yes, you can run SLIGHTLY smaller fonts on a really good LCD than you can on a really good CRT, but its nowhere near enough difference to make up for the huge difference between 1280x960 and 1600x1200 in workspace. Bottom line is you can do/see more with a really good CRT running at 1600x1200 than ANY display running at 1280x960. The bottom line is NET resolution, and I contend that a really good CRT running at 1600x1200 has higher NET resolution than ANY 1280x960 display. Add to that the increased contrast range ( better shadow details ) and generally better color accuracy ( although this gap is closing), It is not as you make it appear to be. And secondly any monitor with better NET resolution is going to be much more useful for a whole bunch of PC applications than just editing photos.
Even web browsing, I can easily read some entire web pages, that you cant without scrolling, that is BETTER in that regard, even for ALL TEXT web pages. This is the very thing you called frustrating & "annoying" because of the necessary scrolling. One of the very first things I was absolutely delighted about when I upgraded to 1600x1200 was how much more enjoyable web browsing became. I can see much more without scrolling. Sometimes more QTY. of entire photos without any scrolling. And things like thumbnail pages, I can see way more thumbs on a single screen without any visible loss of quality of those thumbs...HIGHER DISPLAY NET RESOLUTION IS SIMPLY BETTER than lower NET display resolution... jco -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 3:47 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: POLL - Computer Screen Size & Resolution I've seen a lot of monitors, good and bad. For general use, a good LCD panel that's crisp, has a decent response time and a contrast ratio over 600:1 is significantly better (and easier on the eyes) than any CRT. For editing, the CRT's still a bit better (better blacks, higher resolutions), but not enough to beat the LCD for all-round use. Only way I'd run a CRT now is on a dedicated editing box that does nothing else. As to text, you're still getting similar amounts of text on the screen as you can run smaller fonts on a lower-res display. It's the physical size of the font that matters to readability, and that places a hard limit on how small the font can get onscreen (you can get more text on a higher res display but you risk eyestrain. As someone who gets payed to look at a display for 8+ hours a day, I can't risk that). -Adam J. C. O'Connell wrote: > if your saying your 1280x800 lcd screen > looks better than any CRT running at > 1600x1200 fine ( have you seen them all?) , but there is no way it can > display nearly as much information like text etc. you need the pixels > to do that...and you dont have nearly as many to work with.. > jco > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Adam Maas > Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 12:15 AM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: POLL - Computer Screen Size & Resolution > > > 1. 15.4" 16:10 Laptop screen (replaced my 21" CRT running at > 1856x1392, > miss teh resolution, but the LCD is far more crisp, which makes up for a > > lot. Looks way better than any 19" CRT running at 1600x1200) 2. > 1280x800 (max res) 3. 1000x700 or so > 4. 800-1000 horizontal, 5-700 vertical > 5. yes > > -Adam > > > > Shel Belinkoff wrote: >> Since there has been a rather interesting and lively discussion in a >> couple of other threads discussing computer screen size and >> resolution, it may be time to poll the topic again. >> >> 1) What size screen do you use >> >> 2) What resolution do you prefer? >> >> 3) What's the largest size image that you can see on your screen >> without undue scrolling? This would have to take into consideration >> real estate eaten up by the browser. >> >> 4) What minimum/maximum size images do you prefer to look at? >> >> 5) If you had to scroll to see an entire image, would you be less >> inclined to view additional images from that poster? >> >> >> Shel >> >> >> >> > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
