LCD Monitors Revisited - DPChallenge Forums

	You are not logged in. (log in or register)

DPChallenge Forums >> Tips, Tricks, and Q&A >> LCD Monitors Revisited

Pages:

Showing posts 1 - 6 of 6, (reverse)

Author

Thread

sylandrix

Nikon D50

01/16/2003 12:49:48 AM · #1

Hi everyone... I know this subject has been talked about before but I am having a hard time locating the thread in a forum...

I have considered getting a imac with a 17" LCD screen, which I naturally plan to do photography work with... One of the concerns holding me back is color management. Folks at my camera club seem to agree that while the color, resolution and absent refresh rate is nice in an LCD monitor, the things are very difficult to calibrate...

I think it is important to have a system set up so that the image I see on my monitor is the same as what everyone else sees. (anyone who bothers to calibrate their monitor that is :)

Logically, I would think if Apple phased out their CRT monitors, and now all they sell are LCD displays, that they must be adequate enough for serious photo work. After all, a large segment of mac computer users are graphic artists, who've come to depend on a mac's very reliable color management.

Any thoughts/comments/personal experience on the subject would be greatly appreciated...

Thanks!

greenem2

Canon EOS-10D

01/16/2003 01:27:00 AM · #2

Originally posted by sylandrix:

Logically, I would think if Apple phased out their CRT monitors, and now all they sell are LCD displays, that they must be adequate enough for serious photo work. After all, a large segment of mac computer users are graphic artists, who've come to depend on a mac's very reliable color management.

True, but most graphic artists use a G4 Mac (with CRT), not an imac.

jimmythefish

Canon EOS-10D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

01/16/2003 03:18:57 AM · #3

I find there's a personal preference...a boss of mine swore by his LCD monitor and I thought it was total crap compared to my Trinitron...I had 2 CRTs on my desk, a 17" and a 21" and I always went to the 17" for crucial stuff, even thought the 21" was a $1000 monitor. It's totally a personal preference. The CRT monitors are also a lot cheaper. I've always preferred the CRT for absolute resolution and the antialiasing effect that doesn't seem to be as apparent for me on the LCD. I just don't see the dynamic range and the sharpness in the LCD. That said, I haven't looked at the Mac ones. Just go look at lots and try 'em out. Take a few familiar photos on disk to the shop and if it's a place worthy of your bucks, they'll let you try 'em all.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

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

01/16/2003 03:24:49 AM · #4

Originally posted by greenem2:

Originally posted by sylandrix:
Logically, I would think if Apple phased out their CRT monitors, and now all they sell are LCD displays, that they must be adequate enough for serious photo work. After all, a large segment of mac computer users are graphic artists, who've come to depend on a mac's very reliable color management.

True, but most graphic artists use a G4 Mac (with CRT), not an imac.

Due to popular demand they are also still selling the eMac, which is the old iMac-in-a-box (with CRT) packaged for educational institutions, but available to anyone...

sylandrix

Nikon D50

01/16/2003 11:40:05 AM · #5

Thanks everyone for your replies, I will go to a store with my pictures and get a feel for how the monitors render my images.

Yes, its true graphic artists buy G4s but now apple pushes their Apple Cinema LCD screens with the G4 towers. I think buying a CRT monitor now involves buying from another company, since apple's site doesn't even list any CRT monitors that can be bought with towers..

I figured the imac was a little more economical solution for an "recreational" graphic artist such as myself ;)

Thanks again,
Dave

Azrifel

Fujifilm X100VI

01/16/2003 11:46:24 AM · #6

I have a 15" LCD on my laptop (duhuh) and a 17" CRT on my 'normal' computer. The actual viewing size of the two is similar.
I prefer the LCD for reading and writing (word / wordperfect / adobe pdf / quattro pro / usenet agent / email etc).
But I prefer the CRT for working on photo's and other design stuff like logo's. I can't explain why, but the CRT just seems better and the editing yields better results. Especially visible after transferring a edited photo from the LCD to the CRT pc.
Both have been calibrated on contrast and brightness, both are very close in color and that sort of stuff.

I remember Phill Askey's first samples from the Sigma SD-9 (Foveon), he made them in Cologne and edited them there on the laptop. The posted samples had major flaws (much noise, colors wrong etc). He only saw them when he took a look via a CRT. He edited them with a CRT and they turned out much better. He calibrates all his lcd's and crt's with a spyball calibrating device, so go figure.
Another sample for this is perhaps the Kodak 14n (full frame 14mp dSLR) sample disaster. They were edited on a laptop* and uploaded to the Kodak site, check some threads in the dpreview Canon/Nikon/Kodak SLR talk forums for the (very negative) results. (the Kodak beta editing program was also to blame) The camera is slammed, a marketing disaster.

*(the Kodak man himself said that in the Kodak SLR Talk forum)

Pages:

Current Server Time: 08/26/2025 04:49:57 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.

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: 08/26/2025 04:49:57 PM EDT.