[jfrancis]

Which high-end LCD monitor is best for a high rez monitor, with decent color fidelity and no ghosting on motion graphics and video

HP L2335
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=hp+l2335&btnG=Google+Search

Sony PremierPro
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&c2coff=1&q=sony+premierpro&btnG=Search

Samsung 243T
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&c2coff=1&q=samsung+243t&btnG=Search

None of those...my choice is this other one...

[Popeye]

good thread.

how about the apple hd display?

[jfrancis]

Good point. I added it to the poll.

apple cinema display
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=apple+cinema+display&btnG=Google+Search

[Gort]

Apple cinema? Sony Premier Pro? Absurd. Way to expensive; you've got to be kidding. You can get a better buy with two Viewsonics or Samsungs.

"Something other" is my choice, as the alternatives seem to be a bit wishful for most.


_________________
- Tom Carter

"You can't stop the waves but you can learn to surf" - Jack Kornfield

[henrik]

I'm using 2 LCD's. One Apple 23' and one Dell 20'. Both are pretty good and I really couldn't live without the LCD's, much easier on your eyes compared to CRT's.

I'd have to say the Apple, although it's a little complicated to tweak its brightness/contrast/color settings if you're on Windows. The picture quality is amazing.
_________________
http://www.somniostudios.com

[jfrancis]

Gort - I agree. All are pricey. But of monitors in the 1920 x 1200 resolution range, I curious to see if people have opinions on these or others like them.

[Popeye]

damn not many people reply to this thread..i guess they are really too expensive..

i havent really checked out the samsung and the hp but it seems that the sony one is a little not as shape as the apple one.of course this is just a very un-professional obversation.

i would definitely want to hear more from your guys.

[jfrancis]

I found positive and negative reviews for each monitor. I ended up buying the HP. I'll let you know how it goes when it arrives.

[spooge demon]

Henrik, my ears have pricked up here.

They are easier on the eyes? hmm never heard that before.

I was about to say that I could not think of any reason at all to buy a LCD currently, but if you have anything more to your observations, I would love to hear it.

[stacy]

Just by way of information,
Medical people who study computer related
eye problems say that,
any dot pitch above .24mm and refresh rate below 75Hz
is an eye-killer. Anything above .26mm should be avoided
completel, and anything at 60Hz and below is the beginning
of a constant flicker.

[Gort]

Thanks, Dr Stacy

The only real thing I ever enjoyed the most about having used one was that it took up way less space on my desk, was lighter (my desk at home slightly sags with my 21 inch crt), and it did have less of a tiring effect on my eyes as well. Usually when I would come home in the evenings and work on the CRT, I would get weary, but that was probably a combination of the display with a day of work work work thrown in.

I like LCDs but they're just to much money. I am going dual display here at home and getting CRTs (Viewsonic). So what if their bulky - I'll save some coin (meaning I can buy some Johnny Walker Black Label).
_________________
- Tom Carter

"You can't stop the waves but you can learn to surf" - Jack Kornfield

[stacy]

Sure thing Slick.

It was a story in the Sunday paper insert
this summer, that everybody in the country
gets with thier local paper.
It's pretty much the same publication everywhere.

I only graduated from high school and college.
If, by contrast, to some other people, that
makes me look like a doctor... Well, then so be it!

[henrik]

Spooge>

If you uncertain, try to get to a local store and check out the Apple screen.
Usually in the mornings it takes me an hour or two before I can work comfortably with CRT's, with the LCD I'm on it first thing in the morning.

You should at least look into it if you feel tired after a day in the dark with CRT's. I've used LCD's for all my personal/freelance work since 2002, I really can't think of sitting in front of two CRT's any more. An hour or two makes my head hurt, but I can work on LCD's for a day without pain. It's made a difference for me. If i was still on CRT's, I would've given up a long time ago.

I am on CRT's at work, but I'd replace them with LCD's any day if I could. Yes, they are much easier on your eyes, simply because there's no flickering. An LCD has no active refresh rate. It's like reading a news paper. Most people complain about the color accuracy, but I have never seen the problem. If anything, the contrast ratio is much higher than normal, so you have great control of your darks. I guess what would be the ideal solution then is to work on an LCD and use a second CRT just to comfirm that it looks correct. I was going to buy two Apple screens, but the price tag of well over $4000 scared me.

Stacy>

With my limited knowledge, a CRT and LCD work very differently. A CRT has a refresh rate of, like you say 75 or more. 85-100 is ideal. True, but an LCD work in a different way despite its 60Hz. An LCD does not update the screen actively at 60Hz, only when needed. Say you read a text or watch an image, screen does not update. It's like reading a book. So I can't see how the LCD's 60Hz is an issue.

By the end of the day, I find myself having been more productive with LCD's. Also, my head is clearer and I'm not as tired either. I have energy for other things such as the gym and cooking etc. (Ok, I don't work for Apple although I admit it sounds like I'm advertising it. - Apple, you have my bank account number, I'll be waiting).
_________________
http://www.somniostudios.com

[Impaler]

[skullmonkeys]

This is something I've been wondering for a long time. What advantages [if any] does a DVI connection have over VGA connection?

Are there any cheaper alternative to Apple HD cinema?

[henrik]

DVI is digital, perfectly clear image with USB capabilites. (USB connections in monitor is great for mouse, camera and usb keys etc). VGA is analogue.
Please guys, go to a local store and check out the best LCD's out there. You won't regret it.
_________________
http://www.somniostudios.com

[jfrancis]

It seems also to be inappropriate to compare the refresh rate for LCD's with CRT's. For some reason, LCD's with 60 Hz refresh rates seem to be widely described as "flicker-free."

I hope the flicker-free thing doesn't come at the expense of motion ghosting.

