Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Analogue flat screen

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
August 2, 2005 2:16:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Can anybody tell me if there is a difference between an Analogue flat screen
and a Lcd flat screen and if there is would the Analogue be suitable for
Photoshop .
P.Jay

--
Take dog out to find me

More about : analogue flat screen

Anonymous
August 2, 2005 9:36:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

P.Jay wrote:

> Can anybody tell me if there is a difference between an Analogue flat screen
> and a Lcd flat screen and if there is would the Analogue be suitable for
> Photoshop .

The term "flat screen" is a bit of a marketing victim; it is used to
describe both LCD displays (and plasma, when applied to television
monitors), and standard CRT displays that have a flat face, as opposed
to the more common tube designs that are slightly convex.

The main difference is, of course, one version uses a thin, light LCD
panel, and the other a deep, heavy, glass, high-voltage CRT tube. "Flat
panel" is a more appropriate term for LCDs that helps distinguish the two.

CRT monitors are probably more appropriate for detailed Photoshop work,
until LCD technology improves a bit more, although it depends a lot on
your own tastes.



---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0531-0, 08/01/2005
Tested on: 8/1/2005 10:36:49 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com
Anonymous
August 2, 2005 12:54:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Heavier, better quality [if you use graphic level screen], more free
radiation and cheaper :) 

=bob=

"P.Jay" <pljaydog@eircom.net> wrote in message
news:4iwHe.3265$R5.691@news.indigo.ie...
> Can anybody tell me if there is a difference between an Analogue flat
> screen
> and a Lcd flat screen and if there is would the Analogue be suitable for
> Photoshop .
> P.Jay
>
> --
> Take dog out to find me
>
>
Related resources
Anonymous
August 2, 2005 5:48:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"P.Jay" <pljaydog@eircom.net> wrote in message
news:4iwHe.3265$R5.691@news.indigo.ie...
> Can anybody tell me if there is a difference between an Analogue flat
> screen
> and a Lcd flat screen and if there is would the Analogue be suitable for
> Photoshop .
> P.Jay
>

I use a 21" Viewtronic flat CRT that has more realistic colours and detail
than any of our LCD's. I understand there are some great new LCD displays
though. Some are probably superior.

Dave
Anonymous
August 2, 2005 7:57:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> I use a 21" Viewtronic flat CRT that has more realistic colours and detail
> than any of our LCD's. I understand there are some great new LCD displays
> though. Some are probably superior.

I have never been able to stand looking at an LCD, and wouldn't have even
dreamed of doing any photo work on them. Recently, however, I purchased a
Monaco Optix XR calibration device, and calibrated all of the LCD panels in
the office, and I've been very surprised.

None of the LCDs that I've calibrated have been *anywhere* close to
where they needed to be with factory settings or color choices. All of them
have had to have the brightness turned anywhere from all the way down to
nearly all the way down, and have needed some serious adjustments to the
color - with the different channels needing vastly different adjustments to
get them where they need to be. Also, the white balance has to be
calibrated *after* the brightness, as changing the brightness has
significantly shifted the white balance on all of them.

The CRTs, on the other hand, were pretty usable when just set to 6500k,
and doing a full calibration on them was quick and easy, I didn't have to
fiddle with the RGB channels anywhere near as much as I did on the LCDs.

Overall, while I still prefer the CRTs, when the work is done, a
calibrated LCD is more or less acceptable. Without a calibration device,
however, there is no way I would use an LCD.

steve
Anonymous
August 2, 2005 8:00:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

The term "analogue" or "digital"is a marketing trick.if something is digital
it doesn't necessary mean it is better.All 5 human senses are analogue, of
course, the human brain doesn't understand the digital language of 0s and
1s.With the exception of digital cameras, computer and cds I don't think
that digital is better than analogue, one customer in the shop I work has
returned two sony digital camcorders, prosumer, 1000 euro price range, in
less than a month because they failed to record and show picture on their
screen.Back to the subject, however.I personally use a 17"CRT miro which I
would never exchange for any "flat" lcd.The crt screen has more than 60
years of development behind it, and the lcd or tft screen has some inbound
disantvantages which might never be overcome.

