How far back do I need to sit from this LCD/monitor?

Discussion in 'Computer Hardware' started by Joel, Jan 8, 2006.

  1. Joel

    Joel Guest

    HP L2335 Silver 23" 16ms LCD Monitor

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824176018

    Where I am putting it only allows me to sit about 5 feet away from it as a
    TV. For a computer screen, the distance will probably be only about 4 feet.
    How close is too close before the image turns to crap? I heard that on these
    things for games you need to be at least 8 feet away. Is that true?
     
    Joel, Jan 8, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Joel

    UCLAN Guest

    Joel wrote:

    > HP L2335 Silver 23" 16ms LCD Monitor
    >
    > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824176018
    >
    > Where I am putting it only allows me to sit about 5 feet away from it as a
    > TV. For a computer screen, the distance will probably be only about 4 feet.
    > How close is too close before the image turns to crap? I heard that on these
    > things for games you need to be at least 8 feet away. Is that true?


    No.

    Four feet should be fine.
     
    UCLAN, Jan 8, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Joel

    ff Guest

    Joel wrote:

    >HP L2335 Silver 23" 16ms LCD Monitor
    >
    >http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824176018
    >
    >Where I am putting it only allows me to sit about 5 feet away from it as a
    >TV. For a computer screen, the distance will probably be only about 4 feet.
    >How close is too close before the image turns to crap? I heard that on these
    >things for games you need to be at least 8 feet away. Is that true?
    >
    >
    >
    >

    That monitor has a recommended resolution of 1920 x 1200 which is better
    than HDTV. IMO you should be able to get as close as you want if you run
    it at that resolution. Of course you may have to turn your head to see
    the left and right sides of the screen :)
    Your best bet is to preview one in a store.
     
    ff, Jan 8, 2006
    #3
  4. Joel

    kony Guest

    On Sat, 7 Jan 2006 23:59:57 -0600, "Joel"
    <> wrote:

    >HP L2335 Silver 23" 16ms LCD Monitor
    >
    >http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824176018
    >
    >Where I am putting it only allows me to sit about 5 feet away from it as a
    >TV. For a computer screen, the distance will probably be only about 4 feet.
    >How close is too close before the image turns to crap? I heard that on these
    >things for games you need to be at least 8 feet away. Is that true?
    >



    Trying to declare a certain distance is arbitrary at best.
    Get far enough away that you don't see pixels then you start
    losing recognition of detail too... 8 feet is MUCH too far
    away from a 23" screen. Like anything else, at first you
    will have to get accustomed to it and then you will be fine.
     
    kony, Jan 8, 2006
    #4
  5. Joel

    John Doe Guest

    ff <> wrote:

    > Joel wrote:
    >
    >>HP L2335 Silver 23" 16ms LCD Monitor
    >>
    >>http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824176018
    >>
    >>Where I am putting it only allows me to sit about 5 feet away from
    >>it as a TV. For a computer screen, the distance will probably be
    >>only about 4 feet. How close is too close before the image turns
    >>to crap? I heard that on these things for games you need to be at
    >>least 8 feet away. Is that true?
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>

    > That monitor has a recommended resolution of 1920 x 1200 which is
    > better than HDTV.


    I'm standing in a store looking really hard at their HDTVs, and it's
    like "wow... television"

    >
    > IMO you should be able to get as close as you want if you run
    > it at that resolution. Of course you may have to turn your head to
    > see the left and right sides of the screen :)
    > Your best bet is to preview one in a store.


    I think one main advantage of a larger screen is while you sit at a
    reasonable distance, body and head movement has less effect on the
    picture. In other words, I guess whatever distance feels good.
     
    John Doe, Jan 8, 2006
    #5
  6. Joel

    professor Guest

    Remember, you need to sit at a distance from HDTVs when they are ou
    of native resolution. In other words, when you are watching regula
    TV on an HDTV. Up close, it will look awful. However, when you ar
    watching them in their native resolution, everything will be fine.
    Take an LCD monitor out of native resolution and you will see what
    am talking about. Especially if it's a widescreen set to
    non-widescreen resolution and it's set to stretch. If you ar
    watching 1080i TV on a 1920x1200 monitor, you will be just fine.
    1080p is better…good luck finding anything outside of a wmd though.
    Just remember, when you are in native resolution, you can stan
    anywhere; across the room, with your nose up against it, on you
    head, whatever, and the picture will look great. However, when yo
    are out of native, you are going to want to step back a bit. Thin
    2-3” for every inch of viewing space, in your case 46-69”
     
    professor, Jan 8, 2006
    #6
  7. Joel

    Guest

    On Sat, 7 Jan 2006 23:59:57 -0600, "Joel" <>
    wrote:

    >HP L2335 Silver 23" 16ms LCD Monitor
    >
    >http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824176018
    >
    >Where I am putting it only allows me to sit about 5 feet away from it as a
    >TV. For a computer screen, the distance will probably be only about 4 feet.
    >How close is too close before the image turns to crap? I heard that on these
    >things for games you need to be at least 8 feet away. Is that true?
    >


    For standard TV probably. On my CRT HDTV if the picture is GOOD in
    SDTV cable digital format you have to be about 5-8 feet , you start
    getting about 3 feet away and it looks really grungy. Of course some
    channels look bad at any distance - close or far in SDTV format.

    For PC use -- I have a 26" 1366 x 768 HDTV LCD and its sitting on my
    desk about 2 - 3 feet away. I think thats the res I always forget the
    exact specs. Games at 1024 x 768 or something I forget the exact specs
    in Quake and FEAR look spectacular. Actually FEAR isnt in 16:9 mode it
    squishes and widens the picture I think a bit but in this case you
    really dont notice it.

    The one big quibble I have with QUAKE is the still graphics they have
    when its loading looks really low res and blurry. The rendered
    graphics look great , often spectacular and they really went to town
    on all the settings but the the still graphics and the distant martian
    landscape graphics which are drawn as a background for the outside
    shots in some scenes also has that blurry low res look though well
    designed I wish they looked sharper.
     
    , Jan 8, 2006
    #7
  8. Joel

    Mxsmanic Guest

    Joel writes:

    > HP L2335 Silver 23" 16ms LCD Monitor
    >
    > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16824176018
    >
    > Where I am putting it only allows me to sit about 5 feet away from it as a
    > TV. For a computer screen, the distance will probably be only about 4 feet.
    > How close is too close before the image turns to crap? I heard that on these
    > things for games you need to be at least 8 feet away. Is that true?


    The size of the screen and the viewing distance are not the only
    variables. The other variables are screen resolution (pixels) and your
    eyesight.

    A person with perfect eyesight can distinguish details measuring about
    30 seconds of arc in the center of the visual field. Your monitor
    should be configured such that the pixels on the screen are somewhat
    larger than this in your visual field.

    At a viewing distance of five feet, with perfect vision, the smallest
    pixels you'll be able to see will be 0.22 mm in size. In practice,
    most people don't have perfect vision, and viewing conditions are
    rarely ideal, so you can double this to get a pixel size of about 0.4
    mm. That corresponds to a screen resolution of roughly 1152x864, so
    this would be a good setting for your screen, which you can adjust up
    or down to suit your tastes.

    I work at 1600x1200 on a 20" LCD monitor at a distance of about 50 cm,
    and this seems to be nearly ideal, although I could go with a somewhat
    higher resolution without too much problem (if the monitor and card
    supported it). Extending that to a 23" monitor yields a resolution of
    1840x1380 pixels. Reducing that to accommodate a viewing distance of
    five feet yields roughly 640x480.

    Five feet is actually quite a distance away for a 23" monitor; the
    screen is going to be pretty small in your visual field. A good
    viewing distance is often about twice the diagonal of the screen.

    As always, your mileage may vary. Use the above as a guideline, and
    then adjust viewing distance and resolution until it looks comfortable
    to you.

    The specifics of an LCD screen are that the screen is designed for a
    specific native resolution, and it might not look too great if set to
    other resolutions that don't divide evenly into the native resolution.
    The HP monitor you mention has a native resolution of 1920x1200, so
    I'd suggest that you view it from about 2 feet away at native
    resolution. At greater distances, details will be harder to see, and
    the gaming experience will be less realistic (because it covers less
    of the visual field).

    Games require less resolution than most other applications, so they
    can tolerate greater viewing distances, but that doesn't mean that
    greater viewing distances are better. In some cases, the resolution
    of games is low enough that they will look blurry at close range, but
    the advantages of having more of your visual field involved in the
    game may outweigh that consideration.

    --
    Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
     
    Mxsmanic, Jan 8, 2006
    #8
  9. Joel

    Mxsmanic Guest

    ff writes:

    > That monitor has a recommended resolution of 1920 x 1200 which is better
    > than HDTV. IMO you should be able to get as close as you want if you run
    > it at that resolution. Of course you may have to turn your head to see
    > the left and right sides of the screen :)


    It would be great for most applications. However, keep in mind that
    games make great demands on video cards--you have to make sure you
    have a video card that can support 1920x1200 at the refresh rate you
    want and with all the colors and 3D support you might need for a game.
    To some extent your CPU will also play a role, since higher
    resolutions require more calculations and lower frame rates.

