PDA

View Full Version : CRT Refresh


Knotian
10-26-2004, 07:59 PM
Lots of people going to LCD monitors and I admit they are great if you have the $$$. I have found that a lot of CRT monitors work really well if you crank up the refresh rate. I just got a new 15" for $79 and jacked up the refresh and it is really doing a good job. I wasn't able to hijack my good 21" from the spouse.
Knotian

Dementor3D
10-26-2004, 09:00 PM
I use CRTs, too. TFTs are to expensive (I'm only pupil)...
At this time I'm using 3 22'' CRTs with an refresh rate of 100HZ :)

I think with the money you save with an CRT, you can buy an additional RAM-module or a better graphics card ;)

Goon
10-26-2004, 09:08 PM
LCD's all the way. They cost more, and aren't quite as good, but when you move across the country twice a year going to and from college, having an lcd is a godsend. I can take mine on the plane with me, instead of risking shipping a $600 21" 60+ lb. CRT.

Plus they are generally easier on the eyes for me, esp. compared to this POS I use at work.

DanSilverman
10-26-2004, 09:58 PM
I just bought a 21" LCD monitor (made by Samsung) and promptly returned it to the store for a full refund. Why? Was the monitor bad? Not at all. As a matter of fact, it was beautiful. So why did I return it? Because it does not suit my needs.

I would fully recommend anyone looking at getting an LCD monitor read up on them and completely research them before diving in. LCD monitors have a set pixel size and are manufactured for a specific screen resolution. Therefore, if you get one of these nice LCD monitors that displays 1600 x 1200 but need to run it at a lower resolution for some reason (such as with a game or some other full-screen application) then you will get blurring and fuzziness as a result. In other words, you will have 1600 x 1200 pixels across the screen whether you like it or not and the monitor will "simulate" a lower screen resolution.

Secondly, refresh rates tend to be lower on the higher screen resolutions. For example, at 1600 x 1200 the monitor I had refreshed at only 60 Hz. That is not all that bad, though, since refresh rates are not all that big a deal with LCD monitors (not like they are with CRTs). On the other hand, the refresh rate of the pixels themselves can really kill you. If you need to see anything moving (other than a movie) then you will see a blur durring the motion. I create real-time 3D applications for a living (similar to 3D games) and I have to test them all the time. Running one of my RT3D environments on an LCD gives me a headache because of all the blur.

What I am really saying is an LCD screen is great for 2D applications and even for things like 3D modeling (though I am still bugged by the blurring when I rotate or move something in a view), but they simply are not up to speed for real-time 3D development and similar things. So, if you are considering an LCD then you need to see if your reason for getting one are justified. In other words, can you do what you do on it without problems.

The last thing is that most of them have natively low resolutions (1280 x 1024 on down). So, if you need screen realistate then you have to dish out some cash to get one that supports a bigger screen resolution. After working at 1600 x 1200 on my CRT monitor I just cannot work any smaller. 3D Studio MAX and Photoshop just seem way to crowded at smaller screen resolutions.

Goon
10-26-2004, 10:06 PM
Secondly, refresh rates tend to be lower on the higher screen resolutions. For example, at 1600 x 1200 the monitor I had refreshed at only 60 Hz. That is not all that bad, though, since refresh rates are not all that big a deal with LCD monitors (not like they are with CRTs). On the other hand, the refresh rate of the pixels themselves can really kill you. If you need to see anything moving (other than a movie) then you will see a blur durring the motion. I create real-time 3D applications for a living (similar to 3D games) and I have to test them all the time. Running one of my RT3D environments on an LCD gives me a headache because of all the blur.
This is an issue certainly, however in the next few years this shouldn't be a noticeable problem (btw, did you get a 213T with the distorted aspect ratio?). My current lcd has a fall time of 14 ms and ghosting is much less apparent than my old laptop's screen.

The last thing is that most of them have natively low resolutions (1280 x 1024 on down). So, if you need screen realistate then you have to dish out some cash to get one that supports a bigger screen resolution. After working at 1600 x 1200 on my CRT monitor I just cannot work any smaller. 3D Studio MAX and Photoshop just seem way to crowded at smaller screen resolutions. Totally agree here. It is impossible to find a 1600x1200 lcd screen on anything smaller than a 20" display (unless you go with a laptop. Seriously wtf is with the laptops having all the awesome high res displays), and that of course means you really have to throw down some $$$. But for now I'm gonna make do with one 17" and add another in a couple months. And that should take care of the cramped feeling.

lots
10-26-2004, 10:25 PM
I run dual 19" CRTs for a total screen res of 3200x1200 (1600x1200 x2). Going to a smaller LCD AND lower resolution, would kill me :P. It would be nice for portability and space reasons to buy an LCD, but as of right now those are the only two benifits in my eyes, and the price difference in the two just makes CRTs the better choice for me.

Yourworstnightmare
10-26-2004, 10:47 PM
There's another thing about lcd's, if you are not exactly infront of them you cannot see them because the screen changes to an opaque color and nothing can be seen.

Goon
10-26-2004, 10:57 PM
There's another thing about lcd's, if you are not exactly infront of them you cannot see them because the screen changes to an opaque color and nothing can be seen. Again, this is much less of a problem these days. There is still some loss of color and brightness but only a little.

My lcd is extremely clear for a +90 degree cone and still quite legible when viewed almost from the side.

imashination
10-27-2004, 12:53 AM
There's another thing about lcd's, if you are not exactly infront of them you cannot see them because the screen changes to an opaque color and nothing can be seen.

On cheap screens, yes, on decent screens, no. A decent LCD will look identical at any viewing angle.

thethule
10-27-2004, 01:08 AM
Its a tricky one. I myself have been pondering what to do for the last month. i have the money ready for 2 20" Dell lcd's, but cant decide if its the right choice or not. Its costing me so much more for 20's rather than 17's or 19's, and all for extra desktop space (1600 instead of 1280). I simply cannot decide if i just stick to working at 1280x1024, which is what im running now on 2x17 CRT's) or pay that whole lot more (another 400) to run higher res. The only other option is to get a 23" apple display, but beautiful as that is, it doesnt give me as much deskspace as 2 identical 20" lcds. Its a tough decision, but i have to make it soon. For me, the reduction in eye strain is worth the money. I'm almost 30 and cant keep staring at 2 monitors for 12 hours a day without expecting my eyes to get worse.



Marc

shehbahn
10-27-2004, 01:25 AM
>A decent LCD will look identical at any viewing angle.

not true - even the best ones only advertise angles around 170deg. and that measure usually refers to the viewing angle for which text-contrast (i.e. black/white contrast) exceeds 10:1. perpendicular viewing usually has a contrast ratio above 200:1.

in practice, even the newest screens have perceptible differences over small angles.

swordsspells
10-27-2004, 03:08 AM
I think that, unless you are trying to move around alot CRT's are much better. They have better colour and many other plusses. The only advantage I could find about LCD's is that they are smaller and thus, weight less.
Speaking of CRT's does anyone have any suggestions on buying a new one. (What size ect.) Thanks.

novadude
10-27-2004, 03:31 AM
shehbahn, do you ever expext anyone to ever try to use any monitor from that angle? At extreme angles like that, your eye will distort the image before te monitor will.

Dan, LCDs only work correctly at their optimum resolution and half of that. (1600x1200 does 800x600, 400x300, ect) Any time you have individual lights that turn on to make a picture, each light can only display one point of the image at a time.

CGTalk Moderation
01-19-2006, 05:00 PM
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.