widescreen or not?? cant decide

DrMekon · 31 Mar 2006 at 21:57

My backlight bleed seems to be getting a bit better, although still a patch in the lower left corner..but I dont really notice it, unless I look for it... maybe it will disappear over next few days... but Im not too concerned about that, nor the wonky button!!!

superpc · 31 Mar 2006 at 22:00

How long have you had the TFT? Is this normal for the backlight bleed to go?

drupi · 31 Mar 2006 at 22:23

Oh, i'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news but it will be forever there. You could get used to it, thus the `fade away`.

DrMekon · 1 Apr 2006 at 00:08

Im sure ive seen posts and images where it has settled down after a short period, although this is not always the case... Its not really bothering me that much, but if you know its there, you can notice it in certain conditions.

What is the cause of backlight bleed... its rather annoying when yuo thing it must be an easier problem to resolve compared with dead pixels???

Is it right that NEC have a zero backlight policy?? I know they are not very forgiving with dead pixels (10 I believe...??)

MR.B · 1 Apr 2006 at 04:40

Magic Man said:
Yes I can notice the differene there but you could have also equally have said...
"When you set a game to a 4:3 res/mode it dont cut off any horizontal field of view, and it adds to to vertical view"

But if someone was to say that it would not be true (atleast for most games).

You are implying that the 4:3 image is missing the sides

Yes i am. Heres an image i made to show you that when on a widescreen monitor and the game is set to widescreen res/mode you gain more horizontal view/scenery and lose no vertical view/scenery...

(i used sreenshots from widescreengamingforum.com, the 4:3 image was simply put ontop of the widescreen image, then i put the red lines in to show where it ends)

I admit that some games will cut off a bit of vertical field of view when set to widescreen if they are not done right, but like Half-Life2, and anything else that uses it's engine, most do not do that and instead just increase the horizontal view inside the game.

Booner! · 1 Apr 2006 at 12:35

hi, just read the posts,
I have a 19inch Viewsonic 924 at present but might move to the Belinea 20.1" so that i can use it with a Xbox 360 in 720p. Is this possible? and will my system cope with the resolution of the belinea?

3.2 P4 (478) at 4.13Ghz
2GB ram
6800GT AGP 256mb

will games play in a lower resolution and look horrible on the belinea if i cant get it on max resolution? i play battlefield 2, counter strike (a lot) and strategy games.

eventually moving to AM2 when its out with PCI-E so hoping my system will last that long!

cheers

Magic Man · 1 Apr 2006 at 12:44

But you are just not seeing the logic of what you are implying. You are comparing a 4:3 with a widescreen that has the same vertical height to start with, yes the widescreen is obviously bigger and in that case you are not going to lose vertical fov.

Start with that 4:3 image and then generate a widesreen inside that so that the widescreen has the same width as the 4:3, now it's the widescreen that has less view.

Yes, the image is simplistic and implies cutoff - but so does the original.

You can argue the case but the fact is an aspect monitor can display the image from any other aspect if the fov is effectively zoomed in or out until it fits. Yes, the overall image may be smaller in order to fit but in order to fit you would open up space in another dimension which wasn't in the original which could then be used.

A "widescreen" rendering mode in games is simply the engine rendering to X x Y. You could equally term a 4:3 mode a "tallscreen" rendering mode - it is still rendering to X x Y

MR.B · 1 Apr 2006 at 13:54

Ok Magic Man i'm sure now that you're talking about something different to what i am. I think you're talking about the physical size of a 4:3 compared to the equivalent widescreen? Like a 20" 4:3 monitor would have more physical screen space vertically than a 20" widescreen? Which is true.

I'm simply talking about how much extra scenery horizontally you get inside an actual game on a widescreen when the game is set to widescreen mode. Even if you had a 15" 16:10 monitor compared to a 21" 4:3 monitor, you would still see more inside the actual game on the widescreen because of how most games do widescreen modes. It would still be displayed exactly how it is in the pic i originally did no matter what size the screen is.

Magic Man · 2 Apr 2006 at 13:07

MR.B said:
Ok Magic Man i'm sure now that you're talking about something different to what i am. I think you're talking about the physical size of a 4:3 compared to the equivalent widescreen?

No

MR.B said:
...Even if you had a 15" 16:10 monitor compared to a 21" 4:3 monitor, you would still see more inside the actual game on the widescreen...

Ergh... okay, we'll leave it there then.

wellibob · 2 Apr 2006 at 13:16

lol, well said magic man.

Teal · 2 Apr 2006 at 17:06

If it helps you two at all ...

For any give screen height, widescreen will allow more width.

For any given screen width, 4:3 will allow more height.

Now just pick what you need most of, for me it is width

smids · 2 Apr 2006 at 17:42

MR.B - it all depends on the number of pixels. Only go by pixels - more pixels = more scenery irrespective of screen size.

Rojin · 2 Apr 2006 at 18:02

Actually it depends on the FOV the game uses. Some games do not support widescreen correctly so you will get the same scenery onscreen, others do it correctly and you will get more scenery onscreen, then again people have been changing FOV on 4:3 monitors for years, it has even been called cheating in the past as it gives an advantage... but that's a different can of worms.

Magic Man · 2 Apr 2006 at 18:14

Teal, smids & Rojin - exactly...

saintSIN · 2 Apr 2006 at 23:41

Maybe a minor point to consider, but when Windows Vista is out, it will have that sidebar option on the desktop screen, having widescreen will be of benefit as it won't eat away as much screen as it would if you had a 4:3 screen.

squiffy · 3 Apr 2006 at 00:04

saintSIN said:
Maybe a minor point to consider, but when Windows Vista is out, it will have that sidebar option on the desktop screen, having widescreen will be of benefit as it won't eat away as much screen as it would if you had a 4:3 screen.

Windows XP allows you to move taskbar to L/R sides.

saintSIN · 3 Apr 2006 at 01:33

squiffy said:
Windows XP allows you to move taskbar to L/R sides.

But Vista will have both taskbar and sidebar and having that extra bit of wideness could accommodate the sidebar without sacrificing too much desktop space