What LCD monitor should I purcahse for photography and PP

[mickwhit]

Hi all,

I am wanting to upgrade from my 17" CRT monitor to a 19" LCD monitor soon and I wanted to ask the masses what flat screen monitors you use for your photography and PP work?

What contrast ration is the best to use for more defined 'blacks' when purchasing and subsequently using a flat screen monitor?

I have done some research and found a professional monitor company called EIZO and I was wondering if anyone has this brand of monitor and what experiences do you have with this product?

Finally, does anyone have a colour spyder monitor calibrator and would you be interested in hiring it out or is anyone aware of a company that utilises this service?

Thanks everyone for your help.

Kind Regards,

Mick.

[Steffen]

I am wanting to upgrade from my 17" CRT monitor to a 19" LCD monitor soon and I wanted to ask the masses what flat screen monitors you use for your photography and PP work?

Funny that, I'm in the market too, but the other way around. I'm fed up with LCD's and their incapability to keep anything the same (colour, contrast, brightness) as the viewing angle changes. I'm now looking for a nice 21" or 22" CRT. Or some bracket to rest my head on, so the viewing angle won't change...

What contrast ration is the best to use for more defined 'blacks' when purchasing and subsequently using a flat screen monitor?

Some of the newer shiny ones (high gloss instead of frosted glass) are able to show some pretty dark blacks. I'm not sure actual usable contrast is directly related to "specs" found in marketing material. Maybe it's best to look at some candidate models in real life, and bring a few test pics with you. One test all LCD's I've tried so far failed was performing a gamma calibration from test patterns. The three colours all had their own minds and reacted wildly different to brightness/contrast control.

Cheers
Steffen.

[Onyx]

Eizo are the very top of the price heap - if you're prepared to shell out $2k+ for a monitor, go right ahead. It's about the only monitor supporting hardware calibration for superior colour reproduction.

The Spyder et al method of calibration is considered 'software' based, as it's altering the values output by the graphics card to the monitor via ICC profiles. True inbuilt hardware support is supposedly better for rendering smooth colour gradations - I don't have the pockets deep enough to visually verify this...

IMHO there is no advantage to a 19" LCD over a 17" LCD, as they both support the same max. resolution, the size you pick really should be determined by your sitting/viewing distance to your monitor. Nonetheless Mick, I have some suggestions optimal for PP work: Viewsonic VP930, Acer AL1912, Samsung 193P. These are MVA based panels - Multi-Domain Vertical Alignment; or in the case of Samsung, their proprietary equivalent PVA. They are the only true 8 bit displays.

As opposed to the cheaper and much inferior twisted nematic + film (TN+film) based panels used in virtually every other monitor model. TN+film based panels only render in 6 bit colour and use dithering to fool the viewer into seeing a greater range of colours. This interpolation is better implemented some makes than others, but none are ideal for truly realistic colour reproduction. Furthermore, there are less than 5 true LCD panel manufacturers worldwide: Samsung, AU Optronics (Benq/Acer group), LG-Phillips, Chi Mei (CMV), and Sharp so the differences between brands of monitors are largely non-existent.

The advantage of MVA/PVA panels is that the alignment of crystals can potentially block more of the backlighting (due to polarising effect) leading to deeper blacks than is possible with TN+film displays.

As a bonus, MVA/PVA panels offer wider viewing angles compared to traditional TN+film panels, one of Steffen's criticisms of LCDs.

This is probably more info than anyone looking to LCD monitors ever need...

Shortlist recommendations:
1) Viewsonic VP930 represents the best monitor for colour display accuracy and value IMHO. Additionally, the overdrive circuitry implemented cuts response times down significantly compared to other MVA/PVA based panels, making it ideal for watching fast action movies and playing games as well as having accurate colour reproduction for image editing purposes.

2) Samsung 193P, Acer AL1912, other MVA/PVA based panel.

3) Anything else - brand doesn't matter, cos they're all basically the same cut priced mediocre quality displays.... so choose the one with the nicest packaging or celebrity endorsement.

[birddog114]

There is Mitsubishi/ NEC/ Lacie brand 21" LCD (LCD2180UX 21" ), it's one model from Mitsubishi but rebadged by NEC + Lacie. It's $1760.00 GST Inc. and it's an excellent LCD monitor in doing PP and destop publishing works.

I don't think you can buy any CRT 21" from famous brand as Mitsubishi and NEC. The only one still manufacture the 21" CRT is Samsung (CF21MSBU/XSA ) and it's around $800.00 but it's rarely have stock in Australia.

Other brands as LG, Viewsonic, Samsung, BenQ LCD etc... are just the monitors, I use them as convenience, compact size and modern on my desk, I don't get much benefits of working on those monitors in PP or desktop publishing.

[BBJ]

I dont get into monitors much as i have a 19" AOC crt, but seen my mates new dell 24" LCD and wow what a monitor, he has even done away with his tv and runs his dvd player etc.. via this. Dear but nice.

[nodabs]

i must agree with the inability of LCD's to produce decent colours no LCD i've seen has ever looked as good as a decent trinitron tube and working in a computer shop i've seen and set up most of them i'm going to 2 rebaged sony 21" CRT's i still say they can't be beaten

[glamy]

I followed Chi's opinion and just bought a Viewsonic VP930 from Birddog. I am very pleased I did not go to 20" (too big...). Colors are good and the portrait facility just great, not to mention the great price!
Cheers,
Gerard

[kipper]

Glamy you should be happy. I've been the happy owner of a Viewsonic G810 21" for the past 4 years. Viewsonic, Sony, Lacie and that other brand that Onyx mentioned are among my favorite monitor manufacturers. Although I think a lot of the pro photogs on NSN use Apple Cinema Displays.

[birddog114]

I followed Chi's opinion and just bought a Viewsonic VP930 from Birddog. I am very pleased I did not go to 20" (too big...). Colors are good and the portrait facility just great, not to mention the great price!
Cheers,
Gerard

Glamy,
Actually, you have bought it at the beginner of last month.
20 or 21" LCDs are also great! but it costs more.

[kipper]

Onyx, why wouldn't you recommend an Apple Cinema Display 20" for $1200AU?

[Ivanerrol]

IMHO
Decent CRT monitors have not been made for years. Not since you needed to pay $900 - $1,400 for a good 19"screen.
The last decent CRT's were probably the Trintrons by Sony or Mitsubishi. They still do better blacks than LCD's.
I am still to be convinced that LCD's give a sharper,better toned picture than the older quality CRT's.
I still have a 19" 25 Kilo Sony Trintro CRT which produces fantastic images. I have yet to see a comparable image from LCD. (This was $1,300.00 when bought)
When LCD starting competing against CRT, The major manufacturers dropped their quality products and in fact Sony doesn't even produce monitors anymore. As in previuos post there are only a handfull of LCD manufacturers that have their products rebranded.
Witness the TV market. Very few CRT TV's in Shops these days. Those that are there, are a shadow of the price and quality that you could get even last year.Even TV shop salespeople admit that the picture quality from older good quality CRT's is much better than the LCD and Plasma screens that they are selling now. - Notwithstanding dead pixels and backlight life.
You can still find second hand good quality CRT monitors around quite cheep.If you are concerned with accurate image quality IMHO get one of these.

[kipper]

Also on a side note, a mate of mine was telling me about the VP930's that they have had quite a few sent back with dead pixels. Luckily you get a dead pixel gaurantee/policy. Still rate Viewsonics though as very good monitors.

[DVEous]

... Obsolete ...

[sirhc55]

There is one LCD that comes highly recommended for the graphics industry and that is the Eizo CG-220 - the reason - Adobe RGB support.

But, you will need $7,500.00 to own one

[BullcreekBob]

G'day Why change your monitor - just get another and use both.

A while ago I bought a new graphics card for $80 which supports two monitors - now I use both my 19" BenQ lcd and my 19" Panasonic CRT.

The CRT has better colour repro for looking at photos I love the lcd for reading. The extra screen space is great, if doing PS type stuff I have the image on the crt and I have all the toolbars and email etc on the lcd.

[Onyx]

One fundamental flaw for dual monitors (off a single graphics card) in the PC environment - the inability to independently calibrate each screen.
Even the most basic entry level vid cards nowadays support dual monitors - but it's more for the novelty value than being functionally useful.

Darryl - if you find the Apple cinema display to suit your needs, why not?! An equivalent from Dill costs 30% less... and IMHO there's nothing inherently superior about the Apple screen. At its heart is a 16ms S-IPS panel from LG-Phillips.

