I'm using an HP 8510w laptop with NVIDIA Quadro FX 570M, 256MB 512MB TurboCache, 15.4 inch WSXGA+ WVA (1680 x 1050 and 16M colors)
It's a three year old laptop, so many of you are likely to be judging the photos you see online with much finer screens and graphics utilities. Are most of you that are more than very casually into this hobby using much better monitors? The HP LP2475w - 24" - widescreen TFT active matrix LCD display has a 1900 x 1200 resolution which still only corresponds to 2.280 megapixels of info from your photos. And unless you're using the entire 24 inches to display the image border to border, it's even less.
Other screens....
800×600 (SVGA – standard) 12″..............................0.48
1024×768 (XGA – standard) 12″, 13.3″, 14″, 15″.......0.79
1280×800 (WXGA – wide) 15.4″, 14.1″, 13.3, 12.1″...1.02
1440×900 (WXGA+ – wide) 14″................................1.30
1280×1024 (SXGA – standard) 14″, 15″, 15.7″...........1.31
1400×1050 (SXGA+ – standard) 12.1″, 14″, 15″........1.47
1680×1050 (WSXGA+ – wide) 15.4″.........................1.76
1600×1200 (UXGA – standard) 14″, 15″, 16″.............1.92
1920×1200 (WUXGA – wide) 17″, 15.4".....................2.30
A 1280 x 800 screen, fairly common, is reproducing 1.02mp. The image is not usually viewed edge to edge so we can expect somewhat less than 1mp available to display the detail/resolution of any photo online.
I do understand, of course, the need to have 12mp of info in image files for the purpose of cropping and for producing the finest detail for printing or enlarged printing. But I often see pics on the web accompanied by something along the lines of "look at how sharp this photo is". My screen displays 1.76 megapixels of information. Unless someone identifies the photo as some percentage of a crop from the original, then doesn't it make little sense to comment on it's detail and sharpness? Isn't, for the purposes of comparison on average laptop screens, such an image incapable of displaying sharpness and detail beyond what a 2 megapixel camera is capable of delivering?
Is my thinking off on this? And if, on occasion, shooting images for the express purpose of web posting with no intention of crop or revision then should the camera's range be set to no more than 2mp?
(be kind... remember this is the beginner's section. i might even be off by a few decimal points!)
Last edited by frascati; 02-16-2010 at 09:58 AM.