LCD's for Writers

[Stormer]

This thread is intended as an appendix to xtknight's comprehensive and well-organized "LCD Thread." (Thanks, Knight.)

Professional writers, of course, care most about the appearance of text. For many of us, the Sony CRT's were perfect -- well-formed letters, white background that didn't sparkle or screen-door or create fuzz.

I moved to two Sony HS75P's on a Matrox P650. Recently one of them died. My choices -- find a used 17-inch Sony replacement or move up the technology tree to new panels.

Issues:

1. Resolution and dot pitch. On a 20-inch wide it has to be 1,680x1,050 with .258 DP. Produces excellent text. On a 20-inch 4:5 it should be 1600X1200 .255.

2. Screen surface. Here's the rub. Glossy is great for text, but it really limits your choices: HP, two NEC wide models (both with lousy specs) and two standard models with equally lousy specs [If anyone knows where I can get a 20WMGX2 please yell], Acer Ferrari (20"), the Samsung Syncmaster XX32 series (unmountable), one 22" LG with average specs.

Non-glossy screens. The problem is screens that lather on the anti-glare coating. As xtknight points out, there's no way to compare the relative "fuzziness" of these coatings, though he does advise, in general, avoiding Dell, Apple, and Eizo screens, which tend to be fuzzy. (Alas you can add the HP 2065 to this; it's like looking through depression glass when you have a white background up.) So the question is: which 20-24 inchers, wide OR standard, have the least amount of screen coating, gray fuzziness when a white background is up?

3. Sharpness adjustment. I'd settled on the HP W2007 until I discovered you can not adjust the sharpness. Tried both VGA and DVI connections on this model at the store and neither would yield that OSD menu choice even though the manual indicated some models should. HP tech support useless on the issue. Sharpness is important. Staring at letters all day, you can ease the eye strain a bit by taking a bit of jaggedness off glyphs with this setting. Not all panels have it.

4. I've tried to determine a difference in S-IPS, PVA, TN panels for writers, but I don't think it makes any difference. Key are the other variables -- glossy or non-reflective coating rather than the fuzzy anti-glare coating, resolution, pitch, sharpness, mountablity for a two-monitor setup.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

 

[hans007]

i think you'd probably be ok with a TN panel .

TN panels actually have higher contrast ratios head on than say a PVA, and i suppose if you wanted black text to look really black on a white background its probably best.

 

[Stormer]

Thanks hans007. At the moment, I'm looking at a Samsung 2053BW.

 

[shangshang]

I have the Dell professional 20" LCD running at native resolution 1600x1200. For me, I can look at displayed text on it for 10-12 hours a day without much eye straining.

I don't like the glossy (almost all professional LCDs will not be glossy) they put on "wide-screen" LCDs these days, because while it's good for movies, it play tricks on your eyes (eye strain) towards the latter part of the day when your eyes are tired from looking at text. Also, I prefer the LCDs with wide view angle (170 horizontal) because I find that as i get tire, I tend to slouch a bit, my posture is not as straight, and so an LCD with narrow angle will make the text look funny.

But one time when I was at Best Buy and checked out all their big LCDs for text clarity, I can say that the LG 24" PVA widescreen non-glossy screen has the best text clarity and definition, amongst the likes of HP, Samsung, Acer, Westinghouse, HannsG. Sadly LG has stopped making that LG 24" PVA monitor anymore. I haven't taken a look at the new LG.

 

[Stormer]

Thanks, ShangShang. I'm leaning toward the Acer F-20 at the moment. I don't need the speaker; the bezel is too big; the Ferarri log is ridiculous; and the red stand is a bit much...but its specs are excellent, some early reviews compared it to the NEC 20WMGX2 (this, I think when both were S-IPS panels; F-20 is now PVA according to http://www.flatpanels.dk/panels.php. And, of course, it's glossy. FYI, I found two vendors in England that have NEC 20WMGX2's in stock, but they are roughly $840 (The vendors don't ship to the US, but I have family there.) Price is prohibitive.

