very old pixelly display screens quotation

For screen sizes (typically in inches, measured on the diagonal), see Display size. For a list of particular display resolutions, see Graphics display resolution.

This chart shows the most common display resolutions, with the color of each resolution type indicating the display ratio (e.g. red indicates a 4:3 ratio).

The display resolution or display modes of a digital television, computer monitor or display device is the number of distinct pixels in each dimension that can be displayed. It can be an ambiguous term especially as the displayed resolution is controlled by different factors in cathode ray tube (CRT) displays, flat-panel displays (including liquid-crystal displays) and projection displays using fixed picture-element (pixel) arrays.

One use of the term display resolution applies to fixed-pixel-array displays such as plasma display panels (PDP), liquid-crystal displays (LCD), Digital Light Processing (DLP) projectors, OLED displays, and similar technologies, and is simply the physical number of columns and rows of pixels creating the display (e.g. 1920 × 1080). A consequence of having a fixed-grid display is that, for multi-format video inputs, all displays need a "scaling engine" (a digital video processor that includes a memory array) to match the incoming picture format to the display.

For device displays such as phones, tablets, monitors and televisions, the use of the term display resolution as defined above is a misnomer, though common. The term display resolution is usually used to mean pixel dimensions, the maximum number of pixels in each dimension (e.g. 1920 × 1080), which does not tell anything about the pixel density of the display on which the image is actually formed: resolution properly refers to the pixel density, the number of pixels per unit distance or area, not the total number of pixels. In digital measurement, the display resolution would be given in pixels per inch (PPI). In analog measurement, if the screen is 10 inches high, then the horizontal resolution is measured across a square 10 inches wide.NTSC TVs can typically display about 340 lines of "per picture height" horizontal resolution from over-the-air sources, which is equivalent to about 440 total lines of actual picture information from left edge to right edge.

Some commentators also use display resolution to indicate a range of input formats that the display"s input electronics will accept and often include formats greater than the screen"s native grid size even though they have to be down-scaled to match the screen"s parameters (e.g. accepting a 1920 × 1080 input on a display with a native 1366 × 768 pixel array). In the case of television inputs, many manufacturers will take the input and zoom it out to "overscan" the display by as much as 5% so input resolution is not necessarily display resolution.

The eye"s perception of display resolution can be affected by a number of factors – see image resolution and optical resolution. One factor is the display screen"s rectangular shape, which is expressed as the ratio of the physical picture width to the physical picture height. This is known as the aspect ratio. A screen"s physical aspect ratio and the individual pixels" aspect ratio may not necessarily be the same. An array of 1280 × 720 on a 16:9 display has square pixels, but an array of 1024 × 768 on a 16:9 display has oblong pixels.

An example of pixel shape affecting "resolution" or perceived sharpness: displaying more information in a smaller area using a higher resolution makes the image much clearer or "sharper". However, most recent screen technologies are fixed at a certain resolution; making the resolution lower on these kinds of screens will greatly decrease sharpness, as an interpolation process is used to "fix" the non-native resolution input into the display"s native resolution output.

While some CRT-based displays may use digital video processing that involves image scaling using memory arrays, ultimately "display resolution" in CRT-type displays is affected by different parameters such as spot size and focus, astigmatic effects in the display corners, the color phosphor pitch shadow mask (such as Trinitron) in color displays, and the video bandwidth.

Most television display manufacturers "overscan" the pictures on their displays (CRTs and PDPs, LCDs etc.), so that the effective on-screen picture may be reduced from 720 × 576 (480) to 680 × 550 (450), for example. The size of the invisible area somewhat depends on the display device. Some HD televisions do this as well, to a similar extent.

Computer displays including projectors generally do not overscan although many models (particularly CRT displays) allow it. CRT displays tend to be underscanned in stock configurations, to compensate for the increasing distortions at the corners.

Interlaced video (also known as interlaced scan) is a technique for doubling the perceived frame rate of a video display without consuming extra bandwidth. The interlaced signal contains two fields of a video frame captured consecutively. This enhances motion perception to the viewer, and reduces flicker by taking advantage of the phi phenomenon.

Progressive scanning (alternatively referred to as noninterlaced scanning) is a format of displaying, storing, or transmitting moving images in which all the lines of each frame are drawn in sequence. This is in contrast to interlaced video used in traditional analog television systems where only the odd lines, then the even lines of each frame (each image called a video field) are drawn alternately, so that only half the number of actual image frames are used to produce video.

