atw: Re: Dopey comparisons of monitors and paper

Using Hedley's summary plus some online research:

The usual display capacity of a computer monitor is 72dpi, but a typical =
LCD monitor has a dot pitch of 90 px/in (for example, the HP 1740 =
monitor has a 0.264mm dot pitch, which is slightly sharper than this). =
On Windows, ClearType exploits subpixel technology to improve =
resolution, raising dot pitch to 270 px/in. - not far off 300 dpi.

However, it is still easier to read text printed on paper than displayed =
on a monitor.

Why?


-----Original Message-----
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx =
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Hedley Finger
Sent: Wednesday, 14 May 2008 10:56 AM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Dopey comparisons of monitors and paper

Michael:
> Consider these differences for starters (Well set
> up monitor versus well printed paper):
>     * Projected light (monitor / screen) versus reflected light =
(paper).
>  =20
Of course, the paper is dependent on the brightness and colour of the=20
light source.  The monitor will have higher contrast, a major factor in=20
legibility.
>     * RGB colour versus CMYK or five colour process.
>  =20
Yes, RGB can display more colours than CMYK on paper, as you have=20
probably noticed when you printed out that gorgeous photo from on=20
screen, only to find it looking rather duller and less contrasty on even =

special glossy "photo" paper.
>     * Different resolution: Monitor 72dpi. Paper to and beyond 600dpi.
>  =20
A typical LCD monitor has a dot pitch of 90 px/in.  On Windows, you can=20
use  ClearType which causes each colour in a pixel to be addressed=20
individually, raising the pitch to 270 px/in., not far off the 300 dpi=20
of the original Apple LaserWriter.  However, we are not talking about=20
halftones here, but solid shapes bounded by a continuous curve.  So the=20
issue is  "What is the minimum dot pitch required to display an=20
apparently step-free curve?"  With antialiasing and 270 px/in., I would=20
suggest that is more than adequate.  In fact, I have set my browser to=20
use a serif font as default when the page does not specify a font, and=20
likewise in Thunderbird, precisely because it is more readable than sans =

serif.
>     * No dot crawl and moir=E9 effect (unless
> deliberate or double scanned) issues with paper.
>  =20
Pardon?  The only dots crawling on MY screen are some annoying ants that =

have come in out of the currently cold weather.  I hope they go blind.
>     * No colour saturation or brightness / contrast issues
>  =20
Unlike paper, you can alter the brightness and contrast of a monitor. =20
Unfortunately, the brightness/contrast issue with paper is that it=20
doesn't have any.   The contrast in a typical outdoor scene is about 100 =

000 : 1 compared to about 30 : 1 for paper.  We seem to have evolved=20
over the past couple of million years to cope with the former pretty=20
well.  And what is the saturation problem?  Oh, do you mean the=20
inability of paper to properly render a bright red?
>     * The feel, portability and user friendliness of paper.
>  =20
I'm guessing you are not referring to toilet paper made from recycled =
pulp?
>     * No operating system or other hardware /
> software required, except a brain (software /
> CPU) eyes (human Web cams) hands and a suitable light source.
>  =20
Oh dear, we had better tell the manufacturers of the Kindle, ePaper, and =

various other book substitutes to get rid of the operating system=20
immediately.  On the other hand, the monitor holds itself up, leaving=20
your hands free to write notes, and it doesn't suddenly kink over in=20
your hands like The Age.

And when I pile up windows, sorry, documents, 16 items deep they don't=20
fall over like that stack of open books just did.
>     * Taking your laptop to read in the loo could raise some eyebrows.
>  =20
And not just your eyebrows you dirty little brat!
>     * Few monitors match A4 size and layout.
>  =20
Yeah, my 22 in. LCD monitor is 297 mm deep (viewable), and 472 mm wide,=20
making it equal to  2.25 A4 pages.  Has anybody got any suggestions=20
about how to make it smaller, say 210 x 297 mm, like a single sheet of =
A4.
>     * Paper contains no animated distractions
> (pop up dialogs only tend to occur in pop-up books).
>  =20
Yeah, I find it much easier to understand how a Carnot cycle (internal=20
combustion) engine works by staring at a static diagram in a book.

Regards,
Hedley

--

Hedley Finger

28 Regent Street   Camberwell VIC 3124   Australia
Tel. +61 3 9809 1229   Fax. (call phone first)
Mob. (cell) +61 412 461 558
Email. "Hedley Finger" <hfinger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>




**************************************************
To view the austechwriter archives, go to =
www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter

To unsubscribe, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx =
with "unsubscribe" in the Subject field (without quotes).

To manage your subscription (e.g., set and unset DIGEST and VACATION =
modes) go to www.freelists.org/list/austechwriter

To contact the list administrator, send a message to =
austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
**************************************************
**************************************************
To view the austechwriter archives, go to 
www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter

To unsubscribe, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 
"unsubscribe" in the Subject field (without quotes).

To manage your subscription (e.g., set and unset DIGEST and VACATION modes) go 
to www.freelists.org/list/austechwriter

To contact the list administrator, send a message to 
austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
**************************************************

Other related posts: