Quote:
Originally Posted by Vieo
I'm considering replacing my 19" NEC MultiSync FE991SB with a HP L2335. I've never had an LCD monitor before so I'm worried about resolution issues. I've heard people say that if you run a LCD monitor in any resolution other than it's native, it'll look like crap. Is that true?
|
It's more dependent on the monitor than it is with anything else. If the scaling sucks...it sucks. No getting around that.
Quote:
Also, what happens in both cases when you go below the native resolution of an LCD? For example, I asked someone what happens if you have a LCD monitor with a 1280x1024 native resolution and you bump it up to 1600x1200. They told me that parts of the screen will only be visible through moving your mouse to the edge of the screen so it can shift/pan over to it. If I choose a resolution below the native(1280x1024) one, like 800x600, I wouldn't need to pan to see the whole screen, right? The image will just be stretched or blown up a little?
|
If you bump it up it will basically pan&scan when you move your mouse. There won't be any zooming or anything of the like...it will display but trust me it's not even worth considering. You may not even be able to bump it past the native resolution, IIRC it's impossible in DVI mode (which makes 100% total sense).
For smaller resolutions the main problem is the aspect ratio making the image look like ass. 1280x1024 is 5:4, 800x600 is 4:3. The image will be stretched to the 5:4 ratio unless you keep the aspect ratio on (1:1), then you would see bars on the top of the screen. Otherwise it's going to stretch the image vertically more than horizontally and that is what makes the 800x600 resolution look like shit. There isn't a perfect 1:1 match for every pixel so the monitor has to fudge...introducing a resolution that isn't native means the monitor has to compensate and fill in the pixel that don't scale up to 1280x1024.
This really seems convoluted. If anyone wants to clear this up a bit feel free.