Simviation Forum - Question about your screen resolution...

	Search the archive:

Simviation Main Site | Site Search | Upload Images

Simviation Forum › Graphic Gallery › Studio V Screenshot Workshop › Question about your screen resolution...

(Moderators: Mitch., Fly2e, ozzy72, beaky, Clipper, JBaymore, Bob70, BigTruck)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1

Send Topic

Print

Question about your screen resolution... (Read 2265 times)

Dec 11^th, 2009 at 12:44pm

Fly2e Offline
Global Moderator
It's 5 O'clock Somewhere!
KFRG

Gender:
Posts: 199132

I just stumbled on something that I was not really aware of. I run my PC & Sim on a wide-screen monitor with a resolution of 1680 X 1050 @ 65 hertz. Everything looks crisp, clear and IMHO, quite nice. When I was at my parent's house last night, I logged in to check a few things. Now they have a standard 4X3 Aspect ratio monitor running a resolution of 800. When I was checking my screen shots they looked absolutely horrible! It then occurred to me that anybody not running at the higher resolutions probably see a very different image that what I am seeing. These are the shots that I was referencing as they have a lot going on, especially with auto-gen. Has anybody experienced this and if you don't mind me asking, what resolution do you run your screen at?

Thanks,

Dave Cool

Cool

Intel Core i7 Extreme Processor 965, 4.2GHz/8MB L3 Cache, Asus P6T Deluxe V2 Intel X58 Chipset Cross
Fire & SLI Supported, Mushkin Redline 6GB (3X2GB) Memory, eVGA NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285, Vista 64.

IP Logged

Reply #1 - Dec 11^th, 2009 at 12:59pm

skoker Offline
Colonel
Jordan never wore his
safety goggles...
1G3

Gender:
Posts: 4611

1680 X 1050 @ 65 hertz also, but I have a high contrast monitor, so my darks look darker and my lights are lighter that other screens.

IP Logged

Reply #2 - Dec 11^th, 2009 at 1:02pm

patchz Offline
Colonel
What, me worry?
IN THE FUNNY PAPERS

Gender:
Posts: 10589

They look fine to me Dave, I'm running 1280 x 1024 @ 60 hertz. But I have been wondering if the opposite is true. Does viewing one of my shots on a much higher resolution monitor make it look bad, jaggies more visible, compression results, etc?

If God intended aircraft engines to have horizontally opposed engines, Pratt and Whitney would have made them that way.

IP Logged

Reply #3 - Dec 11^th, 2009 at 1:06pm

Rich H Offline
Colonel
Sweden Jamboree 2011!
Solihull, U.K.

Gender:
Posts: 2082

1440 x 900 @ 75Hz.
But my monitor decided to change it's colour one day, so everything doesn't look quite right.

"Politics" is made up of two words, "Poli", which is Greek for "many", and "tics", which are blood sucking insects. - Gore Vidal

IP Logged

Reply #4 - Dec 11^th, 2009 at 1:06pm

skoker Offline
Colonel
Jordan never wore his
safety goggles...
1G3

Gender:
Posts: 4611

patchz wrote on Dec 11^th, 2009 at 1:02pm:

They look fine to me Dave, I'm running 1280 x 1024 @ 60 hertz. But I have been wondering if the opposite is true. Does viewing one of my shots on a much higher resolution monitor make it look bad, jaggies more visible, compression results, etc?

It does look a tad blurry to me.

IP Logged

Reply #5 - Dec 11^th, 2009 at 1:07pm

Fozzer Offline
Colonel
An elderly FS 2004 addict!
Hereford. England. EGBS.

Posts: 24861

Even with my maximimum screen resolution of 1280 X 1024, on my 17'' LCD Monitor, I still have to scroll the screen horizontally to view the individual 1024 pixel wide pictures, which also hides any text which may be included, and which is so annoying that I rarely visit the Graphics Forum!... Wink

Wink

...!

When I post a screen shot, photo, etc, I limit its width to 900 pixels wide, to display without any horizontal scrolling, in case anyone else suffers the same problem!... Kiss

Kiss

...!

Paul.... Wink

Wink

...!

Dell Dimension 5000 BTX Tower. Win7 Home Edition, 32 Bit. Intel Pentium 4, dual 2.8 GHz. 2.5GB RAM, nVidia GF 9500GT 1GB. SATA 500GB + 80GB. Philips 17" LCD Monitor. Micronet ADSL Modem only. Saitek Cyborg Evo Force. FS 2004 + FSX. Briggs and Stratton Petrol Lawn Mower...Motor Bikes. Gas Cooker... and lots of musical instruments!.... ...!
Yamaha MO6,MM6,DX7,DX11,DX21,DX100,MK100,EMT10,PSR400,PSS780,Roland GW-8L v2,TR505,Casio MT-205,Korg CX3v2 dual manual,+ Leslie 760,M-Audio Prokeys88,KeyRig,Cubase,Keyfax4,Guitars,Orchestral,Baroque,Renaissance,Medieval Instruments.

IP Logged

Reply #6 - Dec 11^th, 2009 at 1:11pm

Fly2e Offline
Global Moderator
It's 5 O'clock Somewhere!
KFRG

Gender:
Posts: 199132

Quote:

Posted by: Fozzer Posted on: Today at 1:07pm
Even with my maximum screen resolution of 1280 X 1024, on my 17'' LCD Monitor, I still have to scroll the screen horizontally to view the individual 1024 pixel wide pictures, which also hides any text which may be included, and which is so annoying that I rarely visit the Graphics Forum!......!

Yes, I know what you are saying Paul but that is not what I am asking...
I am wondering about the quality of the screen shot in reference to what I see as to what others with different resolutions might see.

Intel Core i7 Extreme Processor 965, 4.2GHz/8MB L3 Cache, Asus P6T Deluxe V2 Intel X58 Chipset Cross
Fire & SLI Supported, Mushkin Redline 6GB (3X2GB) Memory, eVGA NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285, Vista 64.

IP Logged

Reply #7 - Dec 11^th, 2009 at 3:22pm

Ashar Offline
Colonel
Ottawa, Ontario

Gender:
Posts: 4485

1920 x 1080 @ 60Hz here and well, your shots look great on my end.

Blabbing Away at SimV Since June 8, 2004

IP Logged

Reply #8 - Dec 11^th, 2009 at 4:22pm

N. Chapman Offline
Colonel
Photography Guy
Fremont, CA

Gender:
Posts: 971

16:10 and 5:4 still look great over here. Though my desktop monitor is a bit out dated and has a lower contrast ratio than my laptop does lol.

Click for Computer info overload!

IP Logged

Reply #9 - Dec 11^th, 2009 at 4:44pm

jime59 Offline
Colonel
I Fly Sim!
Streamwood,Il

Gender:
Posts: 1608

1440 x 900 @60hz........Shots look outstanding on my end.

The mind is like a parachute...it only works when it's open.

IP Logged

Reply #10 - Dec 11^th, 2009 at 5:40pm

Frequent Flyer Offline
Colonel
It's SuperCaliFragilIstic
EspiAliDocious!
Lucy's Sky with Diamonds

Posts: 1569

1280x1024 @ 60hz, looks excellent here (although I have to scroll in order to see the whole shot Sad

Sad

).

I'll check this again when I'll be on my big monitored computer, and I will edit this post.

IP Logged

Reply #11 - Dec 11^th, 2009 at 6:06pm

Crash Ex Member

1680x1050. Same resolution as yours Dave so no problems here.

Carlo Wink

Wink

IP Logged

Reply #12 - Dec 11^th, 2009 at 6:36pm

Bruce448 Offline
Colonel
formally known as WAFU448
Newark, England

Gender:
Posts: 863

Quote:

1680x1050. Same resolution as yours Dave so no problems here.

Carlo Wink

Wink

Snap

Bruce

IP Logged

Reply #13 - Dec 11^th, 2009 at 9:40pm

B-Valvs Offline
Colonel
Jaggie Police
5B2

Gender:
Posts: 5949

The question you bring up is very interseting. The monitor I'm using right now is 1280X800 at 60 Hertz and your shots look amazing.

