Go Back   nV News Forums > Graphics Card Forums > NVIDIA GeForce 7, 8, And 9 Series

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-10-02, 04:16 PM   #73
Xevious
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 291
Default also

btw, doing 1280x1024 is squishing it because its squishing a 5:4 aspect ratio resolution in a 4:3 monitor, its not by much but it still is, i used to run at this resolution before i had a monitor capable of 1600x1200, i run at 1600x1200 on my laptop and 2048x1536 on my desktop, and im trying to find out how i can run at the full resolution of my monitor at 2560x1920.
Xevious is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-02, 10:38 AM   #74
Nvnutter02
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

god guys your are nit picking over a screen resolution

I guess your gonna say PAL is wrong cos it has more pixels, right !!!!?
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-02, 12:15 PM   #75
nihongaeri
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 6
Lightbulb I don't know if anyone's pointed this out but...

1280x1024 does NOT create a distorted image if you are rending a 3d image. A 3d image could be rendered at 2048x384 and you would still be able to display it without any geometric distortion. The only thing that would change would be the ratio of horizontal to vertical pixel over a given area of the screen.

While a *3d* rendered image would not be geometrically distorted by simply rendering it at 1280x1024 (5:4 PIXEL ratio) and then displaying it over a SCREEN with a geometric ratio of 4:3, an image rendered at a resolution of 1280x1024 WOULD end up being geometrically distorted if you were to proceed to display that 1280x1024 "2d" image using a 4:3 pixel ratio RESOLUTION (1600x1200 for instance) on a screen with a 4:3 geometric ratio.

2d images on a 2d desktop of 1280x1024 (5:4 pixel ratio displayed over a 4:3 screen ratio) however, will appear to be vertically "squished" unless the said image content is specifically designed to be displayed over such a resolution and screen ratio.
nihongaeri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-02, 03:13 PM   #76
Feanor
Registered User
 
Feanor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 37
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by K.I.L.E.R
I asked my maths methods teacher about this before (if imaginary numbers could be used anywhere) he went whacko at me and said you just simply can't because the square root of a negative doesn't exist. He said Imaginary numbers are there to help you understand maths better and is an extension of learning maths BUT I.N s can't be used practically.

That's what my maths teacher said. Prove him wrong and I will be happy to tell him


"Well as to the use of imaginary numbers (the complex number system), if the algebra teacher I had when I was back in highschool is correct, imaginary numbers did come into play (an application thereof) when radio technology was being developed. Though I have worked with some circuit design (in regards to computers) I have not looked into this to see if he was correct. Imaginary numbers could have their practical applications however."
Well engineers and mathameticians can argue a bit...after asking the math teacher about uses for imaginary numbers (and if they're useable for anything) you might want to ask a computer or an electrical engineer

Anyway, I did a bit of a search, and look here

http://www.collegetermpapers.com/Ter..._numbers.shtml

Quote:
Imaginary Numbers at Work Imaginary numbers are used in a variety of fields and holds many uses. Without imaginary numbers you wouldnt be able to listen to the radio or talk on your cellular phone. These type of devices work by receiving and transmitting radio waves. Capacitors and inductors are used to make circuits that are used to make radio waves. In order to determine the right values of capacitors and inductors to use in the circuits, designers need to use imaginary numbers. Another use of imaginary and complex numbers is in physics, quantum mechanics to be exact. In quantum mechanics a big problem is to find the position of a particle. Unfortunately, only the probability distribution of its position is possible to find. The only way to calculate this is to use imaginary and complex variables. Lastly, electrical engineers use imaginary numbers. However, instead of using i in their equations they use j. This is because in the equations they commonly use, i means current, so to represent imaginary numbers they use j. Four Most Familiar Number Concepts There are four of the most common numbers that we, the common person, know about and can understand why they exist.
Obviously the physicist would have a few things to add too. There are many things in math that might not come into play when figuring out how much change one needs at the grocery store (aka fractal geometry) that can be of use elsewhere (in that instance "chaos science")...

Quote:
He said: IN's are used for everything electrical BUT the numbers themselves are none-existent or something like that.
I just read further on... Bah he did know they had uses, even as they said they didn't. So he conveniently changes it to "they still don't exist but they're used for everything electrical" LOL Good time to read between the lines

Anyway if he wants to so narrowly define "practical" to what is seen, felt (albeit one can feel a static electric discharge), and touched...despite it having useful applications such as in developing technological devices we use...perhaps it should be pointed out to him that electricity itself is known to exist even though he doesn't go around seeing and touching electricity itself, as he does a cup Don't say that until the semester is over though and the grades can't be changed, hehe...just in case

Last edited by Feanor; 08-11-02 at 03:39 PM.
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-02, 03:27 PM   #77
Feanor
Registered User
 
Feanor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 37
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Remi


Ah ha! What a good laugh! And you let those guys TEACH math? Jeeezz...
You think that is bad...when I was in grade school we had a teacher teaching science who insisted that atoms are indivisable. Not that they used to think this, but he stated as proven fact today...

