LCD monitor or CRT monitor better for photo editing?
in terms of resolution, pixel quality, color etc....
Google's your friend ... do a search. This is discussed a fair bit in other forums and in articles on the internet.
In short ... CRT's the way to go.
depends how long u stare at your monitor daily, i will get LCD to protect my eyes because stare at it more than 12hours a day
although CRT may have better colour, it is useless if you never calibrate it properly
anyway I have no regret switching my dual CRT to dual LCD, my eyes really can feel the different
LCDs are no doubt slightly behind in terms of color accuracy, but with the proper calibration should not be any inferior to a CRT.
The benefits of LCDs (size, power consumption and most importantly ... flicker-free/less strain on eyes) far outweigh the CRT in almost all situations unless you are working in a color-critical environment; so for most (94.528% of photographers) of us here, I would say that an color-calibrated LCD will be able to meet our needs.
I have been using LCDs as the main display device for more than 5 years now ... and the technology has improved steadily to the pont that I cannot see how a CRT (unless its one of those expensive Sony Artisan series) can give me more than what I have today.
have tested a few LCDs and CRT, by far, have edited images that are ok on LCD, but when port over to CRT, it shows up heaps of stuff that I didnt clean up.
good monitors.. hmmmm
Artisan and Lacie 22"
In short ... get a large CRT!
My company manufacture Micro X-Ray Inspection System and we have switched from using CRT to LCD monitor. Minute details are not lost.
I noticed that large CRT prices are kinda very close to similar sized LCDs...the smaller CRTs are way cheaper....Donno if i'm wrong.
adam, you have any recommendation on brand/models for large CRT and their approximate prices?
Originally Posted by Adam Goi
i noticed that in my photos too!Originally Posted by anka
Canon 300D, 30D, 5D. 17-40 f4 L, 24-105 f4 L, 70-200 f2.8 L IS
so which is a "good enough" lcd to recommend for the average joe, apart from lacie and viewsonic 191s and apple cinema display?
open up a photo with hot pixels on both LCD & CRT. you'll see the difference between them.
Viewsonic makes very good LCD's that can be callibrated to beyond what most photographers need. The A90 is a 19" Flatscreem for around $200. I have one at work, and aside from matching art prints it does everything else with extreme accurasy. Also dont forget monitors need replacing every 2 years or so, sometimes less time than that.
You meant to say "Viewsonic makes very good CRT's............"? The A90 is a CRT monitor.Originally Posted by jj1987
Originally Posted by kahheng
The Viewsonic 191B/S already is a very affordable LCD for the average joe.. =)Originally Posted by user111
Anyone knows where I can still get Eizo CRT's?
They seem to have stop production/ sales to end-users.. Can only get them as part of packages with Kodak minilabs..
It's not just about colour - there are LCD panels with extremely good colour capability. The general weakness with LCD panels, even the higher end ones, is the quality of their shadow and highlight rendition, as well as micro details. A lot of LCD panels have pixels that are, how do you say, not 'smooth' or fine enough for looking at photographic details.Originally Posted by Darren
Also, a lot of LCD panels, even some higher end ones, are far too bright. And when you turn down their brightness, contrast goes south.
I'd still go with CRTs for now, despite the fact I am looking forward to the day that LCDs become good enough.
And BTW, if someone can tell me who sells NEC (Mitsubishi) CRTs retail, I'd be very happy to hear from you. These dopes don't seem to like to reply to enquiry emails.
Last edited by kahheng; 25th June 2005 at 06:29 PM.
Hmmm...I also found out that when i connect my laptop to my desktop CRT scrren (Compaq FS740), there is a difference in gamma and contrast...not sure which to follow...
eat. drink. shoot
Originally Posted by kahheng
This is because they don't understand English. Hee...hee.... just kidding.
At the moment CRT is the only way to go for colour critical job- that is to achieve a print result that is identical (or at least 95% - 98%) to the monitor.
BTW to achieve this we need to calibrate the monitor and the printer needs custom profile for the media (paper) and setting.
But if you are not into colour management then it really does not matter.
We are not talking about colour look good and comfortable to the eyes which of course the LCD is better. As of now no one can achieve a print result that resembled the LCD even with calibration.