Cool

Cool

IP Logged

Reply #14 - Dec 12^th, 2009 at 6:45pm

Leigh Offline
Colonel
"Its not the destination
its the journey."
somewhere over the rainbow

Gender:
Posts: 1503

well i was at a friends place and hes got a full HD Tv that i plug my computer into 1980*1080 and it was crisp and clear....but we couldnt see it from where we were sitting so i dropped the res down and then everything looked bad.

i did the same with my 22" LCD TV its good on its native screen res but anything other than that it looks like someone shot it.

just what ive experienced. Cool

Cool

IP Logged

Reply #15 - Dec 12^th, 2009 at 7:55pm

Mictheslik Offline
Colonel
Me in G-LFSM :D
Bristol, England

Gender:
Posts: 6011

I have a feeling that it will be the browser, not the screen that's the issue....A degradation in quality (and more jaggies etc.) will occur if the image is reduced (try it in photoshop...look at an image at 100%, then at something like 70%....looks horrid Tongue

Tongue

)....

Some web browsers may try and automatically reduce images in order to fit on the smaller screen (and eliminate the need to scroll), thus resulting in the loss in quality....

Just an idea (they look fine on my 1680x1050 Wink

Wink

)

.mic

[center]

IP Logged

Reply #16 - Dec 14^th, 2009 at 4:01am

JakesF14 Offline
Colonel
Blistering Barnacles!
South Africa

Gender:
Posts: 1866

My settings is 1280x800 @60Hertz and a secondary monitor 1280x1024 @60Hertz. Your Images look fine to me on both screens.

Just worry about the judge's screen resolution! That's all that matter

IP Logged

Reply #17 - Dec 14^th, 2009 at 4:34am

Hagar Offline
Colonel
My Spitfire Girl
Costa Geriatrica

Posts: 33159

I think the important thing is the resolution of the image. I run my wide-screen monitor at its native resolution of 1440 x 900. As it's wider than the maximum allowed on the forum all images posted here within the width limits fit nicely on my screen.* Must admit I've often wondered what my photos look like on other people's systems, especially at a screen resolution like 800 x 600 where the standard 1024 width images are displayed bigger than the screen. I know a lot of people still use these resolutions for various reasons.

Quote:

Some web browsers may try and automatically reduce images in order to fit on the smaller screen (and eliminate the need to scroll), thus resulting in the loss in quality....

I suspect Mic might be right about this. LCD flat screens not being set at their native resolution is another thing that might affect the display quality of images.

*PS. This is one reason I would be against raising the width limit. I think it would have negative results for the majority of members with smaller monitors.

« Last Edit: Dec 14^th, 2009 at 5:58am by Hagar »

Founder & Sole Member - Grumpy's Over the Hill Club for Veteran Virtual Aviators
Member of the Fox Four Group

Need help? Try Grumpy's Lair

My photo gallery

IP Logged

Reply #18 - Dec 14^th, 2009 at 9:00am

Fly2e Offline
Global Moderator
It's 5 O'clock Somewhere!
KFRG

Gender:
Posts: 199132

Quote:

Posted by: Hagar Posted on: Today at 4:34am
*PS. This is one reason I would be against raising the width limit. I think it would have negative results for the majority of members with smaller monitors.

I agree Doug with you on that Doug. Like I said, I was only wondering what others see with different settings but as i thought, the majority are running wide screens at higher resolutions...

Intel Core i7 Extreme Processor 965, 4.2GHz/8MB L3 Cache, Asus P6T Deluxe V2 Intel X58 Chipset Cross
Fire & SLI Supported, Mushkin Redline 6GB (3X2GB) Memory, eVGA NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285, Vista 64.

IP Logged

Pages: 1

Send Topic

Print

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Top of this page

Simviation Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5 AE!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2010. All Rights Reserved.

Valid XHTML

Valid CSS

Powered by Perl

Source Forge