Please, I don't need my screens to have super duper black levels, if I want to see black I'll just close my eyes.
Please, I don't need my screens to have super duper black levels, if I want to see black I'll just close my eyes.
Doesn't have to be super-duper black - that's why VA LCD monitors are arguably becoming more popular.Originally Posted by Mcjon01
However, a big issue is that TN and IPS displays have literally the worst black levels of any readily-available screen technology (unless you count projectors and e-ink), and TN and IPS pretty much make up the entire laptop market.
Consider that TN and IPS have static contrast ratios of 1000 if your lucky while VA is regularly 5x that. Problem is though, IPS is the better at everything else.
Just remember that OLED is better than all types of LCDs in many other aspects as well (the obvious two exceptions being cost and maximum brightness, but cost is temporary and brightness is a non-issue since PCs don't use "torch mode" like TV shops do).
Last edited by NM64; February 23rd, 2016 at 08:21 PM.
HELP WANTED - Contact me if you know the original source of this song:
Lol. Black levels? I'm so glad I'm blissfully oblivious to these kinds of things, and don't notice or care about them on any kind of monitor anyway. Thank god. Having a keen eye for (what to me are small) visual details honestly sounds like a pain to me. Like, I can see the difference between bluray and DVD quality, obviously, but 90% of the visual related things that have been discussed in this thread since the beginning of the translation project are things I'll never notice anyway. I'm not blind either, I have near-perfect vision. I guess some of us are just hardwired to see the world differently, I don't know.
"The world is just another word for the things you value around you, right? That's something I've had since I was born. If you tell me to rule such a world, I already rule it."
This is partly why I try not to get too involved with NM's tech discussions, because deep down, I know I'd agree with most of it (probably, MAYBE!), but then if I agree with them, I'd invetiably be upset and unable to unsee those distinctions, and I don't have the time or energy to care too much about constant upgrading and maximizng my hardware.
To give an example: Back when Koto made the famous image to tell people not to use OG FSN, NM kept fixing it because the spacing was off, at first I didn't see it and was annoyed that it was being pressed for a dumb joke image, then I DID see it after so much debate over it, and got really mad because I noticed it because that meant I could never look at the joke without thinking about how it's not spaced right.
Memorable quotes
It's actually somewhat a known thing that when people that normally use an LCD display that try out an OLED or higher-end CRT monitor and then go back to their LCD they feel like it's all washed out or similar - it's similar to people that get used to 60fps and then go back to 30fps.
I would like to mention however that, even though it's commonly called black levels, it really refers to the lower half of the brightness dynamic range (that being luma values of 0-127 for standard 8bpc).
But uh, I made the mistake of assuming that you disliked the "black" bars on 16:9 YouTube (or similar) videos on 16:10 screens because those bars aren't actually black and don't blend in seamlessly against the screen bezel...
So I must ask - am I correct in this assumption, or am I wrong?
In other words, if you couldn't tell the difference between the black bars and the bezel of your display, would you still dislike said black bars? (this is assuming that the 16:10 display has the exact same screen width size as the 16:9 display)
I wouldn't say I have a keen eye for these things (that's more of my sister's territory - she's a professional printmaker), I just do a lot of my media consumption at night in a dark environment so it's easy to see when "black" bars are in fact brighter then the screen bezel and the rest of the room I'm currently in.
Last edited by NM64; February 24th, 2016 at 12:01 AM.
HELP WANTED - Contact me if you know the original source of this song:
Oh no I have been aware of LCD's color loss for years. Like, from the first time a I saw an LCD back when I had CRT TVs, I knew the color wasn't as good, I just got used to it over time. As for 60fps, it's funny I grew up with both, couldn't tell the difference between either (only time I could was if I saw a 60 FPS game on a 30 FPS video, and even then I didn't know why it looked different), but eventually I just could, so now anytime I play/watch a 60 FPS game then go to a 30, I have to let my eyes adjust.
Also you completely misunderstood my point. It's not that I couldn't tell the difference between bezel and black bars. It's that when I watch a widescreen video on a widescreen laptop, I want the entire laptop screen to be showing the video, I don't want small sections on the top and bottom that are black bars, which was a consequence of having a 16:10 screen.
As a side note, while I said I want to have every pixel being used to show video, that does not mean I like when people zoom in into 4:3 videos to make them 16:9 for HD versions, I'd much rather have it be HD and 4:3 in that case because I don't like losing parts of the image either.
Memorable quotes
But isn't this based on the assumption that the 16:9 display would be larger than the 16:10? That's why I mentioned the size thing - what if they both had the exact same physical screen width so that the 16:10 is only taller and not narrower?
Last edited by NM64; February 24th, 2016 at 12:07 AM.
HELP WANTED - Contact me if you know the original source of this song:
I prefer to watch videos in 720p on a 15" 4k display.
- - - Updated - - -
Windowed, natch. I can't stand upscaling.
The cheap TV I use as a monitor (which is one reason it's still only 1920x1080: going up from that in TV form means 4K, and there aren't any 4K TVs small enough to fit on my desk) has terrible light bleed. But you know what? Unless I have a specific reason to pay attention to it at the time (like this sort of conversation, for example), I don't notice and don't care. Human beings can get used to literally anything (and this is coming from someone who actually has OCD for real). Knowing as much, and just what all that can entail, being such a stickler over these sorts of things looks kinda like a couple kids going back and forth over whether one's red Hot Wheels toy or the other's blue Hot Wheels toy is more cool.
If you used nearest neighbor upscaling it'd look nearly identical (and actually a teeny bit less pixelated) to a 15" 1280x720 display
But uh, what does upscaling have to do with aspect ratios? Both a 1280x800 and a 1280x720 can display 720p content in fullscreen without any cropping or scaling.
Well it's largely because I find taller aspect ratios to be better for productivity combined with the fact that I made the wrong assumption that Jack hated black bars for sticking out like a sore thumb (hence the black level thing since that would make them no longer stick out but rather blend in with the bezel).
I mean, if you want a taller aspect ratio but also don't want "black" bars that stick out like a sore thumb in a dark environment but don't want to use more than one display, then your only real choice is to have good black levels is it not?
Last edited by NM64; February 24th, 2016 at 12:21 AM.
HELP WANTED - Contact me if you know the original source of this song:
Woah, watch your language buddy I almost gagged.
Hey don't look at me, Jack's the one using a 1366x768 laptop display.
Last edited by NM64; February 24th, 2016 at 12:24 AM.
HELP WANTED - Contact me if you know the original source of this song:
Yeah but I'm not the guy who has created over a thousand tech derails (unknown to motherboards, nor known to CRTs) in this thread so him saying that to me wouldn't be funny.
- - - Updated - - -
I mean, if I had two right next to me of the exact same screen width then I'd prefer the taller one I guess, but ultimately I'd just want a third one that was wider than both so I could have the larger screen and have it fit neatly into the aspect ratio that just about everything is produced on these days.
But as Xer Blade said, I tend to not care unless it's brought up, and that's why I (unlike rihgt now) usually tune out of these tech derails, because then it's just a reminder of "oh, you are not optimized in all these ways".
Memorable quotes
Well then that's just it - you would prefer a wider aspect ratio for media consumption while I would prefer a taller aspect ratio for productivity. It's simply a case of differing priority, and contrary to whatMcjonsome may say, there's nothing wrong with that - that's why we're Windows and Linux users, not Mac users.
Really, a large part of my distaste for 1366x768 is because it was a reduction in vertical resolution compared to the previous 1280x800. I would have been much happier if laptop makers had used a resolution of something like 1536x864 which wouldn't be a reduction in resolution.
It also would have helped if they didn't decide to make all new laptop models not made by Apple have a 16:9 display (this only changed in the last year or so, and even then it's uncommon outside of tablets).
Last edited by NM64; February 24th, 2016 at 01:19 AM.
HELP WANTED - Contact me if you know the original source of this song:
Why would they bother doing that, since all people really do with their laptops is write emails and watch Netflix.
I mostly use mine to play the Witcher 3.
Perhaps for the same reason that most tablets are of ratios taller than 16:9. (16:10, 3:2, 4:3, etc)
EDIT: And perhaps for the same reason why about 15 years ago, when laptops screens were commonly 1024x768, they decided to increase both the width and the height to 1280x800 rather than only increasing the width and shrinking the height to a total resolution of something like 1152x720.
Last edited by NM64; February 25th, 2016 at 02:17 AM.
HELP WANTED - Contact me if you know the original source of this song:
Hi, i want to know if the "Realta Nua Conversion Patch v4.2 with Update 01-07-13" have a new update or is this already perfect to keep?
Hello,
I've a little problem with the game but I don't know if it's me who's doing something wrong or not.
When I try to "skip text" with Ctrl, it doesn't only skip the text that I've already seen, but also the text i've not read yet. I don't really understand why.
The config says "confirmation before skipping" is "on" but I don't have such a confirmation, I press the "Ctrl" key and the text is skipped at an incredible speed, regardless if i've seen it or not.
Am I doing something wrong ? Here is what the config panel look like : http://i.imgur.com/YLyq6i9.jpg
(Sorry for broken English)
Edit : This is how it looks like. https://youtu.be/6vgb4_HqQF8
The text shows up slowly because I haven't read it yet, but a single press on the Ctrl key skip it at the speed of light.
Yesterday I completely forgot to save and I had to skip a lot of text I had read, and this is where I realised that the skip option was skipping everything.
Last edited by Arkadeivitch; February 26th, 2016 at 09:08 AM.
This option let you chose to read already seen scene again or skip.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
