goldstin@shire (Jonathan Goldstine) (07/30/89)
I am looking for a color monitor that can support 1024x768 resolution. Has anyone had experience with the Nanao 9070S monitor? This is a high resolution 16" color monitor that has been available for a couple of years. The current discount price seems to be about $950-$1000. This makes it somewhat more expensive than such alternatives as Sony's new monitor, but the fact that it is larger than 14" is tempting. However, since I have not seen the monitor, I do not know anything about the visual quality of its picture or the quality of features such as autosizing. If you have seen this monitor, could you send me your impressions of it by e-mail? (I'll post a summary if responses warrant it.) goldstin@psuvaxs.bitnet goldstin@shire.uucp goldstin@shire.cs.psu.edu
caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg) (08/01/89)
I've worked out a rule of thumb for discussing resolutions to
use with color monitors with shadow masks, based on the
Nyquist sampling theory. According to the Nyquist theory, we
need to sample at 2*frequency to accurately represent
1*frequency. Applied to my Diamondscan monitor I get:
240 mm horiz display length / 0.28 mm dot pitch = 857.
So it can handle 428 lines of resolution without losing much
information. Since most fonts on 640x480 are two or more dots
in feature size, we can fudge some; 640x480 text "looks good".
But these numbers suggest that increasing the digital
resolution beyond 640x480 isn't going to allow for that much
more information. At 800x600, small font X-Windows text gets
rather hard to read (the "micro" font is illegible). If you
want to get the best out of resolutions above 640x480 you need
a larger screen and/or a finer dot pitch. That's why
"serious" CAD monitors have many more dots on their screens
(and cost many arms and legs too.)
An 800x600x256 rendition of day.gif or mrlake.gif (Mirror
Lake) is mighty impressive, more so than most 640x480x256 pix
I have. Translation: you can bust the minimums on pictures
but not on small font text.
So when selecting a monitor, consider the number of dots on
the physical screen as well as more traditional measures of
resolution.
A final rule of thumb: if you can see the dot pitch on a
monitor, it's too big for your viewing distance. Use a
smaller dot pitch, move away from the screen, use glasses with
last year's prescription, or smoke more dope.dhesi@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Rahul Dhesi) (08/02/89)
In article <820@omen.UUCP> caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg) writes: > 240 mm horiz display length / 0.28 mm dot pitch = 857. > >So it can handle 428 lines of resolution without losing much >information. Wait... Isn't the dot pitch specified for all dots (red, green, and blue)? Consider a black-and-white picture displayed on a color monitor. All three dots (R, G, B) must be equally intensely lighted, yielding much poorer resolution than obtained from the above calculation. Possibly-irrelevant fact: Color television broadcasting separates out the intensity from the hue. The detail is mostly in the intensity. -- Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> UUCP: ...!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!dhesi