--
Tzortzakakis Dimitrios
major in electrical engineering, freelance electrician
FH von Iraklion-Kreta, freiberuflicher Elektriker
dimtzort AT otenet DOT gr
Ï "P.Jay" <pljaydog@eircom.net> Ýãñáøå óôï ìÞíõìá
news:4iwHe.3265$R5.691@news.indigo.ie...
> Can anybody tell me if there is a difference between an Analogue flat
screen
> and a Lcd flat screen and if there is would the Analogue be suitable for
> Photoshop .
> P.Jay
>
> --
> Take dog out to find me
>
>
Anonymous
August 2, 2005 8:00:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Dimitrios Tzortzakakis wrote:
> The term "analogue" or "digital"is a marketing trick.if something is digital
> it doesn't necessary mean it is better.All 5 human senses are analogue, of
> course, the human brain doesn't understand the digital language of 0s and
> 1s.With the exception of digital cameras, computer and cds I don't think
> that digital is better than analogue, one customer in the shop I work has
> returned two sony digital camcorders, prosumer, 1000 euro price range, in
> less than a month because they failed to record and show picture on their
> screen.Back to the subject, however.I personally use a 17"CRT miro which I
> would never exchange for any "flat" lcd.The crt screen has more than 60
> years of development behind it, and the lcd or tft screen has some inbound
> disantvantages which might never be overcome.
>
> --
> Tzortzakakis Dimitrios

I would agree that audio CDs are superior to records and tapes, but not
digital cameras, at least as far as image quality. It is the convenience
of digital that is better, not the image quality. It IS possible, with
increased resolution and dynamic range, that digitals are overtaking
many film types and formats, but there are still films and formats that
are capable of better image quality than most digitals.
Anonymous
August 2, 2005 8:17:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Tue, 2 Aug 2005 16:00:54 +0300, Dimitrios Tzortzakakis wrote:

> The term "analogue" or "digital"is a marketing trick.if something
> is digital it doesn't necessary mean it is better.All 5 human senses
> are analogue, of course, the human brain doesn't understand the
> digital language of 0s and 1s.

Don't be too sure. Do you see anything analogous to the sensor's
(digital) receptor sites in the eye's rods and cones? Hmm, the eye
uses the two to extend its range of light sensitivity, not at all
unlike the technique used in some of Fuji's newer sensors.


> With the exception of digital cameras, computer and cds
> I don't think that digital is better than analogue, one customer
> in the shop I work has returned two sony digital camcorders,
> prosumer, 1000 euro price range, in less than a month because
> they failed to record and show picture on their screen.

Each type has its advantages. Have you ever programmed an analog
computer? They're quite interesting, and lead to insights into the
universality of the physical/mathematical laws underlying many
seemingly unrelated physical realms. But what was the point in the
example showing that digital devices can fail? That's a given. The
failure rate of my own (mostly Sony) analog video devices is quite
high.
Anonymous
August 2, 2005 8:22:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Dimitrios Tzortzakakis" <dimtzort@otenet.gr> wrote in message
news:D cnr3i$aml$1@usenet.otenet.gr...
> The term "analogue" or "digital"is a marketing trick.if something is
> digital
> it doesn't necessary mean it is better...

that's a tricky statement .. TFT screens can accept an "analogous" or a
"digital" signal coming from the video card (or have both inputs available)

by using the analog input one could call it an analog screen while if using
the digital one .. etc ..
Anonymous
August 2, 2005 11:34:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"imbsysop" <imbsysop@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:42ef8196$0$14331$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be...
>
> "Dimitrios Tzortzakakis" <dimtzort@otenet.gr> wrote in message
> news:D cnr3i$aml$1@usenet.otenet.gr...
> > The term "analogue" or "digital"is a marketing trick.if something is
> > digital
> > it doesn't necessary mean it is better...
>
> that's a tricky statement .. TFT screens can accept an "analogous" or a
> "digital" signal coming from the video card (or have both inputs
available)
>
> by using the analog input one could call it an analog screen while if
using
> the digital one .. etc ..

Thank you all,the debate goes on but I think the general drift is
stick with tried and tested CRT. Thanks again for your informed opinions.
P.Jay
--
Take dog out to find me
>
>
!