Hi,
I'm considering swapping my 19" Dell M993s CRT monitor for a flat panel LCD display. If you do the research, the general opinion seems to be that for colour fidelity, CRT is still better than LCD - in most areas. As one of the monitor's main uses will be photo editing, colour accuracy is important.
The question is, is a fairly cheap and cheerful CRT, such as the one I have, any better than an entry level desk top publishing LCD? It would appear from reading around that most desk top publishing CRTs could reproduce about 85% of the AdobeRGB colour space and, unless you are prepared to pay somewhere in the region of £4K, an LCD is limited to being able to reproduce about 72% of the AdobeRGB colour space. This is all very well, but I have been unable to find out how much colour my rather more run of the mill CRT can display.
I would be looking to spend a max of £500 on a monitor and a colour calibration tool of some sort, so I'd probably be looking at a £400/£100 split respectively. The NEC LCD1990SXi appears to be the most highly regarded monitor for colour management in this price bracket. Details here:
http://www.nec-display-solutions.co....6174,group=all
What I don't want to do is spent this kind of cash and find that although I've gained a lot of desk space and cut my electricity bill, I get the over-bright cartoon colours that seem so typical on the "gamers PC" flat panels I'm used to seeing.
So, am I better off waiting a couple of years until the technology is better and prices have fallen? The problem with this approach is that there is always something else better just around the corner, it is the nature of technology. Should I stick with my CRT? Is a cheap CRT still better than a £400-£500 LCD?
Your opinion would be appreciated.
BTW, I did find this in my research. Very, very interesting post.....
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/...01&#entry54301
Posted at the very end of 2005, so things have moved on a bit, but I wonder how much.
Duncan