[kipper]

Cheers Onyx, a few on NSN were raving about them. I guess it's more because it has the name Apple attached to it then anything
My mate said the same about going Dell aswell over the Apple.

Have you had a look at the Formac range of LCDs? Not sure if they're available in Oz though.

[Heath Bennett]

You can get Formac from Applecentres. Applecentre Newcastle is where I was considering one.

EDIT - MAC1 stores have had them in their mail out catalogues -

http://mac1.com.au

[kipper]

Still considering or you went with something else?


Edit:

QUite an interesting article on anandtech.....head to head on apple vs dell.

http://www.anandtech.com/displays/showdoc.aspx?i=2400

[poiter86]

Hi Onyx,

I have a dual screen setup of 2x19" philips 109B6 crts off a mid range card, geforce fx5700. I can independantly adjust colour profiles, resolutions etc, for each screen. I find the colour rendition is pretty good - but not as nice as the Sony G420's that i have at work).

I was wondering if you could elaborate what you meant by dual screens setups not able to calibrate monitors independantly ?

Cheers,

Pete

[quote="Onyx"]One fundamental flaw for dual monitors (off a single graphics card) in the PC environment - the inability to independently calibrate each screen.
Even the most basic entry level vid cards nowadays support dual monitors - but it's more for the novelty value than being functionally useful.

[Onyx]

Hi Onyx,

I have a dual screen setup of 2x19" philips 109B6 crts off a mid range card, geforce fx5700. I can independantly adjust colour profiles, resolutions etc, for each screen. I find the colour rendition is pretty good - but not as nice as the Sony G420's that i have at work).

I was wondering if you could elaborate what you meant by dual screens setups not able to calibrate monitors independantly ?

Cheers,

Pete

Pete, serious amateurs onwards who are fussy over colour matching from capture to print will invest in a colorimeter or spectrophotometer to calibrate their monitors. In a dual monitor setting, while you can adjust each screen's display parameters (which will suffice for the majority of non-image editing PC use), Winblows only supports 1 ICC monitor profile per graphics card.

[poiter86]

Onyx, thanks for the explanation - another item I have learned today. You have spiked my interest and I am now researching the concepts of icc/icm colour profiles.

I'm constantly amazed at how informative this forum can be ... great stuff!

Cheers,

Pete

Hi Onyx,

I have a dual screen setup of 2x19" philips 109B6 crts off a mid range card, geforce fx5700. I can independantly adjust colour profiles, resolutions etc, for each screen. I find the colour rendition is pretty good - but not as nice as the Sony G420's that i have at work).

I was wondering if you could elaborate what you meant by dual screens setups not able to calibrate monitors independantly ?

Cheers,

Pete

Pete, serious amateurs onwards who are fussy over colour matching from capture to print will invest in a colorimeter or spectrophotometer to calibrate their monitors. In a dual monitor setting, while you can adjust each screen's display parameters (which will suffice for the majority of non-image editing PC use), Winblows only supports 1 ICC monitor profile per graphics card.

[cameraguy21773]

I'd recommend the best large screen you can afford. On the second monitor you can compromise as it is used for general work, menus, etc.
I use a Mag 19 and a Dell 24. The Dell 24 is perhaps the best large monitor going right now and is priced well below the other high end large screens.

[glamy]

Chi,
maybe you can help, I get the message "not supported, change resolution or refresh rate" when starting up. This is on the old LCD monitor, the settings of which I have not changed... When I first connected up the Viewsonic with the analog plug, it was as #2 but I could not get proper colours (yellowish overcast). I now use the "AVI" port, the Viewsonic switched to #1 and I now get the message mentioned earlier. When using the Viewsonic in "portrait" I had a few crashes with an error message from Windows about the resolution and refresh rate. The graphics card is a "Radeon 9600XT.
Cheers,
Gerard

[Onyx]

Gerard, the error msg I suspect is mostly likely caused by the use of 85/100Hz or higher unsupported refresh rate on your LCD monitor. Either that your the monitor doesn't particularly like 700x525 or whatever res that the BIOS bootup screens display at.

I would suggest selecting 60Hz* refresh rate in the graphics card properties and lock it to 60Hz at any resolution. There are some third party utils to override the refresh rate, eg. Rivatuner (which does very much more than override refresh rates, but it's off the top of my head).

Additionally, if you're running dual monitors, select the "more capable" one as primary - 'capable' defined as support for higher res and/or refresh rates, so winblows doesn't freak out when it tries to do something it shouldn't. The crashing behaviour is just windows being itself I think.

I could also claim it's inherent instability from ATI's catalyst drivers, but all the ATI fanbois might flame me... Nonetheless, are you running the latest graphics drivers?


* Others reading please note: the advice to use 60Hz refresh rate is strictly for LCDs, 60Hz on a CRT will look crapola and make your optometrist very rich, very quick.

[mickwhit]

Hi all,

Sorry it's taken me a few days to reply, I've been busy with work.

I just wanted to say how much I appreciate all your feedback about LCD/CRT monitors and the pros and con's for each. I must say thanks to Onyx to his most informative replies, as they are exceptionally helpful yet they leave me pondering whether to upgrade from my 17" Diamondview CRT.

Like all TV's I chose a CRT because they gave a much better picture than LCD and plasma but I thought in the computer environment LCD may have been as good if not better than current CRT models.

I so wish I had of bought a Sony CRT when I had the $$$ on my last monitor upgrade. Instead I bought my Diamondview and always regretted it. Hence my query to invest in a LCD monitor now. Only thing is, now I'm not so sure what to do any more

Thanks to everyone for all their comments and suggestions.

Cheers,

Mick.

[shutterbug]

Another vote for the Dell 24" LCD $1399 great price too

[mickwhit]

Hi All,

After all of your recommendations i have narrowed down the field of monitors to the following:

Viewsonic VP930B: Size 19", Contrast Ratio - 1000:1, Response time - 8ms (Tr+Tf - what ever that is), True Res 1280x1024, viewing angle 170°
Samsung 970P: Size 19", Contrast Ratio - 1000:1, Response time - 6ms (G to G - what ever that is), True Res 1280x1024, viewing angle 178°
Samsung 770P: Size 17", Contrast Ratio - 1500:1, Response time - 6ms (G to G - what ever that is), True Res 1280x1024, viewing angle 178°
Eizo S1910AS: Size 19", Contrast Ratio - 1000:1, Response time - 16ms, True Res 1280x1024, viewing angle 178°
DellTM 2405FPW 24" : Size 24", Contrast Ratio - 1000:1, Response time - 16ms, True Res 1920x1200, viewing angle 178°

One further question if I may; Is it better to get 17" rather than 19"? For example in the Samsung range the 770P (17") has a contrast ratio of 1500:1 and the 970P (19") has a contrast ratio of 1000:1

I have searched for Sony CTR models but as previously mentioned, Sony no longer make CRT monitors (only LCD) and I am not overly interested in buying a second hand model. So that is the end of my CRT search and I'm back onto LCD searches.

Thanks again for all your help.

Cheers,
Mick

[DionM]

For what its worth, I just bought a 19" LCD.

I bought an older Benq FP992. It's an 8 bit panel, has DVI and D-Sub connectors, 700:1 contrast ratio and 250 cd brightness.

Benq have a very good dead pixel warranty on their monitors (and its 3 years) - this is what swayed me from a similar spec'd Mitsubishi monitor. Benqs states no dead pixels in the middle of the screen, and only a small number around the outside (forget the exact number, but its quite low, given its a professional series monitor).

Only downside is it's response time is a little slow (25msec, but that's the old measurement, not G to G) but its fine for graphics.

I have just come from a 17" CRt. Already I am seeing little differences in details.

One thing - like all LCD monitors - brightness just won't go any lower than 0! Its very bright - takes some getting used to (picture quality is fine).

[DVEous]

... Obsolete ...

[DVEous]

... Obsolete ...

[fozzie]

VK4CP,

I guess not.

Please excuse Mick, but he is overseas and can not always get access to the internet.

[antman]

Well, I bought this LCD just prior to Christmas.

http://www.eizo.com.au/products/lcd/s2410w/index.asp


So far have been very happy with it. I have calibrated it with my Monaco Optix XR calibrator and the prints are matching my prints from my R1800.
I have set the luminance value at 140cdm2 and the brightness value had to be turned down to only 23% of maximum.

24 inch size is magnificent - just happy to get the whole photo on screen without having to scroll.

