LCDs, unless you’re willing to spend a great deal of money, will not give you the same clarity as a CRT. That’s why I won’t use one.
Bob
Julia, what zoom magnification are you viewing at? Try 50% or 100%, if you haven’t already, and see if that helps.
Julia,
It sounds as though your problem may be more severe than this idea would help, but if you are running Windows XP, try enabling the Clear Type option…specifically intended to improve font clarity on LCDs. My observations have been that it does help, although even without it I don’t think my laptop LCD is as bad as what you are seeing.
Clear Type is selected via the Display Properties > Appearance Tab > Effects Button > "Use the following method to smooth edges of screen fonts" menu
Hope that helps,
Daryl
I just re-read the original post. What is incompatible about your original monitor?
Bob
My original monitor was designed to go with a Packard Bell ‘set’ called Spirit 600 (mhz…very inadequate by today’s standards but state of the Art 4 years ago) …it had a completely different plug…and when we rang Packard Bell they said effectively that there was nothing to be done. But in anycase, I get the impression that it is the computer …the works that is…that is sending directions to the screen as they have all been the same…roughly speaking…the worst of both worlds CLEAR blurry and STANDARD spindly…neither nice to use.
Thanks for your interest. I just don’t know what to do!
Julia
I didn’t know I could spend MUCH more on a screen …over £400 My old one never gave me a moments anxiety so I assumed a new one would be as good. Why not! Has anyone reading this got a nice clear LCD screen?
Julia
Like I said, I only use CRTs. The only LCD I’ve seen that I like is the Apple Cinema Display. It’s the only thing that makes me jealous of Mac users.
BTW, I’ve been using Dell computers for many years and have never had this type of issue, so I doubt very much that it’s computer. Do you have a friend with a CRT you could borrow?
Bob
Nick…I have tried all those things…thanks.
There is not much left I can do except change the whole b… lot…but then I wouldn’t know what to go for.
Why this CLEAR and STANDARD anyway…why not just proper type, nice and really CLEAR. It comes to something when one would prefer to write on a Fontwriter (as used many many years ago). I do as much writing as designing and I hate seeing blurry type. I am really horrified that I seem to be taking a step backwards after sppending all that money! Thanks for your interest anyway. Julia
The problem is LCD technology. They render differently. Different manufacturers use different technologies (and Dell is not a manufacturer). If a graphics professional is going to use an LCD (and most won’t), they are going to go very high end LCD, specifically because LCD is not as mature as CRT and thus, less predictable. The high end (read: pricey) LCD’s, specifically digital v. analog tend to do better.
Point is, everyone here will advise you of the following: Don’t expect too much from your LCD, period.
In regards to your packard bell monitor, if you liked it, see if you can find an adapter that works.
Finally, you can always connect a CRT to your laptop.
Peace,
Tony
Find out the (full) monitor resolution and set your desktop res. to match.
For example, my notebook displays perfectly clear when the desktop resolution is set to 1600 X 1200 – but anything less will "stretch" the desktop to fill the screen causing an effect similar to a heavy night of drinking.
good point jim. most lcds (my nec 15") have a "default resoloution". if the monitor isn’t set that way, it looks like junk. mine is 1280×1024.
check the manual for each monitor’s specific default value.
Julia,
We’ve got NEC MultiSynch LCD1830 monitors on 4 PCs where I work, and all seem to have rather good quality text as best I can tell. But, they still seem to lack just that extra little bit of "oomph" that makes text appear sharper on a good CRT, even this crappy IBM Trinitron monitor I’m using as I type (brigtness and contrast are getting very poor on it, but text looks pretty clean nonetheless). It’s hard to speculate what the source of your problems is, but the resolution factor that Jim mentioned is one good thing to consider.
Daryl
Tony, thanks for the info…but surely it is the messages from the computer to the screen that are a bit scrambled? Are you saying that somewhere at some price there will be an LCD that run by my current XPS (NB Not a notebook…more like a suitcase and a big one at that) that would give me clear lettering? I am really at my wits end over this. This screen cost over £400 ….