Many personal computers introduced in the late 1970s and the 1980s were designed to use television receivers as their display devices, making the resolutions dependent on the television standards in use, including PAL and NTSC. Picture sizes were usually limited to ensure the visibility of all the pixels in the major television standards and the broad range of television sets with varying amounts of over scan. The actual drawable picture area was, therefore, somewhat smaller than the whole screen, and was usually surrounded by a static-colored border (see image below). Also, the interlace scanning was usually omitted in order to provide more stability to the picture, effectively halving the vertical resolution in progress. 160 × 200, 320 × 200 and 640 × 200 on NTSC were relatively common resolutions in the era (224, 240 or 256 scanlines were also common). In the IBM PC world, these resolutions came to be used by 16-color EGA video cards.

One of the drawbacks of using a classic television is that the computer display resolution is higher than the television could decode. Chroma resolution for NTSC/PAL televisions are bandwidth-limited to a maximum 1.5MHz, or approximately 160 pixels wide, which led to blurring of the color for 320- or 640-wide signals, and made text difficult to read (see example image below). Many users upgraded to higher-quality televisions with S-Video or RGBI inputs that helped eliminate chroma blur and produce more legible displays. The earliest, lowest cost solution to the chroma problem was offered in the Atari 2600 Video Computer System and the Apple II+, both of which offered the option to disable the color and view a legacy black-and-white signal. On the Commodore 64, the GEOS mirrored the Mac OS method of using black-and-white to improve readability.

Programs designed to mimic older hardware such as Atari, Sega, or Nintendo game consoles (emulators) when attached to multiscan CRTs, routinely use much lower resolutions, such as 160 × 200 or 320 × 400 for greater authenticity, though other emulators have taken advantage of pixelation recognition on circle, square, triangle and other geometric features on a lesser resolution for a more scaled vector rendering. Some emulators, at higher resolutions, can even mimic the aperture grille and shadow masks of CRT monitors.

In 2002, 1024 × 768 eXtended Graphics Array was the most common display resolution. Many web sites and multimedia products were re-designed from the previous 800 × 600 format to the layouts optimized for 1024 × 768.

In 2010, 27-inch LCD monitors with the 2560 × 1440 resolution were released by multiple manufacturers, and in 2012, Apple introduced a 2880 × 1800 display on the MacBook Pro. Panels for professional environments, such as medical use and air traffic control, support resolutions up to 4096 × 21602048 × 2048 pixels).

The following table lists the usage share of display resolutions from two sources, as of June 2020. The numbers are not representative of computer users in general.

In recent years the 16:9 aspect ratio has become more common in notebook displays. 1366 × 768 (HD) has become popular for most low-cost notebooks, while 1920 × 1080 (FHD) and higher resolutions are available for more premium notebooks.

When a computer display resolution is set higher than the physical screen resolution (native resolution), some video drivers make the virtual screen scrollable over the physical screen thus realizing a two dimensional virtual desktop with its viewport. Most LCD manufacturers do make note of the panel"s native resolution as working in a non-native resolution on LCDs will result in a poorer image, due to dropping of pixels to make the image fit (when using DVI) or insufficient sampling of the analog signal (when using VGA connector). Few CRT manufacturers will quote the true native resolution, because CRTs are analog in nature and can vary their display from as low as 320 × 200 (emulation of older computers or game consoles) to as high as the internal board will allow, or the image becomes too detailed for the vacuum tube to recreate (i.e., analog blur). Thus, CRTs provide a variability in resolution that fixed resolution LCDs cannot provide.

Screen burn-in, image burn-in, ghost image, or shadow image, is a permanent discoloration of areas on an electronic display such as a cathode ray tube (CRT) in an old computer monitor or television set. It is caused by cumulative non-uniform use of the screen.

One way to combat screen burn-in was the use of screensavers, which would move an image around to ensure that no one area of the screen remained illuminated for too long.

With phosphor-based electronic displays (for example CRT-type computer monitors, oscilloscope screens or plasma displays), non-uniform use of specific areas, such as prolonged display of non-moving images (text or graphics), repetitive contents in gaming graphics, or certain broadcasts with tickers and flags, can create a permanent ghost-like image of these objects or otherwise degrade image quality. This is because the phosphor compounds which emit light to produce images lose their luminance with use. This wear results in uneven light output over time, and in severe cases can create a ghost image of previous content. Even if ghost images are not recognizable, the effects of screen burn are an immediate and continual degradation of image quality.

