|
Related Topics:
| Aspect ratio with Samsung 243T - I have a 243T running under XP. This is a new system. Icons and images seem to be (i.e. circles look like eggs.) I haven't checked all but it is true for the Windows desktop and IE. I am sure this has to do with..
16:10 aspect ratio for linux, beos and windows with Sony 2.. - Hello, I am not too familiar with video hardware etc., so please excuse me if it's kind of a newbie question. I am planning to buy the Sony 23? SDM-P232 LCD. I have one win 2000 PC and will probably upgrade it to the ATI 9800, so I suppose..
LCD resolutions / aspect ratios - over the next few months i'll be in the market for a highend display, around size. why are all LCD monitors 16:10 aspect ratio instead of 16:9 which is also HDTV spec? i think driver support has been around for ages for..
TV-Out Problem - Hi, I have a IBM t20 with S-Video out (9-pin) and I tried to connect this to my PAL TV . I'm getting the picture but there seems to be no Color I have a S3 Driver and tried through duo view to change from PAL to NTSC and back and vice versa..
CTX 1785 problem - Is there anybody who got manuals or better service manuals for CHUNTEX 1785 monitor or know where from can I download it?
|
|
|
Next: General: Monitor suddenly dead
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Dec 09, 2007
Posts: 10
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 1:00 pm
Post subject: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10
Archived from groups: comp>sys>ibm>pc>hardware>video (more info?)
|
|
|
Maybe someone can explain this to me.
It seems that a lot of LCD monitors sold as "widescreen" aren't
actually 16:9, they're 16:10. My new BenQ FP241W falls into
this category. The FP241W's native mode is 1600x100. That's
too small for me and hurts my eyes, so I wanted to use one of
the modes that it can scale to in hardware. However, the modes
offered by the BenQ (at least, the ones exposed through my
Nvidia display panel) aren't correct aspect ratio: they're
16:9, which means that I can either view them stretched to fill
the whole screen, which distorts the shape of objects on
screen, or I can have black bars at the top and bottom of my
screen. Either "solution" seems poor to me.
Now, I found my own fix for the problem, which is to get the
Nvidia card to do the scaling, rather than requiring the panel
to support it directly. Now, the Nvidia control panel doesn't
directly expose any modes that correctly support 16:10, but
they're in there. I downloaded a widget that allowed me to get
at (it turned out that 1440x900 is the one I was looking for).
I.e. the Nvidia driver supports it, but you have to use a tweak
utility to get at it.
But here's what I was wondering:
1. What the hell is a video company thinking, only offering
one correct-aspect-ratio resolutions (that would the native
mode 1600x1000) plus a bunch of 16:9 ones on a piece of
16:10 hardware??
2. If a company like Nvidia has already done the necessary
work to support other, *correct* resolutions, why do they bury
them where almost nobody will know about them?
3. With all the artists, videographers, photoshop junkies, et al
out there, how come you never hear anything about this issue?
--
"I know I promised, Lord, never again. But I also know
that YOU know what a weak-willed person I am." |
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Dec 08, 2007
Posts: 2
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 1:00 pm
Post subject: Re: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sun, 9 Dec 2007, Del Rio wrote:
> It seems that a lot of LCD monitors sold as "widescreen"
> aren't actually 16:9, they're 16:10. My new BenQ FP241W falls
> into this category. The FP241W's native mode is 1600x100.
Did you mean 1600x1000? I cannot imagine a monitor with 16:1
resolution ratio. 
BTW, FP241W's native resolution is 1920 x 1200 as per BenQ
<http://www.benq.us/products/LCD/?product=638>
yes it is 16:10
Maybe that's the HDTV resolution?
> That's too small for me and hurts my eyes, so I wanted to use
> one of the modes that it can scale to in hardware.
Alternatively you may want to setup your GUI's setup with bigger
fonts, bigger icons, etc.
> 1. What the hell is a video company thinking, only offering
> one correct-aspect-ratio resolutions (that would the native
> mode 1600x1000) plus a bunch of 16:9 ones on a piece of 16:10
> hardware??
Apparently the are not thinking.
> 3. With all the artists, videographers, photoshop junkies, et
> al out there, how come you never hear anything about this
> issue?
I think they usually use maximum resolution, whatever it is.
--
(stephan paul) Arif Sahari Wibowo
_____ _____ _____ _____
/____ /____/ /____/ /____
_____/ / / / _____/ http://www.arifsaha.com/
Disclaimer: IANAL, IANALP, IANAMD, IANAMP, IANAAP
my statements - if any - should be treated as such. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 02, 2007
Posts: 113
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 1:00 pm
Post subject: Re: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
All LCDs require you adjust Display properties for their small dot pitch.
Start with 120dpi in Settings/Advanced, then large fonts and icons in Apperance.
