RE: [APML] CRT vs Flat Panel for display of astrophotos

[Emmanuele Sordini <vega@bloomingstars.com>]

Hi list,
on the subject of contrast ratio, I feel like having to pass along a couple 
(really interesting) links:

http://www.tomshardware.com/display/20031105/index.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/display/20040226/index.html

they shed a flood of light on my understanding of LCD technology. To put it 
shortly, contrast ratios can be quite easily "bloated", because it highly 
depends on the actual light flux range ends (i.e. lowest and highest 
values) the monitor is capable of displaying.

Any thoughts?

Emmanuele

At 22.59 05/04/2004, you wrote:

>>I've never heard "contrast ratio" used as a term of reference, or
>>comparison before. Is it a valid comparison point? And if so, what
>>would the recommended range be?
>
>Hi Alan;
>         I never heard of it before a few months ago myself, but the 
> computer store where i bought my LCD form I met up with an old friend 
> from way back in my BBS days, who filled me in.
>         Technically I do not understand what the higher contrast ratio is 
> supposed to mean, but when you take two identical brands & sizes of LCD 
> monitors, put them side by side, the one with the higher contrast ratio 
> wins out for dynamic range and overall image sharpness, even when the dot 
> pitch is exactly the same.
>
>         I just happen to be in  Best Buy store today for a totally 
> different reason,a dn went and looked at allt eh LCD monitors.  All of 
> them on display, save one, had contrast ratios of 350:1 or 400:1, and the 
> singular exception was one that was 700:1.  But the price - ouch - it was 
> at elast 50% higher than the same sized monitor (differnt brand) that hd 
> the 400:1 contrast ratio.
>
>         So, there you go, no idea what it is suppsoed to mean, but I can 
> tell you, sitting here in front of my Acer LCD (500:1 ratio), it sure is nice.
>
>         One of the issues too is that whiel I think a really good, top of 
> the line CRT monitor from say Sony or NEC still has the edge in dynamic 
> range, but the eyestrain on good LCD monitors is almost negligible 
> compared to any CRT monitor I have ever used.   That's the main reason I 
> upgraded - eyestrain from longs hours at the monitor - no more headaches 
> now.  :)
>
>         Another issue with LCD monitors is I really had to play aorund 
> with mine to get it where I wanted it.  It feels so different on the 
> eyes, you have a hard time judging where to put your contrast and 
> brightness ad you woudl with say a CRT monitor.  But overall, I have been 
> happy with mine
>
>         You know what the differenc is lsimilar too?  say you have a 
> photograph - astrophoto or daytime shot - and you want to make two 
> versions - one for use on a web site, and one you will print out.  You 
> know how you work in photoshop on the web one differently than the one 
> that is to be printed out, in terms of adjusting contrast, brightness, 
> etc, etc.
>
>         Jumping form a CRT to a LCD monitor is much like that.  In fact, 
> because we had LCD monitors at work, i personally found it difficult to 
> use my CRT monitor at home, making the mental adjustment whebn judging 
> tonality, contrast, brightness, etc, etc, so I broke down and got a LCD 
> monitor there too.
>
>         Hope that helps more than it confuses.
>:)
>joe

_______________________________________________
Astro-Photo mailing list
Astro-Photo@seds.org
http://seds.org/mailman/listinfo/astro-photo