Are flat screen LCD monitors ready?

B
Posted By
Bobby77501
Aug 8, 2006
Views
1294
Replies
36
Status
Closed
I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until now, I’ve understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good color work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in preparation for purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………
SW
Steven Wandy
Aug 8, 2006
You are probably going to get a lot of very divergent opinions. I have a Samsung SyncMaster 213T LCD and am very happy with tie way it works with PSCS2 and some other photo programs. I use Monaco to calibrate it. Many people will say that unless you get one of the very high end ones the black will not be as good as a CRT monitor. Maybe for professional use that is true (don’t know your situation – I have what I feel is a very decerning eye but I am not a professional either photographer or graphic designer), but for most others the LCD’s have improved greatly over the past few years.

I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until now, I’ve understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good color work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in preparation for purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………
B
Bobby77501
Aug 8, 2006
Thank you…..

"Steven Wandy" wrote in message
You are probably going to get a lot of very divergent opinions. I have a Samsung SyncMaster 213T LCD and am very happy with tie way it works with PSCS2 and some other photo programs. I use Monaco to calibrate it. Many people will say that unless you get one of the very high end ones the black will not be as good as a CRT monitor. Maybe for professional use that is true (don’t know your situation – I have what I feel is a very decerning eye but I am not a professional either photographer or graphic designer), but for most others the LCD’s have improved greatly over the past few years.

I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until now, I’ve
understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good color work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in preparation for purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………
J
jaSPAMc
Aug 8, 2006
If you can, borrow one you think you’ll buy and use it for a while. Some find that the illumination source is ‘extra blue’ (extending beyond the percieved visible) and hurts thair eyes after moderate use periods.

Personally, I don’t like them.

You are probably going to get a lot of very divergent opinions. I have a Samsung SyncMaster 213T LCD and am very happy with tie way it works with PSCS2 and some other photo programs. I use Monaco to calibrate it. Many people will say that unless you get one of the very high end ones the black will not be as good as a CRT monitor. Maybe for professional use that is true (don’t know your situation – I have what I feel is a very decerning eye but I am not a professional either photographer or graphic designer), but for most others the LCD’s have improved greatly over the past few years.

I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until now, I’ve understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good color work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in preparation for purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………
B
Bobby77501
Aug 8, 2006
Thanks…

"Sir F. A. Rien" wrote in message
If you can, borrow one you think you’ll buy and use it for a while. Some find that the illumination source is ‘extra blue’ (extending beyond the percieved visible) and hurts thair eyes after moderate use periods.
Personally, I don’t like them.

You are probably going to get a lot of very divergent opinions. I have a Samsung SyncMaster 213T LCD and am very happy with tie way it works with PSCS2 and some other photo programs. I use Monaco to calibrate it. Many people will say that unless you get one of the very high end ones the black will not be as good as a CRT monitor. Maybe for professional use that is true (don’t know your situation – I have what I feel is a very decerning eye but I am not a professional either photographer or graphic designer), but for most others the LCD’s have improved greatly over the past few years.

I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until now, I’ve
understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good color
work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in preparation for
purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………
E
Ed
Aug 8, 2006
-Nisko- wrote:
I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until now, I’ve understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good color work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in preparation for purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………
I had a CRT that was on it’s way out and researched LCD’s. I zoomed in on a Samsung and an LG. I bought the LG Flatiron with 1600:1 contrast ratio, 4ms response time, 1280 x 1024 resolution and 17" display. I don’t like the high res for general computing but for PS and graphics, it’s OK. I spent extra for this monitor and would not do it again. My advice, if you have the room, get a CRT. I am limited in space and it cost $25.00 US to dispose of a CRT in my City.
B
Bobby77501
Aug 8, 2006
"Ed" wrote in message
-Nisko- wrote:
I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until now, I’ve understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good color work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in preparation for purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………
I had a CRT that was on it’s way out and researched LCD’s. I zoomed in on a Samsung and an LG. I bought the LG Flatiron with 1600:1 contrast ratio, 4ms response time, 1280 x 1024 resolution and 17" display. I don’t like the high res for general computing

Please explain why not?

but for PS and graphics,
it’s OK. I spent extra for this monitor and would not do it again.

What else did you find that you didn’t like? Any information would be helpful.

My
advice, if you have the room, get a CRT. I am limited in space and it cost $25.00 US to dispose of a CRT in my City.
J
Jimmy
Aug 9, 2006
"-Nisko-" wrote in message
I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until now, I’ve understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good color work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in preparation for purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………
I first tried to locate a good CRT, but found the market was really limited. I finally went with a Viewsonic BP2030b and use Monaco Optix 2.0 to profile the LCD. I tried to calibrate and profile as I had done with my old CRT, however, I found the brightness to be too intense for me. Monaco suggests adjusting the brightness to suit the user, then profile from there. Much better results. I am not a photo professional, but do like to dabble a bit with CS2 and Rawshooter. I am happy with the move to a LCD.
B
Bobby77501
Aug 9, 2006
Thanks!! Also, what is Rawshooter????

"Jimmy" wrote in message
"-Nisko-" wrote in message
I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until now, I’ve understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good color work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in preparation for purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………
I first tried to locate a good CRT, but found the market was really limited. I finally went with a Viewsonic BP2030b and use Monaco Optix 2.0 to profile the LCD. I tried to calibrate and profile as I had done with my old CRT, however, I found the brightness to be too intense for me. Monaco suggests adjusting the brightness to suit the user, then profile from there. Much better results. I am not a photo professional, but do like to dabble a bit with CS2 and Rawshooter. I am happy with the move to a LCD.
J
Jimmy
Aug 9, 2006
"-Nisko-" wrote in message
Thanks!! Also, what is Rawshooter????
It’s a program used RAW converter program. I have been using Rawshooter Premium for a while now and prefer it to Adobe’s Camera Raw. Rawshooter Premimum is no longer available as Adobe just recently bought out Pixmantec. http://www.pixmantec.com/
B
Bobby77501
Aug 9, 2006
Thank you……is RawShooter available made by Corel?

"Jimmy" wrote in message
"-Nisko-" wrote in message
Thanks!! Also, what is Rawshooter????
It’s a program used RAW converter program. I have been using Rawshooter Premium for a while now and prefer it to Adobe’s Camera Raw. Rawshooter Premimum is no longer available as Adobe just recently bought out Pixmantec. http://www.pixmantec.com/
R
Rob
Aug 9, 2006
-Nisko- wrote:
I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until now, I’ve understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good color work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in preparation for purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………

I have a 21" CRT trinitron IBM which is starting to alter in colour. Since its still in warranty and IBM don’t supply a replacement in CRT of this type, the next step seems a LCD for my image work.

Also in the office there is a Dell 19" LCD (made by Samsung) which I find good to use unlike an older LG which had little or no viewing angle hence unsuitable for photos.

My question is IBM have a Lenovo ThinkVision L201p LCD screen does anyone use or have any reports on this screen?

thanks
K
KatWoman
Aug 9, 2006
"Rob" wrote in message
-Nisko- wrote:
I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until now, I’ve understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good color work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in preparation for purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………

I have a 21" CRT trinitron IBM which is starting to alter in colour. Since its still in warranty and IBM don’t supply a replacement in CRT of this type, the next step seems a LCD for my image work.

Also in the office there is a Dell 19" LCD (made by Samsung) which I find good to use unlike an older LG which had little or no viewing angle hence unsuitable for photos.

My question is IBM have a Lenovo ThinkVision L201p LCD screen does anyone use or have any reports on this screen?

thanks

have you tried cnet for some reviews?? they usually have some feedback on every hardware
A
Aaron
Aug 9, 2006
Steven Wandy wrote:
You are probably going to get a lot of very divergent opinions. I have a Samsung SyncMaster 213T LCD and am very happy with tie way it works with PSCS2 and some other photo programs. I use Monaco to calibrate it. Many people will say that unless you get one of the very high end ones the black will not be as good as a CRT monitor. Maybe for professional use that is true (don’t know your situation – I have what I feel is a very decerning eye but I am not a professional either photographer or graphic designer), but for most others the LCD’s have improved greatly over the past few years.

I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until
now, I’ve
understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good
color
work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in
preparation for
purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………

I think that LCD monitors are ready for professional use. You will hear some incredible sticklers say that they can’t compete with the highest end of professional CRTs, and to some degree they may be right, but as an entry-level professional, I couldn’t afford one of those top-of-the-line CRTs, anyway.

