Dean S. Messing wrote:
: > The statement that LCDs "are crap" for serious graphics work is simply
: > not true any more. High-end LC panels _far_ exceed CRTs in every
: > category (e.g., brightness, colour gamut, tone scale, MTF, dynamic
: > range) except response time, and with "overdrive" and the new
: > "flashing backlight" techniques on the horizon, even that barrier will
: > soon be gone. CRT technology, like the vacuum tube in general, is
: > essentially dead.
:
: Where I work, in television, where they do buy horrendously expensive
: monitors, they will not touch LCDs for anything other than monitors that
: aren't paid close attention to.
That's because studio people are notoriaously over-conservative. (I
worked with them extensively at Tektronix. Trying to get them to use
digital scopes in the beginning was like pulling teeth. At one point
we had to put a circuit into one of our products to make the noise
floor "look analogue". It was entirely artificial but it made the
studio engineers happy.)
I will agree with you. They prefer tools that they are familiar with.
Don't like change. Heck, some would still be using U-matic recorders if
they could get a new portable one. :)
: CRTs far exceed them in all the things
: you just mentioned.
This is simply false. You don't appear to have looked at
the specs in a while.
I have looked at the specs as I am trying to purchase a new computer
system for my work. I have yet to see a LCD monitor that provides all
the specifications that meet the present CRT that I am using. The
killer is the static contrast. I have seen a few that promote 5000:1 or
8000:1 contrast but when you read the fine print, this is only for
dynamic contrast. Some of them have static contrasts in the 300:1 to
500:1 range. Pretty low for working on static images.
: The contrast range of the LCD is inferior, and
: that's the basis of all the other measurements. With a poor contrast
: range, you can't get the full colour gamut.
Again, you don't appear to have looked at the specs recently. At the
last CES, I saw LC displays with contrast ratios exceeding 10000:1 made
by every major manufacturer except Phillips.
I have yet to see one LCD monitor that provides a static contrast of
1000. The high contrasts specified are all dynamic contrasts done by
changing the intensity of the backlight. Can you provide one
manufacturer that makes a high contrast (Static) LCD monitor? I may be
interested in purchasing it.
The best CRTs (measured in a dark room) don't usually don't exceed
6000:1. And a new generation of LCD is already being introduced by
nearly every manufacturer that uses so-called dynamic backlight
modulation. These have contrast ratios exceeding 100K:1
I need high contrast in static images for my work. This dynamic
backlight is useless when comparing individual frames from highspeed
cameras looking for a subtle change in the contrast to see shock fronts.
Then there's brightness. Can you show me a CRT that has a
brightnesses exceeding 12000 cd/m^2 ? Modern High Dynamic Range LCDs
always do. (They use modulated LED backlights).
Colour gamut? Are you kidding? With RGB LED backlights, or peaked
phosphor fluorescent backlights, the LCD gamut completely engulfs the
CRT gamut. Indeed LCDs in the laboratory are now competing with OLED.
Are you going to claim that CRT gamut exceeds OLED? (And yes I'm
aware of the relationship between gamut and max brightness.)
MTF? CRTs have _never_ been close to LCDs.
It's no accident that traditional CRT manufacturers
(e.g. Sony, Sharp) have shut down their manufacturing lines.
Since this has drifted entirely off of Fedora, let's continue the
discussion off-line if you wish. I doubt anyone else is interested.
Dean
I think it is useful to allow others to learn. There are some people
that can learn from these discussions. Marked OT is a good idea though.
In this thread I have learned about RGB LED backlights.
FWIW, I just read a forum post about laser driven monitors that are
supposed to be shown in January. Could be even better than OLED or SED.
--
Robin Laing
