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 |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Calculating the aspect ratio
On 6/7/19 1:48 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Ken Springer wrote: I'm looking at the aspect ratios of various screen resolutions. So far I've located 48. If you want to see a couple oddball resolutions, replace your monitor's driver with MS's Generic PNP Monitor driver. I don't think all of the resolutions are for monitors, new or old, but I don't know that either. As we all get older, most of us begin having visual issues. :-( I'm looking for a solution to help that without having to install any additional software or purchase additional hardware. I need the formula so I can plug it into a cell in a spreadsheet. Scripts and such isn't the answer, as the final spreadsheet file needs to be generic enough to even work in Numbers on a Mac. why? So I can help others when they ask for my advice. Which, the best advice will probably be to start with a larger monitor, as most won't have anything bigger that 20", or they are just using a laptop. pick the highest resolution that is comfortable for your eyesight and ignore the rest. photos will normally be scaled to fit, no matter which one you choose, and can be zoomed to full resolution if desired. Aye yup, known this for years. -- Ken MacOS 10.14.5 Firefox 67.0 Thunderbird 60.7 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Calculating the aspect ratio
"Paul" wrote
| LCDs work best at native resolution. I would not be | thinking about "aspect ratio" with an LCD monitor, because | good options are pretty limited. I have a few choices. Interestingly, I have different choices depending on the connector. HDMI gives me options different from DVI. (AMD 760G graphics with Acer 24" monitor.) Native resolution is generally just too small. I'm running at 1440x900. Suggested is 1920x1080. There are also several other options in the 16:9 and 16:10 ratios. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Calculating the aspect ratio
In article , Ken Springer
wrote: I'm looking at the aspect ratios of various screen resolutions. So far I've located 48. If you want to see a couple oddball resolutions, replace your monitor's driver with MS's Generic PNP Monitor driver. I don't think all of the resolutions are for monitors, new or old, but I don't know that either. As we all get older, most of us begin having visual issues. :-( I'm looking for a solution to help that without having to install any additional software or purchase additional hardware. I need the formula so I can plug it into a cell in a spreadsheet. Scripts and such isn't the answer, as the final spreadsheet file needs to be generic enough to even work in Numbers on a Mac. why? So I can help others when they ask for my advice. Which, the best advice will probably be to start with a larger monitor, as most won't have anything bigger that 20", or they are just using a laptop. advice doesn't change with different resolutions, nor does your display settings need to exactly match what others use. pick the highest resolution that is comfortable for your eyesight and ignore the rest. photos will normally be scaled to fit, no matter which one you choose, and can be zoomed to full resolution if desired. Aye yup, known this for years. apparently not. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Calculating the aspect ratio
On 6/7/19 2:21 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Paul wrote: LCDs work best at native resolution. that does not apply when the pixel size is smaller than what the eye can resolve, as it is with hi-dpi displays. I would not be thinking about "aspect ratio" with an LCD monitor, because good options are pretty limited. different aspect ratios means either letterboxing, stretching one dimension to fit or clipping, none of which look good. Not if the other chosen aspect ratio is the same as the native resolution. -- Ken MacOS 10.14.5 Firefox 67.0 Thunderbird 60.7 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Calculating the aspect ratio
In article , Ken Springer
wrote: LCDs work best at native resolution. that does not apply when the pixel size is smaller than what the eye can resolve, as it is with hi-dpi displays. I would not be thinking about "aspect ratio" with an LCD monitor, because good options are pretty limited. different aspect ratios means either letterboxing, stretching one dimension to fit or clipping, none of which look good. Not if the other chosen aspect ratio is the same as the native resolution. read what i wrote again. |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Calculating the aspect ratio
Ken Springer wrote:
On 6/7/19 1:48 PM, nospam wrote: In article , Ken Springer wrote: I'm looking at the aspect ratios of various screen resolutions. So far I've located 48. If you want to see a couple oddball resolutions, replace your monitor's driver with MS's Generic PNP Monitor driver. I don't think all of the resolutions are for monitors, new or old, but I don't know that either. As we all get older, most of us begin having visual issues. :-( I'm looking for a solution to help that without having to install any additional software or purchase additional hardware. I need the formula so I can plug it into a cell in a spreadsheet. Scripts and such isn't the answer, as the final spreadsheet file needs to be generic enough to even work in Numbers on a Mac. why? So I can help others when they ask for my advice. Which, the best advice will probably be to start with a larger monitor, as most won't have anything bigger that 20", or they are just using a laptop. pick the highest resolution that is comfortable for your eyesight and ignore the rest. photos will normally be scaled to fit, no matter which one you choose, and can be zoomed to full resolution if desired. Aye yup, known this for years. You don't really have as much choice on "wide screen" versus "square screen" as you might think. You also don't need a spread sheet, as the Newegg selector has various options ("trends" as it were), sitting right in front of your face. You can become an immediate expert by looking at what is on offer. Here's your Newegg-based chart. Recommended Resolution 5K 5120 x 2880 (5K) 16:9 * DisplayPort 1.3, HDMI 2.1 5120 x 2160 (5K) 5120 x 1440 4K 4096 x 2160 (4K) wiide 3840 x 2160 (4K) 16:9 2K 3840 x 1600 wiiide 3440 x 1440 (2K) wiiide ^ | 2048 x 2560 B&W Radiology | ----------- Check your video card standard! 2560 x 1600 (2K) 16:10 * Dual lane DVI 2560 x 1440 (2K) 2560 x 1080 (2K) 2K 1920 x 1440 (non-square pixels, 7" display) 1920 x 1200 16:10 Desirable but disappearing from market * Single lane DVI 1920 x 1080 16:9 Most common monitor going (Hollywood here we come) ----------- 1680 x 1050 For the visually impaired, likely 1600 x 1200 to be joke country. "Old" Aspect Ratios live down here. 1600 x 900 | 1440 x 900 | 1400 x 900 v 1366 x 768 1360 x 768 1280 x 1024 1280 x 800 1280 x 720 1024 x 768 1024 x 600 800 x 480 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Visual_Interface Buy an IPS monitor, rather than TN. PV is also an option. There are specialty monitors, TN with 1ms response (gtg), 10 bit color, 60-144Hz refresh. IPS has wide viewing angle, so if your posture is bad, the image won't be degraded all that much. And ridiculous monitors that will poke your eye out. https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-pro-...-mac-pro-wwdc/ 1,000 nits brightness (1,600 nits peak) 32" 6K resolution (6,016 x 3,384) $6000 ? Ghastly power consumption Cooling fan (common on monitors like this). HTH, Paul |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Calculating the aspect ratio
In article , Paul
wrote: And ridiculous monitors that will poke your eye out. https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-pro-...-new-6k-monito r-starts-at-5000-mac-pro-wwdc/ 1,000 nits brightness (1,600 nits peak) 32" 6K resolution (6,016 x 3,384) $6000 ? Ghastly power consumption Cooling fan (common on monitors like this). it's cheaper and with higher specs than existing solutions: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...i_hqlm_3125x_3 1_4k_hd_multi_format_lcd.html https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...3217c002_dp_v2 421_4k_reference_display.html https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...ars_9_006_ruig e_31_cinema_4k.html |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Calculating the aspect ratio
On 6/7/19 2:16 PM, Paul wrote:
Ken Springer wrote: On 6/6/19 3:25 PM, Ken Springer wrote: Does anyone know the underlying mathematical formula used in this webpage? https://andrew.hedges.name/experiments/aspect_ratio/ I'm afraid my algebraic skills have dwindled to almost nil in the 65 years since high school algebra! LOL OK, this is a new subthread, I don't want to derail any of the others. It has been completely unintentional, but this problem has turned into an interesting observation of reading comprehension, and people's tendency to follow the thought processes of those before them. I thought, for a moment, that nospam and Ammammata were going to head off in the right direction. That direction is... To ask me why I need the formula! LOL Everyone assumed I wanted to do something with a photo. I suspect that is a result of the aspect ration calculation pages I looked at all used photos as an example in one way or another. But that's not the purpose. And, I didn't say a darned thing about photos! VBG And, by golly, before I could get this posted, it looks like Char Jackson has the answer! I'm looking at the aspect ratios of various screen resolutions. So far I've located 48. If you want to see a couple oddball resolutions, replace your monitor's driver with MS's Generic PNP Monitor driver. I don't think all of the resolutions are for monitors, new or old, but I don't know that either. As we all get older, most of us begin having visual issues. :-( I'm looking for a solution to help that without having to install any additional software or purchase additional hardware. I need the formula so I can plug it into a cell in a spreadsheet. Scripts and such isn't the answer, as the final