The length of time required for noticeable screen burn to develop varies due to many factors, ranging from the quality of the phosphors employed, to the degree of non-uniformity of sub-pixel use. It can take as little as a few weeks for noticeable ghosting to set in, especially if the screen displays a certain image (example: a menu bar at the top or bottom of the screen) constantly and displays it continually over time. In the rare case when horizontal or vertical deflection circuits fail, all output energy is concentrated to a vertical or horizontal line on the display which causes almost instant screen burn.

Phosphor burn-in is particularly prevalent with monochromatic CRT screens, such as the amber or green monochrome monitors common on older computer systems and dumb terminal stations. This is partly because those screens displayed mostly non-moving images, and at one intensity: fully on. Yellow screens are more susceptible than either green or white screens because the yellow phosphor is less efficient and thus requires a higher beam current. Color screens, by contrast, use three separate phosphors (red, green, and blue), mixed in varying intensities to achieve specific colors, and in typical usage patterns such as "traditional" TV viewing (non-gaming, non-converged TV usage, non-Internet browsing, broadcasts without tickers or flags, no prolonged or permanent letterboxing) are used for operations where colors and on-screen object placement approach uniformity.

Modern CRT displays are less susceptible than older CRTs prior to the 1960s because they have a layer of aluminum behind the phosphor which offers some protection. The aluminum layer was provided to reflect more light from the phosphor towards the viewer. As a bonus, the aluminum layer also prevented ion burn of the phosphor and the ion trap, common to older monochrome televisions, was no longer required.

A nearly two-year-old LCD television showing extreme burn-in of CNN"s circa 2008 digital on-screen graphic; this television is in a McDonald"s restaurant where CNN is permanently turned on and displayed throughout the business day.

Both plasma-type and LCD-type displays exhibit a similar phenomenon called transient image persistence, which is similar to screen burn but is not permanent. In the case of plasma-type displays, transient image persistence is caused by charge build-up in the pixel cells (not cumulative luminance degradation as with burn-in), which can be seen sometimes when a bright image that was set against a dark background is replaced by a dark background only; this image retention is usually released once a typical-brightness image is displayed and does not inhibit the display"s typical viewing image quality.

Mobile phone screen burn is a common issue that occurs on some smartphone devices, particularly those with AMOLED or OLED displays. Screen burn happens when a static image or part of an image is displayed on the screen for an extended period of time, causing that part of the image to become "burned" into the screen. This can result in a faint ghost image that is visible on the screen, even when the display is showing a different image.

Screensavers derive their name from their original purpose, which was an active method of attempting to stave off screen burn. By ensuring that no pixel or group of pixels was left displaying a static image for extended periods of time, phosphor luminosity was preserved. Modern screensavers can turn off the screen when not in use.

In many cases, the use of a screensaver is impractical. Most plasma-type display manufacturers include methods for reducing the rate of burn-in by moving the image slightly,Android Wear watches with OLED displays can request that Android Wear enable "burn protection techniques" that periodically shift the contents of the screen by a few pixels.

Other examples: Apple"s iPhone X and Samsung"s Galaxy series both mitigate or delay the onset of burn-in by shifting the pixels every minute or so for the battery, Wi-Fi, location, and service bars. Also, parallax scrolling may be enabled for the home screen to give icons a 3D-like effect, a setting Apple refers to as "perspective zoom". AG Neovo patented Anti-burn-in technology is also using pixel shifting to activate the pixels to move by the designed time interval to prevent burn in effect on LCD monitors.

Some screensavers move around, such as those on DVD players or those on some television sets that move around paused video after a long period of inactivity.

Depending on the type of screen, it is sometimes possible to remedy screen burn-in through the use of remedial software and remedial devices. In the case of OLED screens on Android phones, burn-in reduction apps can display an inverted image of the navigation and status bars (which are constantly displayed and therefore the most likely elements to be burned in) to burn in opposite pattern, resulting in a screen whose sub-pixels have more even luminosity and therefore less visible burn-in artifacts.

I have two identical HD monitors that worked wonderfully with Windows 8.1, but I started getting the Blue Screen of Death and having other issues, so I bought a new and very expensive system that I was hoping would be more reliable. It"s been a disaster.

For comparison, I connected one monitor to the new computer (Windows 10) and the other to the old computer (Windows 8.1), and the display looks so much better on the old computer. The display on the new computer is very hard on the eyes, with blurry desktop

Undoubtedly, if you have been looking into purchasing an LED Video Display, you have come across the term pixel pitch. Pixel pitch is a key element in determining which LED Video Display is right for you. In order to understand what pixel pitch is, you must first understand what we are defining as a pixel. A pixel is a cluster of colored light sources known as diodes. Each cluster almost always contains at least one red diode, one green diode, and one blue diode. In older LED technology, these clusters could actually be seen as individual lights clustered together, these are DIP (dual in-line pin) diodes. Each cluster makes up one pixel. Pixel pitch measures the distance from the center of one cluster, or pixel, to the center of its neighboring pixel.

