----- Original Message -----
From: "Moose" <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
> On 2/17/2014 4:40 PM, John Hudson wrote:
>> ... Paul, thanks for that. If the long side is 1024 pixels I assume the
>> short side should be 768 pixels. Does the pixels per inch matter at all?
>
> PPI is irrelevant here.
>
> On 2/17/2014 6:57 PM, C.H.Ling wrote:
>> I have some recommendations on image projection, hope it is helpful.
>>
>> If the image is projected through a laptop, make sure the laptop's
>> dispaly
>> port resolution is set to exactly as the native resolution of the
>> projector,
>> it is to make sure you get the right aspect ratio and better image
>> quality.
>
> With recent projectors and laptops, using HDMI, the laptop should
> automagically set the correct resolution. At least
> mine does.
>
Yeah, it does. But in case you have older devices, there is high chance that
you need to set the resolution yourself. Even with the later devices, you
have to be careful if you use dual clone dispaly (both laptop display and
external port show the same screen).
>> If the image size is 900x600 there will be blank space with any type of
>> projector. 1024x768 is 4:3 and 1920x1080 is 16:9 while your image is 3:2
>> but
>> it may not matter much.
>>
>> Since your image is 900x600 the laptop computer will resize your image to
>> fit to the display resolution. Make sure the viewing software has good
>> resize algorithm, with IrfanView you need to check the "Use resample for
>> fitting" under View/Display options to get the best result.
>
> I disagree here. I prefer to not allow resizing and allow the image to be
> slightly smaller, but clearer. With a
> projector with zoom lens and/or if distance to wall/screen is adjustable,
> those have been better ways of adjusting image
> size than upsampling, in my rather limited experience..
>
Yes, image will look sharper without resizing but if you are going to make a
presentation compose of different materials it is better to have the image
occupy the whole screen. Of course if all your images are of the same size
it will work better with your suggested way.
At the mean time, I just tried some 960pixel images to fill my HD screen
with IrfanView, they look very nice.
> The up sizing algorithms in our Samsung Blu-Ray player are much better
> than those in my slightly older Samsung TV (which
> is projection, but inside a box). But I've not seen great upsizing results
> for still image viewers on my computer. I
> wonder how a DVD slide show on the BU player would look.
We watch downloaded TV drama almost everyday, the 720p TV programs look
excellent on my 50" Full HDTV not to mention the original 1080i TV programs.
We don't rely on TV resize, we use computer software player and video
renderer. Even the 1024x576 programs look much better than DVDs, we have not
watch DVD movies for years. When you have seen something sharper you just
can't go back.
>
> When I have done something similar, I have re-downsampled the images from
> original size to max size for the display
> device. FastStone does a good job of doing this in batch.
>
Of course, if one can access the original, it is better to downsize from the
original to fit the final display native size.
C.H.Ling
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|