Matrox Parhelia

What makes you say this...most of what I have read syas that perhaps a touch
worse but very subjectively and minimally so!

Howard


 >ATi 9800 Pro if you can deal with reduced 2D quality.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia 

"HMSDOC" <hmsdoc RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031010154829.23654.00000105@mb-m20.aol.com...
 > What makes you say this...most of what I have read syas that perhaps a
touch
 > worse but very subjectively and minimally so!

If you have a good CRT, and want to use the program for (among other things)
Photoshop, like the original poster, the Parhelia lets you see pictures in
10 bits per colour. That can be a very significant difference, especially
for nuances of green and grey.
Also, all ATI cards I've tried don't have a rock steady picture in high
resolutions (1920x1440 and up) -- the image seems to vibrate or swim. I
even blamed the monitor for a while, until I got a Parhelia.

Regards,
--
*Art<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia 

If, and this is a important if, you have a very high quality monitor, the
difference is quite noticeable. If you only use typical consumer grade
displays, you'll probably never notice the difference since your display is
limiting the resolution.


"HMSDOC" <hmsdoc.TakeThisOut@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031010154829.23654.00000105@mb-m20.aol.com...
 > What makes you say this...most of what I have read syas that perhaps a
touch
 > worse but very subjectively and minimally so!
 >
 > Howard
 >
 >
  > >ATi 9800 Pro if you can deal with reduced 2D quality.
 >
 >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia 

I currently use a Samsung SynchMaster 17 inch 700NF. I am thinking of
upgrading to a LaCie Electron Blue IV 19 incher. I know the Samsung would fall
into consumer class...not sure if you would consider the LaCie consumer class
though you csn get the 19 inch one for about $380. Think I would see a
difference with that one? If so, are we talking subtle and barely perceptable
differences or marked ones?

Howard

Howard


 >If, and this is a important if, you have a very high quality monitor, the
 >difference is quite noticeable. If you only use typical consumer grade
 >displays, you'll probably never notice the difference since your display is
 >limiting the resolution.
 >
 >
 >"HMSDOC" <hmsdoc.TakeThisOut@aol.com> wrote in message
 >news:20031010154829.23654.00000105@mb-m20.aol.com...
  >> What makes you say this...most of what I have read syas that perhaps a
 >touch
  >> worse but very subjectively and minimally so!
  >>
  >> Howard
  >>
  >>
   >> >ATi 9800 Pro if you can deal with reduced 2D quality.
  >><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia 

"HMSDOC" <hmsdoc RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031010200524.07836.00000115@mb-m16.aol.com...
 > I currently use a Samsung SynchMaster 17 inch 700NF. I am thinking of
 > upgrading to a LaCie Electron Blue IV 19 incher.

As far as I know, LaCie doesn't have any products of their own, but is a
relabel/branding company. Checking the specs and , this is the exact same
monitor as the NEC/Mitsubishi DiamondPro 930SB with a glare hood and the
LaCie name. The extra colour calibration device and software can be had for
both (for a substantial price).

I bought the DP 930SB, and have been disappointed ever since. The picture
blurs significantly at high refresh rates, and some parts of the screen is
sharper than others regardless of resolution. Compared to the Sony I had
before, it was a step down. Definitely a consumer product.

Regards,
--
*Art<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia 

One difference, I believe, is that the Mitsubishi does not let you adjust the
RGB guns individually while the LaCie does...but the tube concern is a problem.
I currently am using a Samsung 17 inch 700NF which, though a consumer
product, I have actually been quite happy with. I wonder if I should just move
up to the 19 inch version of this. What monitor that comes at a reasonable
price do you recommend.

Howard




 >As far as I know, LaCie doesn't have any products of their own, but is a
 >relabel/branding company. Checking the specs and , this is the exact same
 >monitor as the NEC/Mitsubishi DiamondPro 930SB with a glare hood and the
 >LaCie name. The extra colour calibration device and software can be had for
 >both (for a substantial price).
 >
 >I bought the DP 930SB, and have been disappointed ever since. The picture
 >blurs significantly at high refresh rates, and some parts of the screen is
 >sharper than others regardless of resolution. Compared to the Sony I had
 >before, it was a step down. Definitely a consumer product.
 >
 >Regards,
 >--
 >*Art
 >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia 

I am not sure that my printer Epson 2200 can produce that many colors and what
I care about most is the final output, so while I want the best image I am not
sure that the Gigacolor is really all that helpful to me.

