17" LCD or 22" CRT for video editing?

Discussion in 'Buying Tips, Advice and Discussion (archive)' started by jrv3034, Sep 18, 2003.

  1. jrv3034 macrumors 6502a

    Oct 23, 2002
    Alright, folks. I'm getting close to making a purchase of my first Mac, a Power Mac G5 (not sure which one yet). The big questionmark is the monitor. I have $700 to spend on it. It will be used for video editing using Final Cut Pro 4. I've narrowed down my choices to the following:

    17" Formac LCD Platinum
    22" Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 2070SB-BK CRT

    Since this will be used for editing video, I assume the higher resolution of the CRT will be more useful than the higher contrast and brightness of the LCD, not to mention the form factor of the LCD vs CRT.

    Any thoughts as to which one I should get? I'd love a 20" Cinema Display, but I just don't have the dough. To me, those are the two best monitors in their price range. Whaddaya think?

    Thanks in advance!
  2. crazzyeddie macrumors 68030


    Dec 7, 2002
    Florida, USA
    I have to say CRT because of the response time of the LCDs...

    Also it should be cheaper, which leave you more money for RAM or a faster G5 =)
  3. Laslo Panaflex macrumors 65816

    Laslo Panaflex

    May 1, 2003
    I'd go with the CRT as well, you can bump up the resolution and get great desktop space. On the other hand, a 22" CRT is really big and takes up alot of desktop space. CRTs are better in my opinion and you can take the rest of the money and invest it in RAM.
  4. primalman macrumors 6502a

    Jul 23, 2002
    at the end of the hall
  5. DreaminDirector macrumors 6502a


    Sep 3, 2002
    Ladera Ranch, CA

    I'm on a 21" CRT Apple Display and a 19" CRT Viewsonic


    It's worth the price, while LCD arent.
  6. stoid macrumors 601


    Feb 17, 2002
    So long, and thanks for all the fish!
    I have done extensive video editing on 1152*864 (or whatever that exact res is) and it worked just fine. Also if you get the LCD you will have more desk space so that it you have a computer that can support multiple monitors, you can eventually connect another monitor...

    So it really comes down to your layout. Do you need space on the desk for ANY reason?? Then get the LCD.

    Also the LCD will be easier the move from place to place. Trust me, moving a 75 pound monitor that's as big as a 22 inch monitor will not be easy or fun! ;)
  7. legion macrumors 6502a

    Jul 31, 2003
    These days it's good to use a LCD for editing and a broadcast monitor for video viewing. You'll need a broadcast monitor anyway for colour checking, so I wouldn't worry about the inaccuracies of colour on a LCD, so it'll just be more pleasant to work on the LCD and it'll take up less space...

    If you're Photoshopping, then a CRT is the way to go because of colour accuracy and resolution.
  8. FuzzyBallz macrumors 6502a


    May 2, 2003
    Home of Al-Qaida
    You know, the Samsung 172T is not a bad choice if you're looking for a 17" LCD. Think of it like this, you'll be spending a lot of time in front of the monitor, and them CRT monitors will give you eye strain in no time, and the the huge 22" will just quicken the pace.

    Too bad you don't have $1300 to throw around, 'cause a 20" Cinema Display would be perfect w/o "breaking" the bank.

    I don't know where people got the idea that LCD monitors have low refresh rate and inacurrate color, 'cause my Sony 18", Samsung 17" and the 20" Cinema are all on target. Although the Samsung's a bit brighter than the Sony, and the Cinema is just off the charts w/ the contrast. :D
  9. legion macrumors 6502a

    Jul 31, 2003
    Refresh rate for LCDs is a standard 60Hz, however, unlike CRTs, refresh rate is not important because LCDs don't have flicker.

    What is important is pixel response time for LCDs. LCD response time is the time it takes for a pixel to light up and to die back down to black. If it's not fast enough, you'll have ghosting or smearing of the image. This would be the equivalent measurement to CRT freqency numbers (for comparison purposes.)

    As for colour being lesser on LCDs, that's simply the case. LCDs are great for crisp line and picture geometry since its projection is based on set "grid-like" layouts, however the weight possible to give to 3 subpixel colours to combine to form a single pixel will always deem it inferior to CRT tubes. Contrast and brightness are not colour accuracy indicators. A better test would be amount of grayscales possible... LCDs will have a set limit whilst CRTs are near infinite (since the gun that causes the luminescence on the glass of a CRT can be modified to near infinite amounts of energy)

Share This Page