spreadsheet file needs to be generic enough to even work in Numbers on a Mac. Although, it doesn't need to work in VisiCalc. LOL OK, give us an example test case with numbers, as to how you would go about doing this. Would you rephrase? I'm not exactly sure what you're asking for.0 LCDs work best at native resolution. They do, no argument about that. But, if you can't read the screen at native resolution, you don't give a damn if it's native resolution or not. I would not be thinking about "aspect ratio" with an LCD monitor, because good options are pretty limited. True. And with what I've seen, your options, at least in Windows with a correct monitor driver are limited to a few resolutions, although I know not how the driver programmers come up with those numbers. Logically, you might see just resolution options that match your monitor. That appears to not be true, as I have 2 resolutions listed that do not match the aspect ration of the monitor. 1, however, matches the native resolution of a video projector I own, but it has never been connected to the computer. You can change the OS "Percentage scale" option to affect font choices, to improve things if your vision is slipping. That doesn't require maths, just a mouse. And, what if that's not good enough? This project does not affect me, for now, but I do know a lady for whom it is an issue. I've done just about everything I can for her, but to do any more she needs a bigger monitor. And, she still uses a magnifying glass. :-( Pan mode has been broken by WDDM "improvements'. So it can't be that. It might work with XDDM. By "pan mode", are you talking about the really old idea of virtual desktops where the desktop is actually larger than the monitor, and you move it around to see the area you want? If so, I hope they never come back. LOL What else is there ? Why do you think we went looking for Image aspect ratio as a first guess ? Because aspect ratio doesn't do you a darn bit of good. That's because no one bothered to ask me what I was doing. And for what I'm doing, it *does* do a bit of good. You preserve aspect ratio choices on a CRT (which can handle multiple resolutions without looking crappy), in order to keep circles looking like circles (rather than ellipses). So that's the reason there. You can hardly "hammer" a CRT and perform miracles. Reducing the resolution too much, causes the user to use the scroll bars too much, when doing MSWord. That would not exactly be satisfactory. I know. I've got a 19" CRT on my Vista system using 1152X864 for the screen resolution. 4:3 aspect. Gorgeous picture. I sometimes use it for playing an old color movie before there was widescreen in the theaters/ So give us a worked example, of how knowing an aspect ratio, will improve your life. Is this similar to your question at the beginning? -- Ken MacOS 10.14.5 Firefox 67.0 Thunderbird 60.7 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Calculating the aspect ratio
In article , Ken Springer
wrote: LCDs work best at native resolution. They do, no argument about that. there is for hi-dpi displays. But, if you can't read the screen at native resolution, you don't give a damn if it's native resolution or not. false. for hi-dpi displays at native resolution, everything will be far too small to be readable. they need to be at a *non* native resolution to be usable. |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Calculating the aspect ratio
On 6/7/19 4:43 PM, Paul wrote:
Ken Springer wrote: On 6/7/19 1:48 PM, nospam wrote: In article , Ken Springer wrote: I'm looking at the aspect ratios of various screen resolutions. So far I've located 48. If you want to see a couple oddball resolutions, replace your monitor's driver with MS's Generic PNP Monitor driver. I don't think all of the resolutions are for monitors, new or old, but I don't know that either. As we all get older, most of us begin having visual issues. :-( I'm looking for a solution to help that without having to install any additional software or purchase additional hardware. I need the formula so I can plug it into a cell in a spreadsheet. Scripts and such isn't the answer, as the final spreadsheet file needs to be generic enough to even work in Numbers on a Mac. why? So I can help others when they ask for my advice. Which, the best advice will probably be to start with a larger monitor, as most won't have anything bigger that 20", or they are just using a laptop. pick the highest resolution that is comfortable for your eyesight and ignore the rest. photos will normally be scaled to fit, no matter which one you choose, and can be zoomed to full resolution if desired. Aye yup, known this for years. You don't really have as much choice on "wide screen" versus "square screen" as you might think. You also don't need a spread sheet, as the Newegg selector has various options ("trends" as it were), sitting right in front of your face. You can become an immediate expert by looking at what is on offer. But only on what's currently available in Newegg's list. That list does me no good if I'm trying to help someone who already has a monitor. Here's your Newegg-based chart. snip https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Visual_Interface Buy an IPS monitor, rather than TN. PV is also an option. There are specialty monitors, TN with 1ms response (gtg), 10 bit color, 60-144Hz refresh. For me, IPS is what I ordered. Arrived today, as a matter of fact. snip https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-pro-...