LaCie is into their second generation of color-calibrated LCD displays (complete with very professional-looking hoods just like their CRT predecessors), and there are plenty of other LCDs on the market with equal performance ratings.

Just remember, let the buyer *beware*! There are so many LCDs on the market right now that buying just any old LCD with a good sync rate and/or contrast ratio isn’t going to guarantee that it won’t completely screw up your colorspace. Right now on my desk at work I have two Dell-branded LCDs, a 17" and a widescreen 21". The 21" is by FAR more color accurate than the 17" (both calibrated with Monaco EZcolor Optix).

Samsung and Philips both make excellent LCD panels in their higher-end models, and Philips also manufactures the panels used in the Apple Cinema HD displays, such as the four-year-old 23" display I use at home for my serious work. I have had truly excellent experiences with that display (after calibration, of course), and so I would expect that a comparable higher-end Philips display would perform as well.

READ REVIEWS, especially on design- and photography-oriented websites before making the final purchase!

Let us know how you make out.


Aaron

"Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest." — John Stuart Mill
J
Jimmy
Aug 9, 2006
"-Nisko-" wrote in message
Thank you……is RawShooter available made by Corel?
I have little knowledge of Paintshop Pro, but according to this link RawShooter is included with PSP X. Since Adobe has acquired Pixmantec, it may be worth your time and effort to contact Corel to see if the included RawShooter will continue to be offered/supported in PSP X. Adobe is suppose to offer Adobe Lightroom to registered owners of RawShooter (not sure of the cutoff date on this offer).
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/psp/pspx.html
GP
Gordon Pembury
Aug 9, 2006
The answer to your question depends on how accutrate you need to be.

If you are a pro working in a colour managed environment then it may – may – be that a CRT will still be best. I judge from your other questions that you are probably an amateur like most of us in which case a good LCD – I have a Samsung which is excellent and wouldn’t dream of going back to a CRT – will suffice

The Adobe buyout of Pixmantec is sad news. No doubt we’ll now have to pay 5 times as much for Rawshooter rebranded as Lightbox with lots of crap we don’t want and bloated as usual. Just like Norton too which fouled up Sygate. But the Adobe boys will get another new Ferrari and can race the Pixmantec boys in theirs at our expense. Isn’t capitalism wonderful? Jus as Joan Robinson proved in 1933, the all aim to be monopolists!

GP

"KatWoman" wrote in message
"Rob" wrote in message
-Nisko- wrote:
I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until now, I’ve understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good color work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in preparation for purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………

I have a 21" CRT trinitron IBM which is starting to alter in colour. Since its still in warranty and IBM don’t supply a replacement in CRT of this type, the next step seems a LCD for my image work.

Also in the office there is a Dell 19" LCD (made by Samsung) which I find good to use unlike an older LG which had little or no viewing angle hence unsuitable for photos.

My question is IBM have a Lenovo ThinkVision L201p LCD screen does anyone use or have any reports on this screen?

thanks

have you tried cnet for some reviews?? they usually have some feedback on every hardware
R
Rob
Aug 10, 2006
Aaron wrote:

I think that LCD monitors are ready for professional use.

This is the line that says it all.

Its just a matter of choice which one.

My choice is the Samsung – there are a few who have rebadged them like Dell and Apple.
E
Ed
Aug 10, 2006
-Nisko- wrote:
"Ed" wrote in message
-Nisko- wrote:
I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until now, I’ve understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good color work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in preparation for purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………
I had a CRT that was on it’s way out and researched LCD’s. I zoomed in on a Samsung and an LG. I bought the LG Flatiron with 1600:1 contrast ratio, 4ms response time, 1280 x 1024 resolution and 17" display. I don’t like the high res for general computing

Please explain why not?
My eyes are getting older and I have to strain to read some stuff. Setting to a lower res just makes text and icons fuzzy. I could put a crt down to the lowest res setting with no trouble.
but for PS and graphics,
it’s OK. I spent extra for this monitor and would not do it again.

What else did you find that you didn’t like? Any information would be helpful.
The brightness of the screen is uneven,when veiwing this and other text docs, making it tiresome to work very long.
I’ll be going back to a crt or I may buy a VeiwSonic or NEC lcd.
My
advice, if you have the room, get a CRT. I am limited in space and it cost $25.00 US to dispose of a CRT in my City.

