How much better are ACDs than older Studio Display LCDs?

I have a pretty old 17" Apple Studio Display LCD. I'm thinking of upgrading to a new ACD 20" or 23". Aside from the increase in size, is there a significant difference in the quality of the ACDs vs. the older Studio Displays like the one I have?

Badlydrawnboy wrote:
Wow. So you're saying the quality of my 17" Studio Display is actually equal to or higher than the quality of the newer ACDs? If that's true, I guess the only reason to get a new display would be for the larger viewing area.
Elsewhere in another forum someone suggested that the ACDs were higher quality, but he didn't give any details.
No, I think BSteely is only specifically talking about 17" screens. Not all screens. The 17" monitors have not improved much since when you bought your older screen, because 17" monitors are now seen as a low end point in the market. Generally, people only buy a 17" screen if they have very little money to spend, or if they just need a very basic monitor for an office, etc. So even modern 17" monitors aren't especially good. The same goes for many other sizes too, because companies seem to be focusing on mass producing cheaper monitors with cheaper components, but there are exeptions. With modern screens, there are always SOME screens that are high quality. Most of the DELL screens, and the Apple Cinema Display's for example, use the best panels available today. They aren't perfect, but monitors that use the best panels on the market (IPS/S-IPS/AS-IPS), have good colours, good brightness and contrast, fairly decent speed, and are generally pretty good. But you have to specifically look out for screens like that, because mostly, modern monitors are using cheap TN panels which aren't that good.
Message was edited by: telelove

Similar Messages

  • Just how much better is nattres than compressor in converting pal - NTSC?

    I am on the verge of buying the Nattres plugin but before i do i would like to know how much better it is than compressor. I did some test with compressor and the results are unacceptable. I have to send some stock footage to America from here in South Africa. The footage im trying to convert is half Betacam half DVCPROHD.
    Thanks
    Andre
    I have posted this thread in the compressor forum but didnt quite get the answer i was looking for, although it was helpful

    I don't think Natress is over $75.
    Natress is the only plug-in or software that has given us consistent results.
    It also does PAL to NTSC or NTSC to PAL.
    Rendering can take a while depending on the length of your sequence.
    Edit in PAL and when you are done duplicate your sequence and make an NTSC version. You can then avoid having to convert footage that doesn't end up in your final sequence.

  • Does any body have any opinions on how much better CS6 is than Cs4?

    Does any body have any opinions on how much better CS6 is than Cs4?  The reason I ask is I am trying to convince my business partner that CS6 is worth buying 

    My pattern has been that every other new version made it worth my while. I spent very little time working in CS4, since I went from CS3, to CS4 with an immediate upgrade to CS5. Then from CS5 to CS5.5 with an immediate upgrade to CS6. I have not gone to the cloud, so cannot comment on the features there. I would still evaluate your price for CS6 against the rental expense.
    I like Todd Kopriva's page laying out the CS6 new/changes features:
    Premiere Pro CS6: what’s new and changed
    That page contains other links (e.g. CS5 and CS5.5 changes).
    In addition to cc_merchant's points about 64 bit (which were HUGE and for CS6 included Encore going to 64 bit), I found these items from the "new" list as important to me:
    adjustment layers (HUGE)
    expanded multi-camera editing, with more multicam angles and improved interface (I hated only having 4 angles, although that usually worked)
    improved color features, including integration with SpeedGrade and redesigned Three-Way Color Corrector effect
    improved workflows with other applications in Adobe Creative Suite, as well as with Final Cut Pro and Avid software
    faster Adobe Media Encoder, redesigned to make authoring for multiple outputs and mobile devices easier (batch processing was added with CS4, but it wasn't until CS6, with other enhancements that I really worked it)
    enhanced Adobe Encore for creation of DVDs, Blu-ray Discs, and web DVDs (Bluray chapter playlists finally; I have used the flash output, which has gotten better at each step)

  • How much better is 2g than 1g?

    I want a second generation Touch, but my first one works perfectly fine.
    Besides the internal speaker and battery life, is there anything significant in 2g? Is Safari more stable? Is 2g's performance better? I want a 2g, but I also want to know if there are any improvements made to make it better. Thanks

    2G = 1G +:
    Internal speaker
    Volume control
    Microphone capability
    Nike iPod interface
    Thinner profile
    USB (5V) only
    If you have older iPod peripherals (> 1 year old), you may not be able to use them with the G2.
    It's probably not worth it if someone has to convince you to upgrade.

  • How much better is VBR 2 Pass than VBR 1 Pass or CBR?