Based on what I have read almost everyone says Matrox is best at 2D but by how
much. Seems like almost everywhere I read I am told that the difference is
minimal unless, perhaps, one is using a 21 inch monitor at high res. So the
question is at my monitor size will I see a meaningful difference, if not then
by getting ATI I get the gaming option for free.

Also, from what I have read the drivers are a bit quirky with Matrox and modern
boards and have also heard of image banding problems with the Parhelia in
specific.

So I am vasilating (?sp) and while I was previously strongly in favor of the
Matrox now I am not so sure.

Howard







If you have a good CRT, and want to use the program for (among other things)
Photoshop, like the original poster, the Parhelia lets you see pictures in
10 bits per colour. That can be a very significant difference, especially
for nuances of green and grey.
Also, all ATI cards I've tried don't have a rock steady picture in high
resolutions (1920x1440 and up) -- the image seems to vibrate or swim. I
even blamed the monitor for a while, until I got a Parhelia.

Regards,
--
*Art
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia 

The last monitor I had was a Sony 21" Artisan....AVOID THEM LIKE THE
PLAGUE!!!

For the cash, you'd think they'd be good, but mine was horribly
mis-converged, and I couldn't adjust out the convergence across the screen.
I could get the center tack-sharp, then the quality was crap 6" from center
and was progressively worse out to the edges. It did, however, have some of
the best color rendition of any monitor, at any price, I've ever seen; and
the color adjustments were good. Unfortunately the color adjustments can't
make up for the horrible focus anywhere out from center.

That experience with the Sony CRT made me run for a pair of Samsung
SyncMaster 191T LCD's. My eyes are thanking me now, even though I cannot
have the same POTENTIAL level of CRT output, the great and CONSISTENT output
is better than the single Sony 21" by a large margin -not to mention saved
desktop space and greater display area. The digital connectors are great.
Color profiling is MUCH EASIER!!! =)


"HMSDOC" <hmsdoc DeleteThis @aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031010212816.05767.00000463@mb-m10.aol.com...
 > I am not sure that my printer Epson 2200 can produce that many colors and
what
 > I care about most is the final output, so while I want the best image I am
not
 > sure that the Gigacolor is really all that helpful to me.
 >
 > Based on what I have read almost everyone says Matrox is best at 2D but by
how
 > much. Seems like almost everywhere I read I am told that the difference
is
 > minimal unless, perhaps, one is using a 21 inch monitor at high res. So
the
 > question is at my monitor size will I see a meaningful difference, if not
then
 > by getting ATI I get the gaming option for free.
 >
 > Also, from what I have read the drivers are a bit quirky with Matrox and
modern
 > boards and have also heard of image banding problems with the Parhelia in
 > specific.
 >
 > So I am vasilating (?sp) and while I was previously strongly in favor of
the
 > Matrox now I am not so sure.
 >
 > Howard
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 > If you have a good CRT, and want to use the program for (among other
things)
 > Photoshop, like the original poster, the Parhelia lets you see pictures in
 > 10 bits per colour. That can be a very significant difference, especially
 > for nuances of green and grey.
 > Also, all ATI cards I've tried don't have a rock steady picture in high
 > resolutions (1920x1440 and up) -- the image seems to vibrate or swim. I
 > even blamed the monitor for a while, until I got a Parhelia.
 >
 > Regards,
 > --
 > *Art
 >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia 

Note the low refresh frequency when driving two digital and one CRT on the
Parhelia...but only noticeable on the CRT. It's better to have matching
monitor type when driving three monitors.

<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.killamanjaro.linux-dude.com/IMG_0009%20small.jpg" target="_blank">http://www.killamanjaro.linux-dude.com/IMG_0009%20small.jpg</a>

Sony since sold - yippeee!!!