-mac-pro-wwdc/ 1,000 nits brightness (1,600 nits peak) 32" 6K resolution (6,016 x 3,384) $6000 ? Ghastly power consumption Cooling fan (common on monitors like this). If I had all the money in the world, that's what I'd buy. And I'd have bought a Power Mac, rather than the cheapest Mac Mini Apple has! LOL -- Ken MacOS 10.14.5 Firefox 67.0 Thunderbird 60.7 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Calculating the aspect ratio
Ken Springer wrote:
On 6/7/19 2:21 PM, nospam wrote: In article , Paul wrote: LCDs work best at native resolution. that does not apply when the pixel size is smaller than what the eye can resolve, as it is with hi-dpi displays. I would not be thinking about "aspect ratio" with an LCD monitor, because good options are pretty limited. different aspect ratios means either letterboxing, stretching one dimension to fit or clipping, none of which look good. Not if the other chosen aspect ratio is the same as the native resolution. There are two settings. You set the resolution to "native", on the understanding the monitor has square pixels. This is the sharpest setting. Any other corrections will be done elsewhere. Good so far. Now, your 4K monitor is making the print really really small. You reach for the percentage control and set the screen to 200%. This causes the OS to make desktop objects twice as big, which compensates for the higher resolution of the display, and makes things easier to see again. https://i.postimg.cc/50kQkT9c/window...nt-setting.gif My WinXP screen is set to 125% I think, and it's not all that big of a screen either. I don't really know what percentage settings are possible on each OS, or make sense. I thought the notion of HiDPI was at least 200% or so. These are things you can play with at the computer store. The only problem here is, the last store that had such a collection of displays, isn't in business any more. And the remaining stores are "cheap" when it comes to such issues. Not nearly the same opportunity for playing. Paul |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Calculating the aspect ratio
On 6/7/19 4:34 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Ken Springer wrote: LCDs work best at native resolution. that does not apply when the pixel size is smaller than what the eye can resolve, as it is with hi-dpi displays. I would not be thinking about "aspect ratio" with an LCD monitor, because good options are pretty limited. different aspect ratios means either letterboxing, stretching one dimension to fit or clipping, none of which look good. Not if the other chosen aspect ratio is the same as the native resolution. read what i wrote again. Exactly what I was looking for when I was experimenting. None of that happened. You can't count windows that are too large when switching to a lower resolution. No letterboxing at all, -- Ken MacOS 10.14.5 Firefox 67.0 Thunderbird 60.7 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Calculating the aspect ratio
In article , Ken Springer
wrote: If I had all the money in the world, that's what I'd buy. And I'd have bought a Power Mac, rather than the cheapest Mac Mini Apple has! LOL powermacs were discontinued more than ten years ago, and can be found used for relatively cheap. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Calculating the aspect ratio
In article , Ken Springer
wrote: LCDs work best at native resolution. that does not apply when the pixel size is smaller than what the eye can resolve, as it is with hi-dpi displays. I would not be thinking about "aspect ratio" with an LCD monitor, because good options are pretty limited. different aspect ratios means either letterboxing, stretching one dimension to fit or clipping, none of which look good. Not if the other chosen aspect ratio is the same as the native resolution. read what i wrote again. Exactly what I was looking for when I was experimenting. None of that happened. You can't count windows that are too large when switching to a lower resolution. No letterboxing at all, read it one more time. |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Calculating the aspect ratio
On 6/7/19 6:13 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Ken Springer wrote: If I had all the money in the world, that's what I'd buy. And I'd have bought a Power Mac, rather than the cheapest Mac Mini Apple has! LOL powermacs were discontinued more than ten years ago, and can be found used for relatively cheap. I probably wrote Power Mac because I have one, 6400. It was my mother's first computer, and except for the monitor, it still runs. -- Ken MacOS 10.14.5 Firefox 67.0 Thunderbird 60.7 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|