CRT or flat screen?

[peanuckle]

As long as you dont buy a cheapy LCD you will be fine. I personally love my CRT and think that for the price you get a lot more.

pea~

[Artbot]

"Cheapie" is a relative term. Does that mean don't bother with the $1200 ones? Do I have to get the Viewsonic 23" for $2900? That's not really an option.

[iC4]

a 1200$ tft will be fine....there are also cheaper one which will do the job

[peanuckle]

cheapy in my terms is a 15" for $300. If you spend over a grand you can get a GREAT LCD. Lacie makes good ones as well as apple. I really like the NEC LCD's also

[mayakindaguy]

Well, from what I know currently you will either have to sacrifice a bit of color quality or performance.

For pure color quality I hear Eizo's are pretty rock solide, but not so hot for response times.

If you're concerned about animation or motion a lot of the recent 19" to 23" models are coming in 12ms to 16ms response time.

By the end of the year response times should be dropping pretty low, so lcd panel performance is catching up to crt.

[shehbahn]

on a $ / pixel basis, CRTs win hand down.

CRT :
pros : cheap / excellent color fidelity / higher contrast / no refresh rate problems
cons : "flicker" on some cheaper models / "near" flat / heavy / bulky

LCDs :
pros : no flicker / small / light / absolutely flat
cons : dead pixels ! / unreliable colorimetry (except Cinema Display that's "acceptable") / expensive / lower contrast / narrower viewing angle / refresh rates (getting better)

the dead pixel problem alone in my case tips the balance : i cannot stand them. the other big problem is the colors. even the best of the best is barely getting in the range of acceptable if you are doing color sensitive work (shading / lighting / print). i work on a nice 16/9 Sony CRT and the only thing i would consider trading it for would be one of the larger ACDs. given the difference in price : ain't gonna happen soon.

my 0.02.

[wedge]

i have a sony SDM-S73 lcd monitor with a 16ms response time and a high contrast ratio (500:1 or something like that.. most cheapy lcds have 200:1 or 250:1).

i have had no problems with anything on my monitor, including animation or movie watching. also, the colors are spot on. i have rendered out projects of mine and viewed them on my lcd as well as other people's CRTs. i personally thought it looked the same.

[shehbahn]

i work for a feature film studio : we are very picky when it comes to monitor calibration. while the human eye has a very good color separation capability, eyeballing images on monitors is really not reliable enough for this kind of work.

[Mantat]

Just a quick note about the CRT. They usualy have better contrast and all but its in a PERFECT environnement. This means working in the dark, or having panels to block light so it doesnt reflect on the screen, etc...

I saw a review recently between CRT and LCD and they said that under 'normal' working condition, the CRT perform on par with the LCD because of all the reflexion.

So if you cant control your environnement, maybe the LCD isnt such a bad choice.

[shehbahn]

>I saw a review recently between CRT and LCD and they said that under 'normal' working condition, the CRT perform on par with the LCD because of all the reflexion.

if your "normal" working conditions cause reflections on your screen, you need new "normal conditions" : monitor calibration is usually performed in the working conditions and account for the ambient light in the room. these conditions are assumed to be constant - if your monitor is sitting in a room lit even partially by daylight then color calibration is irrelevant to your problem : don't expect to produce reliable colors.

back to my first argument : on a pixel for the $ ratio, CRTs come far ahead. LCDs have improved greatly in the past few years, but contrary to the hype, they aren't really a cost-effective option for professional work yet.

[meanadam]

I don't really like Dell.... but this 20.1" 1600 x LCD is the best I have ever seen. I have used mine about a month - and love it. Check out all the deals - and you can probably get one for around $700.

a

[Leonard]

I'd get an LCD display any day. I have two CRT's here and they really hurt my eyes badly after working for 8 hours straight. After a long, hard week at the office, I usually can't focus my eyes properly by Friday. In total contrast, I've worked on my Powerbook 17" LCD screen for weeks on end intensely and never had that problem. I think it may be due to the refresh rate - even though I've set the refresh on the CRT's to 85Hz, it probably still hurts my eyes after prolonged usage.