You should have 1440x900 (17-19) and 1680x1050 (20-22) settings,
but scaling will look ugly and make small text unreadable.
"Del Rio" <delrio.DeleteThis@panix.com> wrote in message news:fjh6ku$qcs$1@reader1.panix.com...
> Maybe someone can explain this to me.
>
> It seems that a lot of LCD monitors sold as "widescreen" aren't
> actually 16:9, they're 16:10. My new BenQ FP241W falls into
> this category. The FP241W's native mode is 1600x100. That's
> too small for me and hurts my eyes, so I wanted to use one of
> the modes that it can scale to in hardware. However, the modes
> offered by the BenQ (at least, the ones exposed through my
> Nvidia display panel) aren't correct aspect ratio: they're
> 16:9, which means that I can either view them stretched to fill
> the whole screen, which distorts the shape of objects on
> screen, or I can have black bars at the top and bottom of my
> screen. Either "solution" seems poor to me.
> >> Stay informed about: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 09, 2007
Posts: 10
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 11:00 pm
Post subject: Re: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <alpine.OSX.0.9999.0712091216480.319.TakeThisOut@imac2006.local>,
S P Arif Sahari Wibowo <arifsaha.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 9 Dec 2007, Del Rio wrote:
>> It seems that a lot of LCD monitors sold as "widescreen"
>> aren't actually 16:9, they're 16:10. My new BenQ FP241W falls
>> into this category. The FP241W's native mode is 1600x100.
>
>Did you mean 1600x1000? I cannot imagine a monitor with 16:1
>resolution ratio.
>
>BTW, FP241W's native resolution is 1920 x 1200 as per BenQ
><http://www.benq.us/products/LCD/?product=638>
>yes it is 16:10
You're right of course. I ran into this problem months ago,
and I'd forgotten some of the details. The native resolution
is 1920 x 1200, and but it does offer 1600 x 1000 natively,
which I immediately changed to 1600 x 1000 (thus my statement
that the FP421W only offers one aspect-ratio-correct mode in
hardware was false: it offers two). 1600 x 1000 was still too
hard on my eyes, which is how I found my way to 1440 x 900.
>> That's too small for me and hurts my eyes, so I wanted to use
>> one of the modes that it can scale to in hardware.
>
>Alternatively you may want to setup your GUI's setup with bigger
>fonts, bigger icons, etc.
That only scales OS-related stuff though, which fixes maybe half
of my issues...
>> 3. With all the artists, videographers, photoshop junkies, et
>> al out there, how come you never hear anything about this
>> issue?
>
>I think they usually use maximum resolution, whatever it is.
Maybe you're right, but I don't see how people can work at
those resolutions.
--
"I know I promised, Lord, never again. But I also know
that YOU know what a weak-willed person I am." >> Stay informed about: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 09, 2007
Posts: 10
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 12:00 am
Post subject: Re: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <13loo2uqeq88k74 RemoveThis @corp.supernews.com>,
Eric Gisin <gisin RemoveThis @uniserve.com> wrote:
>All LCDs require you adjust Display properties for their small dot pitch.
>Start with 120dpi in Settings/Advanced, then large fonts and icons in Apperance.
Resizing the GUI fixes some of the visibility problems I have,
but not all. I suppose between resizing the fonts/icons and
the ability of many browsers to scale web pages etc, I could
probably compensate for 70 or 80% of my issues without having
to re-scale the desktop. But scaling the desktop to a
comfortable resolution fixes all the problems at once.
>You should have 1440x900 (17-19) and 1680x1050 (20-22) settings,
>but scaling will look ugly and make small text unreadable.
Actually, unlike on some older monitors, the scaling looks
really nice. I used to scale my old 17" LCD from its native
1280 x 1024 to my prefered 1024 x 768 - now *there* you could
really see the scaling artifacts. On this one, the scaling
looks fine.
--
"I know I promised, Lord, never again. But I also know
that YOU know what a weak-willed person I am." >> Stay informed about: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 20, 2007
Posts: 25
|
(Msg. 6) Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 3:00 pm
Post subject: Re: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Del Rio wrote:
> Maybe you're right, but I don't see how people can work at
> those resolutions.
>
I have to use reading/computer glasses to use computers and my 22" LCD
is 1680x1050 and I can read text fine. For websites that use really
small fixed fonts I use the zoom feature in the browser. For Firefox it
is ctrl+scroll wheel on mouse. Maybe you need to invest in some reading
glasses? I buy mine at the drug store and they only cost $20.00. Make
sure to get the correct and comfortable strength for reading text though
or else they will make you feel dizzy if they are too strong. Some use
cheap glass too that smudge easily so look for ones with decent quality.
One of my favorite pairs only cost four bucks at the dollar store. I
have four pairs lying about here. >> Stay informed about: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 20, 2007
Posts: 25
|
(Msg. 7) Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 3:00 pm
Post subject: Re: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Del Rio wrote:
> 1. What the hell is a video company thinking, only offering
> one correct-aspect-ratio resolutions (that would the native
> mode 1600x1000) plus a bunch of 16:9 ones on a piece of
> 16:10 hardware??
Did you install the monitor .inf file? The video card won't know what
resolutions the monitor can support until you install that. >> Stay informed about: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 11, 2003
Posts: 251
|
(Msg. 8) Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 3:00 pm
Post subject: Re: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"John Adams" <no.RemoveThis@email.invalid> wrote in message
news:t4g7j.71355$Rr7.60629@fe09.news.easynews.com...
> Del Rio wrote:
>
>> 1. What the hell is a video company thinking, only offering
>> one correct-aspect-ratio resolutions (that would the native
>> mode 1600x1000) plus a bunch of 16:9 ones on a piece of
>> 16:10 hardware??
>
> Did you install the monitor .inf file? The video card won't know what
> resolutions the monitor can support until you install that.
In many cases, the video card will know what timings are
supported by the monitor from the EDID information it
provides. Probably most, if not all, cases, these days.
Re the original comments - indicating support for 16:9 timings
makes a lot of sense, given that many people will want to use
these monitors with HDTV material. Whether or not the
monitor does the right thing and displays such inputs at the
correct aspect ratio (or at least gives the user the option to
do this) is another question entirely, but clearly a 16:10
display CAN correctly present 16:9 material. I've never
understood the objection to, say, having 1920 x 1080
video displayed on a 1920 x 1200 panel via "letterboxing"
- you are getting exactly the same number of pixels as you
would be if the panel had only 1920 x 1080 pixels in the
first place. If the black areas bother you, either try not to
think about it or do what the theaters do - install curtains.
Bob M. >> Stay informed about: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 09, 2007
Posts: 10
|
(Msg. 9) Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:00 pm
Post subject: Re: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <Y0g7j.76739$_H4.26453@fe08.news.easynews.com>,
John Adams <no.DeleteThis@email.invalid> wrote:
>Del Rio wrote:
>> Maybe you're right, but I don't see how people can work at
>> those resolutions.
>
>I have to use reading/computer glasses to use computers and my 22" LCD
>is 1680x1050 and I can read text fine. For websites that use really
>small fixed fonts I use the zoom feature in the browser. For Firefox it
>is ctrl+scroll wheel on mouse. Maybe you need to invest in some reading
>glasses? I buy mine at the drug store and they only cost $20.00. Make
>sure to get the correct and comfortable strength for reading text though
>or else they will make you feel dizzy if they are too strong. Some use
>cheap glass too that smudge easily so look for ones with decent quality.
>One of my favorite pairs only cost four bucks at the dollar store. I
>have four pairs lying about here.
Thanks for the suggestion, but I'm not quite ready to resort
to reading glasses yet for things that are still fixable in
software. 
You know I'm not sure, I'd have to do the math, but I bet I've
probably been viewing things at roughly the same DPI for years.
Every time I get a big, high res monitor I run it at some
fraction of the current-standard "best resolution".
I ran my 17" LCD at 1024 x 768, my 21" CRT at 1152 x 864,
and now my 24" widescreen at 1440 x 900.
--
"I know I promised, Lord, never again. But I also know
that YOU know what a weak-willed person I am." >> Stay informed about: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 09, 2007
Posts: 10
|
(Msg. 10) Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:00 pm
Post subject: Re: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <t4g7j.71355$Rr7.60629@fe09.news.easynews.com>,
John Adams <no DeleteThis @email.invalid> wrote:
>Del Rio wrote:
>
>> 1. What the hell is a video company thinking, only offering
>> one correct-aspect-ratio resolutions (that would the native
>> mode 1600x1000) plus a bunch of 16:9 ones on a piece of
>> 16:10 hardware??
>
>Did you install the monitor .inf file? The video card won't know what
>resolutions the monitor can support until you install that.
Yes, I did. Btw, I corrected my original statement in a
different branch of the thread: the monitor actually offers two
16:10 resolutions (plus a bunch of 16:9 ones). What doesn't
make sense to me is why doesn't it offer a variety of 16:10
ones, and no 16:9 ones, since the latter all cause vertical
stretching??
--
"I know I promised, Lord, never again. But I also know
that YOU know what a weak-willed person I am." >> Stay informed about: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 09, 2007
Posts: 10
|
(Msg. 11) Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:00 pm
Post subject: Re: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <fjk3o2$bll$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com>,
Bob Myers <nospamplease.RemoveThis@address.invalid> wrote:
>
>Re the original comments - indicating support for 16:9 timings
>makes a lot of sense, given that many people will want to use
>these monitors with HDTV material. Whether or not the
>monitor does the right thing and displays such inputs at the
>correct aspect ratio (or at least gives the user the option to
>do this) is another question entirely, but clearly a 16:10
>display CAN correctly present 16:9 material. I've never
>understood the objection to, say, having 1920 x 1080
>video displayed on a 1920 x 1200 panel via "letterboxing"
>- you are getting exactly the same number of pixels as you
>would be if the panel had only 1920 x 1080 pixels in the
>first place. If the black areas bother you, either try not to
>think about it or do what the theaters do - install curtains.
Bob, the panel's hardware scaling "stretches" the 16:9 modes to
cover the whole screen, which looks really messed up if you're
using it for video, CAD, art, etc! My Nvidia card actually
offered your best compromise solution above, of putting black
bars at the top and bottom. But I never use the monitor for TV
display anyway, just computer usage. So finding a supported
16:10 mode (at a resolution that I like) hidden in my Nvidia
drivers was a godsend, even if I had to use a tweako utility to
get at it...
The only thing I was wondering was how much performance hit it
puts on the card, running the desktop in a strange alternative
mode like that and then upscaling it for output at the
monitor's native res. I wonder if I'm losing framerate in
games from doing that?
--
"I know I promised, Lord, never again. But I also know
that YOU know what a weak-willed person I am." >> Stay informed about: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 11, 2007
Posts: 1
|
(Msg. 12) Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 6:00 am
Post subject: Re: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Eric Gisin wrote:
> All LCDs require you adjust Display properties for their small dot pitch.
> Start with 120dpi in Settings/Advanced, then large fonts and icons in
> Apperance.
Nope. Doing that messes up some apps and games. >> Stay informed about: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 02, 2007
Posts: 113
|
(Msg. 13) Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 11:34 am
Post subject: Re: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Mephisto" <spam.DeleteThis@trap.invalid> wrote in message news:Tvt7j.1675$Mw6.964@pd7urf2no...
> Eric Gisin wrote:
>> All LCDs require you adjust Display properties for their small dot pitch.
>> Start with 120dpi in Settings/Advanced, then large fonts and icons in
>> Apperance.
>
> Nope. Doing that messes up some apps and games.
Irrelevant. Don't use broken apps. DPI settings have been there since Win NT 3.1. >> Stay informed about: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 11, 2003
Posts: 251
|
(Msg. 14) Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 2:13 pm
Post subject: Re: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Eric Gisin" <gisin DeleteThis @uniserve.com> wrote in message
news:13ltuhi27226257@corp.supernews.com...
> "Mephisto" <spam DeleteThis @trap.invalid> wrote in message
> news:Tvt7j.1675$Mw6.964@pd7urf2no...
>> Eric Gisin wrote:
>>> All LCDs require you adjust Display properties for their small dot
>>> pitch.
>>> Start with 120dpi in Settings/Advanced, then large fonts and icons in
>>> Apperance.
>>
>> Nope. Doing that messes up some apps and games.
>
> Irrelevant. Don't use broken apps. DPI settings have been there since Win
> NT 3.1.
It's not the app that's broken - Windows, prior to Vista,
simply does not understand display resolution correctly.
Bob M. >> Stay informed about: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 09, 2007
Posts: 10
|
(Msg. 15) Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2007 10:00 am
Post subject: Re: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <13ltuhi27226257 DeleteThis @corp.supernews.com>,
Eric Gisin <gisin DeleteThis @uniserve.com> wrote:
>"Mephisto" <spam DeleteThis @trap.invalid> wrote in message
>news:Tvt7j.1675$Mw6.964@pd7urf2no...
>> Eric Gisin wrote:
>>> All LCDs require you adjust Display properties for their small dot pitch.
>>> Start with 120dpi in Settings/Advanced, then large fonts and icons in
>>> Apperance.
>>
>> Nope. Doing that messes up some apps and games.
>
>Irrelevant. Don't use broken apps. DPI settings have been there since
>Win NT 3.1.
Well, you don't always have a wide variety of choice in
non-business/non-productivity apps. Sometimes there *an* app
that does what you want, and you wouoldn't want to do without
it because the (probably amateur) developer didn't anticipate
the radical changes in display techology that have come along.
Anyway, for the visibility problems I was having, the point is
moot, since a little research determined that the display *can*
be scaled correctly by the graphics card. Really, to me it was
more a question of why panel monitors routinely do internal
firmware scaling to incorrect aspect ratios, and why this
fact isn't more widely publicized.
--
"I know I promised, Lord, never again. But I also know
that YOU know what a weak-willed person I am." >> Stay informed about: LCD aspect ratio problem 16:10 |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in/Register/Password
