baka on 19 February 2007
Kwaad said:if it is a notebook. You are less than 2 feet from the screen. You are talking about you notice the interpolation. You dont notice that on a 1080p screen. And once agian, on the 720p Everything runs native to it.
Not in this case. My laptop is a Dell D800 and I typically use it in a "D Stand", which allows me to use a real keyboard and mouse while still using the laptop's screen. It also keeps the display back a bit, which helps save on the eyes. A 1080 display at 10 feet, I doubt I'd notice much - but the picture isn't going to be as sharp. Of course, on the television most people aren't going to care. I certainly don't mind that my television is SDTV. Someone who pays a few grand for a new television might. I'm not that someone.
Not counting the screwed up aspect ratio of a widescreen monitor.
What you are seeing is NOT the problem of up-scaleing, it is the problem of changeing aspect ratio.
The problem is not the aspect ratio, since the display itself has the correct aspect ratio. The image has been stretched to fit it. Image data is simply lost along with it during the stretching process, and the method of stretching determines what data was lost. Think about it like this: You have a picture of 10 by 10 pixels. We'll use round numbers at first to make the calculations come out nicely. Now you want to scale it up to 20 by 20 pixels. That's easy, we simply use four pixels to draw each of the original pixels. Now say we want to scale it to 14 by 14 pixels. That gets a bit trickier, because you have to either determine which pixels to stretch, double the image and omit some, or redraw the entire image such that it looks something like it did at 10 by 10 pixels. If you redraw with only the original image data, you're going to need to interpolate and data will be lost.
Note that 1920x1200 is also not the only common resolution on a PC which uses an odd pixel aspect ratio; the 1280x1024 resolution you pointed out has a logical 5:4 aspect ratio (works out to 1.25). Displays using this resolution are commonly built to a 4:3 aspect ratio, giving rectangular as opposed to square pixels. 1920x1200 displays are typically built to the 16:9 aspect ratio, which works out close to 1.8. They're both approximations. FWIW, I've used Sony CRT displays at work running at 1920x1200 - I believe it was a GDM-W900. Luckily, we've been removing these monstrosities and replacing them with flat panels.
I'm still using S-Video connections, and am more than happy with the results.