With modern surface mounted diode (SMD) technology (pictured below), each SMD pixel (chip) has a tiny red, blue, and green light inside of it. This compact design allows the pixels to be much closer together, greatly increasing the resolution of the display. Pixel pitch is measured in mm. Therefore if an LED Video Display is said to have a pixel pitch of 1.3, the center of each diode is 1.3mm away from the center of its neighboring diode.

Due to advancements in LED technology, HD, UHD, 4K and beyond are possible with modern LED Video Displays. As with other forms of technology, innovation has simultaneously improved the quality of LED Video Displays while driving prices down, making the benefits of LED Video Display more accessible.

Viewing distance refers to the distance the viewer is from the LED Video Display. The closer the viewer is to the LED Video Display, the tighter the pixel pitch needs to be to produce a pleasing image. At greater distances, the human eye naturally blends color, meaning an LED Video Display can have a wider pixel pitch and still look pleasing to the viewer.

All of Neoti’s LED Video Displays have at least a 120° degree viewing angle. This means that the image still looks good and legible for 60° in each direction of the front of the screen to the left and to the right, where 90° would be completely sideways of the image. Some of our products have a very wide 140° viewing angle! This is all a fancy way of saying that LED Video Displays in general have a very wide angle viewing ability, so as long as your crowd is in front of the LED Video Display, even on the sides, they’ll be able to see the image clearly. It’s one of the most surprisingly pleasant features of LED Video Displays.

Diodes, pixel pitch, optimal viewing distance, viewing angle – it may sound like a lot, but an experienced LED Video Display specialist can help you through it. Ready to make the leap into the world of LED Video Display? Give Neoti a call at (877) 356-3684. If you already have an idea of what you want, you can fill out our easy online quote form.

Screen burn, also called screen burn-in, ghost image, or display burns are images or icons that are displayed on a screen when they should not be there. Screen burn comes on gradually and gets worse over time and is most common on OLED screens. The navigation bar, the top status bar, or home screen apps are frequent images that get  “burned” into the display.

1. You aren’t looking at your phone screen with a white display. Screen burn is easiest to notice on an all-white or blank screen with no icons on it. And it is rare that your phone will display an all-white screen. This is why SmartphonesPLUS uses industry-leading phone diagnosis software and other tools that allow us to see phone screens on an all-white screen, along with other tests, to examine each phone we receive thoroughly.

2. You do not change your home screen layout or background image. You look at the same phone, with the same background every day, and can’t notice the screen burn because the icons and apps on the phone are always in the same position. It is much easier to notice screen burn when you shift the layout of icons and apps on your home screen.

Here’s an example we think relates to screen burn to help explain why it’s not as noticeable: when you see a person every day that is losing weight you don’t notice how much weight they lost, but if you saw a person you haven’t seen in over a year that lost 50 pounds you would notice right away. In the same way, your eyes and mind adjust to the screen burn as it gradually burns into the display over months or years.

Screen burn is caused by pixels displaying the same image or icon for an extended period of time. Static images such as apps, navigation bars, and keyboards can deteriorate pixels in the display from overuse. This causes these over-used pixels to look darker in color than others around them. Certain areas of the screen like status bars are more susceptible to screen burn as they are constantly displaying the same image.

As you can tell from the photos, screen burn can make the display look discolored with darker pink or gray hues. Because of its gradual onset, many users don’t even realize their display has screen burn. If you would like to check for screen burn on your phone, put your phone on a white screen. A white screen will provide contrast making the discolored pixels more noticeable.

You can avoid the deterioration of pixels by changing the image that your device displays. Try to change the positions of apps and backgrounds periodically.

Lowering the brightness will lengthen the life of the pixels in your display. Keeping the brightness as low as possible will ensure that screen burn won’t happen as quickly.

Avoid screen savers when your screen times out as they are generally static images that are displayed for a long period of time. Screen savers will cause the pixels of your display to be overworked when you are not even using your device. If you have a phone that uses always on display, make sure to turn this off to prolong the life of your screen’s pixels.

There are some apps and videos out there that claim they can fix screen burn, however, the results tend to be insignificant as it is a hardware issue of the display. The only way to truly fix screen burn is to replace the entire display of the phone. If you’d like to speak with a technician to see the cost of replacing a screen you can make an appointment or contact us.