B
Bobby77501
Aug 10, 2006
Thanks very much………

"Aaron" wrote in message
Steven Wandy wrote:
You are probably going to get a lot of very divergent opinions. I have a Samsung SyncMaster 213T LCD and am very happy with tie way it works with PSCS2 and some other photo programs. I use Monaco to calibrate it. Many people will say that unless you get one of the very high end ones the black will not be as good as a CRT monitor. Maybe for professional use that is true (don’t know your situation – I have what I feel is a very decerning eye but I am not a professional either photographer or graphic designer), but for most others the LCD’s have improved greatly over the past few years.

I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until
now, I’ve
understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good
color
work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in
preparation for
purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………

I think that LCD monitors are ready for professional use. You will hear some incredible sticklers say that they can’t compete with the highest end of professional CRTs, and to some degree they may be right, but as an entry-level professional, I couldn’t afford one of those top-of-the-line CRTs, anyway.

LaCie is into their second generation of color-calibrated LCD displays (complete with very professional-looking hoods just like their CRT predecessors), and there are plenty of other LCDs on the market with equal performance ratings.

Just remember, let the buyer *beware*! There are so many LCDs on the market right now that buying just any old LCD with a good sync rate and/or contrast ratio isn’t going to guarantee that it won’t completely screw up your colorspace. Right now on my desk at work I have two Dell-branded LCDs, a 17" and a widescreen 21". The 21" is by FAR more color accurate than the 17" (both calibrated with Monaco EZcolor Optix).
Samsung and Philips both make excellent LCD panels in their higher-end models, and Philips also manufactures the panels used in the Apple Cinema HD displays, such as the four-year-old 23" display I use at home for my serious work. I have had truly excellent experiences with that display (after calibration, of course), and so I would expect that a comparable higher-end Philips display would perform as well.
READ REVIEWS, especially on design- and photography-oriented websites before making the final purchase!

Let us know how you make out.


Aaron

"Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest." — John Stuart Mill
B
Bobby77501
Aug 10, 2006
Thanks again……..

"Ed" wrote in message
-Nisko- wrote:
"Ed" wrote in message
-Nisko- wrote:
I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until now, I’ve understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good color work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in preparation for purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………
I had a CRT that was on it’s way out and researched LCD’s. I zoomed in on a Samsung and an LG. I bought the LG Flatiron with 1600:1 contrast ratio, 4ms response time, 1280 x 1024 resolution and 17" display. I don’t like the high res for general computing

Please explain why not?
My eyes are getting older and I have to strain to read some stuff. Setting to a lower res just makes text and icons fuzzy. I could put a crt down to the lowest res setting with no trouble.
but for PS and graphics,
it’s OK. I spent extra for this monitor and would not do it again.

What else did you find that you didn’t like? Any information would be helpful.
The brightness of the screen is uneven,when veiwing this and other text docs, making it tiresome to work very long.
I’ll be going back to a crt or I may buy a VeiwSonic or NEC lcd.
My
advice, if you have the room, get a CRT. I am limited in space and it cost $25.00 US to dispose of a CRT in my City.
B
Bobby77501
Aug 10, 2006
Thanks…..

"Rob" wrote in message
Aaron wrote:

I think that LCD monitors are ready for professional use.

This is the line that says it all.

Its just a matter of choice which one.

My choice is the Samsung – there are a few who have rebadged them like Dell and Apple.
B
Bobby77501
Aug 10, 2006
Thanks……

"Gordon Pembury" wrote in message
The answer to your question depends on how accutrate you need to be.
If you are a pro working in a colour managed environment then it may – may – be that a CRT will still be best. I judge from your other questions that you are probably an amateur like most of us in which case a good LCD – I have a Samsung which is excellent and wouldn’t dream of going back to a CRT – will suffice

The Adobe buyout of Pixmantec is sad news. No doubt we’ll now have to pay 5 times as much for Rawshooter rebranded as Lightbox with lots of crap we don’t want and bloated as usual. Just like Norton too which fouled up Sygate. But the Adobe boys will get another new Ferrari and can race the Pixmantec boys in theirs at our expense. Isn’t capitalism wonderful? Jus as Joan Robinson proved in 1933, the all aim to be monopolists!
GP

"KatWoman" wrote in message
"Rob" wrote in message
-Nisko- wrote:
I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until now, I’ve understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good color work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in preparation for purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………

I have a 21" CRT trinitron IBM which is starting to alter in colour. Since its still in warranty and IBM don’t supply a replacement in CRT of this type, the next step seems a LCD for my image work.

Also in the office there is a Dell 19" LCD (made by Samsung) which I find good to use unlike an older LG which had little or no viewing angle hence unsuitable for photos.

My question is IBM have a Lenovo ThinkVision L201p LCD screen does anyone use or have any reports on this screen?

thanks

have you tried cnet for some reviews?? they usually have some feedback on every hardware

J
Jimmy
Aug 10, 2006
My eyes are getting older and I have to strain to read some stuff. Setting to a lower res just makes text and icons fuzzy. I could put a crt down to the lowest res setting with no trouble. The brightness of the screen is uneven,when veiwing this and other text docs, making it tiresome to work very long.
I’ll be going back to a crt or I may buy a VeiwSonic or NEC lcd.

If you are running WinXP, you might want to try the MS ClearType. This helped text document viewing on my ViewSonic LCD.
http://www.microsoft.com/typography/ClearTypeInfo.mspx
B
Bobby77501
Aug 10, 2006
Thanks…I already have it installed (even though I use a CRT).

"Jimmy" wrote in message
My eyes are getting older and I have to strain to read some stuff. Setting to a lower res just makes text and icons fuzzy. I could put a crt down to the lowest res setting with no trouble. The brightness of the screen is uneven,when veiwing this and other text docs, making it tiresome to work very long.
I’ll be going back to a crt or I may buy a VeiwSonic or NEC lcd.

If you are running WinXP, you might want to try the MS ClearType. This helped text document viewing on my ViewSonic LCD.
http://www.microsoft.com/typography/ClearTypeInfo.mspx
M
Misifus
Aug 11, 2006
Jimmy wrote:
"-Nisko-" wrote in message
Thank you……is RawShooter available made by Corel?
I have little knowledge of Paintshop Pro, but according to this link RawShooter is included with PSP X. Since Adobe has acquired Pixmantec, it may be worth your time and effort to contact Corel to see if the included RawShooter will continue to be offered/supported in PSP X. Adobe is suppose to offer Adobe Lightroom to registered owners of RawShooter (not sure of the cutoff date on this offer).
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/psp/pspx.html

Rawshooter is now an Adobe product.

-Raf


Misifus-
Rafael Seibert
mailto:
blog: http://rafsrincon.blogspot.com/
Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/rafiii
home: http://www.rafandsioux.com
J
Jimmy
Aug 11, 2006
"Misifus" wrote in message
Rawshooter is now an Adobe product.
Yes, I know RawShooter is now an Adobe product. Nisko questioned if RawShooter is available made by Corel. Corel did not make RawShooter, but has been offering it with Paintshop Pro X, as indicated in the URL that I provided. Now that Adobe acquired Pixmantec, I have to wonder if Adobe will honor any existing Pixmantec agreements with Corel and support RawShooter; or will Adobe push these users towards Adobe Lightroom 1.0.
TA
Timo Autiokari
Aug 11, 2006
nesredep egrob wrote:

Viewing angles have improved massively of the last year or two.

Not so. The manufacturers measure black on white and the criteria for the viewing angle is such that there still remains 10% of the maximum contrast, so a 90% drop from the maximum. Therefore the viewing angle specification does not tell us much about how well or badly the display performs when we look at photographic images. Even a 5% drop of contrast will change the tonality and colors very strongly.

What is sure is that a display that has the viewing angle specified to a lesser value than 178/178 degrees is absolutely unsuitable for all imaging and graphical purposes. And that the True Viewing Angle of those displays that do have the 178/178 specification vary a lot. Some behave actually almost decently, some are very bad.

The other thing with most/all of the LCD displays is that they inherently only have 6-bit/channel. Manufacturers hide this coarse gradation by dithering, either a spatial or a time based dither is being used, or both. The spatial dither particularly is not good at all, it makes the images soft (unsharp) and you can actually see the dither from the normal viewing distance. expecially when a large smooth gradation is shown.

Also they do not depend on the 25KV which will emit xrays.

It is true that CRT monitors do emit (quite weak) x-rays. Based on a quick look at Geman safety requlations for CRTs it is my understanding that if you keep some of your bodily part at the distance of 10cm (4 inch) all the time (24h/day, 365days/year) then the dose that is accumulated by that bodily part is comparable to maybe 4x the average of the backgound radiation on the earth (that affects to the whole body). Now, from that distance the dose goes down by the inverse square law, so at 20cm it will be 1x and at 40cm it will be 0.25x, for continuous exposure. For 8h/day it will be then 0.0833x for that bodily part. Since only a small portion of the body is at that distance then maybe we divide it still e.g. by 3, totalling to 0.0278x the average backgound radiation, for the 8h/day, 365days/year.

Timo Autiokari
B
Bobby77501
Aug 11, 2006
Thank you…

wrote in message
nesredep egrob wrote:

Viewing angles have improved massively of the last year or two.

Not so. The manufacturers measure black on white and the criteria for the viewing angle is such that there still remains 10% of the maximum contrast, so a 90% drop from the maximum. Therefore the viewing angle specification does not tell us much about how well or badly the display performs when we look at photographic images. Even a 5% drop of contrast will change the tonality and colors very strongly.
What is sure is that a display that has the viewing angle specified to a lesser value than 178/178 degrees is absolutely unsuitable for all imaging and graphical purposes. And that the True Viewing Angle of those displays that do have the 178/178 specification vary a lot. Some behave actually almost decently, some are very bad.

The other thing with most/all of the LCD displays is that they inherently only have 6-bit/channel. Manufacturers hide this coarse gradation by dithering, either a spatial or a time based dither is being used, or both. The spatial dither particularly is not good at all, it makes the images soft (unsharp) and you can actually see the dither from the normal viewing distance. expecially when a large smooth gradation is shown.

Also they do not depend on the 25KV which will emit xrays.

It is true that CRT monitors do emit (quite weak) x-rays. Based on a quick look at Geman safety requlations for CRTs it is my understanding that if you keep some of your bodily part at the distance of 10cm (4 inch) all the time (24h/day, 365days/year) then the dose that is accumulated by that bodily part is comparable to maybe 4x the average of the backgound radiation on the earth (that affects to the whole body). Now, from that distance the dose goes down by the inverse square law, so at 20cm it will be 1x and at 40cm it will be 0.25x, for continuous exposure. For 8h/day it will be then 0.0833x for that bodily part. Since only a small portion of the body is at that distance then maybe we divide it still e.g. by 3, totalling to 0.0278x the average backgound radiation, for the 8h/day, 365days/year.

Timo Autiokari
MR
Mike Russell
Aug 11, 2006
just wanted to go on record:

Yes, LCD monitors are ready. Years ago, with Apple’s intro of teh high end Cinema display, LCDs began to be used for professional color work. At this point, in 2006, even medium and low priced LCDs are suitable. —

Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com/forum/
B
Bobby77501
Aug 12, 2006
Just curious – but your comments seem contrary to most of the other responses.

"Mike Russell" wrote in message
just wanted to go on record:

Yes, LCD monitors are ready. Years ago, with Apple’s intro of teh high end Cinema display, LCDs began to be used for professional color work. At this point, in 2006, even medium and low priced LCDs are suitable. —

Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com/forum/

GC
Graeme Cogger
Aug 12, 2006
In article ,
says…
nesredep egrob wrote:

Viewing angles have improved massively of the last year or two.

Not so. The manufacturers measure black on white and the criteria for the viewing angle is such that there still remains 10% of the maximum contrast, so a 90% drop from the maximum. Therefore the viewing angle specification does not tell us much about how well or badly the display performs when we look at photographic images. Even a 5% drop of contrast will change the tonality and colors very strongly.
What is sure is that a display that has the viewing angle specified to a lesser value than 178/178 degrees is absolutely unsuitable for all imaging and graphical purposes. And that the True Viewing Angle of those displays that do have the 178/178 specification vary a lot. Some behave actually almost decently, some are very bad.

True, though some panels are pretty good these days. Most people edit their images looking straight at the monitor however and (unless the panel is fairly poor in this respect) it is not a problem. It is, of course, an issue if 2 people are trying to critically view the same image.

The other thing with most/all of the LCD displays is that they inherently only have 6-bit/channel. Manufacturers hide this coarse gradation by dithering, either a spatial or a time based dither is being used, or both. The spatial dither particularly is not good at all, it makes the images soft (unsharp) and you can actually see the dither from the normal viewing distance. expecially when a large smooth gradation is shown.

I think that "most/all" is a rather a large exaggeration! Traditionally it was only the cheap TN film panels that were 6 bit (and had very poor viewing angles). Anything regarded as decent enough for graphics use would use an MVA or S-IPS panel, which used to be 8 bit as standard. There is a worrying article here, however, that suggests that manufacturers are starting to make even these panels in 6 bit versions in order to improve the response time:

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/6bit_8bit.htm

Some panels are even better than 8 bit (my Eizo is 10), although that mostly just improves the accuracy of the internal gamma/calibration curves.

On the whole I’d say that you _can_ get an LCD monitor that is as good for graphics as a top quality CRT, but you have to pay for it (e.g. the Eizo CG series). If you spend less money but choose carefully, they are good enough for all but the most critical use. There is one proviso, however – with a CRT you could get OK colour accuracy just by calibrating the monitor using Adobe Gamma. With an LCD you generally need a hardware system (e.g. Monaco Optix Pro, or Eye-One Display 2).
MR
Mike Russell
Aug 12, 2006
"Mike Russell" wrote in message
just wanted to go on record:

Yes, LCD monitors are ready. Years ago, with Apple’s intro of the high end Cinema display, LCDs began to be used for professional color work. At this point, in 2006, even medium and low priced LCDs are suitable.

"-Nisko-" wrote in message
Just curious – but your comments seem contrary to most of the other responses.

Technology improves faster than people’s impression of it. Many people wrote off LCD’s in the early days, but they are better now. —

Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com/forum/
R
Rob
Aug 12, 2006
Mike Russell wrote:
"Mike Russell" wrote in message

just wanted to go on record:

Yes, LCD monitors are ready. Years ago, with Apple’s intro of the high end Cinema display, LCDs began to be used for professional color work. At this point, in 2006, even medium and low priced LCDs are suitable.

"-Nisko-" wrote in message

Just curious – but your comments seem contrary to most of the other responses.

Technology improves faster than people’s impression of it. Many people wrote off LCD’s in the early days, but they are better now.

I bought an LG screen back in early 2003 useless for most things except some word processing and space saving. Also back then bought a trinitron 21" CRT which I use for photos.

Now also having a Samsung LCD I can use either the CRT or LCD without problem – yes how things have changed.
B
Bobby77501
Aug 13, 2006
Thanks…

"Mike Russell" wrote in message
"Mike Russell" wrote in message
just wanted to go on record:

Yes, LCD monitors are ready. Years ago, with Apple’s intro of the high end Cinema display, LCDs began to be used for professional color work. At this point, in 2006, even medium and low priced LCDs are suitable.

"-Nisko-" wrote in message
Just curious – but your comments seem contrary to most of the other responses.

Technology improves faster than people’s impression of it. Many people wrote off LCD’s in the early days, but they are better now. —

Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com/forum/

B
Bobby77501
Aug 13, 2006
Thanks…

"Rob" wrote in message
Mike Russell wrote:
"Mike Russell" wrote in message

just wanted to go on record:

Yes, LCD monitors are ready. Years ago, with Apple’s intro of the high end Cinema display, LCDs began to be used for professional color work. At this point, in 2006, even medium and low priced LCDs are suitable.

"-Nisko-" wrote in message

Just curious – but your comments seem contrary to most of the other responses.

Technology improves faster than people’s impression of it. Many people wrote off LCD’s in the early days, but they are better now.

I bought an LG screen back in early 2003 useless for most things except some word processing and space saving. Also back then bought a trinitron 21" CRT which I use for photos.

Now also having a Samsung LCD I can use either the CRT or LCD without problem – yes how things have changed.
D
Denis
Aug 15, 2006
-Nisko- wrote:
I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until now, I’ve understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good color work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in preparation for purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………

Hi Nisko
Have a look http://www.eizo.com/ they are amongst the best professional monitors on the market

regards
Denis
B
Bobby77501
Aug 15, 2006
Thank you………

"Denis" wrote in message
-Nisko- wrote:
I’ve been using a LaCie CRT monitor for my Photoshop work. Until now, I’ve understood that LCD screens didn’t have the depth necessary for good color work. I’d like to hear some opinions on this subject – in preparation for purchasing my next monitor. Thanks………

Hi Nisko
Have a look http://www.eizo.com/ they are amongst the best professional monitors on the market

regards
Denis

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections