Jeff,
Ya know I was looking at those CRTs today. I saw an add on the back of an older issue of PhotoshopUser magazine. They look pretty nice but according to the specs are no better than the Mitsubishi DiamondPro and LaCie ElectronBlue IV (both same monitor) However it's price is much more. I thought maybe it was their F520 with a hood and color calibrator...but it isn't. I checked the dot pitch and the Artisan is only .24. The F520 is .22, the highest in the industry.

So you said the Artisan has a really good picture. I'm assuming the Mitsu/LaCie should be in the same realm.

Yeah, that's a real nice set, Glen! :-)

Since I am slowly migrating away from prepress-oriented projects now that I have one of the best Quark-Illustrator-Photoshop artists in CT on my team, and I'm spending more time on video editing, the benefits of LCD become more appealing.

Of course, that doesn't mean our I.T. gods here are the slightest bit inclined to buy them.

When it becomes as difficult to buy CRTs as 8-track car stereos, they'll adopt LCD I'm sure.

When my daughter bought her PC two years ago it came with an LCD and I was like: "Ooooh, cutting edge!" Now, buy a computer at Wal-Mart and it's just as likely to come with an LCD, or at least flat glass on the CRT for a few bucks less.

I have a nice pair...of speakers!
:-)

Mike- do you think having a color calibrator for web graphic work is overkill?...Or can it actually help?

Glen, there is more to a monitor than dot pitch. The color gamut, accuracy etc. are more important for much of my work. One of the advantages of LCD's is they hold calibration much longer than most CRT's. The Sony Artisan has built in hardware calibration that simplifies the process for most users.

Color accuracy is more important for pre press and photography, in my opinion. But as web browsers improve, the need for increased accuracy in web graphics will become apparent.

The hardware calibration is only achieved through the used of a color calibrator made for that monitor. In the Sony Artisan case it comes included in the price. The LaCie and Mitsubishi can be purchased with or without the colorcalibrator. Both of them offer true hardware calibration as well.

Regarding web graphics- the term "web-safe color" is already obsolete...I don't know anyone that doesn't have a video card that can display 16 million colors (at least). Even the lowest of the low, say, a cheap E-machine brand computer with intergrated graphics is capable of 32bit color.

So with the assumption that all browsers that will be viewing my pages will have a video card that can display 16-32bit color- is a hardware color calibrator for my next CRT advisable? Granted I know profiling is mainly for pre-press work however it also sets the black point, white point, and neutral grey which can be tricky. With that alone I can be assured there are no color casts...correct?

In other words........Color Calibrator.......Yay or Nay?

Well, if a Pantone Personal Color Calibrator (P2C2) will do the trick for $45, that's helpful...but before I go paying almost $500 for the La Cie Blue Eye, there are a lot of other things I would want to spend that money on first: another UHF wireless mic, etc.

That's just my situation, your mileage may vary.

But if your doing graphic work for hire wouldn't it be beneficial to know the graphics I'm sending to a client were created on a calibrated monitor?

Calibrating and profiling a monitor is only one step in the entire process of color management. It will insure that your colors are accurate. However, I don't think Internet Explorer supports ColorSync or icc profiles or other methods of color management. If you also calibrate your clients monitors then they will have a chance of viewing accurately your graphic design work. But most software is not color smart and can not be color managed across multiple computers.

Jeff,
My main concern is the guess-work involved in trying to manually calibrate my monitor. When I do graphics and send it out to a client I worry that maybe my monitor is a bit oversaturated and the graphics and beings so...I make the graphics accordingly and have them end up looking flat and undersaturated. Or even worse my white, black, and grey points. I have trouble setting the *perfect* grey point etc.

The benefit of profiling wouldn't really effect me beings I'm not doing pre-press. But I want the colors I see in Photoshop while editing images to be the exact colors they are supposed to be. My client I'm working heavily with has professionally calibrated monitors though they aren't LaCie Monitors so I don't know how much the integrity will hold up.

Regarding IE, I think I'd be using an sRGB profile which is default for webgraphics...which is what I use now. I've even tested graphics I did in Photoshop and checked their integrity in IE and it seemed to hold up.

I dunno maybe I should pick up a book on color calibration/profiling it's all still confusing to me.

So Jeff, do you think having a calibrator will help me?

If your client is using a calibrated monitor then I would definetly consider a good hardware calibrator. I use the Pantone SpyderPro. It works with both LCD and CRT's. The cost is fairly affordable and does a great job for the money. They are available from B & H Photo, one of our sponsors.

Well I'd go with the LaCie blue eye beings it doesn't do calibration on the software level. It litterally does true hardware calibration.
So- yes it is worth it?