Prev: Call for papers (Deadline Extended): HPCS-10, USA, July 2010
Next: DDR2 1250 and 1333
From: Tony Houghton on 26 Mar 2010 20:58
In <Xns9D483DB1D182Plaid(a)193.202.122.174>,
Alan Plaid <nospam(a)here.com> wrote:

> My feeling is I need a panel that I can run at it's native resolution -
> when the LH5000 was running at 1920 x 1080 - the text looked crisp and
> sharp when I first got it plugged in even though it was only driving the
> panel at 60Hz - I had originally planned on using an LH3000 like yours if I
> could run it at 1920 x 1080 - I now have a feeling that it is the limited
> refresh rate (50Hz) that is stopping me doing that.

Surely all modern TVs support 60Hz as well as 50Hz.

> I am still unclear as to how the quoted TV refresh rate relates to PC's as
> I could not get the LH5000 (with it's 100Hz) refresh to run when driven at
> anything over 60Hz - I tried 75Hz, 85Hz and 100Hz but all gave a 'signal
> out of range' (can't remember exactly what the TV said) type error.

They probably only accept a 50Hz/60Hz signal and use internal picture
processing to interpolate the extra frames. That's if it even works on
external signals in addition to the internal tuner. I should think the
data in the MPEG encoding, which is only available to the TV if using
its inbuilt DVB decoder, would be quite helpful in constructing these
frames.

--
TH * http://www.realh.co.uk
From: doS on 27 Mar 2010 00:26
you wont get true 1080 from vga,you need an HDMI connection...

