I use a CRT monitor because I like the crisp images, the colours are better and  there is less blur. I tried using an LCD monitor, my wife has one a very nice 17" non-budget monitor which I tried, and things didn't seem so crisp and sharp i.e. text, images, etc. I know that sooner or later my E70fb Viewsonic is going to crap out, more sooner than later this has been a dandy monitor, and I will have to go with an LCD. The only things I don't like about the CRT is the damn thing is heavy, get warm and seems to be a dust magnet...LOL!!

However, I've only seen the LCD used in an analog mode and not DVI.....hmmmm maybe I should hook the wife's up with the DVI cable to my rig and see if there is a difference. Another thing about my CRT is I don't have to fight with that native resolution stuff. Anyway, what do most of you use and do you prefer LCD over CRT?

Cheers,
Me

I'm still using a CRT, a rather old one at that. It's a 17" and it's outlived 3 base units so far. I use a TFT monitor in work and I find my images on that particular monitor and more lighter than on this one at home but then I never calibrated the monitor in work!!

LCD only for quite a few years now. I will never go back to CRTs, ever.

I'd never go back to CRT now, i prefer the crispness of a TFT, mind you i'd try to see it running before you buy, i recently bought a new PC that came with a Xerox 19" and it had a dead pixel.......at least i think thats what it was (a white dot) ...the shop changed it but he did say other branches may have said no as some count so many dead pixels as OK (We've had 8 TFTs and this is the first though).

On the subject of analog v DVI  my machine has twin DVI so i have 2 monitors connected and i can switch the left one to analog, (media center is connected to it) i think its not as crisp as the DVI but to be honest its hard to tell, this most likely isn't relevant to you as it sounds like your going for quality, but avoid most of the cheap ones, my sister bought a cheap PC with a 14" TFT and its awful, looks like a badly compressed jpg and has almost zero viewing angle. One final thing to note, folks who know more about this stuff will tell you a CRT is better for Colors, now i'm color blind so don't care LOL but its been stated enough and by folks who would know to make me believe its true.......Steve

CRT

Will never go to LCD

IMHO CRTs give better and clearer images than LCDs.

LCDs have a lot of advantages: They're thinner and lighter than CRTs and - errrmm, umm, well there must be other advantages...(especially if you're working on a laptop).. :-)

But until they come up with LCDs that can compete with the sheer image quality (from whatever angle) of a CRT, then I'm sticking with CRTs. Even if the floor is groaning under the weight, and I can't put a full cup of tea on the workstation surface...

Cheers,
Diolma

Well that's a good thing Diolma, you should NEVER have your tea on the workstation!!  

My wife's LCD is a Active Matrix, TFT monitor. I bet if I hooked that sucker up with the DVI cable it would be different.

I have several flatscreen monitors. CRTs suck pretty bad compared to them, IMVHO. not only that, but their construction materials are far more toxic to everything than flatscreens.

I've gone laptop and i wont go back.

I like the TFT over the LCD

CRT. Sharper and better for video.

No arguemnts with the dead head store drone about their 'policy' when you get a 8x8 batch of dead pixels dead centre.

Though it's getting harder to find them in stores. On the plus side friends who want new shiny things do tend give 19in monitors away :)

I have a lcd, if you pass many hours in fornt of the monitor, your eyes thanks you you have a LCD.

21" and 17" CRTs.

Three problems with LCDs - sorry Stewer ;)

• Cost (although they are going down)
• Limited resolution for the cost and size (you need like a 32" LCD to do the resolution that  my 21" CRT runs at - 2048x1536).  Lower resolutions are always interpolations from the maximum.
• I haven't found a single LCD that can handle 3D Stereoscopic glasses.  I like doing stereoscopic 'flicker' or interlaced views - never anaglyph though.

I'll be sticking with my CRTs until they take care of these.

CRT!

I have a 21" that finally gave up (But I haven't) and another 21" where I can only see the bottom half of the screen and a 17" that gets the fuzzies every so often.

I hope I can get them refurbished.

I just can't gel with the LCDs!

Quote - 21" and 17" CRTs.