Leo

[maxrelics]

I like LCDs esp in small work environments or places where there is poor air conditioning. My CRT threw out and insane amout of heat and I would be dying in my room by the time i went to sleep after a day of working on the computer.

The average person is not going to be able to tell a bit of difference between a monitor that has been tweaked until the end of time, and a decnt lcd or crt that hasn't ever been color corrected.

[Tommy5547]

If you buy a 15" flat screen, your 3d app will npt be fun to play with. Say you work in 1024x768 which is standard for a 15", there will be a lot of scrolling and the mesh will not look good. Say you have a 15" and work in 1280x1024. Sure, things look better - but smaller. If you have perfect sight maybe you can handle it but I don't like it small.

Say you buy a 20" flat screen. Everything is good. You work in 1600x1200 or higher. Things look real good IMO. Only problem (if you also play on your computer) is that the image gets blurred if you play fast games as FPS (First-Person-Shooter ex. Doom). If you want a 20" flat screen who can handle this it will cost a fortune. Remember this when bying one.

There is thousands of reviews on the net between Flat vs. CRT.
Check out tomshardware.com or similar sites.

[Valkyrien]

if you can afford a decent LCD (Samsung 191T is a good choice for price/quality) then go for it;)

[TheLostVertex]

Dont forget that LCD's always will have the proper pixel ratio, as CRTs wont. Also LCD's are better for your eyes, which I always thought were important in doing graphics...but, hey I could be wrong.... :D

[kromekat]

I'd get an LCD display any day. I have two CRT's here and they really hurt my eyes badly after working for 8 hours straight. After a long, hard week at the office, I usually can't focus my eyes properly by Friday. In total contrast, I've worked on my Powerbook 17" LCD screen for weeks on end intensely and never had that problem. I think it may be due to the refresh rate - even though I've set the refresh on the CRT's to 85Hz, it probably still hurts my eyes after prolonged usage.

Leo

I agree - after 5-6 years of working with high quality 21" CRT displays in the studio and at home, and suffering terrible eye fatigue after long days, I purchased a pair of Samsung 173P LCDs. I went from 1600x1200 to 1280x1024 x 2 (considerably more screen real estate)
The Samsungs have a contrast ratio of 700:1, they are super bright, very sharp, have a wide viewing angle, and thus far, proved brilliantly colour accurate. Now most people say as Leo that they find the LCD screen far better and less tiring, and I can tell you from experience also that is very true, and the Powerbook (and most other laptops) screen he refers to don't have the qualities (brightness/contrast etc) of the Samsungs, or many other new, higher spec, standalone panels I suspect.

Unless they have been deleted, you should find several threads on this subject in this forum btw! (search for LCD) :)

[kromekat]

I'd get an LCD display any day. I have two CRT's here and they really hurt my eyes badly after working for 8 hours straight. After a long, hard week at the office, I usually can't focus my eyes properly by Friday. In total contrast, I've worked on my Powerbook 17" LCD screen for weeks on end intensely and never had that problem. I think it may be due to the refresh rate - even though I've set the refresh on the CRT's to 85Hz, it probably still hurts my eyes after prolonged usage.

Leo

I agree - after 5-6 years of working with high quality 21" CRT displays in the studio and at home, and suffering terrible eye fatigue after long days, I purchased a pair of Samsung 173P LCDs. I went from 1600x1200 to 1280x1024 x 2 (considerably more screen real estate)
The Samsungs have a contrast ratio of 700:1, they are super bright, very sharp, have a wide viewing angle, and thus far, proved brilliantly colour accurate*. Now most people say as Leo that they find the LCD screen far better and less tiring, and I can tell you from experience also that is very true, and the Powerbook (and most other laptops) screen he refers to doesn't have the qualities (brightness/contrast etc) of the Samsungs, or many other new higher spec panels I suspect.

*The only area I tend to refer to a CRT is for print work when my image has a lot of bright red in, but as long as you are aware that it will appear somewhat less vivid, you'll be ok!

Unless they have been deleted, you should find several threads on this subject in this forum btw! :)

[Artbot]

Thanks for everyone's input. I finally got out to Best Buy to look at the LCDs. I figured if I bought something at the store I could easily return it if it wasn't satisfactory. As I was browsing, I couldn't believe how poor the image quality was on all the units. The LG and Samsung looked fuzzy and out of focus. This may have been due to poor set-up, I don't know. The one that looked the best of the sad bunch was actually an HP, which is probably just a re-branded model from another manufacturer. Finally I asked if there were any LCDs sharp enough and with enough clarity in the small details for graphics work and he showed me a Sony 19". It was so far above the rest it wasn't even a contest. And it was only $750 after a $100 rebate. Sold!

I stayed up late last night working on it and I can already sense the reduced eyestrain. How many of us have worked late into the night on a CRT and when going to sleep, see kind of a phantom glow in our eyeballs, even when they are shut? I didn't feel any of that last night, which I'm very happy about. We'll see how the Sony does in the long run, but for now I'm happy as can be with it.

[SheepFactory]

Det a DELL 2001 FP , you'll thank me later ;)

[pnoland]

Definatly don't get a 300 dollar 15"...I did and I really do regret it. I mean, for movies, games and general surfing it's fine but for 3d applications it's not the best...The max resolution is an annoyance when you're trying to model something in a quad view mode with a 1024x768 resolution...be prepared to squint! :rolleyes: Luckily I sold my dad my CRT 17" for 80 bucks so if I need to I'll just buy it back...then again his computer is downstairs I might be able to snag it back. Think he'd notice? ;)

pnoland

[imashination]

A very important note about store screens. They are almost always run from the same signal. This means:

1) most running non-native resolutions
2) all analogue
3) all running from multiple splitter boxes
4) all running the same crappy mpg demo movie.
5) all set up (if at all) by brain dead store monkies

If there is a screen you are really after, ask to see it on a single machine with a dvi connection.

[pnoland]

A very important note about store screens. They are almost always run from the same signal. This means:

1) most running non-native resolutions
2) all analogue
3) all running from multiple splitter boxes
4) all running the same crappy mpg demo movie.
5) all set up (if at all) by brain dead store monkies

If there is a screen you are really after, ask to see it on a single machine with a dvi connection. Hey, I resent that! I work at an office store... I'm only half brain dead! It really is true though, we have a lot of people that don't know anything about electronics that just BS there way through a sale hoping the customers know even less then they do. I'm at least smart enough to research new items we get in so I know what I'm talking about...er, usually. ;) Our monitor selection, if you can call it that, is set up like this: one dvd player, a vga splitter that splits the dvd signal to our monitors. So yes, they're all running the same really horrible quality demo but sometimes we throw in a dvd if we're bored. If you ask to see the monitor run with a dvi connection 9 out of 10 times people will look at you like you asked them to explain quantum physics. I'll admit I didn't know what DVI was initially but when I bought my monitor I saw it had a dvi connection so I shelled the money for the cable...those things are really expensive! So after spending 60 bucks on a cable I hooked it up and didn't really notice much of a difference. :P Maybe it's more noticeable in a nicer monitor.

I hate working retail,
pnoland. :D

[mayakindaguy]

Yes, almost always at a retail store you're going to be looking at terrible images that are poorly set up. Generally there is no dramatic difference from DVI to VGA, but some swear by it. It's kind of like the FPS argument. (specifically in the lcds native resolution).

About the Sony SDM-HS94P, I assume that's the monitor you're referring to. From user reviews that I've heard (mostly gamers) it is a really nice LCD. It's definitely one of the top LCDs with a great response time in the 19" category. Only draw backs are the thick bezel and the glare factor. You definitely don't want to have a bright light shining anywhere infront of the monitor or else it produces glare.

I'd be cautious about the best buy rebates. You should definitely hound them for it because there is a class action lawsuit in Ohio against best buy for reselling returned items as new and not honoring their rebates.

Here's a link (http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=789600&page=1&pp=20&highlight=Sony+SDM-HS94P)for some user reivews or discussions

Hope that helps a bit and I hope that you enjoy your new LCD http://cgtalk.com/images/smilies/thumbsup.gif

About the Dell 2001FP, Do you have this monitor Sheep Factory. I've been quite wary about purchasing one of these even though the price is quite attractive. I'm specifically concerned about quality control issues (specifically an excess of dead pixels, though Dell's return policy is pretty nice) and screen door effect (which is supposedly common place on this specific panel made by LG...but I'm not sure).

This young kids experience is quite an eye opener thought I'm sure it's not the typical experience. Here's the link (http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=782053)

[SheepFactory]

I had not a single problem with it , many of my friends bought it too and they all love it. Its a wonderful monitor. That guy unlucky but thats about it , it can happen with any brand.


PS: I just saw that image burning problem , i never had that , that guys unit must be defected.

[Spacelord]

Has anyone seen this Samsung monitor ? Any opinions ?
http://www.samsung.com/au/products/monitors/tft/193p.asp

[kromekat]

Yeah - it's the 19" version of my 173Ps, which are amazing! - and looking at the specs on the 19s, this one has the same specs apart from having a higher contrast : 1000:1 which is excellent! :D

[gigantor]

Another vote for the Dell 2001, its the best all around monitor I have ever owned. Its a CG modelers dream,plays games like nobodys buisness,artwork looks insane on it.Photoshop/painter look spectacular.

Best product I have seen in quite awhile. I have a top of the line 21 inch Crt right next to it,and the 2001 make it look like total garbage. I'm never going back to CRT's ever again.

I got really lucky with my panel, and it has absolutely no dead pixels that I can see..,and Iv'e scanned it from top to bottem many times lol.

Honestly guys for the price,under 600 (if you haggle) with free 2 day shipping..how can you get any other monitor then this one.

[leas5040]

Perhaps someone should mention that advertised contrast ratios/ brightness ratings are not the same thing as actual contrast ratio/brightness ratings. Do not trust the tags! Get a feel for what you are buying by seeing some reviews online, and see what they have to say about the screen overall, but about the colors in particular.

[Rick Flowers]

The Samsung 193p is better than the Dell 2001 ;)
Few bucks more though

[orcus]

Most recent consumer-level LCDs are 18-bit panels - and can only realistically create 262,144 different colours and they're creating 16,2 million colors by dithering. (Some professional LCD's like EIZO have better color rendering and they can be calibrated, but they are EXPENSIVE) This image http://www.overclockers.com.au/articles/257238/band.jpg looks on crt ok but on lcd you can see strange color transitions. So it's good to use lcd for modeling, cad, games(with latency 16ms and less), office, programming... and crt for photoshop, videopost, texture creating, printing....

[rocarpen]

Most recent consumer-level LCDs are 18-bit panels - and can only realistically create 262,144 different colours and they're creating 16,2 million colors by dithering. (Some professional LCD's like EIZO have better color rendering and they can be calibrated, but they are EXPENSIVE) This image http://www.overclockers.com.au/articles/257238/band.jpg looks on crt ok but on lcd you can see strange color transitions. So it's good to use lcd for modeling, cad, games(with latency 16ms and less), office, programming... and crt for photoshop, videopost, texture creating, printing....
You need not go to the Eizo-level (which I understand is awfully expensive and suffers from crummy response times) in order to enjoy an LCD with full 16.7 million colour, high contrast, decent response time s, etc. Do like kromekat, and snag yourself a either the Samsung 173P or 193P line. They cost a fair bit more than your average same-sized LCD, but they're god's gift to colour accuracy and graphics work, so I've heard.

Here's my plan, as it stands, for monitor goodness:

Left monitor: 17" LCD: 173P, pivoted for vertical orientation...
Right monitor: 17" LCD: Cheap 18-bit 12-16ms response time LCD, also pivoted for vertical orientation...
Third monitor: Across my office, maybe in a corner, put my current 17" Apple Studio Display (still in great shape, with fantastic colour).

