 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bruce wrote:
>
> Was just curious what size of monitor's people were actually using for
> doing 3D modelling.
I have a 15" monitor and would kill for a 19". 17" is "nice" but if you
can hold out for a 19" with decent resolution specs DO IT.
--
Ken Tyler - 1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
(I'm just writing down my thoughts here)
I have a 17" and it's cool. Before that I worked on a 15" and even
that was great cause I was used to work on a 14" (800*600! I now work
at 1280*1024 :-)
I think, but I'm not sure, that a 19" is rather expensive compared to
a 17", so I think, but I'm not sure (did I say that already?) that
it's still better to buy a 17".
But again: I'm not sure!
ZK
Bruce wrote:
>
> Was just curious what size of monitor's people were actually using for
> doing 3D modelling.
>
> I've only just played with Moray a couple times, but found it pretty
> tough to make anything reasonable with my old 14", so I'm looking at
> upgrading my system, and trying to decide between a 17" and a 19"+
>
> Of course, the bigger the better, but I was just wondering if a 17" is
> actually worth it, or if I should just skip it, save up a few more
> penies and go direct to a 19"?
>
> Thank in advance for any comments
>
> Bruce Lamming
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Recently I went from a Panasonic 17" to a Viewsonic G810 (21"). With a 32Mb
video card, I'm running 1280x1024 at 32bit. I'd say go for the 19"+ with
.25mm dot-pitch (or better). Depending upon your age, vision acuity, and the
time you expect to spend in front of a monitor, the effect may vary. But, to
my way of thinking, with visually intensive programs such a Moray/Povray,
most people don't give enough consideration to the monitor they'll be
using -- you have asked a good question, and your eyes will say 'thank you'.
...larry
Bruce <dke### [at] sk sympaticoca> wrote in message
news:38B### [at] sksympaticoca...
> Was just curious what size of monitor's people were actually using for
> doing 3D modelling.
>
> I've only just played with Moray a couple times, but found it pretty
> tough to make anything reasonable with my old 14", so I'm looking at
> upgrading my system, and trying to decide between a 17" and a 19"+
>
> Of course, the bigger the better, but I was just wondering if a 17" is
> actually worth it, or if I should just skip it, save up a few more
> penies and go direct to a 19"?
>
>
> Thank in advance for any comments
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
It might start to become a bit like college ruled paper compared to wide-ruled
for school. I can see it that way anyhow. I always liked tiny writing (to many
a teachers dismay) so when I moved on to the college rule from wide rule after
elementary school (whatever those of you elsewhere call it) I was very content
to write smaller but then soon after started writing smaller still. I think
this must be a common thing because of the way the concept works to begin with;
large crayon-writing kids to pencil scrawls and eventually pen handwriting.
Whatever the purpose it does seem a typical characteristic.
What I'm getting at is that a person could probably move downward in monitor
size from a 19+" monitor at kindergarten age to a 17" in grade school then 15"
at adulthood, back up to a 17" or 19" when older and lazier eyes take control
perhaps. I'm half joking.
Resolutions for each of those sizes, and age brackets, going from 640x480 to
1024x768 then 1280x1024 and back again to 1024x768 (I have a 19" @ 1152x864
currently). Just to make a guess at a common screen setup.
I'm only pointing out one potential reasoning behind this, not that it has any
basis in reality or whether I know or not if it does. Modeling in a 3D program
is of course possibly very different from a average persons use of a monitor.
Bob
"Zeger Knaepen" <ZEG### [at] studentkuleuvenacbe> wrote in message
news:38B### [at] studentkuleuvenacbe...
| (I'm just writing down my thoughts here)
| I have a 17" and it's cool. Before that I worked on a 15" and even
| that was great cause I was used to work on a 14" (800*600! I now work
| at 1280*1024 :-)
| I think, but I'm not sure, that a 19" is rather expensive compared to
| a 17", so I think, but I'm not sure (did I say that already?) that
| it's still better to buy a 17".
|
| But again: I'm not sure!
|
| ZK
|
| Bruce wrote:
| >
| > Was just curious what size of monitor's people were actually using for
| > doing 3D modelling.
| >
| > I've only just played with Moray a couple times, but found it pretty
| > tough to make anything reasonable with my old 14", so I'm looking at
| > upgrading my system, and trying to decide between a 17" and a 19"+
| >
| > Of course, the bigger the better, but I was just wondering if a 17" is
| > actually worth it, or if I should just skip it, save up a few more
| > penies and go direct to a 19"?
| >
| > Thank in advance for any comments
| >
| > Bruce Lamming
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I started many years ago with 15" at 1024x768 and I was quite happy with it,
until 5 years ago when I switched to 17" at 1024x768 and liked that very
much !