 

[hans007]

I am not a writer, but I'd have to say that the glossy coat on the 20wmgx2 probably would bother a lot of people. I had one for a year and a half actually and I'd say its good only in a dark room with the lights mostly off.

So for movies, or gaming its probably fine.

I'm a programmer so I spend most of my day looking at code on a machine so its a lot of the same use a writer would have. At work I use dual dell 2007fp and 1 2007fpw and i think its probalby better for coding with no glossy screen especially in an environment with flourescent lights.

At home I use a LG246 24" wide screen, also non glossy and it is in the same environment that 20wmgx2 was for me. It is better I'd say for day time use than the 20" was. You may want to considering getting a less expensive 24" than a 20". I know for me at least I'd rather have more source code on the screen than less.... and 1920x1200 allows for that. Also the 20wmgx2 doesn't pivot. And I know al ot of people prefer a pivoting monitor for writing long ways.

The dells I have at work and my LG l246wp all have the pivot function. TN monitors don't usually have this, becuas their viewing angle is bad horizonatally which when pivotted will likely make the view from the left look awful.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

I'm not a writer, but i am a college student. My secondary monitor (Dell 17" E176FP) produces great text when typing essays. Much better for writing than my Acer. I typically use my Acer for research and write on my Dell. I've typed for hours and hours on end and have not experienced any noticeable strain on my eyes. Text is clear as can be on standard settings. Solid white background with pure black text as far as i can tell.

You can find this monitor on craigslist for $75-125. Nobody really sells it now.

 

[legendiychq]

I am using 17-inch BenQ 72E
I feel good when surfing on the Internet

 

[Calculator83]

Originally posted by: Stormer
Thanks hans007. At the moment, I'm looking at a Samsung 2053BW.

Don't be a n00ber.. You may be a writer and know more words than I do.. but I bet I've spent more time looking into an LCD screen than ya.

If you're gonna prioritize text display, you want black background and white txt. unless you want to burn your eyes out. In this case,, it doesn't matter what lcd you get.

Glossy is terrible simply because of glare.. No other attributes of glossy can recover it from that fatal flaw.
Matte ftw.

Logically writers would be making the worst decision in buying a high end expensive lcd for writing purposes. CONTRARY to popular belief, LCDS DO infact "BURN IN" not image retention,, LCDs ALSO burn in.

If an lcd is subject to still image display at high contrast, such as what a writer would use one for, than Burnins would undoubtedly happen..

A writer's lcd should be the cheapest, most disposable lcd panel available. preferably ones that comes with 20 dead pixels already. Think of how much paper writers waste back when, and apply the same logic to lcd panels.

 

[Stormer]

Interesting perspectives. Thanks everyone. And Calculator83's last comment about wasting paper is very funny and much appreciated.

I was hoping someone like Hans007 would weigh in. I think writers and programmers do the same kind of on-screen work -- staring intently at long lines of characters all day looking for errors. I think if I'd started my a career later, post CRT's, the screen-door/grille/frosted glass effect of anti-glare screens wouldn't bother me. And, as I said, I wish panel manufacturers didn't lay that stuff on as thickly as they do. Apparently I'm not the only one who thinks so. Read this amazing thread on stripping the stuff off. http://www.lumenlab.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=8283.

That's not for me, but I get their point. Anyway, I've been working on CRT's since CPM days (Kaypro) so working on a CRT (glossy) screen is natural to me. Second, I work in low light so I don't get any glare at all. Third, to my eyes, which is to say, IMHO, glossy enhances the look of text. I'm sure, knowing I'm speaking out of ignorance, that screen manufacturers can significantly reduce the glitter effect by reducing the amount of of the coating or, better yet, actually doing some research and reformulating it. That coating, I'm sure, was developed for the mass buyers of monitors -- businesses, and most offices are lit with harsh florescent lights, which, of course, makes anti-glare screens necessary.

At all events, I've been looking at matte screens at the local resellers for about a week and can't find any that are pleasing (knowing that all matte is not equal) so I ordered an Acer F-20 (P-MVA, 1680 x 1050, .258 pitch, glossy) and we'll see (pun intended) what we'll see.