|
|
Posted by Richard Crowley on 11/03/07 18:13
"Rita Ä Berkowitz" wrote ...
> Igor wrote:
>> It seems to me that CRT is deader at the high end than it is at the
>> low.
>
> Not true. As I said earlier, look for surplus monitors that use the
> Sony Trinitron flat CRT. The LCD vs CRT argument is akin to VHS vs
> Batamax. Betamax was always the best format, but VHS won out do to a
> stiff marketing campaign and propaganda.
Sony (Betamax) practically guaranteed failure by
refusing to licence the format to other manufacturers,
and by waiting way too long before admiting that a
60-minute running time probably wasn't enough. By
then there were thousands of Hollywood movie titles
availble on VHS because they wouldn't fit on Betamax.
> And as others have pointed out, you do get more
> screen real estate with LCD. This comes at a steep
> price of lack of color accuracy and high price.
So aren't there any graphic-arts publications that do
equipment reviews? A good survey of popular flat-
screen displays would be an interesting read for many
of us. Assuming it would include such topics as
colorimetry accuracy, gamma curves, contrast ratio,
etc.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|