No wonder he lost most people in the class when he went on to try to discuss nuclear fission ROFL
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-02, 06:11 AM   #78
NeoGeo
Geforce 4
 
NeoGeo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: South Coast, England, UK
Posts: 146
Default

shut up!! are you on drugs or somin??? so anoying... the uselessness of your posts is really gettin to me!
__________________
AthlonXP 2500 Barton
MSI K7N2 Delta (MS-6570)
Nvidia Geforce FX 5600 128MB VIVO
512MB (2x 256MB) Crucial PC2700
2x 120GB Seagate Barracuda 7200.7 8MB
16x DVD
52x/24x/52x Lite-On CD-ReWriter
550 watt Q-Tech PSU
Superflower silver case
T1 Internet Connection
AOC 17" 7Klr
MS Keyboard+Mouse
NeoGeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-02, 12:12 PM   #79
JonnyCasino
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Well I use 1280*1024 where ever its allowed as 1280*960 looks squashed up horizontally and wont even fit on my 19" monitor properly, obviously I use 1600*1200 mostly but some games just ask that little more of your pc so I run them at 1280*1024 as I like to keep image quality at max.

Athlon TB 1.4ghz
512mbs pc2700
128mb GF4 Ti4200
40gb 7200rpm Maxtor
40gb 7200rpm Nikimi
SoundBlaster Live 5.1 Plat
Windows XP pro
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-02, 01:00 PM   #80
Xevious
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 291
Default

LOL, actually its not 1280x960 that is squashed, its 1280x1024 which is squashed, lol
Xevious is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 08-12-02, 03:58 PM   #81
Quinn1981
Elite Bastard
 
Quinn1981's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Lyons, GA, USA
Posts: 86
Default

ive recently been trying to get used to a normal aspect and cant do it. 1600x1200 is to blurry and 1280x960 is just tad to small that used to. maybe i can try hard to get used to it. changing the monitor position and size didnt help either, im just to used to it. maybe if i get a 21" monitor i can get used to 1600x1200.
Quinn1981 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-02, 03:59 PM   #82
netviper13
Treehugger
 
netviper13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 942
Default

At 1280x1024, I have done a ton of PS work and nothing seems weird. DVDs play perfectly fine, and games do too. I don't see what the big deal is.
netviper13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-02, 04:33 PM   #83
Cereal-Killer
Posts: 4159
 
Cereal-Killer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 73
Default

...there is no big deal. This thread is about plus or minus 64 vertical pixels hehe
Cereal-Killer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-02, 05:30 PM   #84
Quinn1981
Elite Bastard
 
Quinn1981's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Lyons, GA, USA
Posts: 86
Default

i measured the difference adjusting it to the way i had and to the size it would take to make it the right aspect using a square Adobe PS. the difference is this:

500x500 square
1280x1024
5 3/8th inches wide
5 1/16th inches tall

when adjusted to make it a perfect square on the monitor there are almost half inch gaps on the left and right of the monitor.

so, what you have to ask yourself is, "What difference does 5/16th of an inch make?"

when dealing with presice measurements, your not going to be eye balling it (CAD stuff) and when doing normal design or art, i dont think that much difference is going to ruin anyones work. its like when im drawing, i may twist and turn the paper (not supposed to but anyway) causing the to be slight distortions in my perspective of what i want to draw. happens all the time and unless you walk around with a ruler, i doubt will ever notice the skew factor that in everything that has been done by eye.
Quinn1981 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
nvidia-settings only allowing 1440x900 resolution lumina NVIDIA Linux 4 11-17-12 02:09 PM
Regression with GTK+ menus when using a virtual resolution alex_sh NVIDIA Linux 0 10-20-12 03:20 PM
The Nvidia GeForce GTX 650 Ti GPU is Out Now, Great for 720p S3D News Archived News Items 0 10-09-12 09:40 AM
8800 GT and Ubuntu - Plymouth low resolution legluondunet NVIDIA Linux 3 06-24-12 03:22 PM
30.82 and 40.41 resolution + monitor OSD. Max3D NVIDIA Windows Graphics Drivers 2 09-05-02 02:15 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.