If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#136
|
|||
|
|||
A screen question.
On 2019-09-13 1:33 p.m., J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Rene Lamontagne writes: On 2019-09-13 10:08 a.m., Ken Springer wrote: On 9/13/19 8:48 AM, Rene Lamontagne wrote: On 2019-09-13 7:59 a.m., Ken Springer wrote: [] The native resolution of my monitors are not in question.Â* The are 16:10. It's Rene's that puzzles me.Â* It's listed on Asus's site at 16:9, yet 3 of the resolutions in his list are 16:10 resolutions.Â* At the same time, he did not list 1600:900, which Mark Lloyd suggested he try, which I *think* he is now using. So now I'm, in parallel, digging into my Mac options, and the options there for resolutions are so much smaller.Â* I think, to some extent, the options offered may depend on the video inputs the monitor has.Â* The monitor on the Mac has HDMI, but on the Windows computers, no HDMI. Yes Ken, I am using the 1600x900 and it really is great with this 27 inch monitor. Â*So, we made things better for you, even with all our fumbling around???Â*Â* Â*LOLÂ* But, you've confirmed what I thought would happen when youÂ* correctly play with the settings available to the user.Â* I think this isÂ* one area where I'll have to say that W10 is now superior to everythingÂ* else I've checked. Â*Would you double check your available resolutions list for me?Â* For me,Â* this is one of those things that I just have to find the answer for...Â* Why your system offers resolutions that the monitor should not Yep, here is the list again, this time with my eyes open. 1920x1080 16:9 1680x1050 8:5 (16:10) 1600x1200 4:3 1600x900 16:9 1440x900 8:5 1280x1024 5:4 1280x960 4:3 1280x720 16:9 1152x872 144:109 (!) 1152x864 1024x768 800x600 all 4:3 Fresh off the monitor.Â* :-) So your combination of graphics card, monitor, and OS (and possibly drivers for the first two) is clearly _not_ constrained by either the shape (ratio) of the monitor, or its native resolution. Sounds like it's ignoring the monitor altogether, and just offering all the resolutions the graphics card is capable of generating (with a _possible_ upper limit, though I suspect that's the card's too rather than the monitor). Do you know what the _monitor's_ native _resolution_ is? Rene John Yes, native resolution is 1920 x 1080. Rene |
Ads |
#137
|
|||
|
|||
A screen question.
On 9/13/19 11:06 AM, Rene Lamontagne wrote:
On 2019-09-13 10:08 a.m., Ken Springer wrote: On 9/13/19 8:48 AM, Rene Lamontagne wrote: On 2019-09-13 7:59 a.m., Ken Springer wrote: On 9/13/19 2:30 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: In message , Ken Springer writes: On 9/12/19 7:57 AM, Jonathan N. Little wrote: BTW 16:9 aspect is not 1920X1200 but 1920X1080 This is what is puzzling to me. If the monitor's aspect ratio is 16:9, why does Rene's list of optional screen resolutions have 3 resolutions that are 16:10 aspect ratios? I have 2 monitors with 16:10 aspect ratios.Â* One attached to W10 (1903) system, the other Mac Mojave. Neither system offers me a 1440X900 option, even though that is a 16:10 aspect ratio. It's quite the conundrum. Maybe, with the native resolution of the monitors in question, that one gives a blurring result that is _particularly_ obnoxious (maybe even to VH folk) - _very_ visible blobs, or something? The native resolution of my monitors are not in question.Â* The are 16:10. It's Rene's that puzzles me.Â* It's listed on Asus's site at 16:9, yet 3 of the resolutions in his list are 16:10 resolutions.Â* At the same time, he did not list 1600:900, which Mark Lloyd suggested he try, which I *think* he is now using. So now I'm, in parallel, digging into my Mac options, and the options there for resolutions are so much smaller.Â* I think, to some extent, the options offered may depend on the video inputs the monitor has.Â* The monitor on the Mac has HDMI, but on the Windows computers, no HDMI. Yes Ken, I am using the 1600x900 and it really is great with this 27 inch monitor. So, we made things better for you, even with all our fumbling around??? Â*LOLÂ* But, you've confirmed what I thought would happen when you correctly play with the settings available to the user.Â* I think this is one area where I'll have to say that W10 is now superior to everything else I've checked. Would you double check your available resolutions list for me?Â* For me, this is one of those things that I just have to find the answer for... Why your system offers resolutions that the monitor should not have. Yep, here is the list again, this time with my eyes open. 1920x1080 1680x1050 1600x1200 1600x900 1440x900 1280x1024 1280x960 1280x720 1152x872 1152x864 1024x768 800x600 Fresh off the monitor. :-) Thanks, Rene. This subthread has added 4 new resolutions I didn't have before. -- Ken MacOS 10.14.5 Firefox 67.0.4 Thunderbird 60.7 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#138
|
|||
|
|||
A screen question.
