Can't find Native Resolution of CRT Monitor, Please Help???

This is the monitor Proview 998/998A/998N(1239224727) it's a xflat 19"
monitor.

I searched for the "native resolution" and "best resolution" on the
web for the last 15 minutes and cannot find this information.

Someone please help.
thanks

CRT's don't have a "native resolution". Only LCD's do.

Clint

"Pedro Sanchez" wrote in message
...
This is the monitor Proview 998/998A/998N(1239224727) it's a xflat 19"
monitor.

I searched for the "native resolution" and "best resolution" on the
web for the last 15 minutes and cannot find this information.

Someone please help.
thanks

"Clint" wrote in message
news:0%eig.24087$A8.14490@clgrps12...
CRT's don't have a "native resolution". Only LCD's do.

Clint

Quite true - but they DO have a "best resolution", and for a 19" CRT, it's
1280 x 960. Note: NOT 1280 x 1024, that's for LCDs, which have an aspect
ratio of 5:4 as opposed to the CRT aspect ratio of 4:3.
Regards,
Steve.

There's also no such thing as a "best resolution". 1280x960 may be your
optimal resolution on your monitor, but that's just your opinion. I run my
19" monitors as 1600x1200, and am quite happy with them. I'm not suggesting
that's the "best resolution" for anyone else, as it depends on how you use
your montior, how good your eyes are, the quality of the monitor and
cabling, etc.

All the above is simply my opinion on the discussion, and may not reflect
your reality.

Clint

"stevem" wrote in message
. uk...

"Clint" wrote in message
news:0%eig.24087$A8.14490@clgrps12...
CRT's don't have a "native resolution". Only LCD's do.

Clint

Quite true - but they DO have a "best resolution", and for a 19" CRT, it's
1280 x 960. Note: NOT 1280 x 1024, that's for LCDs, which have an aspect
ratio of 5:4 as opposed to the CRT aspect ratio of 4:3.
Regards,
Steve.

"Clint" wrote in message
news:R0hig.24140$A8.19713@clgrps12...
There's also no such thing as a "best resolution". 1280x960 may be your
optimal resolution on your monitor, but that's just your opinion. I run
my 19" monitors as 1600x1200, and am quite happy with them. I'm not
suggesting that's the "best resolution" for anyone else, as it depends on
how you use your montior, how good your eyes are, the quality of the
monitor and cabling, etc.

All the above is simply my opinion on the discussion, and may not reflect
your reality.

Clint
Absolutely true, and a perfectly fair point. Unfortunately, my eyes are not
what they once were, and nowadays, I really don't think they could handle
1600 x 1200! All I actually meant was that that's the "usual" resolution
used on a 19" CRT. I guess I was aiming more at getting the idea of aspect
ratio across, because I've seen many people use 1280 x 1024 and then wonder
why circles looked like ellipses.
Regards,
Steve.

Pedro Sanchez wrote:
This is the monitor Proview 998/998A/998N(1239224727) it's a xflat 19"
monitor.

I searched for the "native resolution" and "best resolution" on the
web for the last 15 minutes and cannot find this information.

Someone please help.
thanks


Depending on your monitor's dot pitch and shadow mask (thing between
pixel elements), there is normally an advertised "nominal" resolution.
For my Philips 19" it's 1280x1024 advertised as "flicker free at 85hz",
any resolution above that can only do 70 and 60hz, and seem too small
for the size. So that's the maximum effective resolution (but no reason
you can't use 1920x1440.

Also, human vision has been measured effective to about 1 degree per arc
second resolution, so depending on how acute you are, making too many
small pixels within a limited space may be counter productive and hard
to read text, etc. For games it doesn't matter as much, since
resolution effectively reduces aliasing in the image, whereas text
elements and graphics tend not to be fixed size and scale with the image
(hud elements for example are often mapped to polygons).

General guidelines:

15" - 800x600
17" - 1024x768
19" - 1280x1024
21" - 1440x1050 to 1600x1200
30" - 2048x1536 to 2560x1920 (and widescreen aspects)

Although with larger displays, you tend to sit further back or are more
useful in that capacity, so reducing desktop resolution may be desirable.

'deimos' wrote, in part:
| Also, human vision has been measured effective to about 1 degree per arc
| second resolution,
_____

One degree per arc second doesn't make sense.
An arc second is 1/3600 of a degree.
Resolution of one arc second for visible requires an aperture of ~ 120 mm.
The lens of the human eye has an aperture of a few mm.

