your current take on CRT vs LCD

button · 07-02-2007, 08:16 AM

Hello everyone,

My current CRT monitor (a 19" Sony G420) is over 5 years old, and at some point in the not too distant future, I will have to replace it. Could those of you who have had success using both CRT and LCD monitors for post processing please post your experiences and why you like one over the other? I would love to put my monitor on a diet and get a nice svelte 24" (or even bigger if I get impulsive enough) LCD, but I'm concerned that the black levels just aren't there yet for this technology. I know that some pros use LCDs and get great results, but I'm sure that there's a learning curve.

Thanks,
John

Last edited by button; 07-02-2007 at 01:49 PM. Reason: too many "thats"

**jfdavis58** · 07-02-2007, 09:43 AM

Originally posted by button

Hello everyone,

My current CRT monitor (a 19" Sony G420) is over 5 years old, and at some point in the not too distant future, I will have to replace it. Could those of you who have had success using both CRT and LCD monitors for post processing please post your experiences and why you like one over the other? I would love to put my monitor on a diet and get a nice svelte 24" (or even bigger if I get impulsive enough) LCD, but I'm concerned that the black levels just aren't there yet for this technology. I know that some pros use LCDs and get great results, but I'm sure that that there's a learning curve.

Thanks,
John

How 'high-end'/'high-priced' do you want to go? The variety-i.e. number of offerings--in the CRT arena diminish every day, while simultaneously LCDs seem to be spawning like rabbits.

Eizo and Lacie are both offering 12/16bit LCDs with output spectrum claims of full sRGB colorspace coverage.

My last CRT is on it's final days. I'm either building a new windows desktop machine with dual LCD from one of these companies or jumping to Macintosh and the wide cinematic LCD. My opinion is that anyone still recommending CRTs simply hasn't looked beyond their own nose. High-end graphics LCDs with a good proofing inkjet and a dependable lab is the professional standard for my area and as far as I can see.

button · 07-02-2007, 01:54 PM

Good to have you back, John. What can you tell me about LCD calibration and black levels? I just built a Windows box a few months ago with a really strong video card (w/ dual DVI out). Can I just use my Spyder 2 to set a 6500 2.2 output?

John

**jfdavis58** · 07-02-2007, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by button

Good to have you back, John. What can you tell me about LCD calibration and black levels? I just built a Windows box a few months ago with a really strong video card (w/ dual DVI out). Can I just use my Spyder 2 to set a 6500 2.2 output?

John

I've got a couple older Compaq laptops and a brand new Toshiba. There is also a couple of newer HP's boxes, both laptop and tower in the house. All LCD.

Separating black or near black grays get's better with each evolution. Family also has a couple of other LCds in 19-27 inch range, various mid-level units from a variety of manufacturors (Dell, Viewsonic, &???) I've tried the MonacosEZColor w/Optrix bundle on most of them. None give any significant problem; all look quite pleasing, realistic and can be matched to print without much effort or time. I think many exceed the capability of CRTs at this point in time.

I've run Photoshop or Elements on 9 of 10 and spent time browsing various photosites. I'm convinced LCD are the current 'state of the art' and further that CRT are on the way out. Personally, I'm buying a high-mid or low-high end pair for my photos--a little more money, a lot less eye strain and editing frustration.

blwnhr · 07-02-2007, 04:18 PM

I use 2 BenQ 19" LCDs at work and find these pretty good, however they lack some calibration adjustment.

I think the ultimate for good viewing are the screens with a shiney coating (not matte like most LCDs). From my experience these give far greater contrast. The only thing is you have to really watch the lighting in the room as the reflections on the screen can be murder on eyes. However, if you are using CRT now then you’d be pretty used to it and have good lighting set up I’d imagine.

As for recommendation, I’ve used Dell matte screens (20” and 22”) and these are very impressive, however the best screen I’ve come across is a Sony. It was about 20-22” widescreen. It doesn’t appear on the Australian or American Sony web sites so may have been discontinued. Correctly calibrated these were unbelievable though.

chrisman · 07-02-2007, 05:29 PM

I have been looking for a 'reasonably' priced LCD monitor to replace my Mitsubishi DP93SB CRT.

I think the first thing to say is that it is no longer a choice between CRT and LCD but rather "which LCD'?

As John has stated there are some very good high-end LCDs that are well suited to graphics applications - the downside being their price. If you are in the graphics business, or have the money to spend, then price is of secondary importance and you should go for the best.

My needs, on the other hand, are for a general purpose monitor that I can also usefully use for photo post-processing and that doesn't cost 'an arm and a leg'.

To this end I have just ordered a Samsung 226BW 22" wide-screen (16:10) after reading various comparisons of monitors at this price point. It is in my price range and the reviews have been generally favourable.

