Plasma Screen for Computers

[docferdie]

Does anyone know if a 19 inch plasma screen with a resolution of 1280x1024 exists for use as a computer monitor?

 

[BMXTRIX]

No, why would you want a plasma? There are severe burn-in issues that are always at risk with motion video, with a PC, you would almost be guaranteed to wreck the screen in a few short weeks.

LCD is a much better technology, or CRT is still the one to beat, just takes up more room.

 

[docferdie]

LCDs have backlight bleed right out of the box. and CRTs can never have perfect geometry. That leaves plasma. Burn in takes a while and even if I have it after about 2 years that would be fine. I'm just curious why with all the PC and TV convergence no one has ever come out with a small plasma screen. My suspicion was that there was a limit to how small a plasma pixel could be but I have not read anything to substantiate that. I just want to know if there is a PC monitor capable of ultrasharp text, perfect geometry and uniform color right out of the box even if it is at the expense of time limited performance.

 

[furrycute]

Too expensive to manufacture?

 

[BMXTRIX]

2 years? I have seen burn in in one day when an image wasn't shifted. I have seen 60 inch plasmas with burn in after a week of use. Burn in is a very, VERY significant problem with plasma, that is the sole reason they aren't made very small. LCD's own the PC market because they do not suffer burn-in, and no builder will make a plasma to deal with backlight bleed which is not a good enough reason for LCDs to not own the PC market.

LCD & Plasma both have about the same contrast ratio and usually black is not perfectly black on a plasma either, though it is not backlight bleed, it is not black either. Newer LCDs product better blacks that are almost on par with plasma. So, that is why there is no smaller plasmas - LCD's own the market and the happiness with LCD is high enough to not warrant plasma production.

The best possible image? Still CRT, and there are some very, VERY good CRT monitors out on the market that provide higher resolutions, far better contrast, and highly adjustable geometry out of the box that will blow any LCD image out of the water. If absolution perfection is what you are looking for, CRT is the way to go for sure.

 

[docferdie]

CRTs are such a pain to adjust when it comes to geometry and you have to do it for every resolution that you use. The added weight doesn't help either.
I really thought that upgrading to the Xbrite HS94P would be the perfect thing until I noticed the backlight bleed. I don't mind that blacks on flat panels are not nearly as good as that on CRTs but what bothers me is the non-uniformity produced by the backlight bleed. I was staring at my DLP TV last night and I noticed that in the blackscreen test patterns the screen is of uniform intensity--it's really more of a dark gray but at least its uniform. Can somebody explain why backlight bleed exists. I initially wanted to exchange my monitor until I read that this phenomenon is a feature of LCDs per se and some units have it worse than others. Oh well the image is really pretty anyway as I type this message so I guess I shouldn't complain.

 

[BMXTRIX]

Backlight bleed is the effect that occurs in LCD displays in which the entire display is constantly lit from behind by a light source. The LCD then blocks out the light that is not needed. Unfortunately, it can't perfectly block the light 100% so you get some light that always bleeds through the 'almost' opaque LCD. This allows a tiny bit of light to bleed through and the blacks to actually be more of a dark gray.

With DLP technology, which uses a small chip and mirrors to reflect light, you get a more uniform brightness because the entire display is not lit over a large area the way LCD is. The light is focussed on the mirror, then through lenses to fill the screen. The thinner the rear projection DLP (or rear projection LCD) cabinet, the greater the chance for distortion though as very wide angle lenses must be used to create the large image in a shallow box.

CRT may be a pain to setup for multiple resolutions, but it can accurately display multiple resolutions, which is not the case with LCD (or any other fixed pixel) technology. If you have a 1280x1024 display, that is the ONLY resolution that will look incredible on your screen. Anything else, must be scaled to fit 1280x1024 and if you want to use something higher, like 1600x1200, then the screen must drop half a million pixels in order to fit it on the 1280x1024 display. This is also true of plasmas, DLP, and projection LCD technologies.

CRT displays do not suffer from this, but have their own list of issues. Most of which involve a ton of weight. But, a good CRT may store multiple settings, have full control over every aspect of setup, and provide a much cleaner, crisper, FASTER image than LCD can come close to. CRTs are also (somehow) designed to avoid burn in issues on monitors, though I have seen some older ones with burn in, it doesn't compare to plasmas issues.

You can complain for sure - but you still have to wait for something better to come along or for LCD to improve. Everyone wants a FPD technology that is on par with CRT, but nothing is there yet. We also don't get the adjustability that comes with CRT in handling different resolutions, which really is not brought up as an issue by most people, but in my opinion, is just as important, if not more so, than current image quality.