I also use it for gameplaying (fps) and there is some screen blur with very fast movement but it is more than playable.

DVD's look great as well.

Not sure what other comment to make as I haven't used other higher end screen before.

Any questions welcome.

[DVEous]

... Obsolete ...

[mitedo]

Anyone using Dell's 2405FPW 24" UltraSharpTM Wide Screen Flat Panel LCD Monitor
what do you think

[DionM]

Anyone using Dell's 2405FPW 24" UltraSharpTM Wide Screen Flat Panel LCD Monitor
what do you think

Petal666 has one (or is it two?).

Nice monitor, but I don't know if they're a 6bit or 8bit panel.

[DVEous]

... Obsolete ...

[DionM]

Anyone using Dell's 2405FPW 24" UltraSharpTM Wide Screen Flat Panel LCD Monitor
what do you think

 PS: Look at dual 19" monitors. Similar price, more desk space.

[antman]

Anyone using Dell's 2405FPW 24" UltraSharpTM Wide Screen Flat Panel LCD Monitor
what do you think

I have read in a few places that these LCD's are overly bright. If you have a look at the following link there is quite a discussion about these LCD's. Unfortunately it is quite long but there seems to be a fair bit of useful information about monitor calibration and the like.

http://forums.robgalbraith.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=350263&page=0&fpart=1&vc=1

[distudio]

One fundamental flaw for dual monitors (off a single graphics card) in the PC environment - the inability to independently calibrate each screen.
Even the most basic entry level vid cards nowadays support dual monitors - but it's more for the novelty value than being functionally useful.

Well this is my first post to the forum and what do I do but bump an old thread and defend a specific OS, not a good start I know but sometimes you gotta just bite the bullet.

Dual monitors (even different types) can be calibrated under current Windows desktop OSs dependent upon the video card used, the capabilities of its drivers and the scope of the calibration system.

On one of my systems I run a 22" CRT and 19" TFT driven by a Matrox Parhelia card under Wk2 and the system is calibrated using ColorVision Spyder2PRO (V2.1-7). Both monitors are independently calibrated, each card channel is pre-loaded with the appropriate calibration LUTs at start-up by the Colorvision LUT pre-load utility and the Windows Color Management tab for each monitor reflects these profiles (automatically updated by the cal software).

How I normally achieve this is to determine best monitors performance and set this as the customized calibration target for both monitors, in the case above the TFT falls slightly short on black reproduction (0.2 Cd vs 0.40 Cd for the TFT). Calibrating using the same target means that I can optimise the system performance and nearly perfectly match (visually and digitally) two dissimilar monitors excepting reproduction of the deepest blacks. Calibration results for colour temp (Lab) are Delta E 0.6 for both monitors and that is with both of them achieving better than sRGB spec WRT white and black luminance levels and superb gray gamma tracking.

Ducking and running,

[DaveB]

Came back to this thread because I'm considering a bigger LCD so I can pass my old one to my wife.

Both monitors are independently calibrated, each card channel is pre-loaded with the appropriate calibration LUTs at start-up by the Colorvision LUT pre-load utility and the Windows Color Management tab for each monitor reflects these profiles (automatically updated by the cal software).

The problem that often happens in Windows with dual monitors is that while the system recognises a different profile for each display, only one LUT gets loaded (i.e. to both displays). If you're sure that the LUTs that are actually installed are different for each (e.g. by checking with a weird LUT on one, or through some Matrox tool) then you're set.

Of course once you've got each monitor profiled and calibrated properly, the next problem is getting software to use the right profiles. Photoshop will do it properly (even when you have a window spanning both displays) but some software only uses the profile for the "default" display even if their window is moved to the other display (this problem happens with some OS X apps as well as Windows).

[distudio]

The problem that often happens in Windows with dual monitors is that while the system recognises a different profile for each display, only one LUT gets loaded (i.e. to both displays). If you're sure that the LUTs that are actually installed are different for each (e.g. by checking with a weird LUT on one, or through some Matrox tool) then you're set.

Completely sure on my system.

Of course once you've got each monitor profiled and calibrated properly, the next problem is getting software to use the right profiles. Photoshop will do it properly (even when you have a window spanning both displays) but some software only uses the profile for the "default" display even if their window is moved to the other display (this problem happens with some OS X apps as well as Windows).

Solved that one using the lowest common denominator tactic, if one of more monitors are calibrated to different profile targets then they will never be good for spanning images. Imagine for instance if one monitor has a D50 WP and the other D65, it just wouldn't work, it's the same for the other target parameters. So what I do is optimise the cal on my best monitor then set that as the target cal for the second lower performing monitor.

In my case the TFT can't achieve the same black-point but as I've made it try to track the other display regardless of the application and its "colour awareness" the screen to screen gamma and colour is tracked to the point that the TFT simply runs out of black. As a consequence I never adjust shadow values using my TFT monitor. Though you could always go the other way about and just compress the performance of the best monitor so it matches the worst.

Cheers,

[mickwhit]

Mick, did you end up purchasing an LCD screen?
If so, which one and why?

My aging Philips 17" CRT is on it's legs, and I will need to replace it very soon.
Might as well take advantage of any post-Christmas sales on now!

Hi VK4CP,

Firstly, I do apologise for not getting back to you earlier. As Fozzie mentioned I was overseas with work and unable to reply at the time.

I have since returned back to Australia and I can inform you that I recently purchased an Eizo S1910AS (Size 19", Contrast Ratio - 1000:1, Response time - 16ms, True Res 1280x1024, viewing angle 178°). I am ecstatically happy with the monitor and love the true color reproduction. It is fantastic! I am so happy with the monitor I just wish I had of bought its bigger brother but Eizo monitors are very expensive, but for my mind, well worth it. The pictures I took whilst on safari in Africa last year look even better now than they initially did on my CRT.

I love this monitor and I would thoroughly recommend it and if you have a budget of around $1500 upwards then I'd be looking at the Eizo 21.1".

I hope this helps and I apologise again for the delay in my response.

Regards,

Mick.

[kipper]

How do the Eizo's rate in comparison to the Apple Cinema displays, better I take it?

[mickwhit]

How do the Eizo's rate in comparison to the Apple Cinema displays, better I take it?

Hi Kipper,

I cannot give an informed decision about the Apple Cinema displays - Sorry, but I am extremely happy with my Eizo and would recommend it to anyone.

Cheers,

Mick.

[kipper]

The Eizo ColorEdge CG210 looks like my cup of tea, shame they're like 1500gbp

[mickwhit]

The Eizo ColorEdge CG210 looks like my cup of tea, shame they're like 1500gbp

Why not go one better and grab the Eizo CG220? The only graphics monitor available that supports Adobe RGB colour space.

http://www.eizo.com.au/products/graphics/cg220/index.asp

You'll have to mortgage the house to own one, but damn I'm sure it'd be an awesome piece of kit

[cameraguy21773]

I use a Mag 19 for menus, etc. and a Dell 24 (2405FPW) for images. It's not an Eizo but it is lots of bang for the bucks.

[marcos]

I went throught the same thing when buying a new monitor, no more decent CRTs outhere, after checking LCDs for about two monts, looked at the Apple ones, LaCie, NEC and Viewsonic, but I was set went I checked the Eizo line,
almost went for the CG series, but the difference between 21" CG and FlexScan was little to justify the US$750 diff. in price. Most people can't tell the difference, and that goes away when photos are printed. CGs are excellent for high end color correction on offset printing, where the minimal color changes are shown when film or plates are made, not so on digital printing, is true that they are capable of Adobe RGB color space, but the printers we use are not capable of printing a true Adobe RGB, then why bother?, that's just me.
I went for the Eizo Flexscan S2110W, calibrated with Monaco Optix XR and it gives me better rendition and color than any CRT I ever had, better detail on highlights (not blown) and better detail on dark shadows, I very happy with it, printing to a 1280 with PowerRip 7.04 matching as good as it can be to my LCD. In my opinion is all about how you're reproducing your photos, if you're not producing for high end offset printing, there is no need to go for the CG line, I highly recommend the FlexScan series form Eizo.

[robster]

I used to have an Ezio at my last jobby (animation) and loved it to death. I miss her, the lil Ezio. I now have a BenQ FP737s and it's just a monitor. This post comes at perfect timing for me as we're about to get the second monitor and it looks like I'll go the Viewsonic VP930 (or the 17" equivilent so as to match my 17" BenQ).

I guess it'll be one monitor for the real colours and one for the work panels

Thanks again for this great thread.

Rob