Preserved Topic: Digital display and/or font problem (Page 1 of 1)

I'e got a new digital flat panel display here and a 128DDR ATI Radeon 9700 TX w/ TV-out for the video card (supports dual monitor digital and VGA). I'm running Windows XP Pro and have turned off the font smoothing options in the dislpay settings (appearance/effects) cuz I like my aliased screen text. Yet the fonts are still fuzzy!

I like my anti-aliased crispy fonts thanks very much! I have a laptop with an LCD display and have used many in the past, never seen this problem. Can anybody tell me what's wrong here?

gracias

Jason

It may be the resolution you have your monitor set to.

JK check what recommended resoltion settings you have with ya lcd display, some dont show a very good display at certain resolutions. have a look through the manual carefully, and look to see what settings are availiable in the lcd control panel.

i had the same problem with an LG panel, it looked awsome in some resolutions but a pile of crap in others

The poster has demanded we remove all his contributions, less he takes legal action.
We have done so.
Now Tyberius Prime expects him to start complaining that we removed his 'free speech' since this message will replace all of his posts, past and future.
Don't follow his example - seek real life help first.

JK: I hear you on the anti-aliased text. There are times I like it and times I don't. Mostly I have it off.

I have an older Radeon VE with DVI and VGA outputs and a pair of Viewsonic VG151's. One connects to the DVI and the other to the VGA.

Assuming your resolution is set to the display's "native" resolution and refresh rate (60Hz is just fine for LCDs and is preferred over faster rates) ...

First, be certain the display is using the DVI input. Just because you're using the DVI connector doesn't mean the panel is looking at the digital wires. DVI connectors support VGA for legacy purposes. That's how the DVI card to VGA monitor adapters work and why you can run a splitter from a DVI output (one split to a digital panel and the other, (showing the same image) to a VGA monitor.) As I recall, I could be wrong, I had to somehow tell the Radeon which output to use as default.

Is the character fuzziness the same across the entire width of the screen, or does it vary a bit--fuzzy, clear, fuzzy, clear and so on? I've had this problem on the VGA side and it turned out that the Auto Image Adjust was a bit confused. After manually tweaking the size, horizontal position and width settings, (mostly width) I got it as clear as the DVI side. Frankly, I can't see the difference.

Using DVI there is supposed to be a 1:1 relationship between the card's image in RAM and the pixels on the display. Hence, under normal circumstances, you don't need to make those adjustments. My displays don't let you adjust anything when you're using the DVI input. Your displays might let you futz with things.

If that doesn't help, I'm out of ideas.

I considered resolution but haven't checked that yet, I'm so very fond of 1280x1024, if I go 1600x1200 my eyes hate me for it, if I go lower I'll need a second monitor for many of the apps I run. So I pray and pray that this is not the case.

As for bad Windows install and drivers etc, this is a Dell straight from the assembly line less than a month ago, prolly more like 2 weeks. I've not known them to put incompatibles together right off the bat before.

As I recall, the monitor came out of the box with the VGA-like cable attached to it and the DVI cable sealed in the bag, wonder if that was telling me something?

As you can see, I've got a lot of fiddling to do before I whig out. Just thought I'd post and se if there was some silly setting I was just missing before I went messing too deep.

Thanks very much for all the help fellas. I'll check back in and let you know what's up.

Jason

Things should clear up tremendously when you start using the DVI connector. Or, you can keep it connected VGA and tweak the settings. As I said, two identical displays side-by-side connected to the same card, but one DVI and the other VGA, I can't see any difference.

Of course that doesn't mean that no-one can see the difference. I'm just saying I can't.

actually, it had the VGA hangin off the monitor from the box, I hooked it up DVI so... I made a mess of that explanation, left it hangin.

Jason

krikey, looks as I'd like in 1600x1200 and nothing else

caramba, gonna have to hook up monitor #2 asap so I don't have to strain at this tiny text. Meanwhile, I'll be looking for driver updates.

Jason

You'll get used to it. I'm running 1600x1200 on my 15-inch Toshiba laptop and I have no problem seeing anything, although everyone else who looks at it complains that it's too small. Go figure?

I won't get used to it, that's the complaint I was running 1600x1200 on a 21" and still got eyestrain.

Rest assured I'll be super tweakin the office for ergonomics, eyestrain is something you don't want, I'm telling you... ~shudder~

Jason

Quick little story for the sidetracking folk, goes sumpin like this:

1280X1024 is an "unnatural" aspect. 1280X960 is a "natural" aspect.

That is all

640X480
800X600
1024X768
1152X864
1280X960

that's what I wondered you know so took it all the way down to 800x600, figgering if anything, the perfect half would be good, not even that.

