# CRT or LCD for Post-Processing?



## nikonkev (Nov 4, 2007)

I've been using a CRT monitor to edit my photos up until now, after having purchase a laptop. After editing my first photo using my laptop's LCD monitor and looking at the results on my CRT monitor after uploading the image online, it looks like crap.

I'm finding that I can edit on my CRT and have it look awesome on that along with my LCD but I cannot edit on my LCD and have it look nice on my CRT.

Putting aside video card differences and assuming both monitors are calibrated properly, is one still more "accurate" than the other?

I'd like to get some input on the usage of CRT monitors versus LCD monitors for post-processing. What are your thoughts and what do you use and why?


----------



## djf (Nov 4, 2007)

Have you calibrated the monitor?  You have to calibrate a flat panel monitor to make sure all the colors show properly.


----------



## Garbz (Nov 5, 2007)

CRT. LCDs can be calibrated but the end result is always something of a weird thing unless you start spending serious money on one. Notice how with most LCDs you can't view a simple gamma chart? With many LCDs the angle you view it at changes the brightness (ok people say it's slight these days but are the same people saying you must have an accurately calibrated monitor?) It's the reason I still put up with my ugly 19" radiation box despite having the best computer in the house and the entire family having migrated to LCD.


----------



## Alpha (Nov 5, 2007)

Unless you go for an actual proofing LCD, it's not going to be quite as good. That aside, I've had few problems working on Apple LCD's so long as they've been calibrated very well.


----------



## patrickt (Nov 5, 2007)

I'm not an engineer. I have two LCD monitors that are connected DVI. Before, I had two CRT monitors. One thing I've noticed is the two monitors have the same color. I can split a photo, left-half and right-half and the two merge perfectly. I could get that with my CRTs but it would last only a day or two.


----------



## nikonkev (Nov 5, 2007)

Hmm.. I'm getting mixed responses. I was also thinking that CRTs give a better result, as that's what I was finding.

I do notice that a lot of bigshot photographers use iMacs for their PP work so there's got to be something right/good with flat panel LCD's.

Anyway, I'll keep searching for info. I'll be editing on my CRT until I figure out what's best.

Thanks for the responses.


----------



## Garbz (Nov 5, 2007)

For the record the mac's LCDs are surprisingly good for the money. Plus mac is the standard graphic development platform so they may have been dragged kicking and screaming in with apple's upgrade path.

Patrickt did have a point though. CRTs drift quite a bit, LCDs don't. If you get a CRT it would be wise to get a calibration tool with it. They don't cost much and if you take a few minutes a week to calibrate your monitor the results will amaze.


----------



## skieur (Nov 5, 2007)

The concensus of colour experts is that "CRT monitors are better able to represent actually document colours...."If you are a colour professional, stay away from LCDS and buy a good-quality CRT display.  It is the tool of colour specialists."

skieur


----------



## nikonkev (Nov 5, 2007)

do you guys see a future for CRTs still? it seems that LCDs are taking over, especially with the prices being so close to competitive. i wonder how colour experts are going to take that.


----------



## skieur (Nov 6, 2007)

nikonkev said:


> do you guys see a future for CRTs still? it seems that LCDs are taking over, especially with the prices being so close to competitive. i wonder how colour experts are going to take that.


 
They will hold onto their old CRTs until OLEDs come in, which have already been shown at electronics shows and are supposedly a great improvement over LCDs.

skieur


----------



## nikonkev (Nov 6, 2007)

hmm.. interesting. have never heard about OLEDs.


----------



## skieur (Nov 6, 2007)

nikonkev said:


> hmm.. interesting. have never heard about OLEDs.


 
Phosphorus organic light emitting diodes to be exact that individually give off light rather than the back light of an LCD screen. They use a lot less energy than LCD screens and produce brighter, more lifelike and much better quality images.

skieur


----------



## Helen B (Nov 6, 2007)

I've been giving this a lot of consideration recently, now that LCD monitors are getting better than CRT monitors in terms of gamut. Having viewed a few examples, I'm most impressed with the Samsung XL20 (which compares very well with the NEC SpectraView Reference 21, aka the LCD2180WG-LED), followed closely by the LaCie 321, each for different reasons. I've been using a LaCie Electron Blue IV (a CRT), but I think that the time has come to say goodbye to it.

Best,
Helen


----------



## Garbz (Nov 6, 2007)

nikonkev said:


> do you guys see a future for CRTs still? it seems that LCDs are taking over, especially with the prices being so close to competitive. i wonder how colour experts are going to take that.



They don't. The prices aren't near competitive yet. Colour accurate LCDs are still $1000 on the side of uncomfortable.


----------



## skieur (Nov 7, 2007)

nikonkev said:


> hmm.. interesting. have never heard about OLEDs.


 
By the way, Sony and Toshiba will be coming out with OLED screens in December for Christmas.  They are thinner, larger, and use 7 to 10 volts of electricity..much less than LCDs, as well as providing a better quality image.

skieur


----------



## nikonkev (Nov 8, 2007)

Garbz said:


> They don't. The prices aren't near competitive yet. Colour accurate LCDs are still $1000 on the side of uncomfortable.


 
So I take it that the $200 LCDs they sell at BestBuy or FutureShop suck?


----------



## Garbz (Nov 9, 2007)

Not for general use. We have 3 cheap LCDs in the house and they are great. Just don't use them for anything that requires colour accuracy. They aren't even constant from one side of the screen to the other.

Some very good LCDs which are colour accurate and display an even wider colour Gamut than CRTs exist but so far I have yet to see one under $1000. But give it time. Don't get me wrong. I definitely do not see a future in CRTs even in the professional arena. At the moment through they are still the only financially viable option for those of use who don't use them professionally and can write them off as a tax deduction.

http://www.nec.com.au/80031261709843A0A037417D0867D2E2.htm there's a most drool worthy screen but it's worth more than most of our camera gear.


----------