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote:
The original poster Peter Jason didn't say he only had [astigmatism] in one eye. Are your palm prints exactly the same for your right hand as for your left hand? Nope. Same for your right and left fingerprints for the matching fingers. Same for your eyes. Irregularities in the shape of the cornea that generate refractive error (astigmatism) do not progress equally in both eyes because the tissues are separate, not common. Many folks with astigmatism have it in only one eye. While astigmatism usually occurs concurrently in both eyes (bilateral), it is not necessarily equal in both eyes (i.e., it can be asymmetrical). Astigmatism in only one eye is often caused by injury (which is my case due to a cat scratching my right eye when I was a kid) or by degenerative eye conditions or disease; however, eyes do not degenerate equally. No pair of disconnected tissue will degenerate equally. Regardless of astigmatism, how often do eyeglass wearers get exactly the same prescription for both eyes? Most users don't even know the specs for their specs; that is, they go to the optometrist, get their exam, and get their eyeglasses, and the bill they get never mentions the sphere, cylinder, and axis measurements. If they want to keep their own history of how their eyesight has degenerated, they have to ask for a copy of the measurements to know what they are. Several times when I've asked for the specs, they'd look mildly surpised and asked "Why do you need to know?". I'd respond "Why shouldn't I know?" In any case, for a monitor to correct vision impairment would mean the screen would need to place a lens at your face to correct the refractive error at the distance for where the pixels are painted. Don't know about you, but having a large bubble of glass protrude from the monitor against which I would have to press my face seems extreme compared to putting on a pair of eyeglasses. Remember the function of the lens is to correct your focus at a specific distance. My eyeglasses for outside and driving would be impossible to use for reading or the computer monitor, so I use prescription eyeglasses for reading and computer. Likewise, my reading eyeglasses would make everything slightly out of focus at distances. I did this once when I went to a reunion and wore the wrong eyeglasses. They look almost identical. I was wondering why my vision suddenly got so bad beyond my arm's length. I don't like bifocals. I get a sore neck tilting back my head to use the bottom lens portion for computer monitor viewing. |
#139
|
|||
|
|||
A screen question.
On 2019-09-14 8:56 a.m., VanguardLH wrote:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote: The original poster Peter Jason didn't say he only had [astigmatism] in one eye. Are your palm prints exactly the same for your right hand as for your left hand? Nope. Same for your right and left fingerprints for the matching fingers. Same for your eyes. Irregularities in the shape of the cornea that generate refractive error (astigmatism) do not progress equally in both eyes because the tissues are separate, not common. Many folks with astigmatism have it in only one eye. While astigmatism usually occurs concurrently in both eyes (bilateral), it is not necessarily equal in both eyes (i.e., it can be asymmetrical). Astigmatism in only one eye is often caused by injury (which is my case due to a cat scratching my right eye when I was a kid) or by degenerative eye conditions or disease; however, eyes do not degenerate equally. No pair of disconnected tissue will degenerate equally. Regardless of astigmatism, how often do eyeglass wearers get exactly the same prescription for both eyes? Most users don't even know the specs for their specs; that is, they go to the optometrist, get their exam, and get their eyeglasses, and the bill they get never mentions the sphere, cylinder, and axis measurements. If they want to keep their own history of how their eyesight has degenerated, they have to ask for a copy of the measurements to know what they are. Several times when I've asked for the specs, they'd look mildly surpised and asked "Why do you need to know?". I'd respond "Why shouldn't I know?" In any case, for a monitor to correct vision impairment would mean the screen would need to place a lens at your face to correct the refractive error at the distance for where the pixels are painted. Don't know about you, but having a large bubble of glass protrude from the monitor against which I would have to press my face seems extreme compared to putting on a pair of eyeglasses. Remember the function of the lens is to correct your focus at a specific distance. My eyeglasses for outside and driving would be impossible to use for reading or the computer monitor, so I use prescription eyeglasses for reading and computer. Likewise, my reading eyeglasses would make everything slightly out of focus at distances. I did this once when I went to a reunion and wore the wrong eyeglasses. They look almost identical. I was wondering why my vision suddenly got so bad beyond my arm's length. I don't like bifocals. I get a sore neck tilting back my head to use the bottom lens portion for computer monitor viewing. I am in the same boat regards sore neck syndrome, especially reading the top of the display, my bifocals are +9. My ophthalmologist always gives me a copy of the Specs and also sends a copy to my medical Doctor. Rene |
#140
|
|||
|
|||
A screen question.
