Flat Monitors [OT]

John Wendel john.wendel at metnet.navy.mil
Thu Nov 1 20:37:53 UTC 2007


Robin Laing wrote:
> 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.
> 
> 


I'm interested in this thread, too. How about a link the forum 
referenced above?

FYI, google for "silicon light machine" for some info on a really 
promising MEMS/laser based display technology, now owned by Sony. 
Several prototypes were developed about 5 years ago that were superior 
to anything else available then (or now). Then Sony bought the tech 
and they've been sitting on it ever since. Maybe waiting for 
solid-state laser technology to catch up?

Regards,

John



















More information about the fedora-list mailing list