17" LCD or 22" CRT for video editing?

[jrv3034]

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
or
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!

 

[crazzyeddie]

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 =)

 

[Laslo Panaflex]

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.

 

[primalman]

CRT...video needs the rez

 

[DreaminDirector]

CRT.

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

Nice....

It's worth the price, while LCD arent.

 

[stoid]

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!

 

[legion]

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.

 

[FuzzyBallz]

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.

 

[legion]

Originally posted by FuzzyBallz
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.

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)