CRT recommendations

I bought a great LaCie Electron Blue IV 19" monitor last year, in almost new condition. My hope was that it would last until the really good LCDs dropped into my price range. Well, the monitor crapped out on me this month, and a nice big Eizo is still out of reach.

I'm scanning Craigslist for a replacement, in the likely event that my corner t.v. repair shop can't fix the LaCie.

Are there any other monitors in the LaCie's class that I should consider? I need 19 or 21 inches, sharp image, even illumination, and ability to calibrate (independent controlls of R, G, and B channels).

Sony Artisan, but probably harder to find than a LaCie. Good luck!

Yes, Sony Artisan is great and comes with monitor calibration hardware/software. Supposed to have expected 20,000 hr life, I think I read somewhere.

Jon

Paul,

The Sony Artisan is likely to cost you way more than the LaCie if you find one. Even more than some good LCD's. Two suggestions:

1) Take a look at Eizo's online store for their clearance monitors. They have several FlexScanseries monitors in the 17-20 inch size range that are under 500. These monitors willserve you well. We use several of them inour scanning workshops. Take a look at La Cie's refurbs too. I noticed several seemingly good deals in an email I got from them the other day.

2) I have an Electron Blue 19" that is is good working order just taking up space under a table. If you can figure a way to get it to you from NH we can work out a deal.

The Sony GDM-C520 is the best deal in high-end CRTs. That's the same as the Artisan without the fancy stuff. Used to retail for between 1/2 and 1/3 of an Artisan.

I recently bought a new Lacie 300 series 12 bit LCD. To my eye it is every bit (ha ha) as good as the Eizo 12 bit monitors, which I use at the school. All Lacies are now and always were made by NEC. There may be an NEC equivilent that is a few bucks cheaper.

I have a LaCie IV and like it alot. What's wrong with getting another one? Just because one crapped out on you - doesn't mean the next will. Who's to say an artisan or whatever else won't crap out on you too? No assurances. I'm just sayin'...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JW Dewdney

I have a LaCie IV and like it alot. What's wrong with getting another one?

---

Oh, I'm looking for another one. But on the local used market I might not find a good one any time soon, so I'm trying to expand my options.

Ted: thanks for the offer. I'm going to try my luck locally first, just because shipping these beheemoths is such a chore. As far as the Eizos go, I see great deals on the flex scan models, but not the high end ones (which are the only ones i've seen, and fallen in love with). Any idea how the two lines compare?

Kirk: when you compare the LaCie to the Eizo 12-bit monitors, which Eizo line is that?

Thanks everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JW Dewdney View Post
I have a LaCie IV and like it alot. What's wrong with getting another one?

---

Have you looked for one lately? Not only are they hard to find used, but you have to find one with some life left in it. If it won't calibrate to within 80% of target luminosity it is pretty much toast. When I was looking for one a couple of months ago I couldn't find one that I could test that was more than 60%. One I had shipped in here which "was barely used" was at 50%! That is a monitor that was completely used up.

I bought a used 19" LaCie while I wait for $1000 LCD monitors to come down in price. It's a bit green on startup, and the calibration drifts faster than I like, but it cost $60 and once its warm the colour is good enough for me.

At work I have a 20" Apple Cinema screen. I see more shadow detail on the LaCie, and when I take my files to the local Eizo distributor for a lust-session, but the Apple has dropped so far in price, and does enough of what I need, that I am strongly leaning towards getting one for home use when the re-calibration frequency of the LaCie gets too tiresome. Were I only doing colour I would probably have one already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirk Gittings

Have you looked for one lately? Not only are they hard to find used, but you have to find one with some life left in it. If it won't calibrate to within 80% of target luminosity it is pretty much toast. When I was looking for one a couple of months ago I couldn't find one that I could test that was more than 60%. One I had shipped in here which "was barely used" was at 50%! That is a monitor that was completely used up.

---

I got my IV just a little while back - I had to keep my brightness at ZERO percent just to set my white/black points. I figure that's doing pretty good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulr

Ted: thanks for the offer. I'm going to try my luck locally first, just because shipping these beheemoths is such a chore. As far as the Eizos go, I see great deals on the flex scan models, but not the high end ones (which are the only ones i've seen, and fallen in love with). Any idea how the two lines compare?

---

Paul: I've only seen the high-end Eizo's from afar. The FlexScan models are high end enough for me. They appear to have the same build quality as the the higher end ones, jus tnot as many bells and whistles. The frames are metal and they are sturdy. Before I decided to buy them for our workshops, where it is critical that they calibrate and stay calibrated ... even with shipping back and forth across the country .... I checked with X-Rite and got a flat out answr that ALL Eizo monitors calibrate rapidly, easily and stay calibrated. That was all I needed.

As for the LaCie gathering dust. If you decide you want to take a drive up here just shout and you get free shooting in beautiful NH as well as a monitor :).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ted Harris

As for the LaCie gathering dust. If you decide you want to take a drive up here just shout and you get free shooting in beautiful NH as well as a monitor :).

---

cool, i'm juggling my options right now. and waiting to hear what the t.v. repair shack has to say about my dead baby. my climbing partner and i may be heading up to the white mountains one of these weekends, so if i decide the eizo's too dear, and a perfect sony or lacie doesn't rain down from heaven, i may be driving up your way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Struan Gray

At work I have a 20" Apple Cinema screen. I see more shadow detail on the LaCie, and when I take my files to the local Eizo distributor for a lust-session, but the Apple has dropped so far in price, and does enough of what I need, that I am strongly leaning towards getting one for home use when the re-calibration frequency of the LaCie gets too tiresome. Were I only doing colour I would probably have one already.

---

Check out the Dell monitors. They use the same models that Apple uses in their CinemaDisplays, just with a different bezel and a significantly lower price tag (because that's what Dell does).

Paul, just give me a heads up and a few hours notice :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rakesh Malik

Check out the Dell monitors. They use the same models that Apple uses in their CinemaDisplays, just with a different bezel and a significantly lower price tag (because that's what Dell does).

---

Like Struan, I use a cinema display at work. It's great for graphics and surfing the web, but I don't care for it for photography. It doesn't offer true calibration, and the colors and contrast are exagerated. And like most LCDs, it puts an outline around the individual pixels that I can see ... which gives a kind of artificial sharpening effect that makes me crazy. And the contrast changes a fair amount when I move my head around.

Does anyone have a sense of how the Eizo FlexScan measures up with regard to these annoyances? The coloredge that I saw had none of them.

Quote:

---

I had to keep my brightness at ZERO percent just to set my white/black points.

---

JW

That sounds strange. What form of monitor calibration are you using?

I was lucky. I purchased a LaCie Electron Blue a couple of months before they stopped production.

I currently have two monitors side-by-side, and switch to an old NEC when I'm not doing color corrections. I want this thing to last.

As to LaCie's found on Craigslist, I have a friend who's purchased three of these in the Portland area. (LaCie's home base is located near Portland.) Two of the three are defective.

The last few generations of what used to be adobe's gamma control panel, now incorporated in the OSX monitor calibration routine seem to have been quite good. Indeed it works for almost anything I need to do... and I'd recently gotten some lightjet tests done of some tricky images in terms of highlight and shadow detail. I have to say I've been VERY pleased with the results. And, well - sorry if I seem ignorant (believe me though - I've been wrestling with color cal for YEARS and YEARS!!) - but that's really all that matters to me - getting the results I want. Yes, anyway - I know how nutty it must sound - but I figure that the 'brightness' control on the monitor is a variable 'range' controlling the gun voltage. Perhaps it's miscalibrated (the brightness control) but regardless - there seems to be no shortage of photons flying out of the back of the thing. I'm assuming that'll mean there will be PILES of latitude for a progressively dimming monitor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirk Gittings

JW

That sounds strange. What form of monitor calibration are you using?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neil poulsen

As to LaCie's found on Craigslist, I have a friend who's purchased three of these in the Portland area. (LaCie's home base is located near Portland.) Two of the three are defective.

---

If anyone wants one (or two) - I know of three 22" mark III's that should have LOADS of life left on them - and I think they'd be QUITE cheap. In the Los Angeles area, I mean.

If you want real tight monitor calibration you aren't going to get there, IMHO, with software alone. You need to use a an external colorimeter, e.g. a 'hockey puck' such as the Optix, Eye One, etc.

