More Monitor Talk

B
Posted By
Buko
Jun 30, 2004
Views
1296
Replies
59
Status
Closed
OK it looks like I’m going to get some new gear.

MO, made the comment wait till next year, in reference to Apples new 30" LCD.

But I need a monitor now. would it be best to get a LaCie or Mitsubishi now for under $1000 and get a new technology monitor when they show up in a year or so?

How to Master Sharpening in Photoshop

Give your photos a professional finish with sharpening in Photoshop. Learn to enhance details, create contrast, and prepare your images for print, web, and social media.

MO
Mike_Ornellas
Jun 30, 2004
Sony Artisan.

better buy one before they stop making CRT’s.

You can always buy the latest and greatest down the road.

I just put in 3 new La Cie 22’s in the shop. There OK, but I’m still having trouble getting a correct preview in OSX.
GB
g_ballard
Jun 30, 2004
I hear Apple has a new 30" LCD… πŸ™‚
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Jun 30, 2004
crap.

IT’s not diode based, but florescent.
GB
g_ballard
Jun 30, 2004
ya, but a full 1-yr guarantee πŸ™‚ πŸ™‚
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Jun 30, 2004
actually, 8 months warranty after Apple screws you on the purchase date.
TL
Tim_Lookingbill
Jun 30, 2004
Are they really going to stop making CRT’s? I recently tried out the $600 19" IBM LCD at OfficeMax running off my pismoPB. Ran calibration with SuperCal and the PDI file looked horrid in PS.

Adjusting white point created this rippling banding effect on my grayramp.

I’m staying with my six year old CRT till it goes completely out.
GP
Graham_Phillips
Jun 30, 2004
$600 is cheap for a 19" LCD.
TL
Tim_Lookingbill
Jul 1, 2004
From the look of it my six year old 19" Princeton EO90 still trumped it in color accuracy and contrast.

I get about 8 points of RGB gamma bias video card raster adjusts down to the blackest black on my CRT using SuperCal. The IBM gave me about 4 before it went to black. The profile was unusable.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Jul 1, 2004
The CRT vs. LCD thing has been discussed and there are pros and cons. One type is ugly, heavy, less expensive, sometimes more color accurate, does not fit on most desks and gives me headaches. The other type is the opposite.

Mike always says wait until next year. πŸ™‚ Indeed, tech gear generally does get better/cheaper over time. Unless someone actually using them says they are worse than the last generation (which I find to be very acceptable) I personally see one of the new LCDs in my future – before the next generation.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Jul 1, 2004
The LaCie22blue (Series III not IV) running at 85 Hz doesn’t give me headaches.

I don’t deny that it’s HEAVY (fortunately my work-top was built on 2" x 4"s!).

Unfortunately the later LaCies are not of the same caliber.
B
Buko
Jul 1, 2004
Well if something great is comming along in a year. I certainly don’t want to spend $3900 on a 30". I’m having a hard time with $1800 for an Artisan. I can get a 22" LaCie for $700 maybe thats why MO doesn’t like them. I guess I’m going to have to see If I’m given the budget I want.
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Jul 1, 2004
Buko,

There is nothing wrong with the La Cie monitors, but you may need to go through a few before you find a good one.

Purity and convergence is always an issue with the IV 22’s.

I’ve yet to nail color previews in OSX and it’s starting to piss me off to no end.
P
progress
Jul 1, 2004
forget the lacies…theyre just not worth it, we’re on our 4th here…convergence is shot away. Cailbration throws it further out and it takes some enginneer codes to get access to realign the guns.
I’ve had to manually shift the contrast afterwards as well to nail the calibration.
TL
Tim_Lookingbill
Jul 1, 2004
From posts I’ve read on Google Groups, 30 year veterans who’ve repaired and adjusted TV’s and high end monitors like the Barco and PressView, can destinguish a high end unit from a cheapo from the amount of screw adjusters on the circuit board and tube yoke.

From their definition mine is considered a high end unit. I’ve got 12 screw adjusters scattered throughout that area and they all do subtle things to the display beyond what the OSD buttons can do.

