Lcd Monitors

[Springheel]

I'm shopping around for a new monitor, and I was surprised to find it quite difficult to locate CRT monitors around here. Seems like every store is switching to mostly LCD. I was always told they weren't great for gaming, but I was wondering if that is no longer true. Are they worth a look for someone who does a lot of gaming and photoshop work?

[Dram]

for photoshop they're fine. for gaming the new ones are fine. If you want one for gaming though i would suggest you get the varying voltage one (forgot the name) which halves the response time of each cell.

 

The only problem i see with lcds is that they have a native resolution, which means that if you put the resolution down it has to strectch that over several pixels and looks like shit (unless its directly half).

 

I have a crt mind, but many of my friends use lcds, and frankly, i prefer the crt, because you can adjust the colours etc.

 

but an lcd is sorta easier to look at.

 

hope that helps you Spring

[OrbWeaver]

I have heard that a good CRT will always beat an equivalent LCD in image quality and (importantly for graphics professionals) colour fidelity.

 

The issues regarding response time and resolution are not really issues any more - I play games quite happily on my LCD even though it is quite slow (25 ms), modern ones can get about 12 - 15 ms which is more or less unnoticeable. Similarly, modern LCDs are high enough in resolution that intermediate resolutions can be interpolated quite reasonably, although anything less than native won't look good for really fine graphical detail or text.

[oDDity]

You have to pay a lot of money for an LCD of equal quiality to a CRT.

All I can say is that any LCD I've ever seen, I wouldn't take for free, never mind pay money for them.

[Vadrosaul]

Can I receive some help for what's the best CRT monitor to get, as mine is 6 years old and not as sharp or colorful as LCD's, but I as well dislike LCD's

[Dram]

well i guess that depends on many factors:

 

1) how much money are you willing to spend?

2) how big is your desk?

3) what country do you live in? (for pricing)

4) what kind of quality are you looking for?

 

etc

[Vadrosaul]

1) 400 dollars CDN

2) Max 19 inch monitor

3) Canada (dollar is close to US dollar)

4) top quality

[Dram]

This website has a Dell 19" for $101.99, it was however refurbished.

http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/cat...c.asp?CatId=169

This website has several different types. Samsung is not bad, but i prefer brands like Dell etc.

http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?maj...minorcatid=1001

 

You can pretty much find the prices on google. I'm in Australia so i don't know what a good price is in Canada, but 200 for a monitor is about how much i would spend (AU$)

[Renzatic]

If you have the cash to spend, I suggest checking out this baby

 

Top 'o the line 24 inch 16:9 aspect ratio awesomeness. It's the monitor I intend on getting.

[Darkness_Falls]

I've personally never seen an LCD screen that I like better than my good 'ole CRT. For gaming and graphic design, I will stick to CRT until I see absolute proof that LCD or flatscreen can do better. Granted, I haven't done a lot of research and testing. I'm just basing it off of my experiences from work, family, friends, etc.

 

I see ViewSonic makes what they dub "the professional gamers' LCD" (http://www.viewsonic.com/products/desktopd...p930b/index.htm), but is it better than CRT? No clue.

 

Here are some of their CRTs, too: http://www.viewsonic.com/products/desktopd...ys/crtmonitors/

[Domarius]

LCD's are NOT fine for photoshop if you're a decent artist, wether your talking about photo manip, digital painting, doesn't matter.

 

The colour range of LCDs is shit, and I'm not being a snooty petty artist - it really is shit. It can't be worked with to produce reliable colours.

If an LCD can represent the entire rainbow with this much detail;

<---------------->

then a CRT can represent it with this much

<----------------------------------------------------------------------------->

what that means is everything looks very faded and washed out on an LCD, the reason being that to create dark colours, it turns the LCD pixels to opaque, but because there is still light behind them, they wont' be very dark at all, giving you a very washed out image. The colours don't look quite nearly as rich, especially the darker the image (ie. Thief stuff) so you naturally compensate by making things darker - then when its viewed on a CRT it's too dark.

