Aspect Ratios and Squished Displays

DM
Posted By
Dave McElderry
Feb 12, 2004
Views
597
Replies
9
Status
Closed
I’m starting a new topic as a continuation of something that started in the topic "Challenge 53 posted":

jhjl1 "Challenge #53 posted" 2/12/04 10:28am </cgi-bin/webx?13/96>

Some internet investigation has turned up some discussion on this topic, some of which tends to be technically over my head. However, one thing that has become clear is that if you work with graphics on a monitor which is set for a resolution which is a 5:4 ratio (1280 x 1024 for example), that product will looked "squished" in the horizontal direction when displayed on a monitor set for a 4:3 ratio (such as 1024 x 768). Here’s a link to a posting that describes this phenomenon as something that "allows Windows users to mess things up", which I find interesting.

<http://www.quernstone.com/archives/000387.html>

Also, I came upon this page on the Samsung site, which states that there is something called "native resolution" on LCD displays, and that you’re much better off sticking with that resolution. I had already discovered that, and I agree. That’s why I was using what I would later find out was a 5:4 ratio setting, and why my LCD monitor gives less than optimal results when going to a different setting. There’s also an interesting chart showing native resolution for different LCD monitor sizes, and the real grabber is that the small and large monitors use a 4:3 ratio, while the mid size use the 5:4 !!!

<http://www.samsung.com/myguide/hcom/hcom013.asp>

It still boggles my mind that there would not be a standard display ratio, and that choosing one over another would result in creating or viewing images with distortion. If I create something at 1280 x 1024 that’s perfectly square or perfectly round and it’s viewed by someone who also happens to be using a 5:4 ratio, that image will look fine to them. But the same image viewed on a system using a 4:3 ratio will be squished in the horizontal direction. Considering the variety of monitors and users, there’s really nothing that can be done. In the end though, it looks like the 4:3 is more common than 5:4 (which is really not what I wanted to hear).

How to Improve Photoshop Performance

Learn how to optimize Photoshop for maximum speed, troubleshoot common issues, and keep your projects organized so that you can work faster than ever before!

LM
Lou_M
Feb 13, 2004
Ever since the VGA standard was announced many years ago, pixels on a computer have always been square. This is in contrast to televisions, which have non-square pixels.

The 4:3 and 5:4 ratios you are talking about have to do with the screen’s ratio, not the pixels’ ratio (pixels are always square). This wasn’t a problem until multiscan monitors came out, because then you could have a monitor that was designed primarly for 1280×1024 (5:4), but someone could change the resolution to 1024×768 (4:3) and then use the controls to maximize the image on the screen; at this point, the pixels would appear stretched (although of course they aren’t stretched in the Photoshop file).

Someone displaying a 1024×768 (4:3) image on a monitor designed for 1280×1024 (5:4) could theoretically adjust the display using the monitor’s controls so that it was displayed at 4:3, but who would know exactly where to set it? You’d end up with black bars on the screen.

But as you point out this is mostly fixed with LCD screens, since there’s really only one resolution they’re good at displaying.
DM
Dave McElderry
Feb 13, 2004
Lou, some good information you’ve provided, although I don’t understand the term "multiscan" and its relationship to ratios. With my monitor, when I change from 1280×1024 to 1024×768 the image size automatically adjusts to fill the screen, so the change in ratio is not as apparent (or "transparent" so to speak) as it would be if I had to readjust manually.

I understand about adjusting to display 1280×1024 in a 4:3 ratio, resulting in black bars at each side. That would take some getting used to, but it could be very useful when I wanted to work with an image knowing that it would be displayed on 4:3 systems. In a perfect world a simple touch of a button would automatically do this.

Up to this point I’ve been very pleased with my LCD, even for photos and image work. However, I now see this as a major drawback, and am disappointed to realize what it means.

For those unfamiliar with LCD native resolutions, I can tell you that the change in display quality is significant when going outside of that resolution – specifically text. I’m not at all happy with the results.

As a workaround, I’ve decided to leave my display at the 1280×1024 (5:4) native resolution for most work. When I need to create a graphic (especially one which needs to contain perfectly round or perfectly square objects), I’ll temporarily switch to a 4:3 resolution.

Thanks for your response, Lou.
JF
Jodi_Frye
Feb 13, 2004
Ok you know I’m using a 1280×1024 display now. i set it up to be square. There really isn’t much black bar on either side at all. As a matter of fact my other monitor which this one replaced had the same width black bar all the way around ! So, this is not a problem. My screen is still huge….compared to the 15" ( 13.5 viewing area ) that I used for 3 years.
DM
Dave McElderry
Feb 13, 2004
Jodi, how (if any) did that affect the quality of the normal text on your display? Better? Worse? Unnoticeable? That might be worth me taking some time to try.
JF
Jodi_Frye
Feb 14, 2004
Dave, looks great to me. I did not see a change in sharpness. So you know…it took me a while of fiddling to get it right. So, wait t’il ya have free time 🙂
DM
Dave McElderry
Feb 14, 2004
Well, hey Jodi, guess what…I just got the ol’ manual out because I couldn’t figure out how to adjust the horizontal size (or vertical either). Found out that there is no adjustment! I can adjust position, colors, clock, phase, brightness, contrast, and some other obscure things, but I have no control over the actual size of the image on the screen. It’s all automatic. Guess I don’t have to make that decision. It’s back to Plan A.
JF
Jodi_Frye
Feb 14, 2004
Dave, the options for that stuff is the buttons on the monitor…..I thought all monitors had these options….hmmm, maybe not ?
DM
Dave McElderry
Feb 14, 2004
Jodi, it blew me away too, but it really doesn’t exist. The manual is pretty thick, but it’s been translated into a gazillion different languages. The English part only takes up three pages, so I’m sure I haven’t missed it.
JF
Jodi_Frye
Feb 14, 2004
Dave, Oh well, then i guess you don’t need it. :),…stay happy

How to Improve Photoshop Performance

Learn how to optimize Photoshop for maximum speed, troubleshoot common issues, and keep your projects organized so that you can work faster than ever before!

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections