Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Cheap and efficient way to make your photo look better (on monitor only)

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    South Pole with Penguin
    Posts
    5,270

    Default Cheap and efficient way to make your photo look better (on monitor only)

    I have been using nVidia graphic card since 3 yrs ago, from TNT to TNT2 to GeForce 2 to GeForce 3

    usually the max resolution i can go is 1600 x 1200 @ 85Hz
    but at this resolution, it is hardly readable on my 21" Sony Flat screen, so i usually run at 1280x1024 @ 100Hz

    Today, i just bought a $43 Matrox G400 Dualhead, it can reach 1800x1400 @ 70Hz, no flicker and most importantly, the text is still sharp and very readable.

    no more shadow behind the text and all my photo looks so much better now.

    Matrox graphic card is popular for its 2D quality, no only the text look sharper...the colour look richer too....now my photos suddenly look so nice...this card usually selling at around $170, but there is a shop in Sim Lim selling a brand new card at $43 with warranty somemore. at $43, u can only buy a 8MB PCI card.

    Now look at the some close up photo taken with my Sony F707 at the monitor, no sharpen was done, only resizing.

    Graphic card setting : 1600 x 1200 @ 85Hz
    Camera resolution : 2560 x 1900, no tripod.

    With GeForce 2 MX


    With Matrox G400


    With Matrox G550 (taken last year)


    If i remember correctly, Matrox G550 have the best result....i think i forgot to swtich off my room light so there was some reflection for the G400 shot.
    We are HDD of PC & FT are MB add to storage;
    so PC never hangs with enormous storage capacity - LKY

  2. #2
    Senior Member zhapchit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    North-East
    Posts
    693

    Default

    which shop is selling this?

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    South Pole with Penguin
    Posts
    5,270

    Default

    Originally posted by zhapchit
    which shop is selling this?
    Bytes Technology, sim lim sq #05-47

    i saw this lobang in HWZ actually, i went to buy it today and there are abt 20 pcs left....while stock last only...

    btw, other shops are selling abt $150 for this card
    We are HDD of PC & FT are MB add to storage;
    so PC never hangs with enormous storage capacity - LKY

  4. #4

    Default

    hi kamwai.. is this card 16mb or 32mb? cos i read somewhere that there's 2 types. i've been looking for a graphic card since my current one is onli a 8mb!

  5. #5

    Default Re: Cheap and efficient way to make your photo look better (on monitor only)

    Originally posted by kamwai
    I have been using nVidia graphic card since 3 yrs ago, from TNT to TNT2 to GeForce 2 to GeForce 3

    usually the max resolution i can go is 1600 x 1200 @ 85Hz
    but at this resolution, it is hardly readable on my 21" Sony Flat screen, so i usually run at 1280x1024 @ 100Hz
    Wah... 21" SONY FLAT SCREEN!!!
    Most of us only 17" leh...

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    South Pole with Penguin
    Posts
    5,270

    Default Re: Re: Cheap and efficient way to make your photo look better (on monitor only)

    Originally posted by willyfoo


    Wah... 21" SONY FLAT SCREEN!!!
    Most of us only 17" leh...
    my secondary monitor is 17", my brother went to army already so i take his monitor and use as my secondary monitor... it is really useful for photo editing when u have a large monitor

    btw, the card is only 16MB, but unless u play games/rendering at high texture, else it is good enough

    i also just tried playing CS, with a AMD XP1500 and 128MB DDR, it can reach ard 60-70fps, whereas for a GF2MX can reach 80-99fps

    CS is still playable with this card
    We are HDD of PC & FT are MB add to storage;
    so PC never hangs with enormous storage capacity - LKY

  7. #7

    Default Re: Re: Re: Cheap and efficient way to make your photo look better (on monitor only)

    Originally posted by kamwai


    my secondary monitor is 17", my brother went to army already so i take his monitor and use as my secondary monitor... it is really useful for photo editing when u have a large monitor

    btw, the card is only 16MB, but unless u play games/rendering at high texture, else it is good enough

    i also just tried playing CS, with a AMD XP1500 and 128MB DDR, it can reach ard 60-70fps, whereas for a GF2MX can reach 80-99fps

    CS is still playable with this card
    ok. thanks..

  8. #8

    Default

    wai, I know you're a hardware expert, how come the card can affect the sharpness of the screen ?? *scratch*
    36frames Wedding Photography - http://www.36frames.com
    rueyloon - http://www.rueyloon.com

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    South Pole with Penguin
    Posts
    5,270

    Default

    Originally posted by rueyloon
    wai, I know you're a hardware expert, how come the card can affect the sharpness of the screen ?? *scratch*

    Quality of components



    Many nVIDIA GeForce and TNT -based cards have the above circuit onboard. It is a low pass filter and it's purpose is to reduce RFI emissions. In many cases it's manufactured with low quality components and / or designed badly. If 'misdesigned' it basically stops most of the high frequency information necessary to produce, for example, sharp text at high resolutions and refresh rates.

    To produce decently sharp image at 1600x1200@75Hz you need at least 150MHz of videobandwidth. That is half of the pixelclock frequency, called also as RAMDAC speed. However, on some videocards the RF filter on the VGA outputs (diagram above) is designed so that it restricts the videobandwidth to even as low as 60...70MHz. This is unacceptable because these videocards, in case of GeForce2 GTS / MX, are advertised to have 350MHz RAMDACs and capable of resolutions of 2048x1536 at refresh rate of 75Hz.

    You can refer to this page for more detail
    We are HDD of PC & FT are MB add to storage;
    so PC never hangs with enormous storage capacity - LKY

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Northwest
    Posts
    5,011

    Default

    So wai, did you try to tweak your nVidia card to improve the video bandwidth and then compare that with the Matrox card?

    By the way, since you mentioned that you are using 1280X1024 resolution setting, I would like to point out to you that this setting is not exactly 4:3 ratio. 4:3 is the normal display area of the screen, and the correct resolution should be 1280X960. Setting 1280X1024, you are squeezing more rows into the display area, making the pixel ratio 5:4.

    You will experience some distortion of your pictures if the physical display area (controlled by Vsize and Hsize) is at 4:3. The result is a slight compression of the picture in the vertical axis, which make the subject appear to be shorter and fatter. If you draw a circle in a graphic program, it will appear flatten horizontally.

    The remedy is to reduce the Hsize of your display area. What I do when I use 1280X1024 is to reduce Hsize and actually measure the display area on the screen until I get a actual 5:4 ratio.
    As complexity rises, precise statements lose meaning and meaningful statements lose precision.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •