have read almost everywhere that CRT's (which I am still using) are best in terms of true colors. Is this still true? Is it so much better that a HUGE CRT would still be the choice for most?
My primary use other than e-mail is photo editing of course...
Are
Message edited by author 2004-12-03 03:13:39. |
|
|
|
12/03/2004 04:21:31 AM · #2 |
Yes, that is still true.
That extra resolution also comes in handy.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
12/03/2004 04:45:54 AM · #3 |
I used to swear by the CRT I had at work (Dell trinitron 21") and it was awesome, but I don't think you could pry my laptop (Dell 15.4" 1680x1050) from me unless I were dead. The resolution is outstanding, and when I go back to looking at my 17" Samsung I have for my desktop it looks muddy and blurry by comparison.
|
|
|
|
12/03/2004 05:11:55 AM · #4 |
Shadows display better on CRT.
Eyes hurt less on LCD.
That's the experience my brother and I have. Frankly, I value the comfort of my eyes over the extra shadows.
|
|
|
|
12/03/2004 06:06:33 AM · #5 |
I use a 21" CRT here at home, and a 17"LCD at work...
I really like the sharpness of the LCD, and I believe it has adequate dynamic range for image work, when I come home it takes me 10-15 minutes to get used to the 'softness' of the CRT. There's nothing wrong with it, it's a trinitron (Dell badged) and in good order, just that the LCD inherently more sharp. (I run my CRT at 1600x1200, and the LCD is 1280x1024.)
But.. With the LCD (Philips 170S4 ?) I get some weird colour effects.. So much so that I did some portrait editing on the work machine and fixed what I thought was a green colour cast from background flouro lighting (Flash photo).
When printed, or viewed on another screen they looked really weird..
Granted, the LCD is the bottom of the 17" line for Philips, but it's something to check out if you're going to be using an LCD for photo work. No amount of fiddling with settings on the monitor seemed to help, I had a green tint to mid-tone skin on 50% of the images taken during the session.
But (again), at the end of the day I'd leap at an LCD tomorrow if I had some spare cash. The sharpness really is great for keeping your eyes happy...
Cheers, Me.
Message edited by author 2004-12-03 06:09:00.
|
|
|
|
12/03/2004 06:17:06 AM · #6 |
Think that with 19" LCD and 22" CRT gives very similar "visual diameter" (if you know what I mean). Correct if I´m wrong.
About the representation of true color I´m not sure but of course it depends on the screen quality. |
|
|
|
12/03/2004 09:41:37 AM · #7 |
|
|
|
12/03/2004 10:21:40 AM · #8 |
| I heard Apple finally got their Cinema display LCDs qualified for serious colour work. People are starting to switch over to them, but still using CRTs for final evaluation. The cinema displays have the 'problem' of actually showing too good blacks for the shadows - I suspect profiling would let you work around that, but not tried it out. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/13/2025 03:26:33 PM EDT.