    --
    Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
     
    Mxsmanic, Jan 8, 2006
    #9
  10. Joel

    Mxsmanic Guest

    John Doe writes:

    > I'm standing in a store looking really hard at their HDTVs, and it's
    > like "wow... television"


    HDTV resolution isn't that great computer to computer resolution, but
    it's a lot better than traditional television systems (which are only
    320x200 for VHS tape, for example, and barely 320x380 for broadcast
    NTSC or PAL).

    Also, while HDTV has many pixels, it doesn't use them all because of
    video compression, whereas a computer can set every pixel
    individually. Overall, computers make higher demands on resolution
    and require better monitors and closer viewing distances than
    television.

    --
    Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
     
    Mxsmanic, Jan 8, 2006
    #10
  11. Joel

    John Doe Guest

    High-definition television HDTV does not look much better than
    conventional TV, in my opinion, it's not exciting.

    Further comparing it to computer multimedia. Looking at a television
    nowadays, sometimes I want to resize parts of the screen. And
    oftentimes I would like to move the slider back so I can replay part
    of the video.


    Mxsmanic <mxsmanic gmail.com> wrote:

    > Path: newssvr21.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm04.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
    > NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 07:40:46 -0600
    > From: Mxsmanic <mxsmanic gmail.com>
    > Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
    > Subject: Re: How far back do I need to sit from this LCD/monitor?
    > Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 14:40:46 +0100
    > Organization: Just Mxsmanic
    > Message-ID: <3f52s19encr4nr6qn524uvqphhbl7d68t6 4ax.com>
    > References: <5R1wf.120431$aS5.45507 bignews4.bellsouth.net> <U%2wf.72323$tV6.56830 newssvr27.news.prodigy.net> <Xns974516AFA98A0follydom 207.115.17.102>
    > X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
    > MIME-Version: 1.0
    > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
    > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    > Lines: 18
    > X-Trace: sv3-RuQ5o6H+MRc7QG413Ed9fa8V+uc2+raBlxVUYyQkOhv+xVq++5xBc+ejYjY39xSnWk9W+szHNi9PNCg!evIcfk5WtZHKQH9VZk+WUancZUih1finSy9LzQD2W8s1anRUABXQvO3i1ufU5Sx45BA2fFU=
    > X-Complaints-To: abuse giganews.com
    > X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
    > X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
    > X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
    > X-Postfilter: 1.3.32
    > Xref: newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com alt.comp.hardware:298855 alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:455694
    >
    > John Doe writes:
    >
    >> I'm standing in a store looking really hard at their HDTVs, and it's
    >> like "wow... television"

    >
    > HDTV resolution isn't that great computer to computer resolution, but
    > it's a lot better than traditional television systems (which are only
    > 320x200 for VHS tape, for example, and barely 320x380 for broadcast
    > NTSC or PAL).
    >
    > Also, while HDTV has many pixels, it doesn't use them all because of
    > video compression, whereas a computer can set every pixel
    > individually. Overall, computers make higher demands on resolution
    > and require better monitors and closer viewing distances than
    > television.
    >
    > --
    > Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
    >
    >
     
    John Doe, Jan 9, 2006
    #11
  12. Joel

    Mxsmanic Guest

    John Doe writes:

    > High-definition television HDTV does not look much better than
    > conventional TV, in my opinion, it's not exciting.


    I've seen HDTV technologies in the past, and they were very nice--much
    better than conventional TV. But then again, just about anything is
    better than conventional TV, so HDTV is really "high-definition" only
    when compared to the miserable resolution of ordinary television.

    > Further comparing it to computer multimedia. Looking at a television
    > nowadays, sometimes I want to resize parts of the screen. And
    > oftentimes I would like to move the slider back so I can replay part
    > of the video.


    Yes. And the images on a computer screen are much sharper and clearer
    than those on a TV screen, even HDTV. Ever notice how blurry a DVD
    seems when played on a computer monitor, compared to the
    computer-generated images next to it? And if you look at the specs of
    even high-definition TV sets, you see that their resolution is no
    better than that of a medium computer monitor, and often it is much
    worse.

    The last time computers were able to get by with TV-style resolution
    was back in the days of the TRS-80 and Apple II. It didn't take long
    for even microcomputers to push resolution requirements far beyond
    what standard TV screens could deliver. And computers have been using
    much higher resolutions than TV for decades.