So if the fear of the mere possibility of burn-in is your primary concern, the decision is simple: Buy an LCD-based display instead. But know that you"re sacrificing the best picture quality that money can buy. Here are some points to keep in mind:

All things considered, burn-in shouldn"t be a problem for most people. That"s why we at CNET continue to recommend OLED-based TVs, phones and other devices in our reviews. From all of the evidence we"ve seen, burn-in is typically caused by leaving a single, static image element, like a channel logo, onscreen for a very long time, repeatedly.

What can you do to prevent burn-in on that new TV? As we mentioned, vary what you watch a bit. In particular, don"t watch something that has the same static areas displayed onscreen, nonstop for days on end.

The logos and news tickers on cable news channels are examples of those static areas -- they have elements that never move, and they remain on screen the entire time you"re watching. That means if you leave your TV running Fox News, CNN, MSNBC or ESPN all day long and don"t watch enough other programming, you"re more likely to get burn-in. Or at least, image retention, which we"ll discuss in a moment. If you play the same game for 8 hours a day, every day, the onscreen status display or HUD is also a likely culprit for burn-in.

To repeat, you can watch those channels, play games or whatever else to use your TV as a TV, your phone as a phone, etc. You just shouldn"t watch only those channels, all day every day. And if that sounds extreme, know that emails I"ve gotten from readers about burn-in always have some variation on "well I only watched that channel for 5 hours a day." If that sounds like you, get an LCD.

As long as you vary what"s displayed, chances are you"ll never experience burn-in. That varied content will age your screen evenly. So in a 24-hour period you watch a movie, play some games, binge some TV shows, they"re all varied enough that you should be fine.

We"ve designed the OLED screen to aim for longevity as much as possible, but OLED displays can experience image retention if subjected to static visuals over a long period of time. However, users can take preventative measures to preserve the screen [by] utilizing features included in the Nintendo Switch systems by default, such as auto-brightness function to prevent the screen from getting too bright, and the auto-sleep function to go into "auto sleep" mode after short periods of time.

Which is to say, Nintendo is fully aware of this potential and took steps to minimize the risk. Also, despite many games having static HUDs, you"d need to play just that one game, for hours upon hours, every day without ever using the screen for anything else, at the highest brightness settings.

You"re not crazy, probably. That"s just an extreme case of image retention. Chances are it will go away on its own as you watch stuff that isn"t the same still image of the puppy.Here"s a section of a 2018 LG C8 OLED TV screen displaying a gray test pattern after 5 hours watching CNN on the brightest (Vivid) mode. They"re the same image, but we"ve circled the section with the logo on the right to highlight it. To see it better, turn up the brightness. In person, it"s more visible in a dark room, but much less visible with moving images as opposed to a test pattern. Since it disappeared after running LG"s Pixel Refresher (see below), this is an example of image retention and not burn-in.Sarah Tew/CNET

If you play the same video game for hours and days on end, that game"s persistent scoreboard or heads-up display might burn in. Basically, anything that stays on screen for a long time and doesn"t change can cause image retention and perhaps, eventually, burn-in.

Apple, for one, flags users of OLED-screened iPhones, like the X, 11 and 12, that burn-in is a possibility. Here"s the quote from its support page for the products:With extended long-term use, OLED displays can also show slight visual changes. This is also expected behavior and can include "image persistence" or "burn-in," where the display shows a faint remnant of an image even after a new image appears on the screen. This can occur in more extreme cases such as when the same high contrast image is continuously displayed for prolonged periods of time. We"ve engineered the Super Retina and Super Retina XDR displays to be the best in the industry in reducing the effects of OLED "burn-in."

What"s colloquially called "burn-in" is actually, with OLED, uneven aging. They don"t "burn in" as much as they "burn down." The candle that burns twice as bright burns half as long, right? OLED pixels very, very slowly get dimmer as they"re used. In most cases this isn"t an issue since you"re watching varied content and all the pixels, on average, get used the same amount. But if you"re only watching one thing, that one thing could cause uneven wear. Visually, and in the vernacular, this wear is called "burn-in." Uneven wear is more accurate, but also a lot more syllables.

Also, OLED technology has gotten better. Billions of dollars have been spent on OLED manufacturing and R&D, and that"s ongoing. So stories you may have heard about "burn-in" likely entered the zeitgeist years ago about older OLED displays. You just don"t hear about newer OLEDs having these issues except in extreme situations like those discussed above. You"d likely hear a LOT more stories about OLED now that the two largest phone manufacturers, and many smaller ones, use OLEDs in millions of phones and have for years.