One adjuster on mine, called Screen, is very sensitive and loose. The slightest turn will either create a bright blurry glare or a dark and dim picture. With this in mind I can see how careless shipping could be responsible in throwing these units out of spec.

The convergence problems can be fixed if you have adjuster screws labeled (Y)-I guess for yoke-around the narrow neck end of the tube called the yoke. Cheapo’s and very old TV’s don’t have these and rely on magnets you have to manualy move around. Very hard to do. Screws labeled dynamic will allow making adjustments involving only one side of the display.

I had blue shadowing of about a millimeter on the edge of text in one corner and red in the opposite corner that I lived with for six years and fixed with these (Y) screws. It required first readjusting horizontal/vertical focus, setting bias, black point and geometry.

Learned a great deal about the quality of CRT’s.
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Jul 1, 2004
One thing that I’ve found with the 23 inch Apple Cinema displays is that they as well as CRT’s do not have color uniformity and the linearity is less than stellar.

and there are other issues as well.

The diode based LCD’s _ARE_so much better in every way.

seen it with my own eyes.

and the color is beyond comparison to anything that’s on the market today.

CRT now or wait till next year.

or both.

Um,

both.
L
Larryr544
Jul 1, 2004
Mike – thanks for clartifying what you meant!
RS
Richard_Sohanchyk
Jul 1, 2004
Jeez – I just got a new weight lifting belt so I can schlep a $600 LaCie up the stairs after I order it. I remember my prepress days in the mid-90’s when they were one of the best monitors going. Was pretty stunned to read that the later one’s aren’t so good.

Personally, I can live with visual shortcomings of LCD. It was a wonderful thing to lift the Apple 17" out of the box and not be hitting the high notes for a week afterwards.
JV
John_Vitollo
Jul 2, 2004
Buko,

I just installed two Samsung SyncMaster 213T 21" LCD displays for a client and the image quality is excellent – especially after running Eye-One Display. Very uniform illumination and large viewing angle. Under $1200. each.

Here’s a review:

<http://www.explosivelabs.com/reviews/samsung_213t/>

John
L
LRK
Jul 2, 2004
Just sent that link to my husband. His Dell screen is awful.
AR
Andrew Rodney
Jul 2, 2004
Guess what the half life in luminance is on most LCDs? Tell em Mo.
L
Larryr544
Jul 2, 2004
SO tell us?
GP
Graham_Phillips
Jul 2, 2004
Can you define "most" LCDs? Are some more resilient than others?
IL
Ian_Lyons
Jul 2, 2004
Andrew,

Guess what the half life in luminance is on most LCDs?

This is only one example of where the LCD camp claims to be ahead of CRT. I’m sure that the CRT camp will have equal claims.

<http://www.elotouch.com/products/crtlife.asp>

While we have two or more competing technologies we’ll continue to have contradictory views and opinions as to which one is best at whatever task. The reality lies somewhere in the middle and that reality is also very difficult for many of us to stomach. To be blunt I think that more often than not both camps are full of their own sh-one-t. Both CRT and LCD are nothing special in comparison to where we as image makers are going and where other professions have already gotten to. This isn’t a case of me trying to be argumentative just that much of what we think we see and know is based upon a fundamental misunderstanding of what is actually staring back at us – we’ve been sucked in spat out by BS so often we actually believe it.
AR
Andrew Rodney
Jul 2, 2004
The figures I heard were 18 months. That’s half life and out of the box, they exhibit pretty high lumanice (compared with CRT) but none the less, after 18 months, the figures I heard was 18 months to HALF original level. The backlit tubes can be replaced but how much that costs I don’t know and its NOT a user replacement.

As for the term "most" I used that since I can’t say with any degree of authority that this figure is true for all LCDs. I’m not sure anyone could put figure on all LCDs (like saying the average life span of a CRT is about 3 years of daily use). So your mileage may vary.

The other issue is that if indeed it only takes 18 months to go from full to half intensity, what is the rate of change over the course of say a month (as compared to a CRT)? How often do they need recalibration based on their state of change if the 18 month half life is a valid value?
GP
Graham_Phillips
Jul 2, 2004
18 months doesn’t sound right to me. After 2 years I’m still using the same brightness setting (9/16) on my 17" Studio Display.
AR
Andrew Rodney
Jul 2, 2004
What’s 9/16? You have to measure this with a colorimeter or Spectrophotometer I’m afraid to say.
IL
Ian_Lyons
Jul 2, 2004
Andrew,

I have been using an Apple 23 inch HD Display since October 2002. The specs from Apple quote 200 cd/m2 typical. When I measured it new I was getting 190 cd/m2 at full brightness and 120 cd/m2 at their default brightness setting.

For best part of 20 months my unit has been in daily use for anything up to 10 hours. I reprofiled it last Sunday and the max is now at around 170 cd/m2 and the default value is 105 cd/m2.

So far as state change is concerned this fairly easy to check with Monaco OPTIX Pro. Since I began checking with OPTIX back in Feb I find that the typical change over a month is less than delta E 0.2

Evenness of illumination remains as good today as it was when I bought it (i.e less than delat E 3)
D
Dan-o
Jul 3, 2004
Mike, when you say "diode-based", are you meaning LED technology vs. TFT (which Apple’s new screens are according to their documentation)? Why do you say they are better? Any brands and models in particular you prefer in this regard?
CC
Conrad_Chavez
Jul 3, 2004
I have the same question, Mike. When you say "diode-based," are you referring to the new OLED (Organic Light Emitting Diode) screens? I have high hopes for these too, the specs sound great, but aren’t they currently working through issues related to today’s OLEDs fading faster than CRT/LCD monitors?
GP
Graham_Phillips
Jul 3, 2004
Andrew,

Sorry, I meant "9 squares out of 16" in reference to the brightness control overlay that appears when you press F14 or F15. In short, a little over half-brightness.
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Jul 4, 2004
when you say "diode-based", are you meaning LED technology vs. TFT (which Apple’s new screens are according to their documentation)?

YES!

Why do you say they are better?

The color fidelity is life like. I’m not really fond of TFT displays in general because of monitor resolution, or lack there of.

But the displays are outstanding and lays waste to florescent technology driven monitors in a heart beat!

Hmm, lays waste is the understatement…..

Any brands and models in particular you prefer in this regard?

I’d rather not say at this point in time.

BUT!

As far as longevity of a product, it should be measured in "on time hours" and not length of time owned.

It’s not a good enough descriptor, but the simple fact of the matter is that the current technology of flat screens are old technology and a waste of money.

Um, unless, money is of no object to you…..
BF
Bruce_Fraser
Jul 4, 2004
There are a LOT of new technologies coming down the pike. I wouldn’t advise anyone to spend a ton of money on a display with a fluorescent backlight at this point. LED backlights are just one development, albeit a very significant one.

www.projektoren-datenbank.com/pdf/glv.pdf

is a pretty interesting one.
GP
Gary_Politzer
Jul 4, 2004
I am only an artist, and I’m feeling pretty ignorant after reading through this thread. It sounds like the real color experts are saying not to go for the new Apple 30 incher, because it has a fluorescent backlight and better technology is right around the corner. Did I get that right? I would use a 36, 48 or even 60 inch screen if one existed & I could afford it.

My own view on the CRT vs. LCD debate is that neither depicts "true" color, and it is just a matter of what you are used to. By true color, I mean what the human eye is capable of seeing outdoors in nature in full daylight. Therefore, any reproduction is a rather pathetic simulation. What is more important is how the screen’s simulation compares to final printed output, which is also a simulation, and an even more pathetic one. Lightweight flatscreens are inevitable, because they are beautiful and convenient. As LCD or other replacement tech becomes cheap & ubiquitous, we are less likely to care about printed output, because output will be viewed more frequently on big, beautiful & cheap screens which you can unroll & hang on a wall or spread out on a table. In other words, digital output will be more & more the final product.
D
Dan-o
Jul 4, 2004
Gary: that’ll be the day! When our clients start requesting shots in digital frames or books (the day I never have to do another CMYK soft-proof), I will being getting very sauced indeed that night.

Mike and Bruce: thanks for the words of advice, but this begs the question: if there are some monumental display technologies current in the pipeline (and there must be if one or both of guys are under NDA testing them), why in God’s name would Apple wait almost two years to refresh their monitor line with old technology?

