Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 16, 2003, 1:53 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2
Default What is a good monitor for viewing photos

I have an LCD which doesn't look good, what is a good monitor that someone can recommend.

Michael
Snowdon is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 16, 2003, 2:11 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,910
Default

We had a big debate about this a while back. LCDs (the better ones anyway) are very bright, and vivid colour. Problem is they are not good for editing photos as the pics will look bland on other monitors. Also if you buy a cheap LCD it may not be lit uniformly (I've seen LCDs that look like there's little lights shining out every few inches at the top and bottom, light/dark/light/dark).

CRT is still the way to go. There have been great improvements over the years. If you don't want a moniotor with those annoying Trinitron/Aperture-Grille wires, I can reccomend the Samsung SyncMaster 957MB (which I just bought a few months ago, was reviewed as the #1 monitor at the time beating out the Trinitron monitors).

(I'll add more later when I got more time.)
Mike_PEAT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2003, 3:00 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2
Default

I want to get a CRT, so I will check that one out.

Michael
Snowdon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2003, 3:14 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 438
Default

I use a LCD at work and a CRT at home. I very much prefer the CRT (at least over the LCD at work). I have noticed that the CRT can better handle subtle difference in colors than the LCD. For instance, a web site I visit regularly has faint crosshatch pattern as background (thin gray lines over white background) looks plain white in the LCD monitor.
luisr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2003, 4:10 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

i tend to lean to Viewsonic.
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2003, 4:37 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Viewsonic does make some very good monitors.

I am a fan of the Trinitron tube based monitors. But that is mostly because they are (usually) lighter. They also have only 1 color gun, so they can't get out of alignment with each other. Non-trinitron tube monitors have improved a lot in the last several years (like Mike_PEAT says) so if you get a good quality monitor, then you should be all right.

If you look at the roundup reviews in PC Mag it can be very informative. Even if you don't belive their reviews, they do a decent job talking about the different technology. Very educational.
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2003, 8:42 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 14
Default Samsung SyncMaster 1100p

When I bought my computer package, it came with a 17" noname monitor, that had ok color and resolution.

Two months later, while at a computer trade expo in Secaucus, the Samsung SyncMaster 1100p caught my eye. It was a factory refurb, on display at the show, but it looked brand new. It has a 21" screen, and the color and clarity are fantastic-great for photo editing.

I made a lowball offer for it, and picked it up for about half price, which at the time came to about $400.

Well, this was almost three years ago, and it still works great. Don't know where evolution has led this model, but I would recommend it to anyone.
pennstate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2003, 10:55 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,910
Default

Continuing from earlier, the Samsung 957mb is very bright...the "mb" stands for their MagicBright modes...there's a button on the monitor that allows you to switch from three different brightness modes (Text-Internet-Entertain).

You have to watch out because there's other 957 models like the 957nf (a different type of monitor). Make sure you look at the 957mb!

It's very hard to shop for a monitor, since many computer stores don't have all the monitors on display, and the big-box stores have only basic monitors on display. I spent weeks shopping around at the different stores, and even a computer show...I did a lot of reading on the web of reviews, and it was this review that made me decide on the Samsung 957mb:

http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/artic...,107477,00.asp

I bought the monitor sight unseen as I couldn't find a store that had it on display, but I'm happy with my choice.

I admit it really depends on what you need in a monitor...I didn't want an LCD because I do a lot of photo editing, and I can't stand Trinitron/Apterture-Grille monitors; the reviews of a particular monitor say you can barely see the 2-3 black lines/wires on the screen, but I see them every time and they drive me crazy when trying to edit a picture.

I should add that the 957mb is 19" almost totally flatscreen (17.8 viewable, .24 dotpitch).
Mike_PEAT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 17, 2003, 3:22 AM   #9
Moderator
 
Frank Doorhof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,320
Default

Hi,

Always CRT.
The problem with digital technique is the color depth and white/black crunch.

The digital monitors/projectors cannot show the full dynamics of the grayscale and colorgaumet. To get it even in the most striking areas (the midtones) the shift all the definition to that area leaving the black areas with less detail and the whites with a little crunch.

This results in pictures which are fairly good in the middle area but are lacking detail in black and lacking little less detail in the whites.

Another factor is the colorrange. A CRT uses fosfor and that can handle (if the monitor is any good) the complete SMTPE color chart, and LCD will always drift away from that chart often leaving you with a yellow tint or reds that move more to orange.

For photo and movies always use CRT (for the time being anyway).

Greetings,
Frank
Frank Doorhof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 17, 2003, 3:43 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

At the moment. I'd always favour crt. BUT it really depends where your final output will be. Essentially for editing, your monitor should present images compatible with your output device. So for prints, a print alongside a monitor should ideally be indistinguishable! However, if you were editing for outdoor plasmas,lcd's, or powerpoints on projectors, you might want WYSIWIG to work for the other display. I remember many years ago, coming across tests where a camera pointed at a scene was compared with a crt monitor alongside a cutout in a large black board, of the scene itself. Now that's reality TV!

The problem is there are well known colour standards which aim to make all these newer devices compatible and look the same, but the devices themselves have mapping discrepancies which cannot always mean perfect translation. Over time, I'm sure new display technology and colorimetry will improve, but at the moment crt is very mature and what most still use as the final arbiter.

I'd always be careful with high brightness/contrast and magic names for functions. Sometimes this means something else is compromised or covered up e.g low level grey tone tracking. You don't need high brightness 2 feet from your monitor - it gives me a headache! Remember, monitor brightness set up is related to ambient light levels, not what the monitor can put out.
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:59 PM.