JW, I have found that even the newer Adobe Gamma is significantly inferior to something like XRite/GrayTag Macbeth colorimeter. The difference is significant and the only way to measure luminosity, which will tell you in what kind of shape your monitor is in and how much life it has left in it.

FWIW

Some time ago the support at GTM told me that a monitor that calibrates at less than 90% of luminosity is seriously compromised. That is somewhat of an exaggeration (they are in the business of perfection) but.....

I currently have one a LB IV at 80% of target. It seemed workable until I replaced another old Dell monitor at another workstation with a new Lacie 300 series 12 bit LCD. The low luminosity (which makes images appear dull) leads one to slightly overly add contrast and saturation to make the image look snappy. The lower it is the more this becomes an issue. The Dell monitor I replaced, which was not used for critical work, was at 50% and noticeably duller. Knowing this the LB IV is usable for awhile longer. There is no way, according to XR support, to adjust your way around a low luminosity with monitor settings.

Used and "obsolete" colorimeters are available very reasonably particularly the ones with the old GTM logo. (I recently took a XRite workshop. I learned a few things, but they through in a new colorimeter which made the $275 cost of the workshop dirt cheap).

Thanks for the info, Kirk. I'm going to think about it - though I should also clarify that when I (rather flippantly) referred to 'adobe gamma' - I was referring to the calibration engine in the 'monitor setup' in the OS X system control panel. Pretty basic stuff. But if you use it in 'advanced mode' (slightly better) it really does an excellent job in terms of balancing the monitor, visually. Granted - the profiling of devices is a whole different matter. But if my lab provides the drumscans that I print at the same lab - there's quite alot of work already being done for me, profile wise. So - why bother dealing with complex issues if most of the hard stuff is already happening out-of-house. But regardless, I'll be doing a lot of lightjet mural work - so, as they say, the proof is in the pudding - and if this becomes a big issue, then I'll have to deal with it. But for now, I am very pleased with the results I've been getting (fool's paradise perhaps?) - and I will burn that bridge when I come to it! :)

So, I'm getting ready to pull the trigger on a discontinued Eizo:
http://www.eizo.com/support/discontinued/lcd/l885.asp

This is everyone's chance to talk me out of it.
It's between this and a used CRT like the one I had.

My thoughts so far about the Eizo ...

Pros: stable, low energy consumption, good image quality, probably won't break, probably will retain some retai value.

Cons: about double the price, no true hardware calibration (but serious software calibration ... not sure what the tradeoffs are), may not be as smooth looking as the CRT.

Any other thoughts?

That monitor was $1300 when it was current. It is no Coloredge, but I bet it is very good.

Kirk, thanks for expanding on my too cryptic remark.

JW, I got along for years (or thought I did) with the OS X tools. I started using the Monaco Optix xr colorimeter about 18 months ago and the difference is quite noticable in terms of the ease and quality ofmy digitl workflow. Like Kirk says,the investment is minimal. In fact, for awhile Midwest had the Optix available for something like $150 which is a real steal.

Paul --- well I am certainly not going to be the one to talk you out of it since I partially talked you into it :). When you say double the price, double the price of what, the cheap off brand monitors, I ask because the $450 they are selling for at the Eizo online store seems like a solidly good price for a top quality 20+" monitor. Further, I am not sure what you mean by the differentiation between hardware and software calibration. I always thought there were hardware controls on my Flex Scan monitors. That said, see my comments above and Kirk's earlier. IMO, if you are investing in a new monitor make the investment in the calibration tools as well. If you do any amount of printing you will pay for the device in paper not wasted ... very rapidly too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ted Harris

Paul --- well I am certainly not going to be the one to talk you out of it since I partially talked you into it :). When you say double the price, double the price of what, the cheap off brand monitors, I ask because the $450 they are selling for at the Eizo online store seems like a solidly good price for a top quality 20+" monitor. Further, I am not sure what you mean by the differentiation between hardware and software calibration. I always thought there were hardware controls on my Flex Scan monitors. That said, see my comments above and Kirk's earlier. IMO, if you are investing in a new monitor make the investment in the calibration tools as well. If you do any amount of printing you will pay for the device in paper not wasted ... very rapidly too.

---

I meant double the price of a used CRT ...

It seems some of the flex scan monitors have hardware calibration and others don't. This one comes with software that integrates with the buttons on the monitor (as far as I can tell), and it ajusts the calibration through the video card. So the range of calibration probably isn't as wide as what's possible with the monitor hardware. I don't know what kind of difference this makes. I imagine if the monitor is good out of the box and doesn't drift too far, it's a minor deal. But I don't know for sure. i'm open to comments.

I already have an eye-1 match calibration system that I plan to use with this.

While this thread is still cookin, I've been using a Sony Artisan CRT for a long time.I love this monitor.I can tell its on its last leg :( What would be its equal in picture quality to replace it since they are history?

anyway- Kirk... the point I was trying to make was that I picked up my blue IV 2nd hand - and I've used MANY a monitor (5-6) with the same or similar calibration scheme. This is the ONLY one that I've had to set brightness on MINIMUM to get my blackpoint (!) - most are much closer to maximum. I just thought it was really impressive - and a testament to the fact that you CAN get a quality monitor second hand. You just have to do legwork - that's the only thing.

Other than that (and coming from someone who used to have a barco as well!) I can see differentiations between colors on this monitor that I've never seen before. I think that's a good thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rakesh Malik

Check out the Dell monitors. They use the same models that Apple uses in their CinemaDisplays, just with a different bezel and a significantly lower price tag (because that's what Dell does).

---

We have several of the Dells too (20 and 23" models). It may be just that the Apple is my personal monitor and I've been able to tweak it to my heart's content, but I cannot get the Dells to show the same sort of subtlety that I get out of the Apple.

Several of the Barco reference monitors have gone by on our local exchange and mart website, but they have never been local enough. In NY you might have more luck and and find a local seller.

If you are looking at the 'cheaper' Eizos, the 797 and 997 were supposedly a halfway stage between the merely good monitors and the CE and CG models. They have been around for a while now, so in high churn environments may be leaking onto the used market.

I decided against that $450 eizo ... everything i found out about it (including info from eizo reps) suggests it's way below the coloredge monitors, and probably well below the CRT that i'm used to.

Good news is a guy in NYC showed up on ebay selling 8 of the LaCie monitors for $40 each. Condition is a big gamble, but I'll take my chances at that price. If I can get a couple of years out of the thing, i might be able to afford a great LCD when it finally goes.

Of course if this monitor turns out to be crap I'll be right where I started, only $40 lighter ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulr

I decided against that $450 eizo ... everything i found out about it (including info from eizo reps) suggests it's way below the coloredge monitors, and probably well below the CRT that i'm used to.

Good news is a guy in NYC showed up on ebay selling 8 of the LaCie monitors for $40 each. Condition is a big gamble, but I'll take my chances at that price. If I can get a couple of years out of the thing, i might be able to afford a great LCD when it finally goes.

Of course if this monitor turns out to be crap I'll be right where I started, only $40 lighter ...

---

I had my eye on those too Paul.I hope they work out!

Chris

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Struan Gray

We have several of the Dells too (20 and 23" models). It may be just that the Apple is my personal monitor and I've been able to tweak it to my heart's content, but I cannot get the Dells to show the same sort of subtlety that I get out of the Apple.

---

Yes. Dell buys the same monitor that Apple does. Then again, Dell is probably also buying some of the same laptops from the same ODM as Apple now, as well. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rakesh Malik

Yes. Dell buys the same monitor that Apple does. Then again, Dell is probably also buying some of the same laptops from the same ODM as Apple now, as well. :)

---

Isn't it just the same mfr of the actual LCD?? I think the control circuits and power supplies are different, no?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JW Dewdney

Isn't it just the same mfr of the actual LCD?? I think the control circuits and power supplies are different, no?

---

Odds are they both use the same parts, so it's not likely that there are any measurable differences there.

one can only speculate i guess

I really wanted the Dells to be good enough: had they done so I would have a bigger monitor on my work desk and a Dell flat panel at home. But whatever I did, and whatever computer I drove them with, the shadows blocked up faster, and there was a tendency to unsubtlety in the way colours were rendered. The difference was Velvia vs. Astia, rather than Velvia vs. Portra, but real enough for me to go for a smaller Apple screen.

I suspect the difference lies in the drive electronics, or the backlight, or perhaps the acceptable deviation from spec that Dell permits. I don't know, but the difference was significant for me, and consistent across several units.

The CE widescreen Eizos were a step up again, and the CGs better yet, but I have decided to live with a little 'digital drydown' while that level of quality drops in price.

We bought the widescreen CE Eizo's at work (2 of them, non-sequential serial numbers) just as they came out and found they varied gradually at least 10% or so across the screen. Left side was cooler and darker. Right side was lighter and warmer. It was like someone had used the gradient tool in Photoshop but across my screen – all the time. This was especially noticeable when looking at blues and oranges. I sent them both back to Eizo seperately over the span of a coupe of months.

Apparently they were within spec (according to the Eizo techs the allowable varience for this model was 30%!) and Eizo refused to replace them. We moved them on to other users in the company who do not require such critical colour work. We ended up buying Apple 23" Cinema Displays to replace them with and have been happy ever since. Much better colour purity. Go figure.

At the time the Apple's were almost half the price of the Eizo's and delivered a very similar gamut (yes I calibrated both of them with the same EyeOne Display2 and compared both the profiles using Eizo's on-line profile analyzer).

Your experience might vary but my experience is that the Eizo might make some really nice very high end LCDs but the mid-range product is overpriced and outperformed by other products available for far less money.

Dominique, I think it's great to be able to compare experiences, especially to get input from users, and not just gawpers like myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Struan Gray

I suspect the difference lies in the drive electronics, or the backlight, or perhaps the acceptable deviation from spec that Dell permits. I don't know, but the difference was significant for me, and consistent across several units.

---

I suspect that it's something else -- PC's use a higher gamma than macs, so Dell's monitor might be calibrated for that, which would lead to blocking up shadows more, because on a system with a higher gamma, they'd be brighter.

I ran into this while working on some character animation; my monitor turned out to be set considerably brighter than my friend's (because he knew how to calibrate it, and at the time I didn't), and when I set up lighting in a 3D scene and rendered it out, he found that it was much too dark, and the shadows were heavily blocked up. Of course, in our case that was an easy fix since we were in XSI and draft renders don't take very long on my laptop, but it was very educational.

Quote:

---

The CE widescreen Eizos were a step up again, and the CGs better yet, but I have decided to live with a little 'digital drydown' while that level of quality drops in price.

---

I'm with you on that one. Hopefully, it won't be much longer :)

I'm pretty sure I eliminated gamma variations. I tried both sorts of monitor attached to both Macs and PCs. The differences were consistent across the board. I didn't have good control of the ambient lighting, but again, the differences were consistent.

The Dells are good monitors, and I love the ones we have here for the task they were bought for (they are part of the design suite for a lithography system) but they don't make me want to part with my own money for my personal photographic use.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Struan Gray

I'm pretty sure I eliminated gamma variations. I tried both sorts of monitor attached to both Macs and PCs. The differences were consistent across the board. I didn't have good control of the ambient lighting, but again, the differences were consistent.

---

I still suspect a software difference. I've spent far too much time learning about hardware and technology (keeps me occupied at work ;)) to be convinced otherwise any longer.

Quote:

---

The Dells are good monitors, and I love the ones we have here for the task they were bought for (they are part of the design suite for a lithography system) but they don't make me want to part with my own money for my personal photographic use.

---

With any luck, by the time I'm ready to get a new monitor (it's low on my list of priorities right now), LCD's will outperform CRTs at long last. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rakesh Malik

With any luck, by the time I'm ready to get a new monitor (it's low on my list of priorities right now), LCD's will outperform CRTs at long last. :)

---

I think they already do, but only at at about five times my budget! I'm waiting for the price/performance to improve. With luck, all the r&d getting poured into the technology (expensive tv sets, etc.) will speed this along.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulr

I think they already do, but only at at about five times my budget! I'm waiting for the price/performance to improve. With luck, all the r&d getting poured into the technology (expensive tv sets, etc.) will speed this along.

---

Oops... I intended the price tag as a caveat, and neglected to include it in the post :)

I'm hoping the same thing. LCD production volumes are increasing quite a bit now, hopefully that will help.

Looks like I got lucky ... my $40 ebay, sold as-is LaCie IV works fine. No immediate issues, and it calibrates fine. I'm guessing it will last a year or so.

Hoping the LCDs will be affordable by then (refurbs/used included) because there will probably be even fewer decent CRTs around.