More resolution?

Discussion in 'iPad' started by Blarp, Feb 29, 2012.

  1. Blarp

    Blarp Guest

    I own an iPad1.
    Whereas I can identify some shortcomings towards later models, I have
    no issues with the resolution of the screen.

    When I observe the iPad from a normal viewing distance (30 ..40 cm?),
    I cannot resolve the individual pixels.
    This prompts me to postulate the theory that -at least for me- more
    pixels would yield no visible improvement.

    Questions:

    - Is my theory sound?
    - Is my vision substandard?
    - Is full HD on an iPad (iPad3?) actually useful? Or just hype?
     
    Blarp, Feb 29, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Blarp <> wrote:

    > When I observe the iPad from a normal viewing distance (30 ..40 cm?),
    > I cannot resolve the individual pixels.
    > This prompts me to postulate the theory that -at least for me- more
    > pixels would yield no visible improvement.
    >
    > Questions:
    > - Is my theory sound?


    Yes and no.
    All depend usage and needs.
    To read lot of documents a better resolution would be more comfortable.

    > - Is my vision substandard?


    Send your medical report so we can answer ;-)

    > - Is full HD on an iPad (iPad3?) actually useful? Or just hype?


    FullHD useful ? not really, but if you (when you could) compare, the
    double density is a real improvment on readibility (specially with small
    text or books app).
    You can do the test with an iPhone 3 en 4 on the same internet page for
    example.

    Useful is not the right description. Even an iPad is not "useful" for
    some people...

    If you think you don't need high resolution, just do not switch to iPad
    3 (if HD is confirm).
    For my part, i got an iPad é and i'm very happy with it. I do not plan
    to buy an iPad 3 or nothing else, until it fail (not before 2 years i
    hope).

    --
    Pierre-Alain Dorange <http://microwar.sourceforge.net/>

    Ce message est sous licence Creative Commons "by-nc-sa-2.0"
    <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/fr/>
     
    Pierre-Alain Dorange, Feb 29, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Blarp

    Davoud Guest

    Blarp:

    > I own an iPad1.
    > Whereas I can identify some shortcomings towards later models, I have
    > no issues with the resolution of the screen.
    >
    > When I observe the iPad from a normal viewing distance (30 ..40 cm?),
    > I cannot resolve the individual pixels.
    > This prompts me to postulate the theory that -at least for me- more
    > pixels would yield no visible improvement.
    >
    > Questions:
    >
    > - Is my theory sound?


    Yes, for you your assertions are sound.

    > - Is my vision substandard?


    I have no way of knowing that.

    > - Is full HD on an iPad (iPad3?) actually useful? Or just hype?


    I have no way of knowing that; I have not seen iPad 3. Furthermore, my
    definition of "useful" may apply only to me. Example: I have
    telescope-mount control software on my iPad. I find it very useful.
    Would that software be useful to you?

    As for hype, this is capitalism, and furthermore, it's Apple. Will
    there be hype? Is Rick Santorum a raving lunatic?

    --
    I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
    you will say in your entire life.

    usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
     
    Davoud, Feb 29, 2012
    #3
  4. Blarp

    Blarp Guest

    On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 10:45:19 -0500, Davoud <> wrote:

    >> - Is full HD on an iPad (iPad3?) actually useful? Or just hype?

    >
    >I have no way of knowing that; I have not seen iPad 3. Furthermore, my
    >definition of "useful" may apply only to me. Example: I have
    >telescope-mount control software on my iPad. I find it very useful.
    >Would that software be useful to you?
    >
    >As for hype, this is capitalism, and furthermore, it's Apple. Will
    >there be hype? Is Rick Santorum a raving lunatic?


    Perhaps I need to elaborate on my thoughts.

    Lets assume that my eyesight is indeed average, and that the average
    human cannot resolve individual pixels at 30cm distance while
    observing an iPad1/2.

    Hence the enlarging of the amount of pixels brings no actual visible
    improvement, as the human retina is the limiting factor. (at sensible
    reading distance)

    Yet the full HD screen (iPad3, other new tablets?) will require a much
    more powerful processing unit to serve all those pixels, and consume
    more current to do so.

    Question: what is the use of HD resolution on a tabled sized object
    other that marketing hype?

    In the photography world, the realisation is slowly sinking in that it
    is futile to add more pixels than even a quality lens can resolve.
     
    Blarp, Mar 1, 2012
    #4
  5. In article <>,
    Blarp <> wrote:

    > Question: what is the use of HD resolution on a tabled sized object
    > other that marketing hype?


    30 cm is approximately one foot. I find it more comfortable to hold the
    iPad closer than that in many instances, especially when the type is small.
    Therefore, HD resolution is useful to me. And I am not unique.

    --
    Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as
    People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
     
    Michelle Steiner, Mar 1, 2012
    #5
  6. Blarp

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Blarp
    <> wrote:

    > Perhaps I need to elaborate on my thoughts.
    >
    > Lets assume that my eyesight is indeed average, and that the average
    > human cannot resolve individual pixels at 30cm distance while
    > observing an iPad1/2.


    your eyesight would have to be below average to not resolve pixels on
    the current ipad.

    > Hence the enlarging of the amount of pixels brings no actual visible
    > improvement, as the human retina is the limiting factor. (at sensible
    > reading distance)


    it's a visible improvement.

