Posted by Igor on 11/05/07 19:02

On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 09:12:44 -0600, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

>Igor wrote:
>
>>That's true, unfortunately. I need a new monitor, and when I started
>>shopping for one, I had taken it for granted that I would be getting
>>another LCD. When I was looking at monitors in a big box store, I
>>noticed a lone CRT sitting in a corner and went up to examine it. I
>>was blown away by the image quality, compared to all the latest and
>>greatest LCD monitors I had been looking at (and this was a cheap,
>>off-brand CRT). I had gotten accustomed to the "grainy" appearence of
>>LCD monitors and had completely forgotten how good photos look on a
>>CRT.
>
>I have to ask, are you sure the LCD was running at it's native
>resolution, like they really must be?

Yes, I made absolutely sure of that. In fact, some of the sales guys
were becoming visibly annoyed with me playing with the video settings
on the master computers.

The reason I don't think the "grainy" appearance (perhaps "pixely" or
"granulely" would be a better word) is an issue unique to store
displays is because I noticed the same thing years ago when I bought
the LCD monitor I'm using now. At the time, I excused it, thinking LCD
production was still in its early stages and that the image quality
would improve over time. Well, it's been several years, and that
aspect of it hasn't improved at all. In fact, the larger LCD monitors
get, the more I notice it.

Another recent revelatory experience was when I hooked up a relative's
digital camcorder to a CRT televison. This camcorder was a newer model
(a Sony) that was purchased in the last six months. The video as seen
on the camcorder's LCD viewer was, like all the LCDs I've seen, pixely
and overly bright, while the image on the TV was smooth and the colors
much more natural.
--
"Those of us whose brains did not die in college are
actually stunned by just how stupid academic ideas
are." -- Robert W. Whitaker, http://readbob.com/

[Back to original message]