    Hi,
    I had a 2 hour and 40 minute wedding on a Premiere Pro CS 5.5 Timeline. (I exported it as a QT Reference File from Final Cut Pro 7)
    I added my Encore Chapter markers in PPro and went File ----- Export ---- Media.
    Media Encoder opened and I set my settings the following way:
    H.264 Blu-Ray
    1440 x 1080 29.97 FPS
    PCM Audio
    Target Bit Rat = 18.5
    Max Bit Rate 20
    VBR 2 Pass
    When it first started encoding it said that it was going to take 8 hours.
    It has taken 14 Hours and it's finally finished.
    My question is,
    How much better is VBR 2 Pass than VBR 1 Pass or CBR?
    The first pass of this job took about 3 and a half hours. The last 11 hours was the full 2 Pass.
    Would VBR 1 Pass or CBR give a good enough quality as an H.264 Blu-Ray to give to clients.
    Thanks in advance
    Premiere Pro CS 5.5
    Media Encoder 5.5
    Encore 5
    Mac Pro
    10 GB RAM
    2.66 GHZ Quad-Core Intel Xeon

    Depends what you mean by "better". Multiple passes are done to reduce the file size (by more appropriate changes in bitrate for each moment in the footage). It's not designed to change the quality of the displayed frames, though it can have a small-but-noticeable quality effect on certain types of footage (e.g. a presentation that mixes static slides with high-motion video). If you can't see the difference in your footage, and you don't care about making the smallest possible file, VBR1 will get your clips done a lot faster.

  • How much better is the iPod Touch 5 than iTouch 4?

    I was wondering how much better the itouch 5 is than the 4. The 4" screen is obvious. But are there more features or better graphics and processor speeds? I just would like to know overall how much better it is. Thanks

    There is a lightning to HDMI cable now:
    http://store.apple.com/us/product/MD826ZM/A/lightning-digital-av-adapter?fnode=4 5
    It is 1/2 the price of an Apple TV though

  • How much fast are the new iMac's?

    I've been looking at upgrading my G5 PowerMac for a while and now Apple has just updated the iMac. How much faster are the new models over the just superseded ones and my G5 (spec below).
    I mainly us it for my work with Photoshop CS2 and the G5 does a great job most of the time but is showing it's age. I was looking at the 2nd model but for not much more you can get the 27inch screen with better upgrade options.

    Hi Craig,
    even the very first 2006 released Intel iMacs were faster than the G5 iMacs including yours.
    See this Barefeats test http://www.barefeats.com/imcd3.html
    Check additional tests on Barefeats on older iMacs against newer ones http://www.barefeats.com/
    The new 2010 iMacs of any sort run circles around the 2006 iMacs, so you are in for a very pleasant surprise
    Regards
    Stefan

  • Examining how much resources are left in Oracle?

    Hello. I'm writing some programs that interface with Oracle. I want to know if my programs are leaking any oracle resources. Is there a way to do that per connection/session? 'show sga' isn't very useful.
    I'm running a bunch of sqlplus queries over 10,000 times which will eventually call some pl/sql code underneath, which in turn calls some external c++ programs. Some of these pl/sql programs dynamically create tables, views, and procs. I'm doing this 10k test on one connection.
    I'm using top and I see that Oracle is slowly gaining memory, but i'm not sure what that would be that Oracle is just keeping track of items for house keeping purposes, or if my program is genuinely leaking.
    Anyways, any insight/tools to use would be great.
    thanks.

    Do not much like the the phrasing of your questions. A lot of resources in Oracle is shared resources. The db buffer cache being 100% utilised is not an indication of resource leakage, or we-have-a-problem - it is a lot better to have data in the buffer cache than on disk when it comes to I/O. A fully utilised buffer cache is a lot more desirable than a stingy one that aggressively try not to be an "exhausted" resource at 100% utilisation.
    There are also numerous ways to monitor memory usage in Oracle. Oracle consists of a number of different processes (on Unix/Linux each with its own data segment - stack & heap). Oracle uses shared memory. On the o/s side, what is reported at memory footprint of a process. The actual data segment alone? Global/shared memory used? A lot of memory reporting via top and ps are ambiguous, if you do not understand just what kernel calls are made to calculate this "memory" usage of a process.
    Besides, it is very seldom an issue of "how much resources are left"? And even when one happens to be pushing resources, that is the wrong question to ask. Why? Because it is not about how much is left, but how well the resources are configured and being used.
    And from the sounds of it, "Some of these pl/sql programs dynamically create tables, views, and procs." - it does not sound like it is being effectively used at all.
    For PL/SQL code to be run 10's of 1000's times, and dynamically create database objects..? It's the kind of design and approach that makes me reach for my lead pipe.

  • How much better is the 256mb video card?