Three problems with LCDs - sorry Stewer ;)

Well, it really depends on what your priorities are. I for one spend a lot of time staring at text (= Poser source code) and therefore want a 100% flicker free and razor sharp display. Also, a pixel on a LCD monitor is an exact square, where on a CRT it is usually a somewhat roundish blur. CRTs are a bit more forgiving there, to me it always seems as if they added their own slight blur and make aliasing effects not as pronounced as LCDs. Since part of my job is fighting aliasing, I of course need to work on equipment which truthfully shows me jaggies when there are some.

CRT perform better than LCDs.

LCDs are an interesting gimmick(Ever poke one?)

LCD..gives the cats more room to get in my way..;)

CRT...LCDs gives me a horrible headache after a few hours.

LCDs for me

Quote - Well, it really depends on what your priorities are. I for one spend a lot of time staring at text (= Poser source code) and therefore want a 100% flicker free and razor sharp display. Also, a pixel on a LCD monitor is an exact square, where on a CRT it is usually a somewhat roundish blur. CRTs are a bit more forgiving there, to me it always seems as if they added their own slight blur and make aliasing effects not as pronounced as LCDs. Since part of my job is fighting aliasing, I of course need to work on equipment which truthfully shows me jaggies when there are some.

Of course, I'm not saying that I don't like LCDs, it's just those limitations.  CRTs are big, bulky, heavy, emit heat (which can be good in winter), and are not good for your eyes (esp. at lower refresh frequencies).

I just wish that they'd get them to the point where they are viable alternatives to CRTs.  My 21" cost about $500.  Again, something that can do near the resolution (an Apple Cinema 23") costs about $1000 for 1920x1200 (max).  This is a very good LCD display (and HD to boot) - I've had several Apple Cinema Displays and they are crisp and, at last report, had the lowest frequency of dead pixels (another concern).  To beat my current resolution (barely), you have to go to the next step up - a 30" Apple Cinema Display.  That's four times the cost of the CRT at $2000 (and that's down by a $1000)!!  Is it worth it?  Not to me honestly.

Everyone has their reasons and needs.  When LCDs can replace the CRTs for the reasons and needs that I require and not empty my wallet in the process, I will reconsider them. :)  Obviously, your reasons and needs are fulfilled - and that's all the reason you need.

Robert

I bought a new LCD earlier this year and I have both it and my old CRT sitting side by side on my desk, the computer hooked up to display on both (it's great to have Poser on the new monitor and the Poser libraries spread out on the old one beside it).  I'm finding the difference is so great, I'm saving up for a second LCD to replace the CRT so I can have two LCDs side by side.  

The first thing you have to do when you get an LCD is to set the screen resolution to the native resolution of the monitor.  I meet a lot of people who say they can't get crisp images on their LCD and when you check it's always because they left their desktop set to whatever resolution they had with their old CRT, which is always something the LCD can't display properly.  If you have difficulty reading small text and need to keep the screen res low, you're better off with a CRT. 

My old 2.4ghz P4 has twin 17" CRT Viewsonics, and my uberdollar Opteron Quad has twin 17" LCD's. I never use the expensive computer except for long renders because I hate the LCD's. They just don't have the crispness and depth of my CRT's. Over Christmas I plan on revising my graphics cards and swapping out the monitors so I can actually start to use the good system. Leaving it just sit there week in and week out with a dust cover on it is just silly and wasteful.

LCD.  No question, no debate.

Especially with the add-ons you can get with LCDs these days.  My flat-panel at work not only has built-in USB hub, it has a multiple card reader, can be plugged in directly to a HD source to watch TV, uses less power, takes up less space...

On my 20" LCD at home, I play first person shooters with zero problems, watch video and whatever.  It's better than the 20" CRT I use as a secondary monitor sitting next to it.

At this stage, I'm beginning to think that the people extolling the virtues of CRTs are like the people who insist tubes are far superior to transistor when it comes to audio.

I'm an odd duck I guess....I haven't really found and LCD yet that didn't drive my eyes buggy after the first half hour. I know the one the husband has on his machine drives me nuts.

I'd certainly love to have more room on my desk (you'd have to see it to really understand) because I keep a million and one things on it for inspiration at any given point....but I'm just going to have to wait and see until I can find a LCD that gets along with me.