"KJ" <here.TakeThisOut@there.net> wrote in message
news:HUJhb.85044$Of2.3419748@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
 > The last monitor I had was a Sony 21" Artisan....AVOID THEM LIKE THE
 > PLAGUE!!!
 >
 > For the cash, you'd think they'd be good, but mine was horribly
 > mis-converged, and I couldn't adjust out the convergence across the
screen.
 > I could get the center tack-sharp, then the quality was crap 6" from
center
 > and was progressively worse out to the edges. It did, however, have some
of
 > the best color rendition of any monitor, at any price, I've ever seen; and
 > the color adjustments were good. Unfortunately the color adjustments
can't
 > make up for the horrible focus anywhere out from center.
 >
 > That experience with the Sony CRT made me run for a pair of Samsung
 > SyncMaster 191T LCD's. My eyes are thanking me now, even though I cannot
 > have the same POTENTIAL level of CRT output, the great and CONSISTENT
output
 > is better than the single Sony 21" by a large margin -not to mention saved
 > desktop space and greater display area. The digital connectors are great.
 > Color profiling is MUCH EASIER!!! =)
 >
 >
 > "HMSDOC" <hmsdoc.TakeThisOut@aol.com> wrote in message
 > news:20031010212816.05767.00000463@mb-m10.aol.com...
  > > I am not sure that my printer Epson 2200 can produce that many colors
and
 > what
  > > I care about most is the final output, so while I want the best image I
am
 > not
  > > sure that the Gigacolor is really all that helpful to me.
  > >
  > > Based on what I have read almost everyone says Matrox is best at 2D but
by
 > how
  > > much. Seems like almost everywhere I read I am told that the difference
 > is
  > > minimal unless, perhaps, one is using a 21 inch monitor at high res. So
 > the
  > > question is at my monitor size will I see a meaningful difference, if
not
 > then
  > > by getting ATI I get the gaming option for free.
  > >
  > > Also, from what I have read the drivers are a bit quirky with Matrox and
 > modern
  > > boards and have also heard of image banding problems with the Parhelia
in
  > > specific.
  > >
  > > So I am vasilating (?sp) and while I was previously strongly in favor of
 > the
  > > Matrox now I am not so sure.
  > >
  > > Howard
  > >
  > >
  > >
  > >
  > >
  > >
  > >
  > > If you have a good CRT, and want to use the program for (among other
 > things)
  > > Photoshop, like the original poster, the Parhelia lets you see pictures
in
  > > 10 bits per colour. That can be a very significant difference,
especially
  > > for nuances of green and grey.
  > > Also, all ATI cards I've tried don't have a rock steady picture in high
  > > resolutions (1920x1440 and up) -- the image seems to vibrate or swim. I
  > > even blamed the monitor for a while, until I got a Parhelia.
  > >
  > > Regards,
  > > --
  > > *Art
  > >
  > >
 >
 >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia 

What do you think of the Samsung NF series CRT monitors, if you have seen them.

Howard
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia 

HMSDOC wrote:

 > What makes you say this...most of what I have read syas that perhaps a touch
 > worse but very subjectively and minimally so!

If you've got a really clear monitor, you can notice the difference from going
from a Matrox card to something else. The text doesn't look as fine. I'm not
sure if it's worth paying huge money for unless you're a professional, but there
is an appreciable difference in some contexts.

As for nVidia cards, those benchmark-tuned pixel chewers are so bad at colours
that even my onboard S3 Savage looks good in comparison <!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia 

On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 02:31:51 GMT
"KJ" <here.RemoveThis@there.net> wrote:

 > Note the low refresh frequency when driving two digital and one CRT on
 > the Parhelia...but only noticeable on the CRT. It's better to have
 > matching monitor type when driving three monitors.
 >
<font color=purple> > <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.killamanjaro.linux-dude.com/IMG_0009%20small.jpg</font" target="_blank">http://www.killamanjaro.linux-dude.com/IMG_0009%20small.jpg</font</a>>
 >
 > Sony since sold - yippeee!!!

If you're talking about the darker area at the top of the screen in the
jpg you linked, that is perfectly normal for a photo of a CRT--you can
even see it in movies and broadcast TV shows sometimes. Unless the
camera is timed to exactly capture one scan you'll see that. LCDs work
on a different principle and don't have a scan per se, so no darker
area.