Presumeably if they knew something was close at hand… why on earth wouldn’t they use that? They always enjoy being able to say they have the first product to utilize such-and-such a breakthrough technology. This doesn’t seem to fit their recent pattern.

Can either of you comment generally as to whether whatever these new screens (with whatever LED technologies they utilize) will be more or less expensive size per size that what we’re used to now?

[edit – interesting link
<http://www.pacificdisplay.com/lcd_backlights.htm> ]

[and another
< http://www.necmitsubishi.com/press/PressDetail.cfm?document_ id=1124> ]
D
Dan-o
Jul 6, 2004
Evidently, LED-based LCDs are not going to be an affordable option (even relative to existing, pricier displays) for most people in the near term. My understanding is that the good ones will be very expensive and may also not have the flexibility of purpose that standard TFTs have because they may be prone to slower response times.
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Jul 6, 2004
not true from what I here from the tree of wisdom.

price will quickly drop at the end of 2005.
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Jul 6, 2004
Violins speak soft, like candy……..
CC
Conrad_Chavez
Jul 6, 2004
Looks like I was a bit confused earlier. When the discussion started talking about superior LED monitors coming, I thought it was about one kind of technology, but it looks like we’re talking about another. I’ll spell it out here in case I managed to confuse anybody with my last post.

LED-lit LCD: Just like today’s LCDs, but instead of backlighting the color filters with a white cold-cathode bulb, it’s lit with white LEDs. I assume the advantage is that LEDs would be more stable than the fluorescent light bulb, and maybe brighter.

OLED: Tiny red, green, and blue Organic Light Emitting Diodes create color. A major difference between OLED and the LED-lit LCD is that there is no backlight, so the display can be very thin. There is no backlight because the OLEDs glow on their own. Already in use in some cell phones, digital cameras, and car stereos.

It would probably be a good idea to be specific about which type is being discussed. I can see LED-lit LCDs coming out soon because they seem similar to conventional LCDs, but OLEDs are currently only practical at small sizes.
D
Dan-o
Jul 6, 2004
Mike, I guess I would consider 18 months (the time frame you reference) as not being "near term" for a technology product like a monitor. Not "far off" per say, but far enough off that it would be worthwhile for people looking now to consider a good TFT like those Apple makes if they’re looking for professional reasons. Or if their CRT is rapidly reaching replacement age (as mine is).

My understanding after doing a little research / poking around, is that the manufacturing technology exists but that none of the LED suppliers have ramped up their factories / are able to produce large numbers of these backlights in a reasonable time frame. Hence they will be very expensive for the first year or so they are on the market, and they will not be produced in large quantities, relative to the technologies produced now.
B
Buko
Jul 7, 2004
I think this is why MO recomends the CRT over the LCD, right now.
D
Dan-o
Jul 7, 2004
Yah. I’m afraid another five years of staring at a CRT is going to make a be-spectacled man out of me earlier than I had hoped. I know the Sony Artisans are great but… I doubt they are so much better (color-wise) than say a 20 or 23" ACD, that they warrant the desk real estate, eye strain or potential hernias anymore.

πŸ™‚

My 2040u is 73 lbs… there’s a reason why, when I clear off my desk once a year to clean it, the ole Mitsubishi stays put. Sadly she’s starting to lose her color purity without frequent profiling and calibration. The corners have started to go and pretty soon the rest will follow.
TL
Tim_Lookingbill
Jul 7, 2004
You should look into the x-ray levels CRT’s can generate. I’ve been reading a bit about the health aspects on the web.

Signs of overexposure to x-ray:

Hair loss, cataracts and red dry skin to the point of blistering.

Elevated levels of x-ray have been measured to be centered around the back of the monitor. With TCO mandated circuitry protection and the leaded glass used in the monitor tubes, they say it’s at healthy levels. But I’m not so sure considering the corporate world’s history of regulating itself.

I can’t wait for a new affordable display technology that can give the same or better color quality of a CRT and be healthy to boot.
D
Dan-o
Jul 7, 2004
Yeah. It can’t be much healthier for you than what we were warned about as kids in the old days… don’t sit too close to the television. I’m definitely going with and LCD, probably one of Apple’s unless something new and relatively affordable hits the market.

