Resolution question...

[Rhombuss]

Has anyone ever noticed an anomaly in monitor resolutions? Here are the mainstream resolutions

640x480
800x600
1024x768
1152x864
1280x1024
1600x1200

Has anyone ever noticed that the 1280x1024 resolution is the only one that isn't a 4:3 width/height ratio? All the others are 4:3, while the 1280x1024 is 5:4. I know the 1280x960 resolution also exists, but I've never actually heard of someone using that resolution. I've tried it, but for some reason, the pixels look too large vertically, even though the ratio is the same at other screen sizes.

I find one major problem with this. With such things as graphical and web designs, if you're trying to make something circular, or any other shape that has some definitive ratio in width/height, there's always going to be a problem with 19" monitor users, and non-19" monitor users. For those creating in 1280x1024 resolution, the images will appear vertically stretched to users of other resolutions. And to creators in all other resolutions, the images will appear vertically compressed in 1280x1024.

Is it just me or does this seem odd? Or is 1280x960 the industry standard for 19" monitors and I'm just a total ignoramus? .

 

[goog]

Haven't read many monitor threads lately have you

Yes 4:3 is standard ratio, therefore 1280x960, but 1280x1024 is common.

I use 1152x864, "problem" solved.

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

yeah, nothing like looking at short fat people

1280x1024 is just moronic.

 

[Sunner]

Agree with BingBong.

 

[bendixG15]

Maybe they are Tall and Thin _________

 

[BFG10K]

I know the 1280x960 resolution also exists, but I've never actually heard of someone using that resolution.

I use that resolution all the time.

 

[ProviaFan]

Although my 17 inch monitor can do 1280x960 at 80hz refresh, my video card (Radeon VE) only supports 1280x1024.
Thus I have to stick with 1152x864 at 85hz. Is there a registry hack or something I can do to make it support 1280x960? Pls help me, I don't want to use screwed up resolution.

 

[Rhombuss]

Actually, that's probably why I've stuck with 1280x1024. I have the same problem as jliechty, my Radeon 32DDR doesn't display the 1280x960 resolution. I just got the updated official XP drivers, and they're still not there. I find it curious that ATi would leave out an 'industry standard' resolution?

 

[ObiDon]

1280x1024 is why I haven't bought an LCD monitor yet. I want something bigger than 15" but most 17" and 18" LCDs only go up to 1280x1024 :|
I suppose I could just use 1280x960 though...

 

[Rhombuss]

Actually, that's another thing I haven't considered, ObiDon. I'm also thinking of getting a 17-18" LCD soon, but from the displays I've looked at, the native resolution seems to be 1280x1024 for most of them. Why would they pick a 5:4 ratio, ratio than a 'standard' 4:3?

 

[kgraeme]

This is a really old gripe, especially for Mac users since there are a lot of graphics people on the Mac and proportions matter.

What I find interesting is that my latest ATI drivers threw in 1280x768. That's 5x3, or kissin' close to 16x9.

 

[ObiDon]

<< What I find interesting is that my latest ATI drivers threw in 1280x768. That's 5x3, or kissin' close to 16x9. >>


Sounds like a great excuse to pick up that 24" Sony