Need a new hard drive first....I've finally mananged to fill my current one up with my Poser obsession. And I wouldn't have even known had my husband not wanted to figure out why my computer isn't running quite as fast as it should....(I just play with the damn things...why I married the computer tech)

Quote - LCD.  No question, no debate.

Especially with the add-ons you can get with LCDs these days.  My flat-panel at work not only has built-in USB hub, it has a multiple card reader, can be plugged in directly to a HD source to watch TV, uses less power, takes up less space...

On my 20" LCD at home, I play first person shooters with zero problems, watch video and whatever.  It's better than the 20" CRT I use as a secondary monitor sitting next to it.

At this stage, I'm beginning to think that the people extolling the virtues of CRTs are like the people who insist tubes are far superior to transistor when it comes to audio.

No, there is a debate.  Didn't you read any of my replies.  LCDs are definitely more expensive and you'll pay to get higher screen resolutions (I couldn't work on a 1024x768 display ever again).  Dead pixels are still an issue. Maybe the technology is improving to where this is less and less of a concern, but a dead pixel is a replaced LCD.  There is no such thing on a CRT.

Who cares about 'add-ons'.   Did you buy your car because it had an 8-track, CD, and tape player?  That just doesn't make sense.

I'm not a 'luddite' - but I also don't agree with you on the tubes over transistors for guitar amps, particularly.   As a player of 25 years, I've heard them all (from Pignose to Micro to Marshall to Crate to Line 6 to Peavey to Fender to Vox and on and on).  The best sound came from a Marshall with pre and power amp tubes (and 12" Celestion speakers). :)

To each his own (opinion).

I have a 19" Display from Acer and before that, i had a 17" from Samsung. Never ever do i want to sit in front of a CRT. No more headaches, more space on my desk, brilliant colors, sharp text. And the next will be an even bigger one in widescreen. Yes i am a LCD-Junky. lol

I go for the one of each route - I have dual monitors-  a 21" CRT and a 17" LCD - I feel the CRT is "crisper"

One problem LCD monitors have is contrast ratio, having really dark blacks.

non-black blacks
view angle
dead pixels
cost
resolutions
refresh rates

CRTs win for me so far... ;P

Quote - I use dual Philips 21" CRT monitors, which I'm very happy with.  The size is no problem with my current desk setup.

One problem LCD monitors have is contrast ratio, having really dark blacks.

 

Hey Jim that looks like my desk! I remember the old tube days. In our local drug store back in the corner was a tube tester. It was this huge machine you could plug your tubes in to see of they were any good. I also remember the TV repair man and his repair kit  it had trays filled with all sorts of tubes. Back then solid state was a new technology.

 

 

 

TFT's for me. It was a huge improvement to upgrade my (old and cheap CRT, admittedly) to even a budget TFT (Samsung SyncMaster 710T).

The image is A LOT sharper (I have DVI), making text much much easier to read. It also has a handy pivot function, so when working on some writing, I can rotate the screen 90 degrees and MS Word will automatically "tilt" the buttons and everything else, so it's like having the dimensions of a sheet of paper to work on. It's also very handy for reading pdf documents, as it will display one page at a time without having to scroll at all.

I also noticed I can work for much longer periods of time without straining my eyes as much, as the image doesn't flicker at all (constant backlight instead of flashing 50-60 times per second as on a CRT).

It all really depends on your needs, some people will benefit from a CRT and some from a TFT. This thread has been very informative though IMO, some good points for either side.

I actually had to pull out the manual to answer this one. When I went to the store i took a CD with a render burned on it, and the computer guy and I tried it out until I found one I liked.

It's an TFT-LCD. 19 inch due to space issues. Samsung.

My first flat panel monitor was a 15" Samsung 150MP TFT Tv/Monitor combo which is 5 years old and works as good as new. In the past year I bought a new 19" Samsung 910MP TFT Tv/Monitor combo which is just beautiful.  I can't even bear to look at a CRT screen for very long anymore. In a hot climate, the less heat alone is worth switching from CRT monitors, but I also find the screen to be easier on my eyes and I love the high contrast and vivid colors of my Samsungs and having my desktop back from even the short neck 19" CRT monitor I once used.  I even have a new 19" Samsung flat panel monitor at work now too and it's wonderful.