Then I got the opportunity to buy relatively cheap a 21" Sony Trinitron
Multiscan 520GS and I am in heaven now! My eyes are old, about the same age
as I am, but after a recent thorough maintenance job I can see as clearly as
when I was 45! Now the 21" seems a bit overdone, but I am still in heaven.
I would suggest that you wait a little and buy a 19". That would serve you
for as long as the tube lasts...
--
Regards,
Sander
Bruce <dke### [at] sksympaticoca> schreef in berichtnieuws
38B### [at] sksympaticoca...
> Was just curious what size of monitor's people were actually using for
> doing 3D modelling.
>
> I've only just played with Moray a couple times, but found it pretty
> tough to make anything reasonable with my old 14", so I'm looking at
> upgrading my system, and trying to decide between a 17" and a 19"+
>
> Of course, the bigger the better, but I was just wondering if a 17" is
> actually worth it, or if I should just skip it, save up a few more
> penies and go direct to a 19"?
>
>
> Thank in advance for any comments
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi Bruce!
In the beginning I worked with Moray on a 15" Monitor @ 800 x 600 pixels
85Hz. Since three weeks I have a quite good 17" Monitor with 95KHz
horizontal frequency. Now I have Moray running at 1024 x 768 pixels @
120Hz with small fonts.
Working with Moray becomes more comfortable with higher resolution. But
my opinion is: Better have a good 17" monitor than a bad 19" monitor.
Karl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Was just curious what size of monitor's people were actually using
> for doing 3D modelling.
I just use a normal (not very expensive) 17" monitor at 1024x768.
Of course, you'll see an increasing number of people using 19" or even
21" monitors, but actually these wouldn't even fit on my desk. So a
BIG flat-screen is the thing I'm dreaming of... but that's REALLY
expensive so of course I'll never have it.
Florian
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Never heard of a 13" monitor!
75 Hz is not enough for real comfort.
I forgot to mention that I use 1260x960 now routinely. Dont forget that with
age your vision becomes less acute: mine went down from 1.2 to 0.4 the last
few years; now it is back to 1.0!! 21" seems a bit overdone but I love the
resolution and the large icons and lettering...
--
Regards,
Sander
Psychomek <psy### [at] cyberhighwaynet> schreef in berichtnieuws
38B407C0.674CEC89@cyberhighway.net...
> I have a 15" monitor at 800x600 32bit at 75hz and it is better on my eyes
than
> that crappy 13" 640x480 8bit i had....
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I have a 19 inch monitor and i love it. it's a viewsonic v95 and cost 450
bucks plus tax. i think it was worth it. one reason is that once you get
into 19 inch+ monitors, you don't feel the need to upgrade all the time
like you do with CPUs. another reason is that you can run at high
resolutions and actually see everything. i run at 1280 by 1024. so save
and get the 19".
Bruce wrote:
> Was just curious what size of monitor's people were actually using for
> doing 3D modelling.
>
> I've only just played with Moray a couple times, but found it pretty
> tough to make anything reasonable with my old 14", so I'm looking at
> upgrading my system, and trying to decide between a 17" and a 19"+
>
> Of course, the bigger the better, but I was just wondering if a 17" is
> actually worth it, or if I should just skip it, save up a few more
> penies and go direct to a 19"?
>
> Thank in advance for any comments
>
> Bruce Lamming
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The 5:4 aspect ratio doesn't bother you? I use 1280:960... :)
--
Regards,
Sander
ryan constantine <rco### [at] yahoocom> schreef in berichtnieuws
38B6CD78.9834C22F@yahoo.com...
> I have a 19 inch monitor and i love it. it's a viewsonic v95 and cost 450
> bucks plus tax. i think it was worth it. one reason is that once you get
> into 19 inch+ monitors, you don't feel the need to upgrade all the time
> like you do with CPUs. another reason is that you can run at high
> resolutions and actually see everything. i run at 1280 by 1024. so save
> and get the 19".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
