er,. those are all pretty weeny resolutions there..

I'm running 3,520 X 1200

What monitor do you have?
| POLL: "What screen resolution do you use?" |
less than 800 x 600 | 1 0.5% |
800 x 600 | 4 2.1% |
1024 x 768 | 27 14.4% |
1280 x 1024 | 53 28.2% |
greater than 1280 x 1024 | 84 44.7% |
other | 19 10.1% |
S.Horton worship my useful and insightful comments More info | May 29, 2007 13:04 | #16 CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #3285918 er,. those are all pretty weeny resolutions there.. ![]() I'm running 3,520 X 1200 ![]() What monitor do you have? Sam - TF Says Ishmael
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Anke "that rump shot is just adorable" UK SE Photographer of the Year 2009 30,454 posts Likes: 3 Joined Oct 2006 Location: Royal Tunbridge Wells, UK More info | May 29, 2007 13:08 | #17 hortonsl62 wrote in post #3286454 What monitor do you have? By the sound of that res he's got a dual setup, am I right? Anke
LOG IN TO REPLY |
RenéDamkot Cream of the Crop 39,856 posts Likes: 8 Joined Feb 2005 Location: enschede, netherlands More info | May 29, 2007 13:30 | #18 1600x1200 on my primary, 1024x768 on the second monitor. "I think the idea of art kills creativity" - Douglas Adams
LOG IN TO REPLY |
In2Photos Cream of the Crop 19,813 posts Likes: 6 Joined Dec 2005 Location: Near Charlotte, NC. More info | May 29, 2007 14:01 | #19 hortonsl62 wrote in post #3286454 What monitor do you have? Anke wrote in post #3286473 By the sound of that res he's got a dual setup, am I right? Yup, he runs dual CRTs. Mike, The Keeper of the Archive
LOG IN TO REPLY |
CyberDyneSystems Admin (type T-2000) More info | May 29, 2007 14:22 | #20 hortonsl62 wrote in post #3286454 What monitor do you have? Yes, it's a Sony FW900 24" wide screen @ 1920 x 1200 next to a SONY 21" G500 @ 1600 x 1200 GEAR LIST
LOG IN TO REPLY |
May 29, 2007 14:29 | #21 What's the appeal of a widescreen then? Photos from my travels
LOG IN TO REPLY |
In2Photos Cream of the Crop 19,813 posts Likes: 6 Joined Dec 2005 Location: Near Charlotte, NC. More info | May 29, 2007 14:31 | #22 curiousgeorge wrote in post #3286941 What's the appeal of a widescreen then? A 1650 x 1050, which seems to be quite popular, is of a similar height to a 1280 x 1024, so it won't be much use for standard 1.5 ratio images. And many of the panoramic images I've seen have a far higher aspect ratio than that of the widesreens. Viewing two apps side by side for one. In PS you can move the tool palletes out of the workspace so more real estate the better. Movies. Mike, The Keeper of the Archive
LOG IN TO REPLY |
May 29, 2007 14:32 | #23 CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #3286889 Yes, it's a Sony FW900 24" wide screen @ 1920 x 1200 next to a SONY 21" G500 @ 1600 x 1200 Same physical height and resolution on the vertical so they match up nicely despite differing widths. Interesting. Do you have images spanning across both screens? If so, then don't the frames of the monitors disrupt the images? Photos from my travels
LOG IN TO REPLY |
CyberDyneSystems Admin (type T-2000) More info | May 29, 2007 14:45 | #24 No, the 24" is plenty large for the images,, the 2nd screen is used fro tool bars or other open apps. GEAR LIST
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tdodd Goldmember 3,733 posts Likes: 3 Joined Jun 2006 Location: Essex, UK More info | May 29, 2007 15:09 | #25 If the results are to have much meaning I think we need a poll with options that actually reflect modern resolutions.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
jnev Senior Member 258 posts Joined Apr 2007 Location: san diego, ca More info | May 29, 2007 17:16 | #26 My laptop is running 1440x900, and my 20" monitor (which I do all photo work on) is 1680x1050. Camera: Rebel XT with BG-E3| 17-55 F/2.8 IS | 70-200 F/4.0L | Planning on others...
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Zepher Goldmember 1,626 posts Likes: 1 Joined Nov 2005 Location: Norfolk,VA More info | May 29, 2007 18:29 | #27 I use 1440x900 since that is the native res of my LCD's. I was running 1600x1200 when I had my CRT's. Manny Desantos
LOG IN TO REPLY |
cosworth I'm comfortable with my masculinity 10,939 posts Likes: 21 Joined Jul 2005 Location: Duncan, BC, Canada More info | May 29, 2007 18:31 | #28 1920x1200 here. people will always try to stop you doing the right thing if it is unconventional
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Gujustud Senior Member 636 posts Joined Dec 2005 Location: Richmond, BC, CAN More info | May 29, 2007 21:41 | #29 1920x1200 on a 24". And I'll never go smaller again. Visual Artist + World Nomad
LOG IN TO REPLY |
PhotosGuy Cream of the Crop, R.I.P. More info | May 29, 2007 22:52 | #30 it's important to know what resolution is the most popular so you can resize it to the maximum size possible. Why worry? For this forum, the maximum size possible is 800px X 800px? FrankC - 20D, RAW, Manual everything...
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such! 2875 guests, 134 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||