My Vaio laptop has one of those new shiny looking wide LCD screens and it's really sharp and clear too but fingerprints show up pretty badly on the screen and they are harder to get clean and streak free.  I prefer the matte surface screens.

Don't put your hands on the screen! ;)

Why is it that people have to touch the screen?  Unless it's a 'touch screen', better to keep your body oils off the display.

gad..I had a 21" CRT at my desk at work for awhile, it took up a 2' but 2'  'footprint' that scrunched my keyboard and mouse at the edge of my work area..;)

In all honesty, it depends on the LCD; I had 2 15" HP monitors, that were fuzzy and dim, and just snagged an 18" and 17" for my work PC's (being on the reclamation team hath it's privileges..;) are sharper and brighter. My eyes feel better. The newer the unit, the better the picture (for the most part..;)

I use a 22" NEC CRT, because when I bought it three and a half years ago, affordable LCD's were inacapable of 1600x1200 and higher resolutions.  That is no longer true today. 

I think a PROPERLY SETUP CRT will be superior to an LCD, though if I were to purchase a new monitor, I would go to a store where I could compare LCDs and CRTs side-by-side on the same video signal.  I would also rely on professional magazine and web-site test reports.

CRT viwsonic professional series p95f+ and i like it very much and it is good for long time

 If it was not  it big and heavy.........

LCD  is becoming to be an option  now but  i will be waiting  for their durability

Same here, martial.  They need to go down in price somewhat and get better refresh rates for my satisfaction.

My 21" is a Sony G520 and it is sweet.  Heck, at 2048x1536 it does 75Hz (above general 'eye irritation' and far above LCDs).  Photonic emission is the way that CRT works and is not good for your eyes, but the companies making LCDs have to work harder to make it worthwhile to do the upgrade.

I'm sorry, nakamuram, LCDs capable of 2048X1536+ are not affordable. Find me one by a reputable manufacturer (about $750) and I'll purchase it!!!  Good luck with your mission.  This reply will self-destruct in five seconds. :)

ETA: Real good luck as I can't find one under $2000.  Best o' luck bud.  Suckers...

Quote - Same here, martial.  They need to go down in price somewhat and get better refresh rates for my satisfaction.

My 21" is a Sony G520 and it is sweet.  Heck, at 2048x1536 it does 75Hz (above general 'eye irritation' and far above LCDs).  Photonic emission is the way that CRT works and is not good for your eyes, but the companies making LCDs have to work harder to make it worthwhile to do the upgrade.

I'm sorry, nakamuram, LCDs capable of 2048X1536+ are not affordable. Find me one by a reputable manufacturer (about $750) and I'll purchase it!!!  Good luck with your mission.  This reply will self-destruct in five seconds. :)

ETA: Real good luck as I can't find one under $2000.  Best o' luck bud.  Suckers...

Dell 3007WFP 30"widescreen  LCD.  Resolution of 2560x1600, 11 millisecond refresh, 4 USB ports, vertical adjustment (tell me when you can get that on a CRT), 9 in 2 card reader.

About $1500 US now.

If you can stand "only" 1920x1200, you can get a Dell 24" widescreen with DVI, VGA, Composite, component and S-video inputs, 4 USB ports, the card reader, 6 millisecond refresh, and so on for around  $750 US now.

Less than a year ago, the 24" Dell widescreen (with not as many features) cost around $1100.

By the by, 75 Hz is 13.3 millisecond redraw. so LCDs exceed it easily now.

I guess kuroyme's reply just self-destructed.  I'll stick with my CRT until it dies.  Maybe by then, high-resolution, high performance LCDs will be dirt cheap. 

Not really.  Did you see a 2048x1536 LCD for $999?  Nope.  $1500 minimum.  That's more than twice what I paid for my 21" CRT - several year ago!

For that slight increase in resolution and refresh, you pay that much!  I can buy three Sony G520's currently at that cost (that's 6144x1536 depending upon how you spread the multi-monitor display).  This monitor is already several years old - so the cost should be around $400 or less used.  You can get cheaper 21" monitors that do the same, you know.  I'm comparing what I have - a medium range CRT monitor.  A Daewoo or something might be $200 for a 21" with these resolutions.  I could run circles around you (literally - a circle of monitors) at the same cost as ONE LCD.

