Screen resolution problem
February 28, 2007 12:45 PM Subscribe
Help me understand a screen resolution problem. I just got a brand new lenovo t60 laptop which came with an ATI Mobility Radeon X1300 graphics card. The resolution it came out of the box with is 1400X1050 which when I set it to 32bit color depth looks great. However, if I change the resolution to 1280X1024 which is my ideal one, it looks like utter shit!
The screen fonts and everything are totally blurry and not as bright. I called IBM and the technician says that basically this is a common problem with LCD monitors and that they are designed to be optimal at only a certain resolution. if you change that resolution you get poor results.
This answer doest satisfy me however...I have a thinkpad that i'm working on right now that changes resolutions just fine, not to mention my computer at home does as well. At times on other computers, messing with the refresh rate improves results but this screen has only one (60hz).
Can someone explain why this would happen? Also, I once bought an ATI card for my desktop and immediately returned it for the same reasons after not being able to figure out why it just didnt look sharp. Also, it has a wierd way of displaying fonts.. dont really know how to explain it other than to say that everything looks totally different than it does on any other computers I have ever owned. Almost like the fonts are different but in reality they are the same. Does ATI interpret graphics in some different way?
The screen fonts and everything are totally blurry and not as bright. I called IBM and the technician says that basically this is a common problem with LCD monitors and that they are designed to be optimal at only a certain resolution. if you change that resolution you get poor results.
This answer doest satisfy me however...I have a thinkpad that i'm working on right now that changes resolutions just fine, not to mention my computer at home does as well. At times on other computers, messing with the refresh rate improves results but this screen has only one (60hz).
Can someone explain why this would happen? Also, I once bought an ATI card for my desktop and immediately returned it for the same reasons after not being able to figure out why it just didnt look sharp. Also, it has a wierd way of displaying fonts.. dont really know how to explain it other than to say that everything looks totally different than it does on any other computers I have ever owned. Almost like the fonts are different but in reality they are the same. Does ATI interpret graphics in some different way?
Working in non-native resolutions can significantly blur the image. It's the nature of the hardware—an LCD screen is essentially a fixed 2D matrix of pixels. Yours has 1400 pixels across; if you change your horizontal resolution to 1280 fullscreen, the computer is forced to upscale the image in its video buffer to the physical screen.
1280 doesn't divide into 1400 very nicely; the only way to display a pixel in approximately the right place in this case is to render it as shadings of multiple adjascent pixels, which leads to blur. It'd be like laying two different sizes of graph paper one over the other—the grids are both inflexible and do not match up, and the result of the upsampling is a much less crisp image.
Different hardware may handle this differently, some with more elegant results than others, but it's a fact of life. The problem does not exist in the same way with traditional CRT displays.
posted by cortex at 12:57 PM on February 28, 2007
1280 doesn't divide into 1400 very nicely; the only way to display a pixel in approximately the right place in this case is to render it as shadings of multiple adjascent pixels, which leads to blur. It'd be like laying two different sizes of graph paper one over the other—the grids are both inflexible and do not match up, and the result of the upsampling is a much less crisp image.
Different hardware may handle this differently, some with more elegant results than others, but it's a fact of life. The problem does not exist in the same way with traditional CRT displays.
posted by cortex at 12:57 PM on February 28, 2007
Laptop LCDs really only run at one resolution. I'm really not sure what you're talking about having another Thinkpad where you can change the screen resolution - it either gets blurry or simply stops using part of the screen, leaving a black frame around the active screen area.
Anyway, what you describe is what has always been correct as-designed laptop LCD screen operation.
As for the fonts, perhaps you have Microsoft ClearType turned on, which does antialias the fonts and may make them look un-sharp. I like it but YMMV.
posted by GuyZero at 1:00 PM on February 28, 2007
Anyway, what you describe is what has always been correct as-designed laptop LCD screen operation.
