CRT vs LCD Monitor

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

I will be getting a new monitor soon and I have read that CRT monitors
are better for graphics. As I will be using it much of the time for
viewing/processing scanned slides and negs I would like to know how
big the difference is. I will not be using it for games so it is
mainly the still images I am interested in using it for.

Thanks
Mike

 

[ken]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 07:20:55 GMT, mmjmm@ozemail.com.au wrote:

> I will be getting a new monitor soon and I have read that CRT monitors
> are better for graphics. As I will be using it much of the time for
> viewing/processing scanned slides and negs I would like to know how
> big the difference is. I will not be using it for games so it is
> mainly the still images I am interested in using it for.

Then CRT is the best for you.

 

[Scott]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"Ken" <___ken3@telia.com> wrote in message
news:7qheh0dq1261fa47n7l2n6bqlo6agnr42n@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 07:20:55 GMT, mmjmm@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>
> > I will be getting a new monitor soon and I have read that CRT monitors
> > are better for graphics. As I will be using it much of the time for
> > viewing/processing scanned slides and negs I would like to know how
> > big the difference is. I will not be using it for games so it is
> > mainly the still images I am interested in using it for.
>
> Then CRT is the best for you.
>

Based on what?
I find that LCD shows up more vibrant images than a CRT. I have CRT at home
and LCD at work.

Scott

 

[jk]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Two problems with lcd monitor use for editing photos. The first is
that colors tend to change in appearance depending on your
viewing angle, and most lcd monitors that are 19" have
a 1280x1024 resolution. The lcd monitors with higher resolution
are much more expensive. One can get a nice 19" crt monitor
for only around $250 that will give a high refresh rate at 1600x1200.
A good 20" 1600x1200 lcd monitor will cost at least $870. I
didn't see any in 19".

Scott wrote:

> "Ken" <___ken3@telia.com> wrote in message
> news:7qheh0dq1261fa47n7l2n6bqlo6agnr42n@4ax.com...
> > On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 07:20:55 GMT, mmjmm@ozemail.com.au wrote:
> >
> > > I will be getting a new monitor soon and I have read that CRT monitors
> > > are better for graphics. As I will be using it much of the time for
> > > viewing/processing scanned slides and negs I would like to know how
> > > big the difference is. I will not be using it for games so it is
> > > mainly the still images I am interested in using it for.
> >
> > Then CRT is the best for you.
> >
>
> Based on what?
> I find that LCD shows up more vibrant images than a CRT. I have CRT at home
> and LCD at work.
>
> Scott

 

[TJM]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

It all depends what your priorities are. Since you intend to use it for
high-end graphics work, I think CRT is the way to go. Both CRTs and LCDs
support high-resolution (1600x1200), but the photo quality on CRTs just seems
more realistic to me. The big disadvantage with CRT is that they are analog
devices, so you wont be able to take advantage of the DVI interface. They also
are rather heavy and produce a lot of heat.

LCDs have the advantage of being lightweight and produce little heat. Most of
them are pure digital displays, so you can take advantage of the DVI interface
if you have a video card with that connector (most do).

I still prefer CRT over LCD because of the "price per quality per screen size"
factor over expensive LCDs. Just basing things on what you intend to do with a
monitor, I say buy a nice 21" CRT from a reputable manufacturer and enjoy the
view.

Happy shopping.....


<mmjmm@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:411725d5.83689609@news.ozemail.com.au...
> I will be getting a new monitor soon and I have read that CRT monitors
> are better for graphics. As I will be using it much of the time for
> viewing/processing scanned slides and negs I would like to know how
> big the difference is. I will not be using it for games so it is
> mainly the still images I am interested in using it for.
>
> Thanks
> Mike
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

On Mon, 9 Aug 2004 12:16:55 +0000 (UTC), "Scott"
<pawsandclawsremovethis@btconnect.com> wrote:

>
>"Ken" <___ken3@telia.com> wrote in message
>news:7qheh0dq1261fa47n7l2n6bqlo6agnr42n@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 07:20:55 GMT, mmjmm@ozemail.com.au wrote:
>>
>> > I will be getting a new monitor soon and I have read that CRT monitors
>> > are better for graphics. As I will be using it much of the time for
>> > viewing/processing scanned slides and negs I would like to know how
>> > big the difference is. I will not be using it for games so it is
>> > mainly the still images I am interested in using it for.
>>
>> Then CRT is the best for you.
>>
>
>Based on what?
>I find that LCD shows up more vibrant images than a CRT. I have CRT at home
>and LCD at work.
>
>Scott
>
LCD's can't come close to the gamma curves of CRT displays.
That's why CRT displays are used in critical work where color fidelity
is a must.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

I still prefer a 13" monochrome.