Whichever monitor you finally decide to buy it is essential to also purchase a good quality calibration tool - I have the Colorvision Spyder2 - otherwise you will not be getting the best out of your monitor or your photos, no matter how much you have paid for it.

If you are interested I'll let you know how the Samsung performs.

Good luck

scottae316 · 07-03-2007, 12:37 AM

It really depends on how deep your pockets are. If you want the absolute best, I would say LaCie, or possibily Apple. I know that LaCie are used by several photo labs because of their high image quality. However, they are expensive. If price is a concern [which it usually is] try Samsung, Sony, and View Sonic.
Just some thoughts.

Scott

kjao · 07-03-2007, 03:33 AM

If are going to use dual monitor setup and want to calibrate them with spyder2, remember to get the pro version because the statndard version doesn't calibrate two monitors. There are ways around it but very very tedious.

My personal preference is to get a big widescreen monitor rather than two smaller monitors.

When buying cheap LCD monitors, watch out for those that only display 6-bit color rather than 8-bit color. Those monitors are good for games but not good for color reproduction work.

cheers
Kenny

SpecialK · 09-12-2007, 10:58 PM

Originally posted by chrisman

My needs, on the other hand, are for a general purpose monitor that I can also usefully use for photo post-processing and that doesn't cost 'an arm and a leg'.

To this end I have just ordered a Samsung 226BW 22" wide-screen (16:10) after reading various comparisons of monitors at this price point. It is in my price range and the reviews have been generally favourable.

I recently got the Samsung 216BW which is very sharp and has nice color. I am not heavy into PP, and have only calibrated it with the included software, and my eye using everyone's gallery posts:-) It verges on being too bright even though I have it set on zero (out of 100).

One thing that is odd is that in Pentax Photo Lab (yes, I use it - I like having to reboot!) is that the color balance in the preview does not always adjust when I change the WB settings. After I save the jpg (that has my correct WB setting), the WB on the preview will change to what ever I choose again. Sometimes the color change happens when I rotate the image. Very odd. And, in Photo Browser, the preview is generally dingy and warm tinted. I have the same general problem when I go to the next image. I believe there is something corrupted in the monitor color profile as that is what Photo Shop indicates when it boots.

Other than the PPL glitch I see no problems, and I love the widescreen layout.

Maxington · 09-13-2007, 12:40 AM

Originally posted by scottae316

It really depends on how deep your pockets are. If you want the absolute best, I would say LaCie, or possibily Apple. I know that LaCie are used by several photo labs because of their high image quality. However, they are expensive. If price is a concern [which it usually is] try Samsung, Sony, and View Sonic.
Just some thoughts.

Scott

Not Apple, they use the same consumer panels as everyone else, except they charge a premium for the design, not the panel quality. They are under a bit of a cloud for using cheap screens and charging premiums, eg:

20-inch iMacs shipping with janky LCDs? - Engadget
techlogg.com - Class action erupts against Apple MacBook screens

I find some glossy lcds can be oversaturated and difficult to translate to print, and any cheap lcd will have a good chance of being weak in the colour stakes.

Good CRTs are hard to find now, and I really do prefer using an lcd for most things. If colour is critical you will end up paying for it, unfortunately.

Side note, I went from a 20 inch to a 22 inch at work, both at 1680x1050 res, and 22 is simply too big in my opinion for that res, the pixels start becoming visible.

I have good results with a Dell 20 inch at home, which used the same screen as the Apple Cinema Display at the time, and beat it in multiple colour tests. For half the price. I wouldn't buy the low end Dell monitors though.

pdmlmember · 09-13-2007, 02:38 AM

I recently got a Dell 24'' ultrasharp and so far so good. However I haven't had the chance to calibrate it yet.

stewart_photo · 09-13-2007, 07:22 AM

Since LCD displays have improved significantly in recent years, I suspect many (even general purpose ones) would hold up fairly well compared to a 5 year old CRT. Most of my recent computers have been laptops (a lot of traveling), so I haven't used a CRT in perhaps ten years. Getting too old to lug a heavy monitor/display around from place to place. Therefore, an LCD display was the only thing considered when I built my own desktop earlier this year. That display not the very best when it comes to color accuracy, but it serves my purposes well enough.

stewart

07-02-2007, 08:16 AM	#1
button Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 241	your current take on CRT vs LCD Hello everyone, My current CRT monitor (a 19" Sony G420) is over 5 years old, and at some point in the not too distant future, I will have to replace it. Could those of you who have had success using both CRT and LCD monitors for post processing please post your experiences and why you like one over the other? I would love to put my monitor on a diet and get a nice svelte 24" (or even bigger if I get impulsive enough) LCD, but I'm concerned that the black levels just aren't there yet for this technology. I know that some pros use LCDs and get great results, but I'm sure that there's a learning curve. Thanks, John Last edited by button; 07-02-2007 at 01:49 PM. Reason: too many "thats"

07-03-2007, 12:37 AM	#7
scottae316 Inactive Account Join Date: May 2007 Location: New Sewickley Township, PA U.S.A Posts: 3	Monitor choice It really depends on how deep your pockets are. If you want the absolute best, I would say LaCie, or possibily Apple. I know that LaCie are used by several photo labs because of their high image quality. However, they are expensive. If price is a concern [which it usually is] try Samsung, Sony, and View Sonic. Just some thoughts. Scott

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
A common garden 17" CRT monitor vs an average 20-22" LCD monitor for image processing	bc_the_path	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	6	07-11-2009 02:28 PM
On-camera LCD vs Computer LCD	Andi Lo	Pentax DSLR Discussion	6	02-07-2009 01:59 AM
K10 LCD vs K20 LCD	wildboar	Pentax DSLR Discussion	2	10-07-2008 01:56 PM
CRT monitor???	seymop	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	9	09-08-2008 03:09 AM
Dark Photo - LCD vs CRT Monitor	Bubbabob	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	8	08-08-2008 09:31 PM

07-02-2007, 09:43 AM	#2
jfdavis58 Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 13 S 0357397-3884316 Photos: Gallery Posts: 887	Originally posted by button Hello everyone, My current CRT monitor (a 19" Sony G420) is over 5 years old, and at some point in the not too distant future, I will have to replace it. Could those of you who have had success using both CRT and LCD monitors for post processing please post your experiences and why you like one over the other? I would love to put my monitor on a diet and get a nice svelte 24" (or even bigger if I get impulsive enough) LCD, but I'm concerned that the black levels just aren't there yet for this technology. I know that some pros use LCDs and get great results, but I'm sure that that there's a learning curve. Thanks, John How 'high-end'/'high-priced' do you want to go? The variety-i.e. number of offerings--in the CRT arena diminish every day, while simultaneously LCDs seem to be spawning like rabbits. Eizo and Lacie are both offering 12/16bit LCDs with output spectrum claims of full sRGB colorspace coverage. My last CRT is on it's final days. I'm either building a new windows desktop machine with dual LCD from one of these companies or jumping to Macintosh and the wide cinematic LCD. My opinion is that anyone still recommending CRTs simply hasn't looked beyond their own nose. High-end graphics LCDs with a good proofing inkjet and a dependable lab is the professional standard for my area and as far as I can see.

07-02-2007, 01:54 PM	#3
button Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 241 Original Poster	Good to have you back, John. What can you tell me about LCD calibration and black levels? I just built a Windows box a few months ago with a really strong video card (w/ dual DVI out). Can I just use my Spyder 2 to set a 6500 2.2 output? John

07-02-2007, 03:03 PM	#4
jfdavis58 Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 13 S 0357397-3884316 Photos: Gallery Posts: 887	Originally posted by button Good to have you back, John. What can you tell me about LCD calibration and black levels? I just built a Windows box a few months ago with a really strong video card (w/ dual DVI out). Can I just use my Spyder 2 to set a 6500 2.2 output? John I've got a couple older Compaq laptops and a brand new Toshiba. There is also a couple of newer HP's boxes, both laptop and tower in the house. All LCD. Separating black or near black grays get's better with each evolution. Family also has a couple of other LCds in 19-27 inch range, various mid-level units from a variety of manufacturors (Dell, Viewsonic, &???) I've tried the MonacosEZColor w/Optrix bundle on most of them. None give any significant problem; all look quite pleasing, realistic and can be matched to print without much effort or time. I think many exceed the capability of CRTs at this point in time. I've run Photoshop or Elements on 9 of 10 and spent time browsing various photosites. I'm convinced LCD are the current 'state of the art' and further that CRT are on the way out. Personally, I'm buying a high-mid or low-high end pair for my photos--a little more money, a lot less eye strain and editing frustration.

07-02-2007, 04:18 PM	#5
blwnhr Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 663	I use 2 BenQ 19" LCDs at work and find these pretty good, however they lack some calibration adjustment. I think the ultimate for good viewing are the screens with a shiney coating (not matte like most LCDs). From my experience these give far greater contrast. The only thing is you have to really watch the lighting in the room as the reflections on the screen can be murder on eyes. However, if you are using CRT now then you’d be pretty used to it and have good lighting set up I’d imagine. As for recommendation, I’ve used Dell matte screens (20” and 22”) and these are very impressive, however the best screen I’ve come across is a Sony. It was about 20-22” widescreen. It doesn’t appear on the Australian or American Sony web sites so may have been discontinued. Correctly calibrated these were unbelievable though.

07-02-2007, 05:29 PM	#6
chrisman Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery Posts: 237	I have been looking for a 'reasonably' priced LCD monitor to replace my Mitsubishi DP93SB CRT. I think the first thing to say is that it is no longer a choice between CRT and LCD but rather "which LCD'? As John has stated there are some very good high-end LCDs that are well suited to graphics applications - the downside being their price. If you are in the graphics business, or have the money to spend, then price is of secondary importance and you should go for the best. My needs, on the other hand, are for a general purpose monitor that I can also usefully use for photo post-processing and that doesn't cost 'an arm and a leg'. To this end I have just ordered a Samsung 226BW 22" wide-screen (16:10) after reading various comparisons of monitors at this price point. It is in my price range and the reviews have been generally favourable. Whichever monitor you finally decide to buy it is essential to also purchase a good quality calibration tool - I have the Colorvision Spyder2 - otherwise you will not be getting the best out of your monitor or your photos, no matter how much you have paid for it. If you are interested I'll let you know how the Samsung performs. Good luck

07-03-2007, 03:33 AM	#8
kjao Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 423	If are going to use dual monitor setup and want to calibrate them with spyder2, remember to get the pro version because the statndard version doesn't calibrate two monitors. There are ways around it but very very tedious. My personal preference is to get a big widescreen monitor rather than two smaller monitors. When buying cheap LCD monitors, watch out for those that only display 6-bit color rather than 8-bit color. Those monitors are good for games but not good for color reproduction work. cheers Kenny

09-12-2007, 10:58 PM	#9
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,481	Originally posted by chrisman My needs, on the other hand, are for a general purpose monitor that I can also usefully use for photo post-processing and that doesn't cost 'an arm and a leg'. To this end I have just ordered a Samsung 226BW 22" wide-screen (16:10) after reading various comparisons of monitors at this price point. It is in my price range and the reviews have been generally favourable. I recently got the Samsung 216BW which is very sharp and has nice color. I am not heavy into PP, and have only calibrated it with the included software, and my eye using everyone's gallery posts:-) It verges on being too bright even though I have it set on zero (out of 100). One thing that is odd is that in Pentax Photo Lab (yes, I use it - I like having to reboot!) is that the color balance in the preview does not always adjust when I change the WB settings. After I save the jpg (that has my correct WB setting), the WB on the preview will change to what ever I choose again. Sometimes the color change happens when I rotate the image. Very odd. And, in Photo Browser, the preview is generally dingy and warm tinted. I have the same general problem when I go to the next image. I believe there is something corrupted in the monitor color profile as that is what Photo Shop indicates when it boots. Other than the PPL glitch I see no problems, and I love the widescreen layout.

09-13-2007, 12:40 AM	#10
Maxington Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Australia Posts: 255	Originally posted by scottae316 It really depends on how deep your pockets are. If you want the absolute best, I would say LaCie, or possibily Apple. I know that LaCie are used by several photo labs because of their high image quality. However, they are expensive. If price is a concern [which it usually is] try Samsung, Sony, and View Sonic. Just some thoughts. Scott Not Apple, they use the same consumer panels as everyone else, except they charge a premium for the design, not the panel quality. They are under a bit of a cloud for using cheap screens and charging premiums, eg: 20-inch iMacs shipping with janky LCDs? - Engadget techlogg.com - Class action erupts against Apple MacBook screens I find some glossy lcds can be oversaturated and difficult to translate to print, and any cheap lcd will have a good chance of being weak in the colour stakes. Good CRTs are hard to find now, and I really do prefer using an lcd for most things. If colour is critical you will end up paying for it, unfortunately. Side note, I went from a 20 inch to a 22 inch at work, both at 1680x1050 res, and 22 is simply too big in my opinion for that res, the pixels start becoming visible. I have good results with a Dell 20 inch at home, which used the same screen as the Apple Cinema Display at the time, and beat it in multiple colour tests. For half the price. I wouldn't buy the low end Dell monitors though.

09-13-2007, 02:38 AM	#11
pdmlmember Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Malmö, Sweden Posts: 93	I recently got a Dell 24'' ultrasharp and so far so good. However I haven't had the chance to calibrate it yet.

09-13-2007, 07:22 AM	#12
stewart_photo Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Heidelberg, Germany Posts: 1,864	Since LCD displays have improved significantly in recent years, I suspect many (even general purpose ones) would hold up fairly well compared to a 5 year old CRT. Most of my recent computers have been laptops (a lot of traveling), so I haven't used a CRT in perhaps ten years. Getting too old to lug a heavy monitor/display around from place to place. Therefore, an LCD display was the only thing considered when I built my own desktop earlier this year. That display not the very best when it comes to color accuracy, but it serves my purposes well enough. stewart