I wonder with their SWOP certification, what percentage of the Adobe RGB 1998 color space their new ACDs encompass. Obviously less than 100% or they’d be bragging about that too.

πŸ™‚
TL
Tim_Lookingbill
Jul 7, 2004
SWOP? Geez, I wonder what that looks like. πŸ˜‰
D
Dan-o
Jul 7, 2004
Like this (bottom right)

<http://www.apple.com/displays/technology.html>

Mesmerizing, huh? Seriously, let me know when you find a good match. πŸ™‚

I wonder how the ACD gamuts / color space compares to a good "RGB" printer like a 2200 or 4000.
TL
Tim_Lookingbill
Jul 7, 2004
Boy the colors look real good on the ACD, but I wonder if it’s because of my six year old Hitachi tube Princeton EO90 19" CRT.
D
Dan-o
Jul 7, 2004
Yah, at six years, you’re ready for an upgrade is my guess. I know after 5 my Mitsubishi – which many people will tell you is a good monitor for color work – is pretty much on its way out.
RS
Richard_Sohanchyk
Jul 7, 2004
Hair loss, cataracts and red dry skin to the point of blistering.

And I thought it was the approach of middle age causing my hair to thin and turn white! Those bastards!
TL
Tim_Lookingbill
Jul 7, 2004
Heck, I just learned on the History Channel the other day the pilots of the Enola Gay got a metalic taste and tingling sensation from the radiation reacting to the fillings in their mouths when they dropped the bomb. I’ve had that sensation ever so often while getting too close to the screen.

They lived to a ripe old age, I think… Hope? 8/
BF
Bruce_Fraser
Jul 7, 2004
Here’s one that’s real inasmuch as I’ve seen it work. I have no idea what the pricing and availability is, but the display is truly impressiveΒ—the 60,000:1 contrast range is not a typo!

www.sunnybrooktech.com
GP
Graham_Phillips
Jul 7, 2004
Out of curiosity, how important is contrast ratio for indoor viewing? Wouldn’t an 8-bit greyscale image show banding if the contrast ratio were greater than 256:1?
BF
Bruce_Fraser
Jul 7, 2004
No, that’s one of the ingenious parts of the sunnybrooktech solution. The contrast range at any single LED site is much less than 60,000:1 because they use a low-res alpha channel to modulate the brightness of the individual LEDs. I spent about two hours looking for problems in this display, and I didn’t find them. Not the same as having one for real work, but no obvious flaws like banding or blooming, and much better blacks than I’ve seen in any other LCD.
RS
Richard_Sohanchyk
Jul 7, 2004
www.sunnybrooktech.com

No prices so it must cost a fortune.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Jul 7, 2004
If they intend to provide tech products they should invest a bit in their on line product images.
RS
Richard_Sohanchyk
Jul 8, 2004
My thoughts as well. Cheesy site. I’ll stick to the tried and true at that price.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Jul 8, 2004
I get the impression that this technology is still very much in its infancy (they only appear to have one small monitor so far) but that the future may bring great developments.
BF
Bruce_Fraser
Jul 8, 2004
I get the strong sense that this is a technology company, and that the monitor they’re selling right now is proof-of-concept, targeted at other technology companies, rather than something they hope to make money from by selling individual units to users. They don’t employ sales or marketing types, but they seem to have a very clear idea of what they’re doing, and there’s nothing cheesy about the display itself.

What they’re doing is to take existing LCD flat panels and replace the backlight. I suspect that they bought a bunch of NEC/Mits 18-inch flat panels so that they’d have something to show, but the technology could easily be adapted to any-size monitor, including the 30" Apple…
D
Dan-o
Jul 8, 2004
Only if you want to void the warranty.

πŸ˜‰
D
Dan-o
Jul 9, 2004
^
^
Punt!

Anyone place their order for a new ACD yet?

Master Retouching Hair

Learn how to rescue details, remove flyaways, add volume, and enhance the definition of hair in any photo. We break down every tool and technique in Photoshop to get picture-perfect hair, every time.

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections