Monitors for photo work

I was staggered when I went through PC World the other day and saw a display of Apple computers and I compared them with all the others in the shop. The Apple pictures were far brighter and sharper than anything else by far. All the PCs were showing Windows 7 demos which may have made it not quite a fair test. The demo material was clearly aimed at being 'zippy' and eyecatching rather than showing monitor quality.
I have a rather tired CRT monitor and need something better. What's the general opinion about suitable monitors (makes and sizes)?
How much / little can I get away with paying before I can get something which will be significantly better than the bog-standard games playing monitor?
I'm assuming that a wide format 23" screen would be a minimum requirement.

Never thrust display in shops and the Apple was probably too bright like most screens at his standard, et a calibration device to get the best results.

Gaming monitors are also very different and use different types of screens because the speed of the images needs to be refreshed instantly with a Photo monitor we want colour accuracy and we don't bother if we get a little ghosting when playing games.

The gaming panels are mostly TN types and those are not so good for colour.
You need to want to get the PVA or IPS panel, bear in mind that there are even variations in these types but most are good.
Samsung use PVA in most of their screens and LG use IPS of course there are also other brands that use these types of panels but these are the main ones.
HP also use PVA I believe and DELL, IPS so out of my head.

Screen size is personal but get one with a decent resolution.

I'm still of a mind that our CRTs are better, although Sue's new Toshiba laptop and my Sony laptop both have very creditable screens.

The day of reckoning will of course eventually arrive and we'll have to replace, but I'm happy to wait for now.

I use a Dell 24" (2407WFP) calibrated by Spyder3Pro. The monitor output very closely matches any online printing I have had.

A CRT is mostly better in terms of contrast ratios and colour accuracy.
A TFT usually has a higher light output. I currently have the brightness of my TFT set at 19% to achieve 120lm when calibrating the screen with my i1 display 2.

When buying a TFT you should look at the type of panel used. The best panels in terms of colour accuracy are IPS and PVA panels. TN panels are not as good and have a shallower viewing angle.
Most TN panels use dithering to achieve 8 bit colour depth per pixel because most of them are 6 bit panels. This dithering makes it harder to get a decent calibration done with a i1 or Spyder.

I assume that the brightness on the apple displays was just set higher. But I must say that the Apple displays are very good. Last week I was looking at a 30" CinemaDisplay and it was very good.

I have a NEC Multisync 20WGX2 Pro which is a 21" 16:10 widescreen display. This is the smalles that I currently would use. But size isn't everything, look at the resolution as well. My display is 1680x1050 which is a good resolution for a 21" display. I have allso seen 23" displays with the same resolution which are terrible to look at. For 23" and higher I would opt for a 1920x1200 panel.

The best CRT's are better, but the average CRT is pretty poor. Unfortunately CRT's are now virtually obsolete and not generally available.

As others have said IPS and some PVA displays are the best for photo use.

For a mid priced high performance 24" 1920 x 1200 IPS monitor I would recommend the HP LP2475 LINK

It has very good reviews LINK, like all monitors, it is essential to calibrate properly.

I use an HP LP2065 monitor which is basically similar but with a 1600 x 1200 20.1" 4x3 screen.

I've been using a Cornerstone P1750 22" CRT for the last 4/5 years and it was a few years old when I acquired it, but I love it. Until I can find a reasonably priced TFT which can match it's performance I'm sticking with it, plus I can go up to 2048 x 1536 resolution which is ace for gaming. Downside is that it weighs about 30kg and is about 2ft deep, also my desk is begining to sag in the middle and the wife thinks it looks horrendous.

I had along with technoidiot attended a photo printing seminar that covered a whole range of steps and issues at Calumet Photo in NYC at the beginning of this month. While they did not endorse or recommend any specific products in this seminar, the presenter did bring up one important fact that should be taken into consideration, especially if you are looking for a monitor. Apple monitors and on all their products for that fact including the MacBooks, etc. do not have a contrast control which would make it difficult in making monitor adjustments.It was suggested if you are looking for a monitor that can be adjusted, look to any other brand.

I bring this up, only because with the exception of my netbook that I use in the field, I process the majority of my work on Apple equipment.

The Photomonk

I have recently bought the HP LP2475w and though I have nothing to compare it with other than my previous crappy monitor I am very pleased with it. I also bought a Spyder3 Elite and the difference pre / post calibration was quite small so the default settings were pretty close.
Incidentally I ordered directly from HP and the delivery time was very good.

Him speak truth there

It was a good 3 hour Seminar and the topic of adjustment of monitors was well and truly discussed .

He did comment that the Apple display looked good - but kept emphasising that in fact it was no good for work where you wanted to be able to adjust contrast .

Sad , but true and I'm on a MacBook Pro too . Fortunately I , when giving the Tower Unit from my husband's PC to my grandson , kept the Monitor .

That's all interesting info.
Having looked at lists of what's available I can see you need to spend more than the minimum (as ever) but you may get significantly more for paying more.
Apple Cinema displays with LED backlight seems pretty fair - too pricey tho'.
The Spyder pro is attractive but out of my range, I fear.
I will look into the possibilty of using the camera as a way of calibration, as was mentioned on another thread. With a bit of care, it should work well as it only needs to provide the same 'numbers' for the displayed colour and for the 'real thing'.
I reckon the same thing could be done with the printer, too, within reason, but then there's the illumination to take into consideration, too.
I will watch for offers with my new found knowledge.
Thanks all.

Apple (computers - edit) have contrast and brightness controls in their monitor setup software. Ifaik, they always have.

I bought a $212.00 samsung 2333 synchmaster as a stopgap measure, for use with my macbook, while my Imac was being repaired, out of the box it was wayyyybright, buy after adjusting that on the monitiors side panel, I was able to calibrate it with a Huey, and it matches my older 17" imac g5's display easily, I've kept it.

out of the box it is set too bright... I may have to buy two more for use as video lights! lol

Sophiecentaur said
not for my MacBook Pro

If I go to Display in System Prefs I have two options - Display - Resolution - and a huge list of possibilities - a slider for brightness and my MBP will automatically adjust brightness as ambient conditions change . There is also the ability to detect displays

The other option is colour and a goodly number of display profiles - most of the common ones from my memory of the Calumet Printing Seminar . It is possible to calibrate it - but I think this is done manually rather than with a 'gadget ' and I don't want to fiddle with things I don't understand.

There may be differences with Desktop Machines - we need Photomonk here since he has both Desktop and MacBook.

BTW - what System are you running ?

on my macbook:
system preferences/displays/color/calibrate

from there you can set the contrast and brightness on your displays. same for the desktops.