In message , VanguardLH
writes: "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote: The original poster Peter Jason didn't say he only had [astigmatism] in one eye. Are your palm prints exactly the same for your right hand as for your left hand? Nope. Same for your right and left fingerprints for the matching fingers. Same for your eyes. Irregularities in the shape of the cornea that generate refractive error (astigmatism) do not progress equally in both eyes because the tissues are separate, not common. Many folks with astigmatism have it in only one eye. While astigmatism usually occurs concurrently in both eyes (bilateral), it is not necessarily equal in both eyes (i.e., it can be asymmetrical). Astigmatism in only one eye is often caused by injury (which is my case due to a cat scratching my right eye when I was a kid) or by degenerative eye conditions or disease; however, eyes do not degenerate equally. No pair of disconnected tissue will degenerate equally. Like you (though for different reason - mine's from birth), I have dissimilar eyes (to the extent that I don't have 3D vision; both eyes worked fine when I was younger, but my brain never developed the ability to use both images at once). I will admit I'd got used to thinking _most_ other people had eyes that were more similar than mine are. Regardless of astigmatism, how often do eyeglass wearers get exactly the same prescription for both eyes? Most users don't even know the specs for their specs; that is, they go to the optometrist, get their exam, and get their eyeglasses, and the bill they get never mentions the That's _probably_ still true here (UK), but less so: several of our optometry chains offer free eye tests as a marketing exercise from time to time, and also certain classes (children below a certain age, pensioners above one, and I think those on certain kinds of benefit [welfare]) are entitled to free ones too. So the more savvy of us - or, even those entitled to free glasses as well as tests, but who don't like the options (frames, coatings, ...) offered at a particular branch - go for a free test, then take the prescription elsewhere. sphere, cylinder, and axis measurements. If they want to keep their own One that's often left off the card is intraocular distance, i. e. how far apart your pupils are. history of how their eyesight has degenerated, they have to ask for a copy of the measurements to know what they are. Several times when I've asked for the specs, they'd look mildly surpised and asked "Why do you need to know?". I'd respond "Why shouldn't I know?" Indeed! In any case, for a monitor to correct vision impairment would mean the screen would need to place a lens at your face to correct the refractive error at the distance for where the pixels are painted. Don't know about you, but having a large bubble of glass protrude from the monitor against which I would have to press my face seems extreme compared to putting on a pair of eyeglasses. With the one exception of the sort of astigmatism that is purely an aspect ratio distortion, and similar in both eyes. A monitor and graphics card combination _could_ sort that, by simply using the "wrong" ratio - _if_ a ratio "error" that countermatched the astigmatism was achievable (including by rotating the monitor if necessary). _Maybe_ that type of astigmatism is actually very rare; I don't know. I based my naïve thoughts on the matter on being told (decades ago) that the reason some famous painters painted pictures of a stretched world (e. g. tall thin people) was that they had astigmatism. (I was always suspicious of that explanation, because surely if they had, and looked at a picture they'd painted in that manner, it'd still look wrong to them.) Remember the function of the lens is to correct your focus at a specific One function ... distance. My eyeglasses for outside and driving would be impossible to .... and for most practical glasses, for a _range_ of distances - though ones for specific occupations, including display screen use, may be optimised for quite a narrow range. [] -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf As for cooking, what a bore that is. It's such a faff, thinking of what to have, buying it and cooking it and clearing up, then all you do is eat it - and have to start all over again next day. Hunter Davies, RT 2017/2/4-10 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|