Use the 173P for my main workspace. Use the second LCD (low-response time poor-colour-quality but cheaper) for palettes, games, coding etc. And finally, use the Apple Studio Display for a look at colours through a CRT, occasionally glancing over towards it.

Run the two LCD's off a dual-link DVI GeForce 6800 GT, and run the CRT off a last-generation PCI Radeon or GeForce.

To me, this is the ideal setup, balancing awesome performance with cost considerations. I figure why spend for two 173P's when the right hand one will be sporting jst palettes 90% of the time?

http://cgtalk.com/images/smilies/smile.gif

[Spacelord]

I went for the Eizo, I got one for a really good price.
I should recieve it next week, I'll let you know what its like.

[derbyQsalano]

In need of a little insight here. I was thinking about buying a Dual 20" apple cinema display or a single 23" cinema display, however, I tested one 23" on my DVI-I connection on my Quadro 4 and it didn't work, is that because the Q4 doesnt have DDC?
If I buy me a new card, say a GF6800U or GT, is it likely to work on that? On the apple site they say it will, but after testing it with my Q4 I don't entirely trust it... Any help would be hot.
I work on an Intel PC btw and my eyes got tired of the iiyama VM Pro 514 I had, then it blacked out on me and I decided to get me a new (set of) screen(s)... LCD this time, but after reviewing hundreds, I don't think there's a non-apple display that will satisfy me...

[plastic]

but after reviewing hundreds, I don't think there's a non-apple display that will satisfy me...


you realize that all current-generation 23" screens use the _same_ panel? they all come from the same manufacturing plant.
it's the same shit with different case. some use cheaper connectors as the benq, which degrades analog signal quality.

[derbyQsalano]

you realize that all current-generation 23" screens use the _same_ panel?

Apple too? Then why is it that other 23" screens produce different colors? Anyway, this doesn't help me. Because I will probably go for the 20" for one and I am not an LCD fan because they're slow, are not color correct and are friggin expensive, however... I need a screen that's not hurting my eyes and since apple displays have great color and it's about the only LCD I tested that didnt give me a headache (no kiddin), I'm willing to make a sacrifice... Now leaving the "CRT vs LCD" and "Which LCD" discussions aside, since I'm well past that (unless I come to find that there's no sollution to my problem) I'd like to know if the GF6800U en GT support the 20" (or 23") apple cinema display.

[Ryukyu]

Yes the 6800 will work with the 20" or 23" Apple LCDs. Your in luck too because Apple just dropped the price of the 20" by $300.

I'm not trying to start a graphic card war, but just wantd you to be aware that ATI has announced their X800 card for Mac. In some testing that I have seen it beats or at least equals the 6800 Ultra, and it's $100 less than the Ultra.

I am not saying that you should get that instead, but just wanted you to be aware of it as an option.

I've heard a lot of good comments about the new Dell LCDs too. I've even seen Apple fans state that those are the only thing they would definitely endorse from Dell. Plus, for the price you could get 2 for relatively the same price of an Apple. Don't get me wrong, I have an Apple 17" and a 20" and they are great monitors.

[DanSilverman]

There are at least two important issues to be aware of when purchasing an LCD monitor:

- Native Screen Resolution
- Pixel Refresh Rate

Native screen resolution is the resolution the screen is made to run at. For example, if the native screen resolution is set to 1024 x 768 then that is the best resolution to run it at (and the maximum screen resolution). Lesser screen resolutions may produce poor visual results as the screen resolutions are "fixed". Therefore, if you intend to run your monitor at a particular resolution then that should be the LCD's native resolution in order to get best visual results.

Pixel refresh rate is the most important aspect to me and that may be because I work primarily in 3D and especially with real-time 3D. You want to get the lowest refresh rates that you can. The higher the refresh rates the more smearing and ghosting you will get when things move on your monitor. If you are rotating or moving something in a 3D view in MAX, for example, or playing a game, then you will literally see streaks or trails from the moving object. Reports state this happens with monitors that have refresh rates from about 20 - 25 ms. Look for monitors that offer refresh rates at about 16 ms or less and you should no longer see the streaks when moving something around the screen.