 

Try playing thief iwth the lights out on an LCD - all your blacks will glow grey like you have your gamma up too far.

 

As for games - it depends. For most games it's fine, but for Theif, its shit.

 

 

I think it's a crime that you can't really get CRTs anymore. All the graphic artists I know have two monitors - the LCD as their primary monitor (it just lasts longer and is technically easier on the eyes), and a CRT, for actually doing graphics on.

[Redface]

I have a new LCD too and Domarius is right, it really is somewhat worse than CRT when doing graphics, because of the colors and lack of true black. That can be partially fixed by buying a better, expensive monitor with better contrast ratio, around 1000:1. Standard LCDs only have it set at 600:1 or so.

 

Otherwise, LCD is better in every way, even for gaming, and I definitely wouldn't change back to a CRT now.

[Springheel]

Well, if they're more expensive, don't show true colours and don't handle resolution changes well, in what way are they better than a CRT, other than saving desk space?

[Macsen]

I have an LCD monitor. The only problem I can see is that the brightness of the screen changes depending on the angle you're looking at the screen. If I stand up the screen gets much brighter and if I sit down it gets much darker. Adds a more, er... 'full body experience' to the Thief games.

 

The main advantage is that it saves desk space, and lugging your monitor around isn't a massive chore.

[OrbWeaver]

Saving power and desk space are the major advantages of an LCD.

 

I also perceive my LCD to be brighter than my old CRT, but that may be because the CRT was crap (standard budget Dell offering).

[oDDity]

Well, if they're more expensive, don't show true colours and don't handle resolution changes well, in what way are they better than a CRT, other than saving desk space?

 

They aren't better. Maybe the high end ones are, but they cost in the region of £800. People like them becasue they're all kewl and flat and modern looking.

That's the exact reason my sister wanted one, even though I advised her to get a CRT. She prefered to spend twice as much on an LCD, even though the picture quailty was half as good.

[Renzatic]

It is true that most lower end LCD's don't give you the same picture quality as a CRT. And most are designed to run at a set resolution so it's up in the air wether it'll display in a lower or higher res setting and still keep the same quality as it's intended specs.

 

But if you do get a good one, you'll definately be happy with it. Unfortunately most of the good ones are, like Oddity said, a bit on the expensive side. If you want something you know you'll be happy with for less than $500, go with a CRT.

 

The only reason why I'm going the LCD route is because you can't find widescreen CRT monitors anymore.

[woah]

I absolutely depise LCD's. Be it an overpriced $1000 or cheap $250 screen, I've never come across one that does not ghost in gaming or movies. Perhaps I only notice this because I'm am accustomed to CRT monitors, but I cannot really see any reason why one would want to buy an LCD over a CRT--other than the fact that they are smaller and lighter (But the frikkin thing is usually stationary anyways, so size and weight shouldn't really be much of a concern).

 

From my personal experience, CRTs excel over LCDs in almost every way. They're a thousand times "smoother" when movement is taking place on screen, have better image quality, are clearer, are a hell of a lot cheaper, last much longer, and are not nearly as fragile. The list goes on and on.

 

The fact is, the whole LCD craze is just a bunch of marketing and consumer hype. It is very similar to the dilemma currently transpiring in the MP3 player field. Obviously, there are many Mp3 players MUCH better and cheaper than those god damn iPods, but it's the image people want and prioritize--not necessarily the quality. Certainly, one of the most effective marketing schemes is to instill the idea that it's what you own that distinguishes you as a person.

 

Just try educating your average, docile media-deadhead on the advantages of the higher quality, but unfortunately unpopular, electronic devices currently on the market; your consolations will only fall upon dead ears--they won't even register.

[Springheel]

Well, I just ordered a 21" CRT. Thanks for the comments everyone.

[Renzatic]

Whoa, most newer LCD monitors, as in the newest models released within the last 6 months, are becoming more comparable to plasma and CRT screens when it comes to ghosting. The only real hurdle they'll have to pass before they're truly equal is their inability to display true black...so they're not as bad as you're making them out to be, just not quite as good yet.