"Alan Plaid" <nospam(a)here.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9D483DB1D182Plaid(a)193.202.122.174...
> Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie(a)sometimes.sessile.org> wrote in
> news:t00qq5ttv4suuu2r43rfn8ti12slodnajr(a)4ax.com:
>
>> On 26 Mar 2010 17:53:53 GMT, Alan Plaid <nospam(a)here.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie(a)sometimes.sessile.org> wrote in
>>>news:i4rpq5hi2i54m37i6q0u3u80i71c9057pa(a)4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> On 26 Mar 2010 17:16:39 GMT, Alan Plaid <nospam(a)here.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I also tried an LG LH3000 in a Comet - although I got a picture, the
>>>res
>>>>>looked all wrong.
>>>>
>>>> I'm using a 32" LH3000 here, with a Mac Mini as the media centre
>>>> (DVI->HDMI adapter). It's a bit funny about its resolutions - the
>>>> 1080p and 720p both show black borders, as do various non-TV
>>>> resolutions. I eventually settled on 1360x768, which sizes perfectly
>>>> and makes the media player UI look fine too. I'm using it as a TV, not
>>>> a monitor, but I think it'd be okay from say 4 feet away.
>>>>
>>>> I haven't played with the TV in order to persuade it to size the image
>>>> correctly in the 1080p mode, but a quick google showed that this sort
>>>> of thing seems to be pretty normal for some insane reason.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers - Jaimie
>>>
>>>Hi Jamie - thanks for the reply. I tried the LH3000 (which has a 5oMhz
>>>panel) yesterday, I did get a full screen image, but the picture looked
>>>all wrong - like it does if you run an LCD in anything except it's
>>>'native' resolution.
>>
>> Do you mean fuzzy, or out of proportion? Or both, of course!
>>
>> Mine's a little fuzzy because of being used at the non-native res, but
>> it's in proportion and actually looks pretty good up close.
>>
>>>That led me to try the LH5000 (which uses a 100Mhz
>>>panel) which seemed to give a proper 1920 x 1080 display.
>>>
>>>Obviously as you are a MAC user I am not sure how that compares to PC's
>>
>> Not a great deal if difference in this respect, no more than different
>> video card drivers in a PC offering different options.
>>
>>>I would imagine from what I saw yesterday that a 1360x768 would not look
>>>great for me, but it might.
>>
>> What signal are you passing to the panel, VGA or DVI/HDMI? If you're
>> stuck with VGA this alone may make a significant difference.
>>
>> Cheers - Jaimie
>
> Jaimie - thanks again for the reply.
>
> Firstly, I was using the RGB VGA through a standard VGA cable - I am
> fairly
> experienced with computer hardware and understand that cables and
> connection types can make a difference but the problem I saw was to do
> with
> resolution. If I set the monitor I currently use (an HP 22" L2208w -
> native
> 1680 x 1050) to 1360 x 768 (I have just done it as I type !) - then I see
> that text now looks squidged and squeezed where the panel is having to
> redistribute the pixels across the monitor as it is not running at a
> native
> resolution. What I saw yesterdat was actually more 'jagged' than what I
> see
> now but I think the type of effect is similar.
>
> My feeling is I need a panel that I can run at it's native resolution -
> when the LH5000 was running at 1920 x 1080 - the text looked crisp and
> sharp when I first got it plugged in even though it was only driving the
> panel at 60Hz - I had originally planned on using an LH3000 like yours if
> I
> could run it at 1920 x 1080 - I now have a feeling that it is the limited
> refresh rate (50Hz) that is stopping me doing that.
>
> I am still unclear as to how the quoted TV refresh rate relates to PC's as
> I could not get the LH5000 (with it's 100Hz) refresh to run when driven at
> anything over 60Hz - I tried 75Hz, 85Hz and 100Hz but all gave a 'signal
> out of range' (can't remember exactly what the TV said) type error.
>
> Anyhow, I have tried emailing LG but no reply yet. Yours was the type of
> experience I was after but I was hoping to find someone who had used the
> default (native) resolution and could report success. PC Worl did not seem
> tohave a lot of time for me to discover whether it worked properly or not.
>
> Regards,
>
From: PeeGee on 27 Mar 2010 04:11
On 27/03/10 00:22, Alan Plaid wrote:
> Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie(a)sometimes.sessile.org> wrote in
> news:t00qq5ttv4suuu2r43rfn8ti12slodnajr(a)4ax.com:
>
>> On 26 Mar 2010 17:53:53 GMT, Alan Plaid <nospam(a)here.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie(a)sometimes.sessile.org> wrote in
>>> news:i4rpq5hi2i54m37i6q0u3u80i71c9057pa(a)4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> On 26 Mar 2010 17:16:39 GMT, Alan Plaid <nospam(a)here.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I also tried an LG LH3000 in a Comet - although I got a picture, the
>>> res
>>>>> looked all wrong.
>>>>
>>>> I'm using a 32" LH3000 here, with a Mac Mini as the media centre
>>>> (DVI->HDMI adapter). It's a bit funny about its resolutions - the
>>>> 1080p and 720p both show black borders, as do various non-TV
>>>> resolutions. I eventually settled on 1360x768, which sizes perfectly
>>>> and makes the media player UI look fine too. I'm using it as a TV, not
>>>> a monitor, but I think it'd be okay from say 4 feet away.
>>>>
>>>> I haven't played with the TV in order to persuade it to size the image
>>>> correctly in the 1080p mode, but a quick google showed that this sort
>>>> of thing seems to be pretty normal for some insane reason.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers - Jaimie
>>>
>>> Hi Jamie - thanks for the reply. I tried the LH3000 (which has a 5oMhz
>>> panel) yesterday, I did get a full screen image, but the picture looked
>>> all wrong - like it does if you run an LCD in anything except it's
>>> 'native' resolution.
>>
>> Do you mean fuzzy, or out of proportion? Or both, of course!
>>
>> Mine's a little fuzzy because of being used at the non-native res, but
>> it's in proportion and actually looks pretty good up close.
>>
>>> That led me to try the LH5000 (which uses a 100Mhz
>>> panel) which seemed to give a proper 1920 x 1080 display.
>>>
>>> Obviously as you are a MAC user I am not sure how that compares to PC's
>>
>> Not a great deal if difference in this respect, no more than different
>> video card drivers in a PC offering different options.
>>
>>> I would imagine from what I saw yesterday that a 1360x768 would not look
>>> great for me, but it might.
>>
>> What signal are you passing to the panel, VGA or DVI/HDMI? If you're
>> stuck with VGA this alone may make a significant difference.
>>
>> Cheers - Jaimie
>
> Jaimie - thanks again for the reply.
>
> Firstly, I was using the RGB VGA through a standard VGA cable - I am fairly
> experienced with computer hardware and understand that cables and
> connection types can make a difference but the problem I saw was to do with
> resolution. If I set the monitor I currently use (an HP 22" L2208w - native
> 1680 x 1050) to 1360 x 768 (I have just done it as I type !) - then I see
> that text now looks squidged and squeezed where the panel is having to
> redistribute the pixels across the monitor as it is not running at a native
> resolution. What I saw yesterdat was actually more 'jagged' than what I see
> now but I think the type of effect is similar.
>
> My feeling is I need a panel that I can run at it's native resolution -
> when the LH5000 was running at 1920 x 1080 - the text looked crisp and
> sharp when I first got it plugged in even though it was only driving the
> panel at 60Hz - I had originally planned on using an LH3000 like yours if I
> could run it at 1920 x 1080 - I now have a feeling that it is the limited
> refresh rate (50Hz) that is stopping me doing that.
>
> I am still unclear as to how the quoted TV refresh rate relates to PC's as
> I could not get the LH5000 (with it's 100Hz) refresh to run when driven at
> anything over 60Hz - I tried 75Hz, 85Hz and 100Hz but all gave a 'signal
> out of range' (can't remember exactly what the TV said) type error.
>
> Anyhow, I have tried emailing LG but no reply yet. Yours was the type of
> experience I was after but I was hoping to find someone who had used the
> default (native) resolution and could report success. PC Worl did not seem
> tohave a lot of time for me to discover whether it worked properly or not.
>
> Regards,
>

I have a Toshiba set which accepts 75Hz for resolutions less than
1360x768 via VGA (1360x768 is the max) and up to 1920x1080 at 60Hz via HDMI.

--
PeeGee

"Nothing should be able to load itself onto a computer without the
knowledge or consent of the computer user. Software should also be able
to be removed from a computer easily."
Peter Cullen, Microsoft Chief Privacy Strategist (Computing 18 Aug 05)
From: Chris French on 27 Mar 2010 05:09
In message <Xns9D483DB1D182Plaid(a)193.202.122.174>, Alan Plaid
<nospam(a)here.com> writes
>
> If I set the monitor I currently use (an HP 22" L2208w - native
>1680 x 1050) to 1360 x 768 (I have just done it as I type !) - then I see
>that text now looks squidged and squeezed where the panel is having to
>redistribute the pixels across the monitor as it is not running at a native
>resolution. What I saw yesterdat was actually more 'jagged' than what I see
>now but I think the type of effect is similar.
>
>My feeling is I need a panel that I can run at it's native resolution -
>when the LH5000 was running at 1920 x 1080 - the text looked crisp and
>sharp when I first got it plugged in even though it was only driving the
>panel at 60Hz - I had originally planned on using an LH3000 like yours if I
>could run it at 1920 x 1080 - I now have a feeling that it is the limited
>refresh rate (50Hz) that is stopping me doing that.
>

It does sound like some sort of resolution problem.

I wonder if it was just an oddity with the particular video output and
the LH3000?

Not the same sort of size as the LH3000, but I have an LG M237WDP 23
inch monitorTV as LG call it )1920x1080 resolution. As a monitor it
works well. the text on both DVI and VGA inputs is nice and sharp.

I have two PC hooked up to it, one via DVI one via VGA. The one
connected via VGA will not work properly if I connect it to the DVI port
(via the cards DVI output obviously). The desktop area is bigger than
the screen area when set to the screens native res. so you only get to
see part of the desktop (though IIRC it would scroll the desktop
around) fiddle as I might I couldn't get them to play ball at all.

I gave up fiddling once I realised it worked the other way round. I
assume it's maybe some driver glitch or something

--
Chris French, Leeds
From: Peter Hill on 27 Mar 2010 08:35
On 26 Mar 2010 17:16:39 GMT, Alan Plaid <nospam(a)here.com> wrote:

> want to use an LCD TV as a monitor - 32" is all I have room for. If
>anyone hear has experience of doing this and knows a little about
>resolutions etc I would like some advice.
>
>I went to PCWorld and persuaded them to connect my Netbook (Advent 4211C
>or MSI Wind) to a LG LH5000, and we seemed to get a good picture at it's
>native resolution 1920 x 1080 although at one point the picture was
>shunted lightly to the right. It took a lot of persuasion to get them to
>try and they did not really know what they were doing.

Thanks to the shop staff being idiots, back in '83 I got a �80 80
column adaptor card for a 2nd mono screen with my Tatung Einstein from
Dixons for FREE. I asked about the 80 column card (needed for CP/M
they produced one from upstairs. The box had been opened so they must
have tried it but they didn't know it was 1v p-p video and not TV RF
so it didn't work. I used a B/W portable with the family video
recorder as a video to rf converter.

>I also tried an LG LH3000 in a Comet - although I got a picture, the res
>looked all wrong. The difference between the 5000 and the 3000 models is
>that the 3000 runs at 50Hz while the 5000 runs at 100Hz - Does one need
>at least 100Hz to use one with a PC ?

PC refresh is not same as TV. UK TV is 25 frames/sec interlaced, so it
scans top to bottom twice per frame = 50Hz. 100Hz TV stores the frame
and double scans. Double scan is completely idiotic for LCD, it's only
really any use for line scanned CRT where there is a bright spot from
newly scanned beam and image degrades bofore being refreshed. Even HD
doesn't run at 100Hz frame rate.
http://hometheater.about.com/od/televisionbasics/qt/framevsrefresh.htm

Old VGA runs at 60Hz non interlaced. Other common rates are 70Hz and
75Hz. Faster = smoother motion if the PC / graphics are up to it.

>I noticed that even though the LH5000 produced a good looking picture, it
>was being driven at 60Hz, any attempt to bump it up gave a no signal
>error.

It may need to exit PC mode > TV mode and go back to TV to re-sync at
new frame rate? Or there may be other setup options on TV like WXGA
mode?

Otherwise select "Hide modes that this monitor can not display". The
graphics card gets info from VGA port on res and frequency of attached
monitor and can pass that to the windows monitor setup panel so will
exclude any that it can't display.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_Data_Channel

>Anyway, any info or advice would be good.
>I am not expecting a picture of the quality of a top notch Monitor, I am
>actually just after achieving larger icons at a reasonable res. The
>trouble with large pc monitors is that they seem to run very high native
>resolutions.

Right click desktop. Appearance, advanced, check "use large icons".
But it's a bit of a PITA as all the icons wander around to refit.

Or to make all text and icons re-scale set DPI setting on "general"
tab.

>Thanks for any help.
--
Peter Hill
Spamtrap reply domain as per NNTP-Posting-Host in header
Can of worms - what every fisherman wants.
Can of worms - what every PC owner gets!
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Call for papers (Deadline Extended): HPCS-10, USA, July 2010
Next: DDR2 1250 and 1333