Most of the larger, less expensive screens tend to have higher refresh rates (25 ms). Therefore, while they are very tempting (because of all the screen realistate they offer) they will have the refresh problem mentioned above.

[Cosmo]

hey,

i just bought an Apple 20-inch Cinema Display. I love it, It's crystal clear and ultra sharp.
Combined with OSX it's perfect for color control via ColorSync.

I have used several LCD screens, but i have to say this one is the best so far for me.

greetz,

[derbyQsalano]

Your in luck too because Apple just dropped the price of the 20" by $300.

Oh don't worry, by the time I'll buy 'm they're probably replaced by 3D hologram displays or some sh*t like that :) I'm not going to spend this money untill I'm 100% certain.

I'm not trying to start a graphic card war, but just wantd you to be aware that ATI has announced their X800 card for Mac. In some testing that I have seen it beats or at least equals the 6800 Ultra, and it's $100 less than the Ultra.

I am not saying that you should get that instead, but just wanted you to be aware of it as an option.

The results seemed obvious on Mac indeed, however, on pc, the results are about 50-50... So only the price difference could make you decide. However, I've had about 4 ATI cards in my life and with all of m I had problems that resulted in having to lower AGP x... or crashes in games or driver problems that made me search on the net how the ATI drivers could be uninstalled to go back to a previous version... or just booting in a complete black windows, but most importantly problems in Maya; Viewports going black, errors with the image planes, etc... I've had about as many nVidia cards and honestly I can't seem to remember any major issue like that at all, no crashes, games work, maya works so I can work hard and then play... less hard. However times change and I'm always pretty objective about things like that, now I hear the same problems popping up with ATI cards...especially viewports and image planes... I've tested the GF, and I'm damn happy about that... 3 times the framerate in everyting but particles then my Quadro 4 XGL 750, as stable as the Q4, so I'm gonna spend the 600 I save on a GF :)

I've heard a lot of good comments about the new Dell LCDs too. I've even seen Apple fans state that those are the only thing they would definitely endorse from Dell. Plus, for the price you could get 2 for relatively the same price of an Apple. Don't get me wrong, I have an Apple 17" and a 20" and they are great monitors.

I have a problem with the Dell LCDs, they hurt my eyes like most LCDs, I didn't test the new ones, and I will do that before making up my mind though, thanks...

I'm going to check out refresh rates but I tested a 23" and I didnt notice streaking so I guess we're good... Just to make sure, I'll go check ones again before buying one...

[Zack]

Eh, I'm not picky, and my one 15" el cheapo LCD has worked great for me for 3 years now. Up until a few days ago I thought it had no dead pixels until I looked around for a while and finally found one way off to the left. Even now I can't find it. It's definitely not a major distraction.

The size was the main reason I picked it originally, I have a small desk, and with a keyboard I really didn't have size for a monitor that's 23" deep. Yes it's small, but I've grown used to it and I can stare at it for hours on end without any soreness in the eyes. I was thinking about getting a second monitor but I honestly couldn't convince myself that I really needed one.

Zack "I don't have $1200 for an LCD" Taich

[derbyQsalano]

Hey Dan, I checked the specs on the acd's and they have 16 ms response time, so that's A OK...

[Elekko]

Many flat screens dosent support 1600x1200 resolution. You mostlikely need a 20"+ screen. Though there are more expensive flat screens which fully supports it. I run on a 19" CRT and I love it as it was my teddybear.

[derbyQsalano]

I was a bit worried about the natice resolution on a 20" acd, on my iiyama VMPro 514, I was running at 1600x1200, any higher gave blurry characters. Since that broke down I am now looking at my other screen a 19" Vibrant (?) It's junk, but still working... Now the 20" would run on a slightly higher resolution then my 19" which is on 1280x1024 (Any higher drops the Hz too low) So I can live with that.

Btw has anyone had experience with a dual 20" or 23" setup? Seems that the dual monitor support is not so evident.

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.