|Quoting Scotland1979 (Reply 2):|
It is another question. Wonder how can they be avoided as all of us have 2 different monitors. Maybe it would be much easier and save all of us if we all are using one standard monitor. Would that be helpful?
One negative thing is not all of us have $$ to buy to meet all standard monitor.
|Quoting Lennymuir (Reply 6):|
This may explain some very strange 'jaggy' rejects I've experienced lately.
|Quoting Bubbles (Reply 4):|
So, to me, it shouldn't matter as long as the monitor isn't a low-end product.
|Quoting StealthZ (Reply 13):|
The CRT v LCD question is likely not as important as the LCD v LCD question
|Quoting DerekF (Reply 19):|
They look OK to me on my monitor. The last one has some jaggies that I can see which would make me reluctant to sharpen it any more.
|Quoting Chris78cpr (Reply 18):|
I find that when using these i have to view photos at at least 1200x800 to make accurate decisions about the image. So if a screener is running a 1920x... screen resolution how do they find viewing a 1024x683 image? This isnt a criticism i am just curious to find out if indeed you all run large resolutions or have it set at say 1200x800 for screening, etc.
|Quoting Ranger703 (Reply 14):|
I was under the impression that ALL screeners used correctly calibrated CRT monitors! As this changed recently?
|Quoting Chris78cpr (Reply 18):
So if a screener is running a 1920x... screen resolution how do they find viewing a 1024x683 image
|Quoting IL76 (Reply 23):|
I'm running at 2560x1600
|Quoting Walter2222 (Reply 12):|
Furthermore, I also think that the "performance" of a monitor is also dependant on the type of graphics/video-board used in the PC...
|Quoting Walter2222 (Reply 24):|
I wonder if you have tried to hook up your screen to a less performing PC (i.e. with a less performing video-driver) to see what it does to the quality? I am just assuming that you also upgraded your PC when you started working with your new screen...
|Quoting IL76 (Reply 25):|
Not every computer can handle it. I had to upgrade my video card in order for this monitor to work.
|Quoting DerekF (Reply 22):|
What chance have I got now Sad
|Quoting Alexandru (Reply 30):|
I had lots of soft rejections after using this monitor, obviously they were screened on a TN or PVA pannel.
|Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 31):|
If you show some examples we can liven the discussion a bit.
|Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 21):|
Chris I'm no expert on screens but LCDs run best on their native resolution. So if you have a screen made for 1920* and you set it at 1280* it's not gonna look good at all.
|Quoting Chris78cpr (Reply 35):|
'Screened' on my CRT, on my LCD they looks better but also slightly flat.
|Quoting TRVYYZ (Reply 37):|
In the end I think I had asked for an Accepted Anet shot that can be used as reference for sharpness etc.(please don't say any anet shot, one should be a reference say for a 1024x768 shot etc)
|Quoting Scotland1979 (Reply 40):|
My photos often rejected due to soft which I used CRT (perfect sharp monitor) and obviously they used LCD to screen.
And other time I used LCD and to keep photos look good and rejected due to oversharpened which mean they used CRT to screen. After rejected, I checked with CRT and yeah they look oversharpened because LCD doesn't show. Just like the above statements.
|Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 31):|
Most screeners use a CRT
|Quoting Vaporlock (Reply 36):|
I'm a graphic designer and look at my monitor all day long. I have a new computer both at home and work and they have LCD monitors that are not cheap.
Being in the graphic business you look at your monitor all day long and the LCD monitor is much harder on the eyes for sure.
|Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 41):|
By flat I mean lacking contrast, they seem a little 'washed out'
|Quoting ChrisH (Reply 43):|
They must be cheap if your CRT beats them... if you're a GFX designer then im sure you've heard of Eizo, or LaCie... Get one, and live happily
|Quoting Alexandru (Reply 45):|
Still I think there is an issue with the diffrece between monitors.