Phil Weldon

"deimos" wrote in message
...
| Pedro Sanchez wrote:
| This is the monitor Proview 998/998A/998N(1239224727) it's a xflat 19"
| monitor.
|
| I searched for the "native resolution" and "best resolution" on the
| web for the last 15 minutes and cannot find this information.
|
| Someone please help.
| thanks
|
|
| Depending on your monitor's dot pitch and shadow mask (thing between
| pixel elements), there is normally an advertised "nominal" resolution.
| For my Philips 19" it's 1280x1024 advertised as "flicker free at 85hz",
| any resolution above that can only do 70 and 60hz, and seem too small
| for the size. So that's the maximum effective resolution (but no reason
| you can't use 1920x1440.
|
| Also, human vision has been measured effective to about 1 degree per arc
| second resolution, so depending on how acute you are, making too many
| small pixels within a limited space may be counter productive and hard
| to read text, etc. For games it doesn't matter as much, since
| resolution effectively reduces aliasing in the image, whereas text
| elements and graphics tend not to be fixed size and scale with the image
| (hud elements for example are often mapped to polygons).
|
| General guidelines:
|
| 15" - 800x600
| 17" - 1024x768
| 19" - 1280x1024
| 21" - 1440x1050 to 1600x1200
| 30" - 2048x1536 to 2560x1920 (and widescreen aspects)
|
| Although with larger displays, you tend to sit further back or are more
| useful in that capacity, so reducing desktop resolution may be desirable.

deimos wrote:

Pedro Sanchez wrote:
This is the monitor Proview 998/998A/998N(1239224727) it's a xflat 19"
monitor.

I searched for the "native resolution" and "best resolution" on the
web for the last 15 minutes and cannot find this information.

Someone please help.
thanks


Depending on your monitor's dot pitch and shadow mask (thing between
pixel elements), there is normally an advertised "nominal" resolution.
For my Philips 19" it's 1280x1024 advertised as "flicker free at 85hz",
any resolution above that can only do 70 and 60hz, and seem too small
for the size. So that's the maximum effective resolution (but no reason
you can't use 1920x1440.

Also, human vision has been measured effective to about 1 degree per arc
second resolution,

Huh? I believe that one arc minute (not "one degree per arc minute" which
is an incomprehensible unit anyway) is the accepted number.

so depending on how acute you are, making too many
small pixels within a limited space may be counter productive and hard
to read text, etc. For games it doesn't matter as much, since
resolution effectively reduces aliasing in the image, whereas text
elements and graphics tend not to be fixed size and scale with the image
(hud elements for example are often mapped to polygons).

At 3 feet one arc-minute works out to about .26mm. One wants the dot pitch
to be less than this for optimal results.

General guidelines:

15" - 800x600

works out to .27mm

17" - 1024x768

..24

19" - 1280x1024

..21

21" - 1440x1050 to 1600x1200

..21 or .19

30" - 2048x1536 to 2560x1920 (and widescreen aspects)

..21 or .17


Although with larger displays, you tend to sit further back or are more
useful in that capacity, so reducing desktop resolution may be desirable.

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 21:21:29 -0500, deimos
wrote:

Pedro Sanchez wrote:
This is the monitor Proview 998/998A/998N(1239224727) it's a xflat 19"
monitor.

I searched for the "native resolution" and "best resolution" on the
web for the last 15 minutes and cannot find this information.

Someone please help.
thanks


Depending on your monitor's dot pitch and shadow mask (thing between
pixel elements), there is normally an advertised "nominal" resolution.
For my Philips 19" it's 1280x1024 advertised as "flicker free at 85hz",
any resolution above that can only do 70 and 60hz, and seem too small
for the size. So that's the maximum effective resolution (but no reason
you can't use 1920x1440.

Also, human vision has been measured effective to about 1 degree per arc
second resolution, so depending on how acute you are, making too many
small pixels within a limited space may be counter productive and hard
to read text, etc. For games it doesn't matter as much, since
resolution effectively reduces aliasing in the image, whereas text
elements and graphics tend not to be fixed size and scale with the image
(hud elements for example are often mapped to polygons).

General guidelines:

15" - 800x600
17" - 1024x768
19" - 1280x1024
21" - 1440x1050 to 1600x1200
30" - 2048x1536 to 2560x1920 (and widescreen aspects)

Although with larger displays, you tend to sit further back or are more
useful in that capacity, so reducing desktop resolution may be desirable.

Thanks!!!:-)

"deimos" wrote in message
...
Pedro Sanchez wrote:


General guidelines:

15" - 800x600
17" - 1024x768
19" - 1280x1024
21" - 1440x1050 to 1600x1200
30" - 2048x1536 to 2560x1920 (and widescreen aspects)


Unless you are working with a non-4:3 monitor, your recommendations for 19"
and 21" (first one) would give you a distorted image... standard 4:3
monitors should have a 4:3 resolution for proper image interpretation...
While I know most monitor / video card combinations don't always offer such
a combination, for proper representation, they should be as follows:

19" - 1280x960
21" - 1440x1080