Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (
-   New Technology (
-   -   CRT or LCD monitor (

bilzmale Oct 23, 2005 9:56 PM

My 5 year old computer monitor is packing up and needs replacing. Forgetting about it being flat vs bulky, what advantage if any does a CRT still have over an LCD for photo viewing and editing (a 19" CRT costs about the same as a 17" LCD). I am not a pro - just a keen amatuer like most here I suspect?


[email protected] Oct 24, 2005 2:46 PM

Well, I heard that a CRT has more accurate color rendition.

As for myself, I use a Samsung 17 inch LCD with 700:1 contrast, 300 brightness, and 8ms response.

Recently I bought a Samsung 19 inch LCD for about $340 which is magnificent, same spec as the 17inch.

The advantage of an LCD is less eye fatique. I really noticed after working all day with an LCD how little eyestrain I experienced in comparison to the CRT. That should be the deal breaker for you.

Also, the CRT takes up a huge amount of desk real estate. My prediction is that most CRT's are going to end up at the town dump, for free give away.

If you buy an LCD, get one with a DVI port. Using a DVI connection improves the quality of the LCD output, especially for printed text.

-- Terry

NLAlston Jan 26, 2006 1:05 AM

Hi Bill,

Terry nailed it for you, but I'll just add one thing -----Less Electricity :-). I also have a Samsung 17" LCD monitor, as well as a 17" CRT monitor that I will use - on occasion - with my dual display apps (until I can afford another LCD unit). But my firm choice is (and will always be) the LCD type.

E.T Jan 26, 2006 3:11 AM

Differences in image quality between different models can vary huge amount so you should test screen before buying it. (or TFT of same model)

Their design causes some disadvantages.

First of all is color of black, because backlight is always on some of that light can leak through meaning black isn't black but something lighter/grayish.
Then there's resolving of different shades, after certain color everything can just go completely black.
Same applies to bright colors which can easily "burn through" and destroy different shades.
Of course then there's that reasonable (those not costing same as rest of high end PC) priced TFTs use about PC stone age resolutions, also that resolution is about locked, any lower resulution causes distorting of pixels and drop in accuracy of picture.

And remember that contrast doesn't tell nothing concrete, it's like zoom number, it just tells difference between darkest and lightest color screen can represent.
So while black might not be even close to black they can cover it and increase contrast number by very overbright white color.
It's like 10W light looking very dark when you compare it to 10kW light next to it.

Here's quite many TFT tests, but problem is that there's just so huge amount of models on market and new models come out constantly:

Before going for any specific TFT you should definitely test such model.

I have myself three years old 19" CRT (Samsung 959NF) which is well capable to high refresh rate UXGA (1600x1200) resolution when needed, getting TFT capable to same resolution would cost three times as much as I paid from that screen and even then there wouldn't be no quarantees about is it capable to representing equal dynamic range.

[email protected] wrote:

The advantage of an LCD is less eye fatique. I really noticed after working all day with an LCD how little eyestrain I experienced in comparison to the CRT.
That's most often reason of P.O.S bottle bottom CRT having low refresh rates.
Those are just about horrible to use when it feels like someone would waving black paper in front of screen.
That, smaller space requirements and about half power consumption are their only advantages, in other aspects holyness of them is still mostly groundless "hype".

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:15 AM.