I have mail in to Dell before I sweat too much over it, that's why I buy from them mainly, so I don't have to fuss to much =)

Jason

One thing I'm thinking of is the standard resolution on your display. See, an LCD display only has so many points and at the standard resolution one point = one pixel. If you have a lower resolution, your video card scales the image up so that it can be displayed on the whole screen. In the process, I'm sure some anti-aliasing is done.

So, if you have a smaller resolution, I think your aliased screen fonts were anti-aliased when the screen image is scaled up. This could be the explanation.

Silence has it exactly.

An LCD display is like a checkerboard. In this case a checkerboard 1600 squares across and 1200 squares down. Each square is a pixel and each pixel (square) contains three LCD cells, one each for red, blue and green. Behind it is a light source, usually flourescent.

Now if you think of the LCD cells as venetian blinds on a window, the way to light a pixel is to open the blinds on each cell of the pixel an appropriate amount to let the right amount of light through to create the color and brightness you want. #000 = all blinds closed, #fff = all blinds open. Bad pixels are the result of one or more of the cells in a pixel being stuck a a particular opening. A bad pixel can be all white, all black or any weird, and sometimes variable, thing in between.

This opening and closing blinds thing, by the way is why LCDs aren't really that great for games or TV/movies. You can't open and close the blinds fast enough and the result is blurry artifacts. (They're getting better all the time.) The same holds true for shading between similar colors (you can't control opening the blinds quite *that* precisely) and contrast, particularly at the dark and light ends of things.

On a CRT the difference between #fff and #ffe jumps right out at you. It's really, really hard to tell the difference between them on an LCD, even when (as I have) you've gone through the whole color balancing routine. In the middle 80% or so of the range, it's less of a problem. Again, they're getting better at this all the time too.

Now that you have a metaphor for how it works, you'll see why at 1280x1024 everything looked blurry. The display itself had to anti-alias everything. That's hard to do when you can't light (or dim) half a pixel. And that's why drivers aren't going to clear up your image at 1280x1024. It's a hardware issue.

So the four things to examine closely when buying an LCD display are, "native" resolution (number of squares on your checkerboard), brightness (the pixels don't MAKE light, they let light pass through), contrast ratio (more accurate positioning when you open the blinds) and whatever it is they call the speed they can open and close a pixel.

The DVI vs. VGA interface is a separate fifth issue I'll save for another dissertation.

now I know, and knowing is half the battle. Sure is nice to save all that desktop real estate but I'm not sure I would have bought it if I had known this beforehand. feeling a bit torn now. grrr.

Jason

Can you move the display closer to you?

Of course my answer when asked that was, "No way! I bought LCDs so I would have more desktop space in *front* of them."

Last week at the eye doctor I told him that 11px type, like here in the Asylum, on my displays is 1/8 of an inch high. Then I told him I'd measured the distance from my glasses to the displays. 34 inches on average if I sit up straight, a few more if I slouch or tilt back. Now remember that I'm 45 and have been wearing glasses since 4th grade and bifocals since I was 38. The conversation went like this:

?We have exactly the thing you need to see text that small at that distance,? he told me with confidence.

I perked up. ?Oh??

?A telescope.?

?Oh.?

I left with two pairs of glasses ordered. A set of trifocals for "ordinary" use and a special set of bifocals to use at my PC. They're "set" to 36 inches on the top and 19 inches on the bottom for reading papers on the desk. I'll let you know how it works out after I get the new lenses.

That's how I solved the problem. Moving your display and replacing it are two other options. I'm sure there are more.

Great explanation, bruce. I especially like the venetian blinds analogy.

congratulations Bruce and Co, you got me satisfaction before Dell support did, still getting form mail back for the 3rd time. May have bought from them for the last time. I believe they're taking their business model in a new direction, oh well. One more !@#$%in thing to learn, 'how to build beefy sweet computers' grrr

Jason

quote:

---

I especially like the venetian blinds analogy

---

It's not original but I can't think of where I saw it first so I can't give proper credit. It sure helped me understand how they work.

quote:

---

still getting form mail back for the 3rd time

---

Isn't it sad? When you're a corporate account, they kiss ass big time. But when some poor person is paying with their own hard-earned cash, nada.

quote:

---

'how to build beefy sweet computers'

---

Actually it's not hard, only intimidating. If you can safely and properly operate a screwdriver, and you can install Windows from scratch, you have the requisite skills. Picking which bits to put in the box is a little harder only due to the almost religious zeal that's passed-off as advice on most hardware-oriented web sites. If you can see through the starry-eyed fan adulation and marketing fluff expressed by most of them, it's not that hard to pick the right bits. Like most other things, the key factors are how do you personally use your PC and how thick is your wallet.