# monitor resolution has screen print way too small



## keakar (Jan 27, 2008)

my widescreen lcd monitor (see specs) needs to use 1680x1050 to have a normal looking picture but this monitor resolution has the screen print way too small for my liking. its like looking at newspaper print. this print size looks to be about the same physical size as my old 17" monitor had but on this 22" it looks very miniturized and not in proportion to the monitor size.

is there a way to increase webpage print like your reading here in this post?

by using desktop right click to properties i tried changing text size but it only effects start menu items or the menu bar up top but not the address window or tabs or the search bar. if i use a different resolution to get bigger print i end up with a stretched out look to the screen. the best way to describe that is the round smileys on the right become lemon shaped and the larger the object, like the tpu shortcut icon on my desktop, the more pronounced the warping is.

can someone tell me how to adjust this for better reading?

PS - i have the lastest video and monitor drivers installed.


----------



## Mussels (Jan 27, 2008)

windows does have settings to adjust font/dpi.

Unsure of the exact location in XP, but its in the same general area as where you change the refresh rate.

the warping you speak of is normal for LCD's - they ONLY work at their intended (maximum) resolution.


----------



## keakar (Jan 27, 2008)

Mussels said:


> windows does have settings to adjust font/dpi.
> 
> Unsure of the exact location in XP, but its in the same general area as where you change the refresh rate.
> 
> the warping you speak of is normal for LCD's - they ONLY work at their intended (maximum) resolution.



i never messed with refresh rates so i cant even guess where that section is lol.

as for the resolution, i tried all of them and figured it was 1680x1050 or nothing, it has a box saying hide resolutions monitor cant use so it may as well just list the one since its the only normal view it has. but then maybe some people dont notice flattened circles .

glad to hear there is a way to change it though, otherwise i might have to get used to a stretched screen .


----------



## JRMBelgium (Jan 27, 2008)

I use this software for screenshots:
http://www.ntwind.com/software/winsnap.html


----------



## strick94u (Jan 27, 2008)

I just got this samsung sync master 22" wide screen tonight and @1680x1050 everything looks normal mines a 2232bw not sure why yours is doing that


----------



## OnBoard (Jan 27, 2008)

If you use firefox very handy and fast way to increase font  size is 'ctrl' & '+/-' (ctrl + 0 for default).

For Windows DPI settings. Right click Desktop/Properties/Settings/Advanced and DPI setting is the first thing there, change that to 120 DPI (or use custom).


----------



## keakar (Jan 27, 2008)

OnBoard said:


> For Windows DPI settings. Right click Desktop/Properties/Settings/Advanced and DPI setting is the first thing there, change that to 120 DPI (or use custom).



thanks, that was it its perfect now and the type is in proportion to the screen size. it was set at 96 dpi as default so i selected the 120dpi choice and it said it was 125% of normal size.

still seems strange to have so small a print for default size but i guess its the widescreen thing that does it.


----------



## OnBoard (Jan 27, 2008)

Bigger the resolution (and or smaller dot size in screen) the smaller the font goes. 17" and 19" LCDs have the same 1280x1024 resolution, but 19" has bigger text because of bigger dots to make out the size difference. I have a good vision but it was seriously hard to read text in my 17" LCD and although I didn't gain any resolution, moving to 19" was I right thing to do.

If you had 1024x768 resolution in your 17" monitor, it had under half the pixels on screen than your new one and depending on dot size (of the monitor) the font might have been twice as big. Good that it looks nice to you now


----------



## Mussels (Jan 27, 2008)

OnBoard said:


> If you use firefox very handy and fast way to increase font  size is 'ctrl' & '+/-' (ctrl + 0 for default).
> 
> For Windows DPI settings. Right click Desktop/Properties/Settings/Advanced and DPI setting is the first thing there, change that to 120 DPI (or use custom).



thanks whats what i was trying to direct him to.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 27, 2008)

life used to be easy when with an old crt monitor u just picked a resolution that gave nice readably fonts.. now u get lumbered with an lcd native one.. its one thing i hate about lcd montitors..

its adjustable but only in a fashion..  never as good as just picking the resolution based on readability like people did with the old crt..

trog


----------



## JRMBelgium (Jan 27, 2008)

There is absolutely no difference between CRT, my native resolution is 2048x1536, that's a lot higher then 22" LCD native...if you don't have an uber-PC, forget about playing on my native resolution...