 > "KJ" <here.RemoveThis@there.net> wrote in message
 > news:HUJhb.85044$Of2.3419748@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
  > > The last monitor I had was a Sony 21" Artisan....AVOID THEM LIKE THE
  > > PLAGUE!!!
  > >
  > > For the cash, you'd think they'd be good, but mine was horribly
  > > mis-converged, and I couldn't adjust out the convergence across the
 > screen.
  > > I could get the center tack-sharp, then the quality was crap 6" from
 > center
  > > and was progressively worse out to the edges. It did, however, have
  > > some
 > of
  > > the best color rendition of any monitor, at any price, I've ever
  > > seen; and the color adjustments were good. Unfortunately the color
  > > adjustments
 > can't
  > > make up for the horrible focus anywhere out from center.
  > >
  > > That experience with the Sony CRT made me run for a pair of Samsung
  > > SyncMaster 191T LCD's. My eyes are thanking me now, even though I
  > > cannot have the same POTENTIAL level of CRT output, the great and
  > > CONSISTENT
 > output
  > > is better than the single Sony 21" by a large margin -not to mention
  > > saved desktop space and greater display area. The digital
  > > connectors are great. Color profiling is MUCH EASIER!!! =)
  > >
  > >
  > > "HMSDOC" <hmsdoc.RemoveThis@aol.com> wrote in message
  > > news:20031010212816.05767.00000463@mb-m10.aol.com...
   > > > I am not sure that my printer Epson 2200 can produce that many
   > > > colors
 > and
  > > what
   > > > I care about most is the final output, so while I want the best
   > > > image I
 > am
  > > not
   > > > sure that the Gigacolor is really all that helpful to me.
   > > >
   > > > Based on what I have read almost everyone says Matrox is best at
   > > > 2D but
 > by
  > > how
   > > > much. Seems like almost everywhere I read I am told that the
   > > > difference
  > > is
   > > > minimal unless, perhaps, one is using a 21 inch monitor at high
   > > > res. So
  > > the
   > > > question is at my monitor size will I see a meaningful difference,
   > > > if
 > not
  > > then
   > > > by getting ATI I get the gaming option for free.
   > > >
   > > > Also, from what I have read the drivers are a bit quirky with
   > > > Matrox and
  > > modern
   > > > boards and have also heard of image banding problems with the
   > > > Parhelia
 > in
   > > > specific.
   > > >
   > > > So I am vasilating (?sp) and while I was previously strongly in
   > > > favor of
  > > the
   > > > Matrox now I am not so sure.
   > > >
   > > > Howard
   > > >
   > > >
   > > >
   > > >
   > > >
   > > >
   > > >
   > > > If you have a good CRT, and want to use the program for (among
   > > > other
  > > things)
   > > > Photoshop, like the original poster, the Parhelia lets you see
   > > > pictures
 > in
   > > > 10 bits per colour. That can be a very significant difference,
 > especially
   > > > for nuances of green and grey.
   > > > Also, all ATI cards I've tried don't have a rock steady picture in
   > > > high resolutions (1920x1440 and up) -- the image seems to vibrate
   > > > or swim. I even blamed the monitor for a while, until I got a
   > > > Parhelia.
   > > >
   > > > Regards,
   > > > --
   > > > *Art
   > > >
   > > >
  > >
  > >
  > >
 >
 >


--
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia 

Hi,

In message <rYJhb.85046$Of2.3420567@twister.tampabay.rr.com>, KJ
<here.TakeThisOut@there.net> writes
 >Note the low refresh frequency when driving two digital and one CRT on the
 >Parhelia...but only noticeable on the CRT. It's better to have matching
 >monitor type when driving three monitors.
 >
 >http://www.killamanjaro.linux-dude.com/IMG_0009%20small.jpg

I don't think I understand this. The Parhelia cannot drive two digital
(DVI) outputs plus a CRT. It can drive three analogue outputs, or one
digital plus two analogue, so at least one of the flat panels in the
picture linked above is being driven with an analogue signal. Since flat
panel monitors are physically incapable of "flickering" in the same
manner as a CRT (whether they are driven with an analogue or a digital
signal) the picture is exactly what I would expect. Did I miss
something?

A good many flat panels can accept an analogue signal at up to 85Hz, so
even if you have to run all three displays at the same vertical refresh,
you should be able to achieve sensible settings given good displays.

--
Regards,
Glenn Booth<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia