"Fredrik Eriksson" <fe79}--at--{yahoo}--dot--{com> wrote:
> Make no mistake; the large pictures *are* getting downscaled. It could be
> that the software only supports scaling to certain predefined dimensions.
> It could be that the software looks at all the images and chooses a fixed
> scaling factor based on the dimensions of the largest one. It could be
> that a wizard did it. It could be any number of things, but nothing the
> software does can overcome the fact that the display panel only has
> 1366x768 pixels.

make no mistake:  I'm not suggesting the software is pulling a Jesus here. :)

What I'm suggesting is that perhaps they just advertise the display is 1366x768
because it can't, for some reason or another, display 1080p video content but
the physical screen is still 1080p.  That or the picture are being unreasonably
scaled down.  Yes, I realize that by Occam's razor the latter should win out,
but the facts don't seem to add up.

I just crafted away quite a few 1 pixel grids with 100x100px of spacing between
the lines, in several resolutions, including 1366x768 and 1920x1080.  I've not
rescaled of course, I generated a new 1 pixel grid for each one with Gimp _>
Render -> Pattern.  The 1080 one fits the whole screen just like the previous

patterns or anything like that.  The 768 one doesn't fit the whole screen as
expected.

It's very bizarre and amusing...

Post a reply to this message