My biggest worry is that I will hate the possible lack of color fidelity, and noisy, grainy, weird blacks.

Anyhow, I'll soon see.

[Meaty Ogre]

sorry, off topic

[henrik]

Jfrancis> That's what I said in my previous post. Motion ghosting IS an issue, but not for painting or video editing. I can only see this being a problem with games of a refresh rate higher than 60. I am not 100% sure, but I think most LCD's have a refresh rate of 50fps, while the Apple screens are at 60. I could be wrong.

The grainy weird blacks you are talking about exist because of the higher contrast ratio (often 350 or higher). It is obvious on the LCD's, but when viewed on a CRT it looks all the same. All this means you have more control of your darks.
_________________
http://www.somniostudios.com

[jfrancis]

This HP is widely described as being free of ghosting. Here's a couple of quotes I found, and threads...

http://reviews.designtechnica.com/review1695_main8483.html

"It has been drilled in your head for years: you can�t game on an LCD monitor. Until recently, LCD monitors didn�t have a fast enough response time to keep up with the fast-paced graphics of today�s games and action-packed movies. Hewlett-Packard aims to crush that notion with the release of their L2335, a 23-inch widescreen monitor targeted toward graphic designers, hardcore gamers and those simply wanting a high-end display." -designtechnica.com

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?s=1f4ab38d985463c300d5fbde9cb575c7&t=757963&page=1&pp=20

I just got this monitor for review over at Designtechnica (yes I own Designtechnica.com and I am an avid HardOCP'er and friends with Kyle) and so far nothing bad has stood out so far. I have only had it for a couple days and I am already in love. I have been able to play UT2004 at 1600x1200 resolution as well as Call of Duty and Final Fantasy XI online (playing this game with 1900x1200 background resolution). So far the only limitations have been with my video card (Radeon 9800PRO).

What impresses me the most is how good the display looks using the regular analog VGA input. Usually text is noticeably blurrier than using the DVI connection but so far I think that text looks very sharp; it is impressive.

The blacks are very deep and the whites look very white without a lot of the yellowish tint which you can find on some LCD displays (like samsungs).

"I am also reviewing a 20" Gateway monitor (FPD2020) which I believe is made by Samsung (its says made in Korea on the box and the menu system looks nearly identical to Samsungs) and the HPL2335 is noticeably better at gaming than the Gateway monitor (which is better than average). I am not seeing ghosting or other artifacts ususally associated with slower response rate. The L2335 could be the hidden treasure in the LCD market. But it also costs a premium price."

[stacy]

I've been reading from Google and AltaVista on
the subject and what I found is:

Yeah, the refresh rate does apply to LCDs.
Some very new, VERY expensive LCDs are
now good enough to play games, but still
not enough for video color fidelity and speed.

LCD pixels are controlled individually and only changes
light levels when the video card tells them to.

The CRT needs to scan continually to keep the light level
and color saturation constant.

For video work with lots of movement that's generated
on the fly from digital signals, that's a problem
because the illusion of movement is created by the
light levels changing from pixel to pixel.

In the CRT the liight level is aready decaying when the
decision is made to light the same spot or move on.

In the LCD the old spot is still brightly lit when the decision
is made to light the same pixel or move on.

Thus leaving an almost identical image behind as it moves.
That leaves multiple images or 'ghosts'.


Since I do more and more video all the time, I guess I'm sticking
with CRT.

At .22 pitch and 85Hz I've never had one of those "CRT head-aches" either.
AND... I'll not have to worry about dead pixels.
AND... I'll still have money left over to get a nice new copy of
Invigorator Animator from Zax da' MAN!!!

[jfrancis]

I have a Sony GDM-FW900 in the office, so I should have a good basis for comparison.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=Sony+GDM-FW900&btnG=Google+Search

---

I was unimpressed with this monitor until I started paying closer attention to it. Appareently what I chalked up to the monitor was probably really due to the graphics card.

When I run it in a Linux environment at 1920 x 1200 on a Quadro FX 2000 it looks blurry.

When I run it in a windows environment at 1920 x 1200 @ 85 Hz on a GeForce 3 it looks great.

Maybe I should have picked up a used one of these for home. (hey, For $900 I could have gotten EIGHT of them here ( ! ) )

http://cgi.liquidation.com/auction/view?id=457809

[B0b]

my brother has the sony 23"TFT in his office, it only displays 18Bit colour.. not full 24..

thats why it has a response time of 16ms..

Dell 20"is nice, or Formac's 20"TFT both very nice monitor and i belive the Formac is Pantone approved

[cheney]

[Drunken Monkey]

for what its worth... our entire programming team is now dual lcd... we look at text all day. i used to get headiches, i thought from programming, but they went away with LCD's. And we used to have high end 21" sony crt's. The last couple of generations have better color than CRT's imo. Last generation middle tier dont even have the vertical falloff anymore, at least not noticeable.


by the way, DVI is worth extra 50-80 bucks..

[stacy]

DrunkenMonkey,
You're right. What I forgot to add in my last post
is, that the refresh rate and the way it's controlled
are still pertinent in LCDs in regards to ghosting,
but it's true, the flicker isn't there because the
pixels stay lit until the transistor that controls that
particular pixel tells it to change.

[B0b]

refresh rate has been replaced in TFT/LCD's by Pixel response time the faster the response time the less ghosting u get

most TFT/LCD's require a refresh of 60Hz or less for input

[jfrancis]

Here's one with a 14 ms response time.

http://www.gizmodo.com/archives/westinghouse-digital-ltv17vl-14ms-response-monitor-022795.php

"The age of LCD TVs is clearly upon us." - gizmodo.com

[B0b]

beware fast response time TFT's the faster they are the less colours they seem to support

[balistic]