Nope, I don't see a 2048x1536 LCD for $750 mentioned there - do you?

 "4 USB ports, 9 in 2 card reader."

Sounds like more stuff to go wrong with it?

Why not just buy a USB hub and a card reader for less than 75 bux instead if your running short of USB ports?

I have 3, dual monitor,PC set ups (Yes..that "Six" CRT's, not including the extra ones in the closet...lol) all lined up and networked.

I have USB hubs connected to all of them, (I'm not gunna count right now but that's at least 20 USB ports). 7 fire-wire ports ,Card readers on 2 of the boxes, as well as on two of my printers.

Do I really need more on my monitors too?... If one of my USB ports goes belly up,I just go buy a new one.

I just don't see the joy in those extra bells and whistles on my monitors, unless perhaps,I' was REALLYcrunched for desk space or my office is in my closet or something.

My biggest beef with LCD is the viewing radius..I dislike having to get my line of site "Just Right" just to see what is being displayed. Especially in a multiple monitor set-up.

I'll probably always be a CRT guy,my Brother has a huge 21 inch LCD and I simply hate it, but it has been interesting hearing folks pros/cons,and specs in this thread. My main point was that USB ports, and card readers would not be a selling point for me...just seems like more possibility for things to go wrong, and driver conflicts.

Tom

Yeah, that's my beef too.  I have the 17" CRT to my left, the 21" CRT in front of me, and my iMac to the right.  If I'm in front of the 21" CRT, I can't see the iMac display that well.   Even if I'm in front of the iMac display, it has to be tilted to me (whether I'm standing there or have scrolled my chair over to it).

Again, I love my iMac and its display, but these limitations are apparent.  Do I really need to start using logical arguments here?

And I agree, hawkfyr,  What's this crap about "it has ten DVI ports, and SVGA and card readers and ...." .  Did you buy your car because it had a CD/Tape/8-track player?  Most doubtfully.  I purchased my monitor for resolution, refresh, and cost (although weight is another story!) ;)

I see LCD displays reaching respectible costs in the next year or two.  That will be a big selling point that may sway my convictions here.  But cost is a MAJOR factor and I don't see the relevance of equating them.  I can get a respectable 21" CRT that does 2048x1536 for $400 or less.  You can only get a respectible LCD that does this for about $2000.  Look at your wallet and consider this carefully (1920x1200 is not close enough - 128 W less and 336 H less).

Yours stubbornly,
Robert

Ten years ago CRTs were exactly in the same position as LCDs now.  A 14" would run you $250, a 15" $350, a 20" $1400 and a 21" $1600.    And for those 20 and 21s, the price could be plus or minus $1000 depending on the manufacturer.  It's only been in the last few years that the big CRT prices have tumbled, and that was when the demand for big monitors was such that the market could support it.

In fact, just looking at resolution and such, LCDs are very much ahead of the curve compared to what CRTs monitors were.  And in speed at which the prices are dropping, clearly ahead as well.

You can look at plasma screens in the same sort of light.  Eight years ago, a 42" plasma would cost you about $18,000 (Canadian).  The other day I was wondering through a Best Buy and the same size screen can be had for $1800.

The CRT is very quickly approaching the same situation as the floppy diskette: hanging on to life even though it's clearly going obsolete.

Not an exaggeration: the last time I saw a CRT monitor review, the best rated monitor was the exact same model that had won the previous two years.  I can't even easily find CRT monitor reviews these days.  For most companies, the only CRTs they make are the really low end under $100 jobbies or the higher end big monitors.  Nothing in between.

I'm a techno-junkie, I love my LCDs, I've never had any problems with them.  I had a 17 inch screen, and when I upgraded my LCD television to a 52 incher, I took my 32 inch and made that my computer screen...One word...SWEET!!  Poser is so awesome on this huge screen, and so is my online video games (City of Heroes is like watching a cartoon!)  I also have an Alienware laptop with a 17 inch widescreen display to play and create on the road or at work when bored.

Although, I understand why some prefer CRTs over LCDs.  Like said above many times, it's all about your personal preference.