As for the fonts, perhaps you have Microsoft ClearType turned on, which does antialias the fonts and may make them look un-sharp. I like it but YMMV.
posted by GuyZero at 1:00 PM on February 28, 2007
1400x1050 is a 4:3 aspect ratio resolution. 1280x1024 is not. I mean, it's very close, but it's not. And it'll scale like it's not. Which is to say, poorly.
Analog displays (CRT monitors) can handle this sort of thing just fine, but LCD panels do not. Some will handle it better than others, but you've got two stikes against a pretty dipslay right now.
#1 Running an LCD display at a non-native resolution.
#2 Running an LCD display at a non-native aspect ratio.
Combine the two and you're pretty well guaranteed a crap display. I suggest learning to love the wonderful resolution of 1400x1050. Why are you so fond of 1280x1024? Quite often, people don't like higher resolutions because of the smaller fonts, but font size can be changed easily in any operating system.
posted by terpia at 1:08 PM on February 28, 2007
Analog displays (CRT monitors) can handle this sort of thing just fine, but LCD panels do not. Some will handle it better than others, but you've got two stikes against a pretty dipslay right now.
#1 Running an LCD display at a non-native resolution.
#2 Running an LCD display at a non-native aspect ratio.
Combine the two and you're pretty well guaranteed a crap display. I suggest learning to love the wonderful resolution of 1400x1050. Why are you so fond of 1280x1024? Quite often, people don't like higher resolutions because of the smaller fonts, but font size can be changed easily in any operating system.
posted by terpia at 1:08 PM on February 28, 2007
Response by poster: This all makes good sense to me now. Thanks. And youre right.. I need to learn to love it.
posted by postergeist at 1:19 PM on February 28, 2007
posted by postergeist at 1:19 PM on February 28, 2007
Does 1280x960 look better? Like terpia mentions, this will preserve the aspect ratio:
1400/1050 = 1280/x => x = 960.
posted by sbutler at 1:21 PM on February 28, 2007
1400/1050 = 1280/x => x = 960.
posted by sbutler at 1:21 PM on February 28, 2007
This is true not only of laptop LCDs, but LCDs in general.
For more info, see Native resolution on Wikipedia.
posted by qvtqht at 1:21 PM on February 28, 2007
For more info, see Native resolution on Wikipedia.
posted by qvtqht at 1:21 PM on February 28, 2007
Just because you're stuck with the native resolution doesn't mean you can't tweak it a bit. Experiment with different font sizes to see what's comfortable for you to work with. My T60 has the lowest resolution, XGA - 1024 X 768, which suits my eyes, but chews up real estate. Depending on the application I'm in, I'll occasionally scale the fonts smaller so more fits on the screen.
posted by SteveInMaine at 1:44 PM on February 28, 2007
posted by SteveInMaine at 1:44 PM on February 28, 2007
The T60's 1400x1050 is very nice (writing this on one). If it's too small, you can raise font sizes and the like, and keep the nice crispness from running at your native resolution.
posted by fogster at 2:31 PM on February 28, 2007
posted by fogster at 2:31 PM on February 28, 2007
I'm having the same problem with a new Dell laptop and an ATI Mobility Radeon X1400 card. Is there a simple way to increase font and icon sizes for everything on the screen at once so that everything appears bigger while maintaining the sharpness. I mean, for all the programs at the same time and not just each program piecemeal? Thank you!
posted by sk381 at 2:58 PM on February 28, 2007
posted by sk381 at 2:58 PM on February 28, 2007
Go to the Display Properties->Settings->Advanced->General->DPI Setting
That should make some stuff show bigger text. Not all programs do the right thing; some use hardcoded sizes and you'll have to customize them by hand (if you can at all!)
Also if you're running at a non-native resolution, for god's sake, turn off cleartype. Cleartype is about using the subpixel color layout of LCDs (see?) to fake higher resolution, but will make things look worse if it's not actually dealing with physical LCD pixels.
posted by aubilenon at 3:52 PM on February 28, 2007
That should make some stuff show bigger text. Not all programs do the right thing; some use hardcoded sizes and you'll have to customize them by hand (if you can at all!)
