Evan Cooch wrote:
In normal conditions 250 nits is way too bright (my one is set at
34%) unless the monitor is in a very bright room or possibly hit by
direct sunlight.
Contrast is very important if you do image editing or watch DVD
movies or TV. CRTs achieve 900:1 so 450:1 is going to look a lot
better than 350:1. Response time is also very important. My 17" NEC
achieves 16ms and that means no noticeable smearing on fast moving
objects.


Thanks much. Most of the units I've looked at are in the 450:1
contrast ratio, and = 250 nits brigthness.

However, I have't seen many units in my price range with a response
rate 25ms. I guess I'll have to look a bit further.

Response rate is only important if the monitor is being used for
gaming/video watching. For office machines it doesn't matter as much. (You
mentioned both).

It's my understanding that contrast ratio is partly a function of brightness
as well. It's difficult to acheive a high contast ratio if the 'whites'
aren't bright.

I wish I could afford an LCD, I'm down to using a scratched 15" CRT as the
missus' old 17" gave up the ghost and I gave her my new 17" CRT as her eyes
aren't as good as mine. (She runs the 17" at 800x600, I use the 15" at
1024x768) I'm reduced to using the old Philips 105/S that we had as a spare.
shrug

Hi brightness (other than the connection with contrast ratio) can be very
important if the screen is in a very bright room. Otherwise, as mentioned,
you'll have it turned way down anyway.
--
~misfit~