19" Display Help

[Jaw3000]

I’m looking at purchasing a new 17” or 19” LCD display (preferably 19”), and am incredibly confused at the choices, and would like any advice that could be given. I understand I more than likely will not be able to find my perfect monitor, but I do need fast refresh rates (gaming), good color, contrast, brightness, etc. Besides gaming, I also do a lot of photography and digital video editing work. I defiantly want DVI, and dual input capability (if available). I was at a friend’s house recently, and played around with his 19” Samsung 193P. I absolutely love the look and build quality of it, along with its nice touch-sensitive button and color reproduction. But, as you all know, it was total usable for gaming.

As far as 17” monitors go, I’m considering the Samsung 172X and 710t (love the look of the 127X). I’ve read about the newer, faster BenQ, LG, and Philips models, but I’m not sure about brands (and build quality). Any suggestions. I don’t mind paying a little more, so preferably I can get something a little better in build quality and looks than the low-end. Also, has Samsung announced or come out with a 8 MS display model (not on their website)?

In my opinion, the 19” decisions get even harder. I’m currently looking at the Hyundai L90D+ (although I don’t care/want speakers). It looks like it has a pretty good build quality and value for the money. Besides this, I’ve seen the Samsung 913N with the same Samsung 8MS panel, yet it looks like crap (compared to the 193p or 17X – very entry level), and it doesn’t have digital input (a must for me). Since this model apparently isn’t even on Samsung’s site, does Samsung have any other 19” models out, or on the horizon, that may use a newer panel like the 8MS but with DVI and maybe better looks? I’m also considering the Viewsonics, and would like any suggestions there; along with any advice on the LG’s, Philips, and BenQ displays that have gotten so much press (again, not sure about looks or build quality).

Any advice you can provide would be great! Thanks for the help!
-Jeff

 

[palmerg]

I suppose you have already read this thread on the L90D+ but just in case you haven't:
<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/ce/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=20289#20289" target="_new">L90D+ Thread</A>
Because its a Samsung TN (Twisted Neumatic) display it may have a limitation for color rendering that you seem to want. As far as gaming goes its pretty slick.
Good luck!

 

[Jaw3000]

That's what I was thinking about the L90D+. Any other 19" suggestions? What bothers me is that no electronic stores (in the US) sell good monitors, they sell the low-end general use models from the likes of Envision and Daewoo, along with cheap Samsungs and NEC. The L90D+ may work fine for me, but not being able to see it in person (along with 172x and others - have to order online), makes it hard.

Anyway, thanks for any help!
-Jeff

 

[silverpig]

If you're doing video/photo editing make sure you don't get a 1280x1024 screen. The aspect ratio is 5:4 and not 4:3 so what normal people see as circles will appear as ovals to you. If you make a circle in photoshop and it looks circular to you it won't look circular to anyone else.

s signature has been formatted to fit your scr

 

[Jaw3000]

I thought I had done all the research I neeeded, but I didn't know this about 1280x1024 screens (although this probably should have occured to me if I did the math)? So I take it then that all 17" and 19" LCD displays are 5:4? Do you know a good article or site that talks about this? What would you suggest for LCD displays then?

Thanks!

 

[palmerg]

Technically you are correct. The AR diffs 1.33:1 vs 1.25:1 will produce a stretch in the image going in that direction. However, the diff is generally so minor to be almost unnoticable. I do a fair amount of work in photoshop supporting a website I created and support and I use both 1280x1024 (5:4 or 1.25:1 AR) and 1400x1050 (1.33:1 or 4:3 if you like) to create and render. I submit that there is almost no apparent difference in circular or eliptical rendering.
There are those I know on the list (doesn't mean there aren't many others) who do this sort of thing for a living (<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=profile&mode=viewprofile&internal=1&username=p05esto" target="_new">p05esto</A> for one) so the poster would do well to ask them their opinion as well. I'm not debating your opinion. In fact, you are correct there is a difference in rendering due to aspect ratio, however I am suggesting that the difference is too small to be a concern for most flat panel users.

I just created a series of circles of differnt image sizes and color fills on my 1400x1050 laptop in Photoshop. I transferred and displayed them as Gif's in a web page and several image rendering tools on my L90D+ (1280x1024) and I could see no difference in the rendering. No image morph was apparent, even though I know it should be there.

I will try going the other way later today.

OK, did it just added findings to this post.

Created several varied shapped Gifs on the 1280x1024 (5:4 if you like) and viewed them, in and out of photoshop, using 1400x1050 (4:3). I can't see any difference. I don't have a CRT...oh yes I do on the MAC in my sons room. That's the next test.

Ok did that with 19" CRT at 1024x768 and 1600x1200. I detected no "egging" of the three circular images I used.

Granted this is far for scientific and conclusive, but just my experience.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by palmerg on 02/10/05 03:06 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[asgallant]

Be warned that the 172x, 710T, and 913N Samsung models all use pixel dithering to achieve 16.2 million colors with 18 bit color (instead of a full 16.7 million that you would get from 24 bit color). Using dithering speeds up the pixel transitions, thus the lower response times of these models. If you need true color fidelity, it will come at the expense of speed. You will also likely pay more for monitors that use 24 bit color (my 173P was almost twice as expensive as the 710T).
Almost all the Samsung models come in several variations, which include analog only and analog/digital interfaces. As a general rule, their "N" models are analog, while "T" and "P" models are digital, but you should check the specs to make sure.

I personally use the Samsung 173P, and I love the monitor, though it should be noted that the games I play tend to be of a slower pace than FPS's, and so I don't have a problem with ghosting that other users might experience. 25ms response time is not too slow to watch movies or play slower paced games (think Starcraft or Neverwinter Nights), and IMHO the color fidelity makes up for it.