ah, i knew it, you got nothing.
your not very logical proffessor
Anyone has more than two computers?
- Thread starter FunMan
- Start date
ah, i knew it, you got nothing.
your not very logical proffessorhow can you be logical if your not rational first?
I like gray backgrounds for text. In programming, I set my IDE and text editor backgrounds all to (192, 192, 192), reduced the brightness and contrast, and it felt like a lot less strain on my eyes. Coworkers would say my screen looked so dark. I think the white background was so bright it would cause my forehead and eyelid muscles to tense, like trying to squint, but I wasn't aware of it. Is that the real explanation? I don't know. But bottom line, if it works, it works, I don't really care why.
And I still wish they would bring back 4:3 monitors with 1200 vertical resolution!! Now I can only get refurbs off of Ebay, they'll be gone in a few years.
And I still wish they would bring back 4:3 monitors with 1200 vertical resolution!! Now I can only get refurbs off of Ebay, they'll be gone in a few years.
The HP LP2065 is still widely available (new), I believe.
http://www.google.com/products/cata...=X&ei=Fk8zTdDLB4bmsQP_6-mTBg&ved=0CFYQgggwAA#
Addendum...
Apparently the Samsung 204B, with lower cost TN panel, is also still available.
Great to have that info you provided. I knew of it, but not the specifics.
However, it still stands that some people are having problems with the CCFL backlighting but do not have problems with LED backlighting. This has nothing to do with the other properties. We don't know the frequency of the backlighting in THEIR monitors, if they have fluorescents in their environment or with transformer or electronic ballasts, nor if the LED backlit monitors that work for them have LEDs that are pulsed or DC/continuously driven. Not enough info to know why they have a problem nor why the LED solves it, but they attribute it to a flicker they see.
Since you know so much about LCD monitors, perhaps you could shed some light on what I had to do with my six monitor setup. They're a mix of Hannspree/HannsG 28" monitors. The screens appear identical, but the menu choices vary slightly. My eyes are around 30" back from the center monitor, with the side monitors angled in toward me slightly. The bottom row of three monitors are positioned such that the top of the screens are level with my eyes. If the top row is mounted right side up, when viewed from sitting the top row is both darker and hugely lacking in contrast (largely unreadable). The bevels are rounded on the bottom, so the top row of monitors mount nicely upsidedown, and then everything is fine when I'm sitting. When standing, the bottom row is good but not quite as sharp, and the top row of monitors is perfectly viewable but appears slightly darker.
Viewing stays the same even when viewed from way off on the side.
Follow then, that NITRO should be ET's most successful player!
I hear he can get a tan just from the radiation from all of his monitors.
Quote from Scataphagos:
Follow then, that NITRO should be ET's most successful player!
I hear he can get a tan just from the radiation from all of his monitors.
With a wall of six 28" LCDs, after they've been on a while and the room's heated up, the heat from mine is uncomfortable at a foot. Makes a good space heater on chilly nights.
Not wanting the security issue of having a window open, I had to run the a/c into early December, and this is in Canada.
Apparently NITRO likes the room "warm and toasty"..
I know much more that I ever wanted, but I had to, because the LCD business has been built on more false promises and misinformation than the entire financial industry. That contrast shift and discoloration (darkening) at high viewing angles are both typical of TN panels, so perhaps your screens have them. High viewing angles are the easiest way to recognize a good panel - unless they are minimally less than 180 degrees (but 170 is not good enough sadly, has to be 176 or 178 - TNs can claim to have 170, because contrast ratios at such angles are not standardized and can differ vastly yet still be 'acceptable'). Try sitting further away from your monitors, tilting them in the form of a beak facing away from you, or placing the offending beasts in portrait mode (if horizontal viewing angles are better and you have a pivot function or a wall mount), all of which should reduce the need to look at them from above or below, i.e. at a high vertical viewing angle (which is a stress test for any panel, even IPS have contrast shift more pronounced vertically than horizontally).
Always read a detailed review before you buy these things, because with these uneven beasts you can neither rely on the manufacturer brand nor on the quality of the panel used. To illustrate, see the tables below, where it turns out that 'even' Dell can release monitors with 50 ms input lag(!), while another manufacturer (Apple) managed to double the perceived image latency (aka ghosting) of an otherwise excellent IPS panel (from 10 to 20 ms)... and bear in mind, that all of such independent reviews rely on ridiculously small samples (usually one specimen), so if there is a large within-group variance (e.g. due to different firmware versions in 'the same' model), the reviews can be misleading. In one such case, Dell resorted to the trusted 'bait and switch' technique with their 2007WFP model, replacing the originally used S-IPS matrix (just after reviews have been written) with the cheaper are slower S-PVA technology (giving the unsuspecting users higher contrast instead). The model symbol remained the same, so people had to resort to delving a bit deeper, into the service menu, to check what they really bought...
...'even' Dell can release monitors with 50 ms input lag:
...while another manufacturer (Apple) managed to double the perceived image latency (aka ghosting) of an otherwise excellent IPS panel (from 10 to 20 ms)...:
