LCD question
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Ian East on November 11, 2005, 12:02 am
Please log in for more thread options Sounds like you might need to adjust your convergence. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Alan S on November 11, 2005, 12:52 pm
Please log in for more thread options >>I've just got a 20" Viewsonic VP2000s but there's a major screening
>>effect going on. It looks like the border between pixels is way >>thicker in proportion to the pixel size itself, which gives the image >>a pixelated retro look. I'd never seen this on 17" or 18" LCDs. Is it >>normal for 20" or is it because this brand/model is bottom of the line >>for 20"? What about Samsung 204T? TIA. >Sounds like you might need to adjust your convergence.
Oooookay <g>
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Noozer on November 11, 2005, 11:00 pm
Please log in for more thread options What is the native resolution?
I find that larger monitors that have the same resolution as the smaller ones can look "pixilated" The pixels are larger and can have larger gaps (but I don't know why they should). I really don't understand why LCD TV's cost so much when their resolutio is usually far worse than any LCD monitor that you'd buy these days. ie: Acer 20" widescreen monitor is around $460 here and has a resolution of 1600x1050. A 20" LCD TV at 1280x1024 (which is about the best I've seen for a 20"TV) is over $1000 !!! >
>>I've just got a 20" Viewsonic VP2000s but there's a major screening
>>effect going on. It looks like the border between pixels is way >>thicker in proportion to the pixel size itself, which gives the image >>a pixelated retro look. I'd never seen this on 17" or 18" LCDs. Is it >>normal for 20" or is it because this brand/model is bottom of the line >>for 20"? What about Samsung 204T? TIA. >
> Sounds like you might need to adjust your convergence. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Alan S on November 12, 2005, 1:38 am
Please log in for more thread options
>What is the native resolution?
As with most 20" LCDs, it's 1600x1200, which matters not for my problem (yes, I'm running at native res :) ). Upon examining a couple of LCDs with a loop, the vertical spacing between pixels on the Viewsonic is indeed much larger than others. Horizontal spacing also seems rather large but it is harder to guesstimate well (blue against black). Unfortunately, the other LCDs I checked are 17" and 18" so I don't have any other data point on 20". So, if anybody here is using a 20" LCD (especially either ViewSonic 2000s or Samsung 204T, which I plan to exchange this one with), can you notice any screen effect, ie faint grid lines between pixels at normal viewing distance? It seems more pronounced at gray shades (probably because of the enhancing effect of Hermann grid illusion). | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Similar Threads | Posted |
| AT/ATX PS question | July 10, 2005, 11:49 pm |
| UPS Question | September 29, 2005, 9:55 am |
| Question about DSL | October 29, 2005, 11:29 am |
| LCD question | November 10, 2005, 12:07 pm |
| PSU question???/ | November 26, 2005, 11:30 pm |
| HDD Question | December 21, 2005, 12:00 pm |
| DVD-RW question | January 11, 2006, 9:51 am |
| Question regarding 32- and 64-bit PCI | March 8, 2006, 12:05 am |
| usb question | May 25, 2006, 10:59 pm |
| Question about PSU | August 13, 2006, 8:07 pm |
| UPS question | October 21, 2006, 3:24 pm |
| fsb question | October 29, 2006, 2:43 pm |
| Ram question... | November 6, 2006, 5:35 pm |
| DR2 question ? | November 29, 2006, 7:51 pm |
| RAN Question | January 11, 2007, 1:57 pm |
>effect going on. It looks like the border between pixels is way
>thicker in proportion to the pixel size itself, which gives the image
>a pixelated retro look. I'd never seen this on 17" or 18" LCDs. Is it
>normal for 20" or is it because this brand/model is bottom of the line
>for 20"? What about Samsung 204T? TIA.