Used to have CRT's and would never even consider an LCD...that was until I had my CRT replaced at work...I now work on a 21" widescreen DELL and its and incrediblle piece of kit. Crisp clear picture, no problems with viewing angle. Loved it so much that I bought myself one for home and would never go back to CRT.

Another thing I have noticed since using LCD screens, no more sore eyes and headaches.

Cheers :))

Quote - > Quote - Same here, martial.  They need to go down in price somewhat and get better refresh rates for my satisfaction.

My 21" is a Sony G520 and it is sweet.  Heck, at 2048x1536 it does 75Hz (above general 'eye irritation' and far above LCDs).  Photonic emission is the way that CRT works and is not good for your eyes, but the companies making LCDs have to work harder to make it worthwhile to do the upgrade.

I'm sorry, nakamuram, LCDs capable of 2048X1536+ are not affordable. Find me one by a reputable manufacturer (about $750) and I'll purchase it!!!  Good luck with your mission.  This reply will self-destruct in five seconds. :)

ETA: Real good luck as I can't find one under $2000.  Best o' luck bud.  Suckers...

Dell 3007WFP 30"widescreen  LCD.  Resolution of 2560x1600, 11 millisecond refresh, 4 USB ports, vertical adjustment (tell me when you can get that on a CRT), 9 in 2 card reader.

About $1500 US now.

If you can stand "only" 1920x1200, you can get a Dell 24" widescreen with DVI, VGA, Composite, component and S-video inputs, 4 USB ports, the card reader, 6 millisecond refresh, and so on for around  $750 US now.

Less than a year ago, the 24" Dell widescreen (with not as many features) cost around $1100.

By the by, 75 Hz is 13.3 millisecond redraw. so LCDs exceed it easily now.

While I'm a CRT man right now, I should point out that I haven't seen any inexpensive high-resolution wide-screen (16:10) CRTs.  I think a high-res wide-screen display is the way to go  for the future. 

Also, remember that a 22" CRT really has a viewable area of only 20", while a 21" LCD has a viewable area of 21".  All they need to do is to improve the contrast (deeper blacks) and response times (for gaming).

Quote - Also, remember that a 22" CRT really has a viewable area of only 20", while a 21" LCD has a viewable area of 21".  All they need to do is to improve the contrast (deeper blacks) and response times (for gaming).

The response time is a real non-issue for new monitors.  As it happens I was looking at monitors this afternoon and some were showing response rates of 6 milliseconds (that's equivalent to over 150 Hz).  The black thing is an issue, of course.

Gamut/color depth is the reason to stick with a CRT.  If your just doing web work well maybe the LCD's are better for you.

Fast response times on panels usually indicates 6bit panels which are far cheaper to produce along with only testing grey to grey speeds. Look for a decent 8bit panel or higher and you'll shoot the price up.  Think I saw a eizo 20 or 21 rated at 14 bit for around 1600.

Why the decline of crt's to lcd's?  Price to profit.  The panel manufactures can keep releasing revised versions and push them into the market at the same price point of a panel from 6 months ago. Plus longevity of a crt to a panel.  A good CRT will last you 10 years can you say the same about a panel one?

Card readers/hubs/speakers on lcd's, you buying a monitor or a hub?  Last I checked most modern motherboards come with 6-12 usb 2 ports and 1-2 firewire ports not including add-in cards or external cheap hubs you can daisychain.

I just bought 2 LCDs and they look better than all 6 of my CRTs. Don't believe the hype about CRTs being better. LCDs are great! This debate reminds me of the photographers I work with who don't want to go to digital because film is better. Yeah right. Digital cameras are better in so many ways. Maybe thery are not better in all ways but they are better in more ways just like LCDs are better in more ways than CRTs. This thread had me 2nd guessing my purchase. I'm glad I jumped in because these LCD screens look great ( better than my CRTs) and the price was great. I bought 2 19 inch LCDs with free shipping for $376 from newegg. We can measurebate the specifics all day, but IMO LCD screens are better than CRTs in many ways. I am more than happy with my purchase and more than happy that I did not buy new CRTs.

"We can measurebate the specifics all day"

Which reminds me...CRT's do clean up easier too...IMHO

8 )~

Tom