    --
    Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
     
    Mxsmanic, Jan 9, 2006
    #12
  13. Joel

    John Doe Guest

    Mxsmanic <> wrote:

    > John Doe writes:
    >
    >> High-definition television HDTV does not look much better than
    >> conventional TV, in my opinion, it's not exciting.

    >
    > I've seen HDTV technologies in the past, and they were very
    > nice--much better than conventional TV.


    In your opinion.
     
    John Doe, Jan 9, 2006
    #13
  14. Joel

    Mxsmanic Guest

    John Doe writes:

    > In your opinion.


    My opinion was widely shared. This was years ago, though, long before
    the general public knew anything about HDTV.

    --
    Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
     
    Mxsmanic, Jan 9, 2006
    #14
  15. Joel

    John Doe Guest

    Mxsmanic <> wrote:

    > John Doe writes:
    >
    >> In your opinion.

    >
    > My opinion was widely shared.


    I wouldn't be surprised if it's a consensus in your head.
     
    John Doe, Jan 9, 2006
    #15
  16. Joel

    kony Guest

    On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 17:51:03 GMT, John Doe
    <> wrote:

    >Mxsmanic <> wrote:
    >
    >> John Doe writes:
    >>
    >>> In your opinion.

    >>
    >> My opinion was widely shared.

    >
    >I wouldn't be surprised if it's a consensus in your head.



    It may or may not look "much" better depending on your
    definition of "much". There is an obvious visual
    improvement but whether it's enough to get excited about, or
    even necessary, is quite another thing... regardless, the
    improvement is real and an evolutionary step rather than one
    that would make everybody throw away a decent set to buy
    into HD rather than getting the life out of one. Then
    again, I don't watch a lot of TV besides the news and
    occasional movies.
     
    kony, Jan 9, 2006
    #16
  17. Joel

    geoff Guest

    I sit on the other side of the room and look at my monitor with binoculars
    :p

    -g
     
    geoff, Jan 10, 2006
    #17
  18. Joel

    John Doe Guest

    kony <spam spam.com> wrote:

    >
    > [digital TV] may or may not look "much" better depending on your
    > definition of "much". There is an obvious visual improvement


    If you put the same pictures and scenery on my modern analog TV set
    that you see in a digital TV display, it would look practically the
    same. You probably can't see any difference when viewing moving
    images. It might be evolutionary, but it's not worth paying any more
    for.




    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Path: newsdbm04.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!wns13feed!worldnet.att.net!attbi_s22.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail
    > From: kony <spam spam.com>
    > Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
    > Subject: Re: How far back do I need to sit from this LCD/monitor?
    > Reply-To: spam spam.com
    > Message-ID: <itd5s1h5kf70bai79l0tq8nfgvls3sj2vt 4ax.com>
    > References: <5R1wf.120431$aS5.45507 bignews4.bellsouth.net> <U%2wf.72323$tV6.56830 newssvr27.news.prodigy.net> <Xns974516AFA98A0follydom 207.115.17.102> <3f52s19encr4nr6qn524uvqphhbl7d68t6 4ax.com> <Xns9745EDE12B592follydom 207.115.17.102> <k054s1t685m0bs2q6gd75502r9km9kfgeb 4ax.com> <Xns974612D9CA67follydom 207.115.17.102> <i585s1haf6vr6a4h9ls8inca8ns5dnns06 4ax.com> <Xns97467891394B0follydom 207.115.17.102>
    > X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
    > MIME-Version: 1.0
    > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
    > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    > Lines: 23
    > NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.211.125.48
    > X-Complaints-To: abuse asp.att.net
    > X-Trace: attbi_s22 1136834646 12.211.125.48 (Mon, 09 Jan 2006 19:24:06 GMT)
    > NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 19:24:06 GMT
    > Organization: AT&T ASP.att.net
    > Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 19:24:06 GMT
    > Xref: newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com alt.comp.hardware:299037 alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:455802
    >
     
    John Doe, Jan 17, 2006
    #18
    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. dave
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,185
  2. NN

    LCD Monitor need alignment?

    NN, Jul 8, 2004, in forum: Computer Hardware
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    958
    Michael Culley
    Jul 9, 2004
  3. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    248
  4. Bartman

    Così per capire, monitor lcd o tv lcd?

    Bartman, Dec 29, 2006, in forum: Computer Hardware
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    238
    Bartman
    Dec 29, 2006
  5. VanguardLH
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    454
    VanguardLH
    Aug 26, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page