Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Headshot · Jul 13, 2005, 11:28 PM

The more I look the more I'm thinking that the CRT is still the best for graphix, am I right?
Yeah I'd love the desk space (physical) and the convenience factor, and my eyes could use a break, but even the best CRT (LaCie Elctron-Blue) at $800 is still half the cost of the 23" Apple.

While I want to see what the majority of my customers (real estate agents, brides at their office cubicles and home users) see, which is LCD, I want to have the best fidelity and resolution available.

Surely in this opinionated realm of creative professionals, there must be a lot of feedback and ideas, so, let's get it on!

Headshot · 12:14 AM

An interesting article as I continue to research...

Talk about right down the middle! (also makes me think that maybe LCD's are more consistant?)

http://www.photo.net/equipment/display/

loki74 · Jul 14, 2005, 03:43 PM

for my purposes, LDC works great. I used to get headaches from CRTs because of the refreshing of the screen... doesnt happen on LCD. and there is no convergence error. I dont get why people like CRTs so much better... I mean, with the calibration stuff on osx I get get the right gamma etc. Also, the detail is incredibly sharp--as a designer I can tweak an image to the finest detail.

$0.02

iMOTOR · Jul 14, 2005, 04:57 PM

Personally, I've always thought CRTs had a sort of blur to them, even at high resolutions. My lcd just seems crisper and it doesn't kill my eyes. I'm talking about high end LCDs though.

Now if you're referring to most of the crap best buy sells, then yes, LCDs suck.

mitchell_pgh · Jul 14, 2005, 06:25 PM

If you only have $300-$500, I would go CRT. If you have $700+ an LCD.

Low end LCDs stink and CRT is just too old school.

(P.S. I have dual CRTs)

Headshot · Jul 14, 2005, 06:34 PM

Price is not an issue. I don't wanna throw my money down the toilet but whatever it takes within reason.

I love the punch of my new Powerbook, and when I transfer files to my G4, they look murky on my older Sony 21"
CRT.

More important than anything is the closeness to what is outputted on my 2200 via Imageprint.

bwahahax · Jul 14, 2005, 07:27 PM

LCDs also use a heck of a lot less power.

Headshot · Jul 14, 2005, 08:33 PM

I'm talking about quality of image!
(20% gratuity for you.)

mitchell_pgh · 11:55 PM

Originally Posted by Headshot

I'm talking about quality of image!
(20% gratuity for you.)

If quality is the ONLY criteria, I would recommend getting a pro series CRT ($800+) with a color calibration system ($300) and a hood. You should also plan on calibrating your monitor every day.

NOTE: That being said, LCDs have numerous advantages: they stay calibrated for longer periods of time, less magnetic interference, easier on your eyes, (but you made it abundantly clear that quality was the only criteria)

ALSO, you will NEVER get 100% accurate color from your screen (RGB) to your printer (CMYK).

loki74 · Jul 15, 2005, 05:20 PM

you could also get one of those doohikeys that you put on the screen and run this software, and they match your printer to your screen... but even then will not be perfect.

also mitchell makes a very good point about magnetism. no need to degauss on an lcd, right?

mitchell_pgh · Jul 15, 2005, 05:40 PM

Originally Posted by loki74

you could also get one of those doohikeys that you put on the screen and run this software, and they match your printer to your screen... but even then will not be perfect.

also mitchell makes a very good point about magnetism. no need to degauss on an lcd, right?

No need... but they still need calibration from time to time.

Headshot · Jul 16, 2005, 01:55 AM

It's settled. CompUsa has a 2 day 'employee discount' sale that ends tomorrow.
I have an order on hold for a G5 Tower & 23".

ghporter · Jul 16, 2005, 08:42 PM

As long as an LCD is run at its native resolution (that is, the physical resolution of the screen, taking into account the actual pixels on the panel), then it's going to look great. It must have a good response time, but that's a problem with CRTs that have long persistence times, so it's not really an issue.

firefly · Jul 18, 2005, 07:17 PM

LCDs arent quite there yet. CRTs still produce much deeper blacks, and overall have a wispy, natural quality to their image; LCD on the other hand has an undeniable crispness and clarity, its just that in dim environments especially, has trouble reproducing dark colours. Certainly cheaper LCDs based on a TN panel cannot come close to a good Aperture Grille CRT, though a Cinema Display (or similar IPS/MVA/PVA) will do fine and produce an excellent picture.

OogaBooga · Jul 18, 2005, 10:29 PM

LCD.

Thorzdad · Jul 19, 2005, 02:06 PM

I use both. The LCD is somewhat sharper and has higher contrast. The CRT has more accurate color, though they are close. I still find a good CRT can display much more delicate colors and blends. The LCD tends to have a little more trouble with subtle colors and variations. But, like I said, I use both. As long as I am aware of the differences, I can adjust.

It's the higher contrast of the image, I think, that people respond to on an LCD. It just makes it look better...whether or not it is actually displaying accurate color. It's similar to buying a TV. All stores pump-up the saturation and brightness on the displays because people respond to the vivid display. The fact that the images aren't accurate gets lost.

Whichever screen you use, if you are doing any sort of image work, accurate calibration is a must.

loki74 · Jul 20, 2005, 04:19 AM

Originally Posted by Thorzdad

Whichever screen you use, if you are doing any sort of image work, accurate calibration is a must.

really, thats what it comes down to: accurate calibration.

beyond that, I would say you've only really got to balance the desk space vs. money saved...

Headshot · Jul 20, 2005, 10:54 AM

Fine, I've enjoyed this incredible view for a few days now, what's it gonna take to calibrate?
My Imageprint (RIP) prints pff the 2200 look alright, they could be punchier like my screen! (haha, I knew it.)

Monaco?
Gretag/Mac?
Spyder?

Thorzdad · Jul 20, 2005, 06:51 PM

The Spyder is a good, cost-effective calibration tool. Especially for the one-man operation. The Monaco, etc. are more commonly found in larger press and pre-press operations.

If money is a serious constraint, you can also get by using SuperCal, which is a shareware ($19) software-only calibration tool. Since it relies upon your own visual acuity, the results aren't going to be perfect. But, you can get a darn good result with a little work.