    > Yet the full HD screen (iPad3, other new tablets?) will require a much
    > more powerful processing unit to serve all those pixels, and consume
    > more current to do so.


    more powerful yes. more current depends, and rumours are that the next
    ipad is slightly thicker which suggests a higher capacity battery, so
    any additional current demands are moot. another rumour is that it has
    lte, which also consumes more battery.

    > Question: what is the use of HD resolution on a tabled sized object
    > other that marketing hype?


    it's not hype.

    > In the photography world, the realisation is slowly sinking in that it
    > is futile to add more pixels than even a quality lens can resolve.


    it's not futile at all.
     
    nospam, Mar 1, 2012
    #6
  7. Blarp

    Wes Groleau Guest

    On 02-29-2012 10:19, Blarp wrote:
    > I own an iPad1.
    > Whereas I can identify some shortcomings towards later models, I have
    > no issues with the resolution of the screen.
    >
    > When I observe the iPad from a normal viewing distance (30 ..40 cm?),
    > I cannot resolve the individual pixels.
    > This prompts me to postulate the theory that -at least for me- more
    > pixels would yield no visible improvement.
    >
    > Questions:
    >
    > - Is my theory sound?
    > - Is my vision substandard?
    > - Is full HD on an iPad (iPad3?) actually useful? Or just hype?


    Suggestion: Read the discussions on this made back when the "retina" was
    introduced. Discussions that lasted for months.

    --
    Wes Groleau

    It seems a pity that psychology should have
    destroyed all our knowledge of human nature.
    — G. K. Chesterton
     
    Wes Groleau, Mar 2, 2012
    #7
  8. Blarp

    jcdill Guest

    On 29/02/12 7:19 AM, Blarp wrote:
    > I own an iPad1.
    > Whereas I can identify some shortcomings towards later models, I have
    > no issues with the resolution of the screen.
    >
    > When I observe the iPad from a normal viewing distance (30 ..40 cm?),
    > I cannot resolve the individual pixels.


    It's not just about resolving individual pixels, it's also about being
    able to see the difference in a line (not a vertical or horizontal line)
    being drawn by a collection of pixels. While you might not be able to
    resolve a single pixel, you MAY be able to see if a diagonal line is
    sharper when drawn on a screen with more pixels. This would lead to
    improved sharpness in text (especially ornate text, such as cursive
    fonts with fine serifs), photos, and videos when displayed on a screen
    with more pixels.

    jc
     
    jcdill, Mar 2, 2012
    #8
  9. Blarp

    Blarp Guest

    On Thu, 01 Mar 2012 23:30:04 -0800, jcdill <>
    wrote:

    >It's not just about resolving individual pixels, it's also about being
    >able to see the difference in a line (not a vertical or horizontal line)
    >being drawn by a collection of pixels. While you might not be able to
    >resolve a single pixel, you MAY be able to see if a diagonal line is
    >sharper when drawn on a screen with more pixels. This would lead to
    >improved sharpness in text (especially ornate text, such as cursive
    >fonts with fine serifs), photos, and videos when displayed on a screen
    >with more pixels.


    You may have a point there, OTOH - if pixels are not resolved, how to
    spot jagged edges and such.

    It must also be considered that more pixels means less light from the
    screen (backlight being equal), more pixels mean more boundaries.

    So far I can only conclude that with my modest eyesight and preferred
    reading distance - (due to my advanced age my autofocus function has
    become defective - reading distance is not all that variable when
    using optical aids :)
    ...- more resolution is not something I would pay extra for.

    Young eagle-eyes probably violently disagree :)
     
    Blarp, Mar 2, 2012
    #9
  10. In article <>,
    Blarp <> wrote:

    > So far I can only conclude that with my modest eyesight and preferred
    > reading distance - (due to my advanced age my autofocus function has
    > become defective - reading distance is not all that variable when
    > using optical aids :)
    > ..- more resolution is not something I would pay extra for.


    With my contacts, I have to hold something about a foot away in order for
    it to be clear. Ignoring the fact that that's uncomfortable, I find that I
    can see my iPhone's text more clearly than I can see my iPad's text
    (assuming that the text is the same size). The more clear and precise the
    letters are, the easier they are to read.

    The greater pixel density does make for more easily read text, and for
    finer detail in pictures.

    --
    Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as
    People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
     
    Michelle Steiner, Mar 2, 2012
    #10
  11. Blarp

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Blarp
    <> wrote:

    > It must also be considered that more pixels means less light from the
    > screen (backlight being equal), more pixels mean more boundaries.


    the backlight will remain constant so the light is the same. the image
    will have more pixels, thus a higher resolution.

    a print that's printed with a higher resolution isn't going to reflect
    less light than one with a lower resolution. it will just look a whole
    lot sharper.

    > So far I can only conclude that with my modest eyesight and preferred
    > reading distance - (due to my advanced age my autofocus function has
    > become defective - reading distance is not all that variable when
    > using optical aids :)
    > ..- more resolution is not something I would pay extra for.


    if it's like the iphone 4, the price will be exactly the same, but with
    a better display. you will not need to pay extra.
     
    nospam, Mar 2, 2012
    #11
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. antadote1

    video card/resolution probems, help!

    antadote1, Apr 2, 2004, in forum: Hardware
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    1,141
    antadote1
    Apr 3, 2004
  2. Marc Heusser
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    300
    Marc Heusser
    Nov 9, 2008
  3. Mike
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    539
  4. Larry
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    348
    Larry
    Nov 10, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page