The reason I want an LCD is because my house is small and I like to be able to put it away on occasions…but having had a perfect one for 4 years it simply never, never occured to me I could end up worse off.
AND every-one…I have checked every sort resolution…down-loaded a new driver installed a replacement graphics card given Dell a bad time (AND myself) on the phone to Ireland Tech Support for a total of 5 hours following instructions plus …and then be told …well thats how they are. Which is really what every-one here is saying. That is I have NO OPTIONS! But thanks everyone for your helpful comments. It is like everything is subtly out of register…so irritating. All the best, Julia
Julia, I have two NEC/Mitsubishi LCD monitors which both show text as very sharp and clear, not like what you’re describing at all. However, I don’t use either of them for critical color work in PS. As others have mentioned, LCDs can’t be effectively color calibrated unless you go for one of the very high end ones. (In addition to the Apple Cinema Display, I’ve heard good things from Bruce Fraser about the Eizo line of LCDs.)
Nick
Julia,
but surely it is the messages from the computer to the screen that are a bit scrambled?
What makes you say that? That assumes that all displays render a signal the same. If this were true, there would be no advantage to one LCD over the other.
If it is the "messages from the computer to the screen", that means the video card/chip/driver. It’s possible, but the experience with most graphics professionals is that LCDs are less predictable not only in terms of quality, but color management as well. That’s why most don’t use them.
I looked up the Dell Inspirion XPS Notebook. It says that it comes with: * 15.4 inch Wide-Aspect UltraSharpTM TFT Active Matrix WUXGA (1920×1200) display. * Standard: 128MB ATI® MobilityTM RADEONTM 9700
It doesn’t look like a suitcase on the website, and as a laptop its display is integral. Are you saying that you have a separate LCD monitor?
Peace,
Tony
Nick…I have already spent over £400 on the monitor alone…frankly I would dish out more for peace of mind! I will look up Eizo. I am so interested in what everybody has to say. Another monitor, another , another interpretation? Is that correct?
It is being driven by Dell Dimension XPS 3.2ghz
160 GB Mem
Graphics 256 MB ATI Radeon X800 XT
It is NOT a laptop as people (not you) keep saying!
Both the computer/works and the Ultra sharp LCD Monitor have only been out for just over one month. They should be state of the art. I always (well usually) find it best to go for the best…however….
I will repeat this to another kind correspondant who seems not to have got it. Thanks, and best wishes, Julia
TONY
It is being driven by Dell Dimension XPS 3.2ghz
160 GB Mem
Graphics 256 MB ATI Radeon X800 XT
It is NOT a laptop as some keep saying! It is HUGE! And very quiet and very fast. Believe me! I am sure there are cheaper ways but I am not clever enough to be super selective.
Both the computer/works and the ‘Ultra sharp’ LCD Monitor have only been out for just over one month. They should be state of the art. I always (well usually) find it best to go for the best…however….
AND TONY I don’t assume anything…I am ignorant…just trying to work out which bit of the computer is responsible for out-of-register lettering…(seems OK for pics) and that intrigues me too…you would expect some distortion on pics as well…but its seems OK…just lettering that keeps me awake night…although I must get my priorities right! I hate to be stuck with something so aggravating for the next ? ten years! Cheers, Julia, and thanks. And now I have burnt the potatoes…like I said, ‘priorities’!!!
what is the actual make and model # of the monitor?
(It prints OK but that is not the point)
It may not be the point but it points to the screen fonts if you ask me.
I don’t recall if you said this problem is confined to Photoshop.
Cheers – John
(happy user of a Sony LCD) 🙂
Julia, it seems to me it would be wiser to either borrow a different monitor, as someone else suggested, or take your desktop machine to a shop where it could be hooked up to several different monitors (both LCD and CRT). I, too, find it odd that just the text would be messed up, and not the photos. Is this just text in PS, or is it all the text that you view, like in other programs or on the net? One thing you might try is to enter some text in PS and then rasterize it, thereby turning it into a "picture".
(And, I hope that the potatoes are salvageable and that you haven’t cut the dickens out of your finger!)
It is NOT a laptop as people (not you) keep saying!
Not me, either. I hope my link but that to rest. But I still contend that you bought a gaming machine to do 2D graphics. The graphics card in that machine has a primary job of 3D and motion graphics, not 2D and text. That may be the actual culprit.
Bob
John…it is all Dell…the monitor is Dell Ultra Sharp 1703 FP Active Matrix 17" TFT Dot pitch 0.240mm 31khz -8khz horiz (auto) TCO-3 (whatever all that means…but since you ask….)
Bob…Thank you…well…I can tell you even those who are supposed to know …people who claim superior knowlege are not fit to properly inform (me)…I said I assume a graphics card is for all graphics…no-one knew any different….
Julia,
I have worked on computers with ultra sharp flat panel monitors and although the quality is not as high as it is with a CRT it is still very good and not at all like you describe.
Unless I have missed something there is still some missing information that would help.
1) Monitor model number
2) Display Settings (Screen Resolution)
3) SVGA or DVI
4) Is the problem only in Photoshop or is it in all applications. If it is only in Photoshop I suspect you are working in a very low resolution, 72 PPI Perhaps and using a small point size for your font or possibly just at a high magnification as Nick suggested earlier.
I agree with Bob that the video card is overkill, but doubt very much that it is the problem (unless it is defective). For all we know Julia could also work with 3D applications as well.
Nick…I would love to do that…but it as big and heavy as they get… same size as a GMac And of course I looked at various monitors in PC World (tried an Iiyama and another on my machine at home…both had blurry lettering…(took them back) thats why I thought Dell’s very own BEST must be OK…but NO.
And of course at PC World…lots of Monitors…but none of them connected to Word or anything that puts them to any test. You simply can’t tell without bringing them home. Ridiculous. Only I guess most people are not so particular.
It is not for lack of trying!
Maybe it is worth trying a Sony?
Each time I am using my credit card,,,and getting repayments ages later…I’ll blow my bank balance soon…all the best…Goodnight 10.35pm UK time.Julia
PHOTO HELP
It is all Dell…the monitor is Dell Ultra Sharp 1703 FP Active Matrix 17" TFT Dot pitch 0.240mm 31khz -8khz horiz (auto) TCO-3 (whatever all that means…but since you ask….)
This is a repeat…but incase it was overlooked …
THANKS EVERYONE …I AM LEARNING!
Julia,
If you flatten the image and print it does the text still look ok? This goes back to the resolution of the image. If the printout looks bad then your image resolution is too low.
Photo Help…
The print is fine…it is just the screen that looks unpleasant… Tell me…is the LCD image down entirely down to the Graphics Card…what exactly is it that determines the on-screen image? And is type determined by something different from photos? There isn’t a shadow around the edge of photos …just, as I type, on the letters, and partially shading in the white letters on red ‘POST MESSAGE’ below this space.
It would be nice to know that at least the actual computer is OK (the graphics card has been changed once so its not that) because then it is entirely down to the make of LCD…or is it…?
One longs just to shift the registration a ‘nats doodle’ as my father used to say! I can see that many people wouldn’t mind and no doubt Dell are not bothered about the exceptions who complain. Thanks again…I could take people on a tour of my settings…and I am no computer buff…as you can see! Julia NB What is anti-aliasing? Would it help?
It is all Dell…the monitor is Dell Ultra Sharp 1703 FP Active Matrix 17" TFT Dot pitch 0.240mm 31khz -8khz horiz (auto) TCO-3 (whatever all that means…but since you ask….)
This may have already been addressed, but are you connecting your display to the computer using the digital cable, or the analog? I have a Dell LCD display (20"), and it has three or four ways to connect to the computer: digital, analog, composite video, S-VHS.
I have tried all of them and only the digital connection gives me sharp text. If your video card does not have digital output capabilities, you should get one that does.
Regards,
Rafael
Display properties>appearance>effects.
Experiment with the "use the following method to smooth edges fo screen fonts:" settings.
Bob
PHOTO HELP
More Info.
Resolution 1280 x 1024 32bit
96DPI
60Htz
I tried ticking anti-aliasing…made it worse!
I note that there are some settings UNticked…
Disable Quick resolution feature
Reduce DVI frequency on High Resolution Displays
Alternate DVI operational mode
Haven’t a clue what this means!
Question is what chance another monitor being different? Where are the instructions coming from? ANYWAY…thanks for your forebearance everyone. Julia
Bob, They only offer you CLEAR or STANDARD…Standard is like needle-point…CLEAR is out of reg. Both are unpleasant and in bold type have two tones that half fill in when high-lighted. WHY do they have to have 2 settings…one good one would be more to the point!
Cheers, Julia
One missing setting…REGISTRATION!
NB Lettering in Photoshop has the same effect a shadow down the side of the letters…but lines and design work appears unaffected.
Photoshop has several antialias settings for type. Additionally, you really have to be zoomed at 100% for best results.
60hz is a VERY LOW refresh rate, but I don’t know much about LCDs except that the affordable ones just aren’t good enough for me to use at this point.
I don’t know if you’ve answered this or not, but which connection are you using to hook up the monitor? DVI would certainly be best.
Bob
I thought the native resolution for a 17"LCD was 1024×768.
Have you tried changing resolutions? Does your LCD have a convergence adjust in the LCD OSD menu when you press the front buttons if available?
A while back, I could induce your same problem on my 4 year old Pismo Mac Powerbook hooked to an 18" Microtek LCD I tried out from Walmart. A number of variables in combinaton would bring it in and out of this state. Changing the font, size of font and resolution of monitor.
Another thing to consider is overly tightened fingerscrew cable connects on each plug end of the cable. This can induce interference like shadowing on vertical graphical lines. This happened to me on my CRT but I’m not sure as severe a yours.
Always gently push the connects straight in by hand (not by screwing in) and plumb till they stop and hold it in straight and secure. Then gently finger tighten each screw till they stop with the slightest pressure. Don’t force tighten by squeeze/twisting down on them. Then, when they’re snug, pull gently straight back a bit on the plug to check slack which might vary with plug manufacturer. Some slack is OK. Just don’t overtighten the screws to achieve snugness.
But also, I’m leaning toward Robert Levine’s 2D/3D graphics point. From what I saw on the Window’s machines I checked out at CompUSA, they seem to dump quite a few nested drivers, libraries and customizable graphics interface dialog boxes in the system that could have some feature turned on or conflict with font and VLUT matrixes with the LCD’s matrix. Not sure.
On the machines I tinkered with, clicking on Property Settings of the graphics dialog box led to quite a few nested panels I couldn’t tell which was from Windows and which was from the graphics card manufacturer.
Am I crazy or would a screenshot be helpful here? I’m dying to see what Julia is seeing, actually.
Yes a screen shot would be nice, but it would have to be taken with a digital camera if it is an output problem.
Thanks everyone… am sure many people would think (as Dell does) that I have a ‘perception problem’…well YES. Maybe I am over-fussy.
I could send some rather inadequate pics straight from the photos I took with my digital camera and which I have sent to Dell…very hard to be clear but would give the idea…
TELL ME how I email them to this spot?
I have tried most of the things people have suggested…and will check the connections as has just been suggested (it is often something silly like that). Or it could be that I am using 2, only-out-a-month ‘machines’ and there are unresolved nuances…
On the credit side the Computer is very quiet and very fast which is an absolute delight. Thanks every-one for your interest. Julia
(NB No I don’t do 3d graphics (would like to know how)…just design really).
Julia,
Have you had anyone else look at your problem?
Thomas,
Well that was fun…I thought for a moment it was ‘one bound and she was free!’ No-one has ever mentioned that Microsoft site for fine-tuning clear type…quite exciting but doesn’t seem to have done the trick. It did show you how much worse it could be!
I can’t work out what the difference is between the click right on desktop for properties settings etc (choose CLEAR or STANDARD)… and how these relate to the Microsoft site. Are they two totally different ways of controlling type? It is such a puzzle to work out where the responsibility lies where the signals come from. I can’t work out to what extent the LCD is responsible…
Anyway thanks… Julia
Julia, just re-read thru this thread and you never answered Rafael’s question – are connecting the monitor with the analog or digital connector? It’s supposed to make a big difference and you did mention that the old monitor had a different connector
—
Rick Moore
Barnes Gromatzky Kosarek Architects
www.bgkarchitects.com
PHOTO HELP
Yes…the guy from Dell changed the graphics card (very minor improvement on the desktop photo but nothing else!)…and he (a man of few words) silently checked all the settings changed the lead to the digital one (sense obviously, but not what it said on the instructions!) and made me feel as if I was slighly mad to expect anything different.
I on the other hand found it amazing that he didn’t see that it was short of what you would expect from something costing over £400 and called ‘Dell ultra-sharp’ and given that for 4 years my old LCD had been perfect. (NO, before you ask it has gone elsewhere as I was told by Packard Bell that there was no way of it working with the new computer…this may have not been true but it is too late now!)…
Would there be any point in trying a Sony? If so which one? AND ANYONE…when people say about top of the market LCD’s being unaffordable…what are we talking about? What make…what price…and what makes them better? All the best to all…Julia
Rick..
Have just said…maybe muddled to whom I am answering WHAT… Using the digital connector although there was no noticeable difference in the effect.. the old monitor was custom made for a Packard Bell duo…it was Packard Bell who said we wouldn’t be able to connect it…no known adaptor (as far as I know…all of these things you question later…too much later as I have passed the whole lot on to a friend!).
Julia
I bought a Sony Vaio PCG-GRT360ZG laptop a few months ago and it has the best display I’ve ever seen on any computer, CRT or LCD. Text is sharp and crystal clear at any size; in fact, I’m able to read tiny text on websites and in applications that I’ve never been able to before. It’s a 16" display with a 1400×1050 resolution (odd size, I know, but easy to get used to) driven by an NVidia GeForce FX Go5600. The color is rich, crisp, and bright (Sony calls the display XBrite). The trick, of course, is that the display has to run at the native resolution. I downsized it just for testing and the text showed artifacting and inconsistent thickness. I’m now using the Vaio for most of my Photoshop work and couldn’t be happier with it. I used to have a Dell laptop that exhibited the same type of problems Julia describes and was wary of another laptop, but this Sony has made me a believer again.
Julia,
As far as I know, the Microsoft site gives you more options than WinXP itself can provide. In WinXP you can just turn ClearType on or off but on the MS site you can fine tune it.
I’m not satisfied with the software based ClearType in XP either. Well it looks better than nothing but compared to Matrox’s Glyph Antialiasing, which is hardware based, ClearType looks like s… in my opinion so I’m using Glyph Antialiasing instead of ClearType at the moment.
—
Regards
Madsen
Interesting. I’ve got a Parhelia and tried the Glyph antialiasing but it wasn’t even close to ClearType in terms of quality, at least on my monitor – LaCie electron19blueIV
—
Rick Moore
Barnes Gromatzky Kosarek Architects
www.bgkarchitects.com
Well it looks better than nothing but compared to Matrox’s Glyph Antialiasing, which is hardware based, ClearType looks like s… in my opinion so I’m using Glyph Antialiasing instead of ClearType at the moment.
but this Sony has made me a believer again.
