Just got my dual 2001FPs :)

F

Fuzzb

Weaksauce
Joined
Jan 21, 2004
Messages
94
They just arrived a few hours ago and I've set them up on this 9800 Pro (1 on D-Sub, the other on DVI).

Initial opinion is that the image quality isn't as good as my 17" LG 1710B (LG.Philips 16ms panel). I do see the screen door effect that everyone talks about, but to be honest it isn't a major thing and isn't noticeable when you're >50cm away from the screen.

There is a noticeable difference between D-Sub and DVI, DVI appears to be a lot brighter and more vibrant. As for text, they both look the same to me.

Now onto the problems....the 2nd display has one vertical line of dead sub pixels on the right handside, and are especially noticeable on blue colours. There is also one dead pixel in the top right hand corner. In addition to this, the input select LED's do not work, apart from one (4: COMPOSITE). It looks like this one is going back to Dell for a replacement. Their QA on these monitors appears to be abysmal.

The other 2001FP however is excellent, no dead pixels or backlight problems.
 
as far as i can understand from what I've read it looks like you are looking at the screen through a "screen door" or a really fine mesh looking grid over the screen.
 
The manufacture date for both displays is October 2003.

As for the screen door effect, yes it is like looking at the screen through a fine mesh. The pixels look to have a very fine border around them, and on some colours such as light blue it looks like interlacing.
 
Screen Dooring is just what happens when the pixel density is fairly low. You'll see it on just about any 14"-15" laptop display with an XGA resolution, but not with a higher SXGA or UXGA resolution. for a 20" panel, the UXGA resolution is fairly low so you are going to see it a little bit. Likewise a 17" panel with a 1280x1024 resolution has a lot more pixels crammed into a smaller space comparitively.
 
It seems that the screen door effect is caused by the extra anti-glare coating that the 2001fp has. If you take a look at the samsung 213t (which is a inch bigger, but still running @ 1600x1200), there's no such effect. Try to rub the screen surface with your fingers.. The two monitors feel totally different. You will be able to confirm that the 2001fp has some kind of coating that's causing the "screen door" effect..
 
Originally posted by enyceexdanny
It seems that the screen door effect is caused by the extra anti-glare coating that the 2001fp has. If you take a look at the samsung 213t (which is a inch bigger, but still running @ 1600x1200), there's no such effect. Try to rub the screen surface with your fingers.. The two monitors feel totally different. You will be able to confirm that the 2001fp has some kind of coating that's causing the "screen door" effect..
Click to expand...

I'd have to agree, as my 1901FP has lower "pixel density", yet it doesn't have this issue. On the plus side , after owning a few Trinitron CRT's, the 2001FP's "screen dooring" is far less noticeable (to me) than the support wires in the trinitrons. Sure I can see it if I focus in on it, but in every day use I don't see it.
 
Sorry but I don't think Screendooring has anythink to do with the coating, Think of it as a border/positional spacer around each pixel this border is part of the way the screen is manufactured and the way the individual pixels are held together and spaced, the anti reflect coating is applied last. The coating on the Dell2001fp is one of the most aggressive ant reflect coatings I have ever seen which gives the images produced on this monitor a grainy appearance with an almost sanblasted texture like feel. But reflection almost don't exist. All this only seems apparent on 16 ms Philips displays. The Mitsu 213t is a 25ms response display.
 
So does pixel size change? or is it standarized between resolutions and/or LCD's ? If the 1901FP pixels are spaced further apart and it doesn't display this effect, are the pixels themselves smaller on the 2001FP ?
 
I think Phillips redesigned things to get a 16ms response time and the result is this crappy screendoor thing. But other advantages result, I think what we are seeing is explained here section 12.
Btw I could be totally off base here, its just speculation. I am not an LCD expert. If I was I would have a 72 inch beta version on my desk with 6ms response times (in my dreams)


http://www.lgphilips-lcd.com/en/technology/technique.html#35

12. Column Spacer
Column Spacer technology patterning over the Color Filter Black Matrix. Eliminates light leakage in conventional Ball Spacer type technology and further provides features of improved contrast ratio and ripple free.
 
Originally posted by Ramfart
I think Phillips redesigned things to get a 16ms response time and the result is this crappy screendoor thing. But other advantages result, I think what we are seeing is explained here section 12.
Btw I could be totally off base here, its just speculation. I am not an LCD expert. If I was I would have a 72 inch beta version on my desk with 6ms response times (in my dreams)


http://www.lgphilips-lcd.com/en/technology/technique.html#35

12. Column Spacer
Column Spacer technology patterning over the Color Filter Black Matrix. Eliminates light leakage in conventional Ball Spacer type technology and further provides features of improved contrast ratio and ripple free.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link, I had thought they had reduced the pixel size to get them to respond faster, since pixel-to-pixel distance is measured centre-to-centre. Thus they could increase pixel density without reducing the distance between the edges of the pixels, or actualy increasing the edge to edge distance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top