[pakmannen]

I have had no problems whatsoever with any games with my LCD. Everything runs perfectly smooth. It's also a lot easier on the eyes (as in no eyestrain), and it fits on my desk. Honestly I would never go back to a CRT again, even if they have slightly better image quality.

[Dram]

Well, I just ordered a 21" CRT. Thanks for the comments everyone.

 

Glad to be of assistance

 

just as a sidenote, there were actually professors at some university in the US (dunno which one) which converted an lcd screen to be HDR (which cannot be achieved by a normal lcd screen nor by a crt - HDR is realistic colourdepth, not 16million). They did it using the original lcd and adding many led's to the back etc. Quite a big project but you could do it yourself. Apparently it showed true black too. anyways, i think you can find the instructions on how to convert an lcd screen into a hdr lcd screen on the net somewhere, not sure. Anyways, i thought it was very interesting

[Domarius]

@Renz - yes, I've seen the newest ones, you can't really see any ghosting.

 

But the true black problem is reason enough alone. It affects the whole experience. The reason the old 2D video games ran at 320x200 at 256 colous instead of 640x480 at 16 colours (when those were the only 2 real choices) is that our eyes percieve more colour as being more realistic. The same principal applies here - the colour is most important.

[obscurus]

I am very happy with my LCD monitor, except when playing Thief on it. Since I use my computer mainly for music and audio recording, I prefer a monitor that is cheap, quiet, doesn't take up too much space, and doesn't use much power. I don't care that much about 1337 image quality, LCDs are more than good enough for my needs. Unfortunately, Thief looks way worse on an LCD monitor than it does on a CRT - the contrast ratio just isnt there (my LCD is 600:1 contrast ratio - a good CRT is more like 12,000:1). You can get high contrast LCDs that are a reasonable match for CRTs, but they are still quite expensive.

 

I can hear unusually high frequency sounds, and the high pitch whine generated by CRTs (CRTs produce a ~16KHz hum that can be very loud) is very uncomfortable for me. Walking into a department store with a bunch of CRT TVs running is painful to the point I get nauseous and disoriented. Most people my age can't hear the noise generated by CRTs anymore, but I can hear things that humans aren't supposed to be able to hear (ie, above 20KHz) - things like those ultrasonic pest repellers drive me nuts - people see me blocking my ears and wonder what is wrong with me.

 

Some LCD monitors have noisy EL backlighting (50-60 Hz hum), I stear clear of those, although they are merely annoying while CRTs are painful...

 

If I spent more time using my computer for things that required high quality image manipulation etc, I would suffer with a CRT, but I don't so I prefer LCD monitors.

 

My LCD has 8ms response time, so ghosting is not a problem, but the contrast ratio is a problem when playing games that are very dark, like Thief

 

Another reason people perceive LCDs as a better choice than CRTs is the lower radiation emissions - CRTs pump out radiation near the Gamma frequency band, and while there is not much evidence that it is harmful, it might make your risk of cancer or mutant chidren a bit higher. I personally doubt CRTs are that bad for you, though I find LCDs are less straining to my vision than CRTs are (though a good CRT should be able to operate above 72 Hz, which should be OK for your eyes).

 

So if superior image quality and low price is your thing, get a CRT, otherwise LCDs are generally better.

[Springheel]

Well, as an update...

 

I'm not terribly happy with the monitor I got. It's a 21" that uses trinitron technology--really very rich colours and quite crisp. But I'd never heard of trinitron lines before getting this monitor, and the horizontal trinitron lines are a nuisance. I could probably get used to it, but I also find that staring at the monitor, even for short amounts of time, makes me feel a slight sense of vertigo and nausea. Never had that happen before with any other monitor. I'm guessing it's the size but it's only 2" larger than my previous one so I'm not entirely sure why that would have such an effect.

 

At this point I'm starting to lean heavily towards selling it and eating the loss just so I can get a new version of the 19" I had before.