CRT Monitor - DPChallenge Forums

01/03/2005 06:12:15 PM · #1

I'm looking to buy a new computer as I am currently using a laptop. I already have the CPU chosen but I wasn't so sure on a CRT Monitor. My laptop screen is horrible for PS Elements so I wanted to ask your opinion on the type of CRT that any of you use.

Any information would be greatly appreciated! Thanks!

~Colette~

fsteddy

01/03/2005 06:33:29 PM · #2

If you can scratch up the coins for a Flat Panel LCD that would be the best. If not, then a Flat Screen CRT should be your choice.

Brock

Canon PowerShot Pro1

01/03/2005 06:35:14 PM · #3

short of a silicone graphics I seem to prefer Viewsonic monitors with a high resolution setup...I have the PS790 at home and their 19in best model in same Professional Series at work. LCD is best but a flatscreen CRT is next best if money is an issue.

Message edited by author 2005-01-03 18:39:33.

Natator

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

01/03/2005 06:46:50 PM · #4

Originally posted by fsteddy:

If you can scratch up the coins for a Flat Panel LCD that would be the best. If not, then a Flat Screen CRT should be your choice.

I'm mid looking into this as well.

The grand concensus of opinion, both here and the interweb in general, is that CRT's are still far better for photography than LCD's, although there are now a few high end, and very expensive, LCD's that come close.

Where have you guys found the "LCD is best" advice? I would prefer LCD myself, but what I am finding contradicts this completely.

soup

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

01/03/2005 07:03:55 PM · #5

from what i have heard/read - CRTs are better than LCD for photo editing, and games for that matter.

money is always an issue...

Message edited by author 2005-01-03 19:04:49.

hdogg4u

Canon EOS-20D

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX Aspherical DF for Canon

01/03/2005 07:06:05 PM · #6

I use 2 laptops and a full CRT but I prefer the CRT over the LCD to tell you the truth the Laptops have good LCD's but the CRT I thinks gives me better color overall and the 19" size makes things easier to work with. I use the Samsung 955DF about $130 but can do 1600 X 1200 so I can do some editting without having to zoom down in levels. Another thing I learnt is a good vidoe card really helps.

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

01/03/2005 07:35:27 PM · #7

Originally posted by Natator:

The grand concensus of opinion, both here and the interweb in general, is that CRT's are still far better for photography than LCD's, although there are now a few high end, and very expensive, LCD's that come close.

Where have you guys found the "LCD is best" advice? I would prefer LCD myself, but what I am finding contradicts this completely.

This is what I have been coming across as well...that the CRT's are better for Photography than the LCD's. When I have worked with my photos on my laptop and then uploaded for critiqueing it seems to be a very low exposure and doesn't show what "I'm seeing" on my LCD.... I would prefer a 'space saver' Monitor...but I don't want to sacrifice quality....money isn't a real issue...although I would prefer to keep it low...because the more money you save the more toys you can get :)

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

01/03/2005 07:44:05 PM · #8

Most certainly in the low end, LCDs can be competitive, but for photo editing, we need to stay away from the low end of either the CRT or LCD displays.
My favorite displays for best performance/cost ratio are the 19-21" CRTs. You can pick of a very good 21" CRT for about $500 if you ddo your research. My Sony E500 was about that 2 years ago, got it as a "store display unit" with factory warranty from CompUSA. Displays 2048x1536 resolution, 32-bit color depth (LCD maxes at 24) and has higher refresh rate and better contrast than all but the very best ($1500+) LCDs.
Bottom line, for photo editing, get a CRT. By the next time you replace it , LCDs might be competitive.

01/03/2005 11:36:40 PM · #9

I just looked up the monitors online that all of you suggested and I think I may have a good idea of what I need to get! I thank you for your opinions and advice!

Good day!

~Colette~

01/03/2005 11:40:31 PM · #10

By far the best monitot I have ever seen that's not utterly stratospheric in price is LaCie's ElectronBlue series. I use the 22 inch version and it's to die for. It's not cheap, though...

Robt.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

01/04/2005 12:18:08 AM · #11

I just checked out that LaCie 22 series...wow! Looks sharp! I've never even heard of that brand before. I'll go in and check reviews next....

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

01/04/2005 12:22:44 AM · #12

Originally posted by colyla:

I just checked out that LaCie 22 series...wow! Looks sharp! I've never even heard of that brand before. I'll go in and check reviews next....

Just don't plan to move it around much once you hoist it into position -- they are quite massive. They do look great -- we have two at work.

LaCie also makes excellent hard drives. I think you can get a 1TB drive at CDW for $999.

Message edited by author 2005-01-04 00:24:08.

01/04/2005 12:25:55 AM · #13

Yes, they are very heavy. The uPS guy wasn't happy at all. The dark grey casing and the hood are great for isolating the screen and giving you a truer look to your color.

Robt.