Also if you're running at a non-native resolution, for god's sake, turn off cleartype. Cleartype is about using the subpixel color layout of LCDs (see?) to fake higher resolution, but will make things look worse if it's not actually dealing with physical LCD pixels.
posted by aubilenon at 3:52 PM on February 28, 2007
Also--make sure to run at the NATIVE REFRESH RATE.
(On the Display Properties/Advanced/Monitor tab in Windows)
If you do not, the screen will add (or drop) frames and make animations jerky.
If they're already jerky, it will make them jerkier :)
posted by hexatron at 4:47 PM on February 28, 2007
(On the Display Properties/Advanced/Monitor tab in Windows)
If you do not, the screen will add (or drop) frames and make animations jerky.
If they're already jerky, it will make them jerkier :)
posted by hexatron at 4:47 PM on February 28, 2007
The reason your older laptop scaled properly is that the resolution to which you were scaling was the same aspect ratio. 1400x1050 is not the same aspect ratio as 1280x1024.
Your alternative is to send it back and get one with the 1024x768 screen. ;) I suppose you could use an external monitor, too.
FWIW, the scaler in my T60p (I have the FireGL card instead of the X1300 or X1400, otherwise it's the same as what you have) works very well, as long as I keep the correct aspect ratio. The one in my Sony desktop LCD is better, though, as it has a native resolution of 1280x1024 but will scale to 1024x768 just fine. A little blur, but not bad at all.
Nothing beats an LCD at native resolution, though. Just get used to it, and if you can't, change your icon sizes and DPI settings so that text and desktop icons will be bigger.
Oh, and the font thing is just that IBM/Lenovo use a non-standard font (Tahoma) by default on the newer Thinkpads. I've grown to like it, personally. I think the default is Arial, so it should be simple to switch it over.
BTW, coming from a 1024x768 T30 of the same 14.1" panel size, it took me a while to get used to the smaller fonts, but now I'm absolutely loving the extra real estate. It bothers me to use my lower resolution desktop monitor now.
posted by wierdo at 5:22 PM on February 28, 2007
Your alternative is to send it back and get one with the 1024x768 screen. ;) I suppose you could use an external monitor, too.
FWIW, the scaler in my T60p (I have the FireGL card instead of the X1300 or X1400, otherwise it's the same as what you have) works very well, as long as I keep the correct aspect ratio. The one in my Sony desktop LCD is better, though, as it has a native resolution of 1280x1024 but will scale to 1024x768 just fine. A little blur, but not bad at all.
Nothing beats an LCD at native resolution, though. Just get used to it, and if you can't, change your icon sizes and DPI settings so that text and desktop icons will be bigger.
Oh, and the font thing is just that IBM/Lenovo use a non-standard font (Tahoma) by default on the newer Thinkpads. I've grown to like it, personally. I think the default is Arial, so it should be simple to switch it over.
BTW, coming from a 1024x768 T30 of the same 14.1" panel size, it took me a while to get used to the smaller fonts, but now I'm absolutely loving the extra real estate. It bothers me to use my lower resolution desktop monitor now.
posted by wierdo at 5:22 PM on February 28, 2007
« Older Why do my digital pictures have lines on them? | How do I get my mouse to scroll down again? Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
1400x1050 is probably the "native resolution" of that screen. So what the IBM techs told you is somewhat accurate. you should be able to adjust the screen to a different resolution and it should look pretty good, but none of the settings you choose will ever look as good as 1400x1050.
It could be a limitation of the hardware (the LCD screen, or the ATI video chipset. It could also be a limitation of the video driver software.
Perhaps someone who is more well versed in LCD's will correct/expand on what I am saying.
posted by jmnugent at 12:52 PM on February 28, 2007