"There is generally no warranty coverage for image retention by TV companies and display manufacturers. Image retention may result when consumers are out of normal viewing conditions, and most manufacturers do not support warranty for such usage regardless of the type of display," said Tim Alessi, director of new products at LG.

When CNET reached out to Samsung for details, the representative defined "normal consumer use" as "use of the product by consumers in a home environment for viewing content and/or gaming in a typical manner. It doesn"t cover business use." In other words, those ESPN logos you see burned into the screens at your local sports bar would not be covered.

Pretty much all OLED TVs also have user settings to minimize the chance of uneven wear or burn-in. One is called something like "Screen Shift" (on LGs) or "Pixel Shift" (on Sonys), which moves the image slightly around the screen. They also have built-in screensavers that pop up after extended idle time. You should also enable screen savers on connected devices like game consoles and streamers.

LG also has a Daily Pixel Refresher, which it says "automatically operates when users turn off the TV after watching it for more than four hours in total. For example, if a user watched TV for two hours yesterday and three hours today (more than four hours in total), when powered off the Daily Pixel Refresher will automatically run, deal with potential image retention issues, and reset the operation time. This process will occur when the TV is powered off after every four hours of cumulative use, even if it"s in one sitting."

A monitor is key. You’ll use it hour after hour, day after day, year after year. Monitors even have the audacity to resist obsolescence, so the monitor you buy today might be the one you’re still using in a decade. (My editor and I both have decade-old Dell U2412 monitors that are still going strong.)

I’ve reviewed monitors and laptop displays for over a decade. While different monitors suit different owners, I believe the idealhome office monitor has a 27-inch screen and 4K resolution. It uses an IPS panel, reaches a brightness of at least 250 nits, and can display 99 percent of the sRGB color gamut. Around back you’ll find a USB-C port that can deliver enough power to charge a laptop, along with HDMI and DisplayPort, plus an ergonomic stand that can adjust for height and attaches to a VESA mount.

Most standard-width monitors come in one of three sizes: 24-inch, 27-inch, and 32-inch. Bigger is not necessarily better. A large display may look more impressive, but I find it uncomfortable when placed close to my eyes. There are also practical considerations like perceived pixel density. A big monitor will look fuzzier than a smaller monitor of the same resolution unless you move it further away — which isn’t always an option.

That’s why a 27-inch monitor is my go-to recommendation. It’s large enough to look impressive on a typical home office desk but isn’t excessive. In my experience, 32-inch monitors should be reserved for unusually large and deep desks, or corner setups where it’s possible to position the display around four feet away from your face. This is especially true for 32-inch monitors with a resolution below 4K, which look grainy to me at a distance of three feet.

You can be creative with size if you mount a VESA-compatible monitor to an arm, as this will let you move it to your preference (including the proper ergonomic height). If you’re just doing it to move a large monitor farther away, though, give it a second thought. Why spend more for a larger monitor, and a monitor arm to position it farther away, instead of buying a smaller display to start?

Smaller models lack vertical space. A 29-inch ultrawide has less vertical display space than a 24-inch widescreen. Larger models generally have the opposite problem. Many are too big for a typical home office desk, not only because of their screen size, but because of the large stands used to stabilize them (some are several feet wide). You might need to rearrange your desk around a 38-inch or 43-inch monitor or add a top-tier monitor arm to make it work.

4K resolution (3,840 x 2,160) looks fantastic and is widely available on 27-inch and 32-inch displays. It’s not that expensive, either. Budget 4K 27-inch monitors like the Dell S2721QS can get you 4K for $350 or less.

With that said, settling for 1440p (2,560 x 1,440) can save money. It’s a bit disappointing on a 32-inch display, unless you move it far away, but it’s workable. A 27-inch 1440p display can look reasonably sharp and is a good choice if you personally don’t care about having the sharpest picture possible.

Super-ultrawides also don’t offer much choice. All 49-inch super-ultrawides I’m aware of use the same 5,120 x 1,440 resolution which, again, roughly equals the pixel density of a 1440p 27-inch display.

Most monitors have HDMI and DisplayPort. There’s no great reason to prefer one over the other for remote work. The huge majority of monitors sold today offer both, so the port you use will likely come down to what’s available on your PC.

If you’ve got extra cash to spend, the galaxy-brain move is to ignore HDMI and DisplayPort entirely and leap to USB-C and/or Thunderbolt. USB-C and Thunderbolt are great because they allow a single-cable solution for modern laptops that support the standard. You can plug in the laptop and charge it from the monitor while sending video to the monitor simultaneously. The best USB-C monitors even act as a hub with multiple extra ports like USB-A, USB-C, and ethernet.

Just make sure you check the fine print. Look for USB-C with DisplayPort Alternate Mode and Power Delivery, or Thunderbolt with Power Delivery (the standard has DisplayPort baked in). Those sorts of USB-C ports aren’t exactly uncommon on laptops: even the modest ThinkPad E545 I bought a few years back includes them.

But you’ll also need to make sure the monitor you buy provides enough electricity. Power Delivery currently maxes out at 100 watts, so even the most powerful monitors can’t fully power laptops like a top-spec Razer Blade or high-end MacBook Pro 16, but a monitor that delivers 60 watts or even 45 watts might be enough if you have a thin-and-light laptop like a Dell XPS 13 or MacBook Air. The higher the better, but if the USB-C monitor doesn’t deliver as much power as your laptop’s power brick, your battery might only charge when it’s idle or even powered off.

Many monitors also adjust for tilt and swivel, and some pivot 90 degrees into portrait orientation. That can be particularly handy when a monitor is used as a second display. For example, you could swivel a monitor to directly face you while doing detailed work, like editing a photo, and swing it away when it’s just displaying Slack or Discord. Tilt is similar but on the vertical axis, and especially handy if you have a standing desk, as you may need to tilt the monitor up while the desk is standing.

But if your monitor doesn’t have enough range of motion, or you want to free up space on your desk, you could instead add a VESA-compatible monitor arm to get it off the ground. Look for monitors with a 100mm x 100mm VESA spacing pattern. This is an extremely common feature found in all but the most affordable monitors, and you only need to worry about the 100mm spacing pattern. Others exist, but are relevant to other types of displays (like televisions).

A monitor arm is rarely a necessity, but it’s great for multi-monitor setups that place secondary displays around and above your main monitor, or for positioning an especially large and bulky monitor. Unfortunately, monitor arms can also be a bit expensive. A basic monitor arm off Amazon can run $30 to $50, but I’ve been burnt on their quality in the past. A good arm like those from Jarvis or Ergotron will start around $130.

Larger, heavier monitors will need a beefier, more expensive arm: the model Ergotron recommends for the 49-inch Samsung Odyssey Neo G9 is currently $379 (and, at the time I wrote this, sold out!)

Color accuracy is critical to image quality. An inaccurate monitor will look unnatural, flat, and dull, with strange swings in quality depending on what you’re viewing and the precise colors that are inaccurate (it’s common for monitors to be less accurate in blue or cyan than other colors, for example). A monitor with terrible color will disappoint you every time you sit down to use it.

The good news? Accuracy is low-key the greatest advancement in monitors over the last decade. Noticeably inaccurate displays were common when I began testing monitors well over a decade ago. Today, most midrange monitors have reasonable accuracy straight out of the box.

Color gamut, which describes the spectrum of colors a monitor can display, is also good enough on most monitors. The majority of content on a computer targets a color gamut called sRGB. Modern monitors display at least 95 percent of this gamut, and many display it all. Other gamuts also exist. DCI-P3 is the most advertised, though you may see Rec.709 or Adobe RGB as well. These gamuts are important if your work requires them, though if that’s the case, I’m guessing you know that. As with color accuracy, buyers concerned about gamut should read reviews to verify a monitor lives up to its claims.

Why would you want a brighter monitor? Well, if you’re viewing SDR content, there’s no particular reason (aside from using a monitor in a very, very bright room which, though rare, does happen). Viewing SDR content at a high brightness (say, 300 nits or more) might look nice at a glance, but can cause image quality issues like disappointing dark levels and reduced overall contrast.

High Dynamic Range, aka HDR, is a different story. This standard supports a way higher range of luminosity than SDR. HDR10, the most common standard, technically allows for a peak brightness up to 10,000 nits. Brightness does matter for HDR because the content includes additional luminance data that only HDR-compatible displays can show.

If you are looking for an HDR monitor, DisplayHDR certification labels could help, but know that “peak luminance” means “a tiny region on screen can get that bright,” and DisplayHDR 400 is barely HDR at all. Screenshot by Sean Hollister / The Verge

Nearly all monitors sold today use an LCD panel based on one of three technologies: twisted nematic (TN), in-plane switching (IPS), and vertical alignment (VA).

The least expensive monitors often use a TN panel. Avoid them. TN panel monitors will display an image, but that’s about it. They look achingly dull next to IPS and have astoundingly bad viewing angles.