----------



## twicksisted (Jan 27, 2008)

OnBoard said:


> If you use firefox very handy and fast way to increase font  size is 'ctrl' & '+/-' (ctrl + 0 for default).
> 
> For Windows DPI settings. Right click Desktop/Properties/Settings/Advanced and DPI setting is the first thing there, change that to 120 DPI (or use custom).




or you can click and hold ctrl and use the mouse scroll wheel (up or down)... also works on photos (handy for porn too lol)


----------



## Triprift (Jan 27, 2008)

twicksisted said:


> also works on photos (handy for porn too lol)



Lol i dont no you kids and porn


----------



## trog100 (Jan 27, 2008)

Jelle Mees said:


> There is absolutely no difference between CRT, my native resolution is 2048x1536, that's a lot higher then 22" LCD native...if you don't have an uber-PC, forget about playing on my native resolution...



u miss my point.. old crt montitors never had a "native" resolution.. for windows readability u simply selected a resolution that suited u best.. in my case it was never the max resolution the monitor could run.. simply one i could read..

as for games it was one the hardware could handle.. never a thought about trying the monitors max resolution..

now i have to look at fonts way too small and mess about trying to make them readable.. 

my current 20 inch widescreen at 1680 x 1050 produces way too small fonts..

basically windows XP was never set up for such high resolutions we now run with our lcd panels..

in windows trying to lower the panels resolution below native simply produces interpolated blurry fonts.. not being able to simply select a more "readable" resolution is one thing i miss with lcd panels..

with games it isnt a problem just in windows..

trog


----------



## JRMBelgium (Jan 27, 2008)

trog100 said:


> u miss my point.. old crt montitors never had a "native" resolution.. for windows readability u simply selected a resolution that suited u best.. in my case it was never the max resolution the monitor could run.. simply one i could read..
> 
> as for games it was one the hardware could handle.. never a thought about trying the monitors max resolution..
> 
> ...



Again, I don't see what the difference is with LCD's.

My 17" CRT had native 1280x1024, I used 1182x864 for desktop. My 19" CRT had native 1600x1200, I used 1280x1024 for desktop, my 22" crt has native 2048x1536, I use 1600x1200 for desktop.

What's the difference, you have 20" LCD, just use 1440x900... If your fonts are blurry at lower resolution that you just have a crappy monitor...

My Samsung 2032MW displays EVERY resolution just fine from 800x600 to 1650x1050, no blurry unreadable fonts...


----------



## Mussels (Jan 27, 2008)

trog100 said:


> u miss my point.. old crt montitors never had a "native" resolution.. for windows readability u simply selected a resolution that suited u best.. in my case it was never the max resolution the monitor could run.. simply one i could read..
> 
> as for games it was one the hardware could handle.. never a thought about trying the monitors max resolution..
> 
> ...



Just to throw it in, they raised the default font size a little in vista, as well as icon size. Lots of people randomly complained, but it is a lot better for high res screens. my 22" at 1680x1050 looks fine to me, but i can see how a 20" would be small.




Jelle Mees said:


> Again, I don't see what the difference is with LCD's.
> 
> My 17" CRT had native 1280x1024, I used 1182x864 for desktop. My 19" CRT had native 1600x1200, I used 1280x1024 for desktop, my 22" crt has native 2048x1536, I use 1600x1200 for desktop.
> 
> ...



So you're honestly telling us, that no matter the resolution - even if NON widescreen your image doesnt stretch to fill it out? somehow i find it more likely you just arent seeing it.

Go use 800x600 or 1024x768 and tell me everything isnt stretching sideways to make it fat - and if you STILL say it doesnt, take a pic with a digital camera and show us.


----------



## JRMBelgium (Jan 27, 2008)

Mussels said:


> Go use 800x600 or 1024x768 and tell me everything isnt stretching sideways to make it fat - and if you STILL say it doesnt, take a pic with a digital camera and show us.



This is how my screen shows 4:3 resolutions:
http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff312/JelleMees/RIMG1415.jpg

I can stretch it if I want by pressing a button.

This is how my screen shows a resolution that is lower then 1650x1050 ( size depends on resolution ):
- http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff312/JelleMees/RIMG1417.jpg

I can also stretch it to fullscreen if I want but the screen will not become blurry...

Seriously, next time, buy a Samsung monitor


----------



## trog100 (Jan 27, 2008)

Jelle Mees said:


> Again, I don't see what the difference is with LCD's.
> 
> My 17" CRT had native 1280x1024, I used 1182x864 for desktop. My 19" CRT had native 1600x1200, I used 1280x1024 for desktop, my 22" crt has native 2048x1536, I use 1600x1200 for desktop.
> 
> ...



u dont understand how lcd panels work do u.. your crt does not have a native resolution..

an lcd panel does.. mine has 1680 x 1050.. at the native resolution all pixels are used.. any attempts at using less than all the pixels causes the monitor to blend or blur more pixels into less.. hence blurry fonts at less than the native resolution..

crt monitors dont work this way..

now say thank u to me for taking the time to educate u and stop argueing about things u know nothing about... he he he

please..

trog


----------



## JRMBelgium (Jan 27, 2008)

trog100 said:


> u dont understand how lcd panels work do u.. your crt does not have a native resolution..
> 
> an lcd panel does.. mine has 1680 x 1050.. at the native resolution all pixels are used.. any attempts at using less than all the pixels causes the monitor to blend or blur more pixels into less.. hence blurry fonts at less than the native resolution..
> 
> ...