01/04/2005 01:15:11 AM · #14

Just checked out the 19 and 22 in Lacie's....wow! The 19 is pretty reasonable and 22 is about 674 at the cheapest I found it. I wish I could see them physically side by side....(maybe it's good I can't:)

fsteddy

01/04/2005 01:16:23 AM · #15

Originally posted by Natator:

I guess everyone has there own opinion on this subject and they can rattle of all the facts they want to, but for me, I like my Hyundai L90D LCD monitor. It works well for me and THAT is all that counts.

Natator

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

01/04/2005 01:38:49 AM · #16

Originally posted by fsteddy:

It works well for me and THAT is all that counts.

I am sure the good LCD's work really well. I am just looking, personally, for the BEST I can find, rather than something that will just do the job (even if do it well).

I was just surprised to see a couple of people see CRT as second best here when that was exactly the opposite of what I was reading everywhere else.

I was just wondering if that was based on evidence, reports, reviews, even direct comparrisons between monitors, or just a preference someone has. The way it was written implied that there might be more behind it than a preference, so I was keen to see what, as I am still open as to which way I will go.

Nazgul

Canon EOS-20D

01/04/2005 01:53:32 AM · #17

Lacie has a pretty good LCD too that is supposed to compare just fine to the CRTÂ´s ....
In fact it says on their web "This item is on backorder until January 2005 due to an increase in demand."

I Think professionals are moving more and more into high end LCDÂ´s and the consumer ones are well useable for amateurs like us:p

Message edited by author 2005-01-04 01:54:02.

HRoxas

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

01/04/2005 02:02:02 AM · #18

Glad to hear more positive feedback regarding the Lacie. I've been wanting to get one of these babies, the 19". Just wanna settle the Xmas bills first so I'm hoping to get one by mid-January.

I've read/heard reviews regarding CRT as the hardware of choice for photo editing/graphix works. Although I briefly considered a BenQ LCD. Lacie wins hands down.

01/04/2005 02:36:25 AM · #19

Colyta,

The 22 is a LOT bigger than the 19 in viewable area. If you can afford it, go that way. You won't regret it. Re: 674$, consider that I bought mine a couple years ago when it cost 1,400$, and I haven't regretetd it for a moment. And I live on a very small fixed income, it was a major expense for me.

Robt.

Natator

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

01/04/2005 02:52:46 AM · #20

Originally posted by bear_music:

The 22 is a LOT bigger than the 19 in viewable area.

Yup, I only just realised that when I compared my 17" to a 19", it made a bigger difference than I realised.

However, as I learned today, I believe that .....

With the 22" CRT I am eyeing off it is a viewable area of 20". Apparently this is standard for CRT's that the size is the full CRT size, but less is viewable, presumably because of the case (please correct me if someone has better info).

However, apparently with LCD the listed size is the actual size as they do not have that problem.

It might, therefore, be that a 19" LCD has roughly the same actual viewing area as a 21" CRT (to hazard a guess).

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

01/04/2005 09:15:30 AM · #21

Simon, you're correct about the difference is the way size is measured. For CRTs what's stated is the size of the tube, and there si always non-viewable area around the perimeter of the glass tube. It's the area where the tube curves around frm side to front, and where the aperture grille mounts. You can usually find the actual diagonal "viewable" dimension listed for many CRTs, and this can be compared directly to the diagonal dimension for LCDs; LCDs are viewable across the entire width of the LDC panel, and though they have a frame outside that, it's the panel dimension that's given.
The other fly in the soup is aspect ratio; don't get caught comparing a LCD display with a 16:9 (wide screen) aspect ratio to one with the standard ratio. The viewable areas don't directly compare.

01/04/2005 02:00:55 PM · #22

Originally posted by bear_music:

I was thinking the 19" would be more affordable...but I wonder if I wouldn't be disappointed that I hadn't went ahead and got the bigger one... Wow...that's a huge difference in price...it's amazing how much the price comes down on stuff if you can just wait (I hate waiting!)

I get my taxes back before the end of January .... I think this will be my gift to myself this year :)

I'm a new member and I really appreciate everyone's feedback as I went out and searched on all the monitors that were mentioned...there is so much great information in here!

01/04/2005 02:02:39 PM · #23

Originally posted by bear_music:

Mr. Robert/bear music
Do you know if these monitors are sold in particular stores or only on the internet? If I could save shipping and get from store I would rather do that....I'll do some more searching online as well.

Thanks!!

01/04/2005 02:10:49 PM · #24

Colyta,

At the time I bought this monitor, it was not available in a brick-and-mortar store anywhere near me; the closest was in Boston, a 2+ hour drive away. It's my impression you can only find them in stores that specialize in sefvicing graphic arts professionals. If you live in or near a major metropolitan area you could probably find one. As it happened, the Boston store said they could order it and "have it in 3 days". The price differentil al over online was such that I could pay for the shipping with my price savings, and then some, so I bought it online.

Robt.