great monitor for xara but?

**MEB** · 07 June 2007, 04:57 PM

Originally Posted by Xhris

Don't get me started on monitors (or mice)...

As a PC gamer, I'm into monitor perfection, and CRTs still reign supreme - by a significant margin. LCDs are good enough for non-gaming situations (and even some gaming situations), but suffer from two major inferiorities relative to CRTs - one of which will likely never be able to be overcome.

You forgot the third biggest problem (for designers, photographers etc): color reproduction

However the new OLED LCD technology should improve reponse times and color reproduction.

**Soquili** · 07 June 2007, 05:29 PM

Moved the thread to the Off Topic forum as it really doesn't discuss anything specific to Xara Xtreme or other versions.

LCD and CRT monitors have considerable differences when discussing their construction and the physics involved.

Using a high quality flat screen CRT with a very fine dot pitch is ideal. The ViewSonic that Xhris mentioned is very good.

LCD monitors come in a wide range of prices and quality just like CRTs. Many of the first released LCD monitors would not even qualify as a low end, low quality LCD made today although they were very expensive in their time.

Getting back to Behzad's original question. Why change your monitor's resolution to something that is not it's optimal?

Using a CRT or a LCD you loose quality of the image when you are working at a non-optimal resolution.

**behzad** · 07 June 2007, 07:12 PM

Wow, I am very impressed with all the answers you have given me. You guys are very smart, I appreciate your comments. I will keep it at optimal resolution, I guess i will get used to it very soon. It is now funny to see my website so small in the center of the screen.

Initially when I designed it, it was on my old CRT at 1024 resolution.

I wonder now if I design websites, how would it look on other monitors (LCD considering they are all running at different resolutions) and also how it will look on a standard CRT?

Challenging I guess.

**Xhris** · 08 June 2007, 04:02 AM

Originally Posted by Miguel B.

You forgot the third biggest problem (for designers, photographers etc): color reproduction

However the new OLED LCD technology should improve reponse times and color reproduction.

Colour reproduction is a falacy; LCDs and CRT can both be calibrated to be within low standard deviations of true colours. Only native resolution and response time (or equivalent) are significant differences. Well, dot pitch is arguably another - LCD have pixel sized dot pitches and CRTs are much smaller. People say text looks better on an LCD as it is sharper. I say otherwise because it is less pixelated on a CRT - i.e. effectively antialiased.

RE response time improvements: Unless the LCD response times are improved by a factor of one thousand for LCDs (not likely - a factor of 2 to 10 at best in coming years) then CRTs will easily be superior. Simple (accurate) direct measurements can show this.

**willdean** · 08 June 2007, 07:32 AM

Originally Posted by Xhris

RE response time improvements: Unless the LCD response times are improved by a factor of one thousand for LCDs (not likely - a factor of 2 to 10 at best in coming years) then CRTs will easily be superior. Simple (accurate) direct measurements can show this.

I'm interested in how you measure this. Even at a crazy refresh like 120Hz, the screen is only redrawn every 8ms or so. I'll concede that you might want the response of the 'pixels' on the screen to be 'settled' well within that time, but I can't see where microseconds come into it. Nothing changes on the screen for milliseconds at a time.

**Xhris** · 08 June 2007, 10:09 AM

Originally Posted by willdean

I'm interested in how you measure this. Even at a crazy refresh like 120Hz, the screen is only redrawn every 8ms or so. I'll concede that you might want the response of the 'pixels' on the screen to be 'settled' well within that time, but I can't see where microseconds come into it. Nothing changes on the screen for milliseconds at a time.

The CRT phosphor relaxation time is very rapid. Setting the CRT monitor refresh rate to 120 Hz and setting vertical synch on yields visually obvious performance differences. Measurements can be taken using very high speed photography at key stages during phosphor transitions (not a bedroom job).

This is perhaps the closest 'data' available on the web (that I've found).

For a more technical explanation of what I was referring to, see this paper by Lee and Lee 2001, from the literature - in particular: Chapter III. Note however, that their conclusions have not been met. LCD's remain inferior in this faculty...considerably.

**handrawn** · 08 June 2007, 10:30 AM

colleague of mine who does video editing would never have anything but CRT.

However CRT strains my eyes
LCD does not.

rather glad I don't do video editing....

PS don't watch too much TV either

**behzad** · 08 June 2007, 02:50 PM

Nice green eyes, if you watched too much t.v. then your eyes would be all red.

**pauland** · 08 June 2007, 03:22 PM

Originally Posted by handrawn

However CRT strains my eyes
LCD does not.

Same here.

**Rodzo** · 08 June 2007, 04:08 PM

I've been saving for a big LCD/plasma for a while now in the belief that it will be better for my eyes. Only thing that's stopped me so far has been the lack of a reasonably priced wide screen with a 90degree option.

I've been told that with these things the individual pixel transistors are programmed to change colour and brightness themselves, so there is no need for a cathode ray, which is the thing that causes flicker, hence eye strain.

I'm currently using an old vision master 21" and in order to remain comfortable I need to keep the refresh rate pretty high. The 60hz mentioned above would give me a blinder in 5 or 10 minutes. At the moment the card is pumping out a Vf of 99 and a Fh of 82 at 1024x768 and I would not dare go lower.

So I'm really glad I found this thread. It's giving me a lot of things to think about.

anthony