I now do more PS work on my Sony Vaio laptop than I do on my big machine with its 20" Diamondtron.
The colour from source to screen to printer or press is faultless.
Cheers – John
Rick,
It seems that all the different kinds of LCD panels needs different settings. Some looks best with ClearType on and some looks better with it off.
For a couple of months back we discussed it in a Danish monitor newsgroup and as far as I remember, none of us used the same setting. Some preferred ClearType off and some preferred it on and those who had fine tuned their settings on the MS site, didn’t use the same setting.
I have tried all settings and there’s no doubt in my mind that Glyph antialiasing is superior to ClearType on my LCD, which is a Viewsonic VP201s connected via DVI (the older model with 20 ms refresh rate and an S-IPS panel).
Back then I made a quick web site to illustrate it:
<
http://home18.inet.tele.dk/madsen/winxp/cleartype/>
The first screenshot shows a window with neither ClearType nor Glyph antialiasing enabled (‘Hverken ClearType eller Glyph antialiasing slået til’) and with ClearType enabled (‘ClearType slået til’). When both are disabled the text has jagged edges and with ClearType enabled, it seems slightly out of focus. I can’t get it in focus on the MS site and notice how the ‘Y’ in ‘Apply’ is cut off when ClearType is enabled because Clear- Type makes it bolder. Glyph antialiasing is much smarter on that point because it doesn’t touch the smallest text in that window.
The second screenshot shows the same window with Glyph anti- aliasing enabled. (‘Glyph antialiasing slået til’). It looks much better in my opinion. The ‘Y’ in ‘Apply’ isn’t cut off and the text isn’t jagged, but it still looks sharp compared to ClearType.
—
Regards
Madsen
Another factor is my screen is a Trinitron CRT, not an LCD. ClearType doesn’t seem to help shadow mask monitors but on every Trinitron I’ve seen, it made a big difference. And my "Y" is not cut off 🙂 It’s also probably more of a personal preference – my beef with the Matrox glyph antialiasing is that the slider doesn’t go far enough, I like the chunkier look, probably because I sit farther away from the monitor than most people.
—
Rick Moore
Barnes Gromatzky Kosarek Architects
www.bgkarchitects.com
Rick Moore wrote:
Another factor is my screen is a Trinitron CRT, not an LCD.
That’s a very important factor. ClearType and Glyph antialiasing is mainly designed to be used on LCD panels.
ClearType doesn’t seem to help shadow mask monitors but on every Trinitron I’ve seen, it made a big difference.
On my CRT (Sony GDM-FW900) it looks best with both ClearType and Glyph antialiasing off. A CRT isn’t as sharp as an LCD so there’s no need to make text more fuzzy than it already is. 🙂
And my "Y" is not cut off 🙂
I think it happens here because I don’t use the default font setting (Normal Size 96 dpi). I use a custom setting of 104 % of normal size because that suits me much better in all programs.
It’s also probably more of a personal preference [..]
True.
—
Regards
Madsen
Thomas,
"A CRT isn’t as sharp as an LCD so there’s no need to make text more fuzzy than it already is."
Quite the opposite actually. The pixels are so large on an LCD that you have to make them blurry so you don’t see them as well. The dot pitch on CRT monitors has decreased considerably over the years allowing for incredibly high resolutions at very affordable prices.
LCD’s are light weight, have a small form factor and use less power. Quality is not a place you want to go when challenging a CRT.
Quite the opposite actually. The pixels are so large on an LCD that you have to make them blurry so you don’t see them as well.
An LCD is 100 % in focus when it’s set to it’s native resolution (or at least it should be). Isn’t that another reason why there’s a need for some kind of anti-aliasing?
An electron beam is not 100 % in focus over the entire screen so you can’t avoid that there’s some degree of edge blurring going on, or am I completely wrong here?
The dot pitch on CRT monitors has decreased considerably over the years allowing for incredibly high resolutions at very affordable prices.
