Whats Your Display Resolution?

[tutubibi]

okay , so i did a search but couldnt find anything , am using my 17 inch iMac since aug 05 , and its set to 1440x900 , everything is fine but i cant find a lot of large images for my wallpaper , so i decided toady to set it to something lower , so its 1152x720 now , images for the wallpaper look much better since they dont need to be stretched or anything , but everything else i see (in safari,mail,iphoto..etc) looks smoother , images arent sharp anymore , do i have to change any settings ? or edit something ??

thanks guys!!

So, you reduced resolution to make your wallpaper look good? Are you using that iMac for anything else? I mean do you cover your wallpaper from time to time with some appplication?

 

[dops7107]

That's what I thought too. It doesn't make since to me.

My monitor can run at 1600 by 1200, and my vid card (6600 LE) can handle 2048 x 1536, so I don't get what the problem is.

What happens when you click "Detect displays" under display in system prefs? Sounds like the PM just isn't recognising the display model properly. I don't know how it does it - monitors don't need drivers surely, just vid cards? What if you change the refresh rate?

I dunno, I guess you'll have tried all that

 

[Josh]

^ perhaps that is it.

I went to see if I could make it larger res, and was only given the option of 1024x768 and 800x600.

I'm a little new to Macs, so perhaps I missed the 'detect displays' option. I'll give that a go, and hopefully that does the trick.

 

[Kalinatek]

So, you reduced resolution to make your wallpaper look good? Are you using that iMac for anything else? I mean do you cover your wallpaper from time to time with some appplication?

yeah , i use safari,mail,itunes,iphoto,photoshop(sometimes),preview,VLC and some other apps...

 

[ravenvii]

Kalinatek, the screen looks blurry at the lower resolution because it isn't the native resolution for the LCD. That's one weakness of LCDs, it looks the best in it's native resolution, but progressively worse at lower resolutions (until the resolution that is exactly 1/4 of the native resolution, then it'll look fine because it's easy to replace 1 pixel with 4 pixels).

It's easy to find images that will look good on your screen. Just find ones that are hi-res (like 1600x1200), and then center the wallpaper.

Anyway... I run at 1280x1024.

 

[tutubibi]

yeah , i use safari,mail,itunes,iphoto,photoshop(sometimes),preview,VLC and some other apps...

I hope you put your iMac back to 1400x900?

 

[ftaok]

I'm currently stuck on an emac 17inch with a res of 1152x864. i have to say... its a real struggle at the moment. im using that because at the native 1024x786 its virtually unusable for anything other than safari and mail. Using photoshop, dreamweaver, flash etc. really heavily this passed few weeks has really been a nightmare.

I thought the eMacs had a max res of 1280x960, no? Anyways, CRTs don't really have a "native" resolution. They're all multi-syncing these days.

 

[dotdotdot]

I'm running on a 19" Samsung at 1280x1024, and frankly it is the perfect size.

Not only that, but Windows you can adjust the screen using DPI and if you set the DPI levels low it increases the way it looks so it looks like you are running higher than you really are.

 

[ITASOR]

^ perhaps that is it.

I went to see if I could make it larger res, and was only given the option of 1024x768 and 800x600.

I'm a little new to Macs, so perhaps I missed the 'detect displays' option. I'll give that a go, and hopefully that does the trick.

You need to adjust your refresh rate and it should let you go higher. On my 17" CRT which is retired in the basement, I had to play with the refresh rate in order to use the higher resolutions. Just play around and see what you get.

 

[Eric5h5]

I went to see if I could make it larger res, and was only given the option of 1024x768 and 800x600.

That's bizarre. If fiddling around in Displays Preferences doesn't get you anywhere (some sort of weird non-standard monitor?), there are programs you can use to override that. I use DisplayConfigX, because it allows for a lot more precise control. I use it to bump up the refresh rate for my standard resolutions...OS X was only allowing 85Hz at 1280x960, even though my monitor will do 95Hz just fine at that res. Also useful for a few games that insist on trying to use nasty 60Hz refresh rates; now they're forced to use something sensible.

--Eric

 

[cgratti]

1680 X 1050 here

 

[maestro55]

No widescreen here, and so I use 1024x768 on all of my machines, and that is the resolution I have set on the imacs at school, and I set that on any ibook I touch at school.

 

[FadeToBlack]

1280x960 on my eMac.

 

[homerjward]

I'm currently stuck on an emac 17inch with a res of 1152x864. i have to say... its a real struggle at the moment. im using that because at the native 1024x786 its virtually unusable for anything other than safari and mail. Using photoshop, dreamweaver, flash etc. really heavily this passed few weeks has really been a nightmare.

assuming you have the most recent emac, or the one before it, it should be able to do 1280x960.
right now i have my 17" lcd at 1280*1024, and my 15" crt at 1024*768. i need to get a bigger monitor sometime

 

[Calvinatir]

1920x1200 on my brand new 2405FPW!

 

[clayj]

1280 x 854 on my PB, 1920 x 1200 on my Mac mini.

 

[Benjamin]

1280 x 854

 

[Aggamemnon]

1400x1050

 

[robbieduncan]

No, actually. I was explaining the difference between my CRT and my ACD. On my CRT, I don't have these problems, because I can switch the resolution to whatever I want and not have it look like crap.

10.5 will support true resolution independant display. You can run your screen at maximum resolution at all times and have the UI scale up and down in size to your comfort point. If you want to have the appearance of running at a lower resolution you can but the extra pixels will not go to waste as they are used to make everything look smoother.

You can play with this in 10.4 with the developer tools installed but it's buggy as hell at the moment!

 

[Deepdale]

1280 x 854 on my PB, 1920 x 1200 on my Mac mini.

800 x 600 on my iMac G3. The screen is very bright and sharp and that resolution is perfect for the font and size I use as my defaults.

 

[Kernow]

Yes.

Even more fun trying to find 1920 * 1200 wallpapers.

Definitely. I am also running at 1920*1200. I tend to make my own wallpapers now.

 

[Kalinatek]

Kalinatek, the screen looks blurry at the lower resolution because it isn't the native resolution for the LCD. That's one weakness of LCDs, it looks the best in it's native resolution, but progressively worse at lower resolutions (until the resolution that is exactly 1/4 of the native resolution, then it'll look fine because it's easy to replace 1 pixel with 4 pixels).

It's easy to find images that will look good on your screen. Just find ones that are hi-res (like 1600x1200), and then center the wallpaper.

Anyway... I run at 1280x1024.

thx 4 the info

 

[solaris]

I'm at 1280x854

 

[bousozoku]

My current desktop LCD is 1280x768 in 17 inches and replaced 1024x768 in 15 inches. The PowerBook is slightly different at 1280x854. Either way, the widescreen is fine for the applications that support it. Games based on the Quake III engine don't do well, but UT2003/UT2004/UT and games based on those engines work quite well with the manual addition of the resolution into the configuration file. Non-native stuff doesn't look good but it's only a bit stretched because for 17 inches, it's a low resolution for 2005.