Cousin Ricky nous illumina en ce 2009-02-07 08:03 -->
> "clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>> Not recommended with current LCD technology: It's still too
>> viewing-angle-dependent (typically in the up/down diretion), and taking a few
>> steps back may change the angle significantly enough to make your results quite
>> useless.
> 
> This is especially true of these new-fangled glossy screens that are all the
> rage with laptops.  As if seeing the reflection of my ugly face is an
> "improvement."  Between the extremely narrow viewing angle (I can sense a
> mismatch between my eyes just by tilting my head) and the reflection, setting
> the gamma is nearly impossible.
> 
> (I'm just as puzzled over the popularity of glossy magazines and of the glossy
> varnishes used on paintings.  I just find myself frustrated with the reflection
> of the room and room lighting interfering with the picture or magazine article.
> Sure I like gloss--but on things that I don't have to examine, such as flower
> vases and kitchen appliances.)
> 
Yes, gloss on reading material is a PAIN! I prefer my photos printed in low 
gloss mate or satin finish.
On CRT monitors, they go to a great lenght to reduce or elliminate the gloss. 
You can buy anti-reflection screens that fit over the monitor.
Initialy, LCDs where mate. Now, they stupidly invest a lot of efforts into 
making them glossy, and thus, less useable.

-- 
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
A true friend is someone who reaches for your hand and touches your heart.

Post a reply to this message