The resolution of my CRT is set to 1920 x 1200 (the recommend resolution) and text looks good and sharp when the eyes are used to it, but compared to my LCD with a resolution of 1600 x 1200, the CRT looks very fuzzy indeed.
—
Regards
Madsen
Thomas,
It probably equates to…
CRT is to LCD as Photograph is to Ink Jet.
Most people don’t have LCD monitors with native 1600×1200 resolutions so you are getting closer to the resolution of a CRT. Unfortunately you probably had to pay 5-10 times as much for that LCD as a comparable CRT.
As long as you are happy with it that is all that matters. I wouldn’t mind having a 1600×1200 LCD monitor myself, but I will just wait for the prices to drop and the quality to get better. A couple more years and consumer flat panel technology should be better than CRT’s.
BTW, Have you don’t anything with video or 3D and if so what do you think of the refresh rates on LCD’s?
How much easier is the LCD on the eyes?
Unfortunately you probably had to pay 5-10 times as much for that LCD as a comparable CRT.
Yes I had to pay a lot for it and it wasn’t easy to made up my mind either. I was seriously considering buying yet another CRT and wait a couple of years more for the LCD’s to drop in price, but I took a chance and haven’t regret it one single minute since. (I bought it about a year ago).
As long as you are happy with it that is all that matters.
Couldn’t agree more. 🙂
I wouldn’t mind having a 1600×1200 LCD monitor myself, but I will just wait for the prices to drop and the quality to get better.
That sounds very reasonable.
A couple more years and consumer flat panel technology should be better than CRT’s.
I’m looking forward to see the new wide gamut LCD’s from NEC / Mitsubishi. I’ve heard they should be on the market in late 2004 or early 2005 but maybe they’re to darn expensive at first.
BTW, Have you don’t anything with video or 3D and if so what do you think of the refresh rates on LCD’s?
3D games is not what I do most but I often watch DVD movies on it and there’s no problem with ghosting or anything like that. It can easily keep up with movies, although I prefer watching movies on my CRT because of the widescreen format. That’s about the only thing my CRT is used for nowadays.
How much easier is the LCD on the eyes?
Much easier. I’m working more than eight hours per day in front of it without getting dried out eyes and headaches. A thing I often experienced when using the FW900 the same amount of hours per day even if I was running it in 1920 x 1200 @ 90Hz.
—
Regards
Madsen
Thomas,
Thanks for the info.
I understand your thoughts on taking a chance. It is very difficult to find the right product. Most stores only deal with low end products so when it comes to buying top quality you are pretty much stuck with online reviews and buying expensive products sight unseen. Even if you can get to the trade shows you often don’t get a chance to compare competing brands side by side.
Glad it worked out well for you. I only hope I am as lucky when I take the plunge.
Thanks for the info.
You’re welcome.
Most stores only deal with low end products so when it comes to buying top quality you are pretty much stuck with online reviews and buying expensive products sight unseen.
True. The only good thing about it is the fact that when you buy a monitor online and therefore unseen, you get fourteen days to evaluate it in and if you’re not satisfied, you can just send it back. That’s how it works here in Denmark.
Even if you can get to the trade shows you often don’t get a chance to compare competing brands side by side.
No and that’s a shame because all the different kinds of LCD panels are very different. Try comparing an LCD with a cheap MVA panel (the panel most notebooks use) next to an LCD with an S-IPS panel and you’ll probably be very surprised on how different they are. S-IPS has often purer colors than the other panels (S-IPS is the Trinitron of LCD’s IMHO) and that’s probably the reason why you’ll only find S-IPS panels in the most expensive LCD’s. (Apple Studio displays, Eizo ColorEdge and the large Sony LCD’s for instance has S-IPS panels).
I only hope I am as lucky when I take the plunge.
I hope so too but I don’t think that LCD’s are getting worse over the next years. They’re getting better and better and cheaper and cheaper so it’s very wise to wait.
—
Regards
Madsen
