I need better eyes
Aug. 5th, 2011 02:45 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Assuming that I am sitting 2 feet (or around 60cm) from my monitor, and it
is 22" across the diagonal at 16:9 ratio (so approx 19"x11") , what is the
maximum resolution that my eyes would be able to see?
Is 1080p (1920x1080) almost as good as it gets? Or is it worth pushing the
resolution much higher? I know that's only about 100dpi, but can I
actually resolve objects smaller than a quarter of a mm from two feet away?
(Come to think of it - 1080p being 100dpi on a 22" monitor seems an
unlikely coincidence - is that why it was chosen?)
is 22" across the diagonal at 16:9 ratio (so approx 19"x11") , what is the
maximum resolution that my eyes would be able to see?
Is 1080p (1920x1080) almost as good as it gets? Or is it worth pushing the
resolution much higher? I know that's only about 100dpi, but can I
actually resolve objects smaller than a quarter of a mm from two feet away?
(Come to think of it - 1080p being 100dpi on a 22" monitor seems an
unlikely coincidence - is that why it was chosen?)
no subject
Date: 2011-08-05 02:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-05 02:31 pm (UTC)"In humans, 20/20 vision is the ability to resolve a spatial pattern separated by a visual angle of one minute of arc. A 20/20 letter subtends 5 minutes of arc total."
if i've got the trig right, you'd have roughly 2600x1550 arcminutes to play with if you had perfect 20/20 vision and sat in exactly the right place. and whether "pattern" means the same as what's shown on a computer screen.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-05 05:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-05 02:31 pm (UTC)At two feet, 1" seems to be about 2.4 degrees, so that'd be somewhere just over 40 ppd.
(I had a coworker who used to run her CRT at the highest resolution she could and then use 4 point text in her terminal windows. I have good eyes, and even I couldn't read it from much distance.)
no subject
Date: 2011-08-05 02:32 pm (UTC)I think the question of what your eyes are able to see depends rather on how they're trying to see it. If you display a one-pixel-wide horizontal line and elevate it by an extra pixel for some of its length, the points where it shifts back and forth are instantly obvious (at least to my eyesight) at normal viewing distance on any of those monitors, so the resolution could go a lot lower than that before a single pixel made no perceptible difference. And, along the same lines, a slanting line without antialiasing can look perceptibly jaggy, and a character in a font can look asymmetric if there's even a one-pixel difference between two lengths that ought to be the same (e.g. in my default browser font at work the + is annoyingly off-centre). On the other hand, if you display a true-colour JPEG of a photograph, I won't perceive any distracting blockiness at 100dpi on a monitor, so for those purposes (when the source material is kind of blurry anyway) it's good enough.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-05 02:33 pm (UTC)And I can certainly resolve far better than 1920 x 1080.
Good luck finding a monitor that will do anything more - even the larger sizes top out at the 1080p HD std in terms of res - most disappointing. Still, the 21" only just fits at my desk so I suppose that's as good as I am goig to get.
It's annoying cos I've used higher res than this on a smaller screen - one of Steven's old laptops did a few notches up, and Dev work is much nicer with ore screen real estate. I never got the hang of 2 monitors - probably cos i am not a touch typist
no subject
Date: 2011-08-05 02:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-05 05:15 pm (UTC)hmm, no real test but I can still read 10pt text (Times New Roman) at 100% at about 7-8ft. (21" 1920 x 1080) A sharper monitor would make it easier, though.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-05 04:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-05 04:31 pm (UTC)Looks like 100DPI is pretty much what people aim for. I guess it would make sense for panel manufacturers to have a single production resolution.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-05 05:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-06 08:46 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-05 05:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-06 12:51 pm (UTC)For some reason the display world talks about dot pitches and the printer world about dpi. This is like how rocket scientists do specific impulse and jet engine designers do specific fuel consumption: you can convert from one to the other, if you remember that they're upside down with respect to each other. (or American car manufacturers with mpg versus Europeans with litres per 100km)