I might not use the right term, but it doesn't change the fact that my screen doesn't become blurry at a lower resolution.

My monitor as a built-in TV-Tuner, and TV-input is only 720x576 in my country and it looks beatifull:
http://i15.tinypic.com/4uykbvr.jpg
http://i14.tinypic.com/4pa2lwk.jpg

Do you see distortion artifacts? I don't...

When I know that I am going to chat for a long time, I go in my bed ( monitor is at my foot end )and connect my laptop and use resolution 1280x9xx ( don't know exact resolution ).
The screen is just as sharp as on 1680x1050.

Is it possible that my monitor is better at resolution scaling because it has a TV-Tuner? Isn't that the most logical explenation? 
Samsung also has a 22" TFT ( 1920x1200 ) with TV-Tuner and in the store ( when I went shopping for a monitor ) I saw that the image quality from that monitor was just as good as on my 20".
Samsung must use some kind of resolution scaling technology to display a 720x576 input on 1920x1200 without distortion artifacts...


----------



## twicksisted (Jan 27, 2008)

An LCD will only look crisp and defined at its native resolution... if you run it anything under its native resolution it will look fluffy and blurred, especially with fonts...

FACT


----------



## JRMBelgium (Jan 27, 2008)

twicksisted said:


> An LCD will only look crisp and defined at its native resolution... if you run it anything under its native resolution it will look fluffy and blurred, especially with fonts...
> 
> FACT



FACT FACT FACT...

Fact, this  is a 720x572 image resized to 1650x1050:
http://i15.tinypic.com/4uykbvr.jpg

Everyone who looks at my screen thinks it HD for heaven sake...


----------



## twicksisted (Jan 27, 2008)

Aah ok, i think I know where you getting confused here...
I am talking about running a screen below / under its native resolution...
(native resolution being the MAX it runs and the only res it should run at)

Your talking about taking an HD source and upscaling it to fit on an LCD screens native resolution.


----------



## JRMBelgium (Jan 27, 2008)

twicksisted said:


> Your talking about taking an HD source and upscaling it to fit on an LCD screens native resolution.



720x572 is not HD, 1366x768 is HD...


----------



## twicksisted (Jan 27, 2008)

dude its not going to look blurry from a small photo on the web, but the difference between the two resolutions when you sitting in front of it are going to be apparent... unless you have very bad eye sight of course


----------



## keakar (Jan 27, 2008)

i was informed of a little tool that was added to explorer 7 in the last update from microsoft. they actually made it better for a change lol. in the bottom right hand corner they added a zoom tool to enlarge the screen for better viewing just like we used to be able to do for the crt monitors. it needs to be redone each time you open your browser but its no big deal to do this since you just click it once to go to 125% which doubles the text size. by using this i can leave the DPI at the proper setting and have the resolution set properly at 1680x1050 and i get much better results this way.

 thanks again to all who gave advice.


----------



## Mussels (Jan 28, 2008)

Jelle Mees said:


> This is how my screen shows 4:3 resolutions:
> http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff312/JelleMees/RIMG1415.jpg
> 
> I can stretch it if I want by pressing a button.
> ...


both mine ARE samsung. hehe. TV has that option, my 22" doesnt - do you have the new 19" with 97" color gamut? that'd explain it if so, cause its newer than most other samsungs.


----------



## JRMBelgium (Jan 28, 2008)

Mussels said:


> both mine ARE samsung. hehe. TV has that option, my 22" doesnt - do you have the new 19" with 97" color gamut? that'd explain it if so, cause its newer than most other samsungs.



I have the 2032MW.


----------



## Mussels (Jan 28, 2008)

ok... also, do you have scaling disabled in Nvidias flat panel options? if so thats an Nvidia only feature, and ATI users cant get that.


----------



## JRMBelgium (Jan 28, 2008)

Mussels said:


> ok... also, do you have scaling disabled in Nvidias flat panel options? if so thats an Nvidia only feature, and ATI users cant get that.



Actually, my laptop has Intel Graphics.


----------



## Mussels (Jan 28, 2008)

Jelle Mees said:


> Actually, my laptop has Intel Graphics.



was talking about your 8800GT, connected to the samsung.


----------



## JRMBelgium (Jan 28, 2008)

Mussels said:


> was talking about your 8800GT, connected to the samsung.



Don't remember.


----------



## Mussels (Jan 28, 2008)

Jelle Mees said:


> Don't remember.



The black bars around the image can come from a monitor, OR the video card driver. the OP mentioned distorting, but i'm pretty sure he had an ATI card thus making it impossible for him to disable scaling.


----------