    I am shopping to get a new laptop and am sold on the MacbookPro 15'' model, but a I am wondering how much better the 2.16 model is than the 2.00.
    My real concern is in the video card. If I get the 2.0GHZ model with 1GB of RAM should I just upgrade to the 2.16 and get double the video card.
    How much of disadvantage will I be at with 128mb graphics card running say Adobe Illustartor(if the Intel version ever comes out.)
    Thanks
    Dell 8300 Windows XP
    Dell 8300 Windows XP

    Actually it's more of the opposite. Unless you are
    playing a game like Oblivion, the extra Vram will not
    make any noticeable difference in games. The pipes
    and frequency are the same on both models. The extra
    Vram helps in editting situations as there is more to
    draw from.
    Never did I say it will make a noticable difference in games, I said 5-10%. I don't know what "editting situations" is but in most programs it does not help at all unless the program uses GPU to render rich 3d graphics such as animation programs.
    I just have a MBP so can't offer a firsthand account
    but I did read an online magazine I think in the UK
    where they compared gaming performance between the
    two and it was huge. One some popular games the
    performance was like
    60 FPS MBP
    10 FPS MB
    I don't recall the exact games they tested but there
    WAS a big gaming difference. So check it out and
    google for some test results.
    Thats Macbook vs. Macbook Pro i.e. Intel Integraed video card vs. X1600, he wants to know how x1600 256mb compares to the 128mb version.

  • For the 24 inchers...how much better is the ATI over the NVIDIA?

    Well, I just purchased the new 24in IMac at 3.06 ghz with its basic options....4gb ram, TB hard drive and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 130 video card. My friend, coincedentally bought the same one just a few days later, however its refurbished, has the (only) other video card option, I believe the ATI Radeon HD 4850. My friend has relentlessly teased me saying their IMac is "better" than mine. Now this doesn't all bother that much, however, according to the apple website, at only $50 more for the "better" ATI video card....how much better is it actually? Will the performance be that noticable in applications such as After Effects and Motion? If anybody can clear up the $50 difference and as to why that is, I'd appreciate it.

    I don't know how much detail you want in the answer, but Apple has basic comparisons between the GT 130 and the 4850. Go here
    http://www.apple.com/imac/features.html
    and click on +View the iMac Graphics Performance Chart+ link under +Fast, faster, or fastest?+
    On the plus side (for your choice), Apple seems to be working more closely with NVIDIA these days. That may (or may not) be beneficial when Snow Leopard is released.

  • How much better is the new Graphic Card?

    How much better is the new graphic card compared to the X1600 256mb in the older 2.33 Core 2 duo's? Im a gamer and was wondering if there is gonna be a big difference or just a small difference?

    Hi,
    according to this there seems to be a big advantage: http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/graphics.html
    (Scroll down to the bottom).
    Regards
    Stefan

  • How much memory are actually being used? db_32k_cache_size

    Hi everyone,
    Using Oracle 10g on RHEL 5.3.
    I've been asked to check how much memory are actually being used by our db cache's. Currently we are using the parameters db_32k_cache_size (user-defined) and db_8k_cache_size (default) both allocated with 12gb. Now I want to know if there is any way to find out how much of the 12gb are actually being used by the cache.
    Is this possible?
    Thanks

    Thanks Guys,
    Okay, so it is using the whole 12gb. I guess the next question would be, is 12gb really needed? You see, we are trying to increase memory where possible as this database has performance issues. Now we are thinking of taking some of the 12gb that is allocated to the 32k cache and assign it to the sga for instance.
    Does this make any sense?
    Regards

  • Hello i have an iphone 5 it is very slow when i am downloading app my iphone 4 it is much much better are all the iphone 5 are the same or my iphone 5 have problem please

    hello i have an iphone 5 it is very slow when i am downloading app my iphone 4 it is much much better are all the iphone 5 are the same or my iphone 5 have problem please????

    Thank you for your help are you aware of any apps that will work the iso 4.2.1 system that will let you watch movies on the phone. Also I tried to down load something else the other day and got message that Safari wont let you open this is ther any to see if i have the latest safari on my phone?

  • How much ram are You using ?

    Dear Logic Users, simply question :
    How much ram are You using on your logic-mac system ?
    Thank you

    Does anyone know how much RAM you can whack in one of these new quad machines? And if and when Logic goes 64-bit to catch up with it all, will it be able to use 8GB of RAM? Just wondering, cos as mthinking of getting one of these critters fairly soon.. Best, Fred

  • How to find out how much columns are there in Array?

    How to find out how much there are columns in Array?
    Array.length returns only number of rows.

    If you have a multidimensional array and each row has the same number of "columns" then call length on any of the arrays that are elements of your "main" array.
    Lee

Maybe you are looking for