A majority of monitors use IPS. Monitors based on IPS have very accurate color and can support a wide color gamut at a reasonable price. IPS struggles with dark scenes, however, because it can’t achieve a convincing shade of black. This is the dreaded “IPS glow” you may have heard of, which can look unappealing when watching movies or playing games. However, gamers still enjoy IPS monitors because some IPS panels have low response times and very high refresh rates.

High-refresh gaming displays aren’t especially expensive, with 24-inch, 144Hz models sold for as little as $200. But you’ll typically trade something away for refresh rate: that $200 monitor might use an iffy TN panel (rather than IPS or VA) or feature a low resolution. It’s possible to snag a 4K display for a reasonable sum, or one with a high refresh rate, but going for 4K at 144Hz means looking at monitors that cost as much as big televisions.

Also, USB-C with Power Delivery is rarely found in gaming monitors, and I haven’t seen a USB-C gaming monitor that doubles as a USB-C hub. That could be an issue if your work setup involves a lot of wired peripherals.

OLED? It flips the table, using an array of organic elements that create their own light. This provides pixel-level lighting control for truly unparalleled contrast you have to see to believe. OLED is also susceptible to burn-in, though there are ways to mitigate it from affecting a display prematurely.

If you demand the very best from a monitor, however, I recommend Mini LED. OLED’s burn-in worries are legitimate on the PC which, compared to a television, will display static images more frequently. Mini LED can’t match OLED’s contrast, but it’s still a major upgrade over a backlit LCD screen. There’s also the emerging category of quantum dot OLED (QD-OLED) screens, but manufacturers haven’t announced prices for those yet.

Other than art being either Raster or Vector there are some other limitations. Often the most prodominate is the maximum number of colors. Screen printing consists of breaking down every image into the total number of colors used, separating all of those colors into their own screen, registering the screens on press, then each screen is filled with the proper color inks and printed onto your garment. If a light ink is being printed on a dark garment then a white ink is printed under the color so it can remain vivid and bright. Think of trying to paint a watercolor onto a colored piece of paper, it just wouldn"t work. This means the most colors we can print on a light color fabric is 6 colors and on dark it is 5. This should be more than enough colors to achieve amazing results but some art has to be re-worked to achieve this.

I can well understand Microsoft"s excitement over their apparently independent rediscovery of these techniques, but we should not lose sight of the fact that this is very well explored technological territory.

Microsoft must have forgotten that twenty-two years ago the famous Apple II personal computer employed and patented exactly this sort of solution for its high-resolution graphics display. Their sub-pixel addressing was used to double the effective horizontal resolution of the Apple II video display.

Given this information, it is my sincere hope that Microsoft will acknowledge that they, in fact, rediscovered old and well-proven technology, and that they will not attempt to acquire and/or enforce overly broad patents which would certainly be overturned following a closer examination of PC industry history. This technology is too important for any one company — especially a company that didn"t invent it — to attempt to prevent its free use within the industry. I hope Microsoft will understand this.

In the beginning, the Pixel Art aesthetic wasn"t really an artistic choice but a necessity: hardware limitations in the "70s, "80s, and "90s made it prevalent in most games. But with the rise of 3D games in the "90s, Pixel Art became less and less used. But then why is Pixel Art so popular nowadays? The most obvious reason is nostalgia. Because most early games were made in this style, there"s a strong connection between Pixel Art and the vibe of an old-school gaming. For those growing up in the late 80th and the beginning of 90th, Pixel Art fuels memories of Friday evenings and Saturday mornings of Metroid, Super Mario Bros., and The Legend of Zelda marathons.

Most modern Pixel Art games aren"t just replicating the technical limitations of the past. Instead, they take the pixelated flavor and enhance it with larger screen resolutions. By dropping the old 4:3 format of old games and adopting the 16:9 widescreen format, they can achieve more visual complexity without sacrificing the retro flavor. This is what Jo-Remi Madsen (Owlboy) defined as Hi-Bit.

Some modern Pixel Art games have strayed away from the old sound path and use other types of sounds instead, while others keep using purely chiptunes music. Interestingly, somewhere in-between these two there"s a rising trend of Hybrid 8-bit/16-bit soundtracks, seen in games like Celeste or Ikenfell. These hybrids combine the old-school chiptune sound with realistic/modern sounds to create fresh-sounding music that still preserves the retro connotations that connect so well with the Pixel Art visuals. In a way, it"s similar to Pixel Art games using modern visual effects on top of the pixel visuals to expand its vocabulary.

The effectiveness of game music is proportional to how well it fits the game. And chiptunes have such strong ties with Pixel Art that they very easily fit with each other. When we see and hear them together, the music reinforces the retro connotations of the Pixel Art graphics, and at the same time, the pixel visuals reinforce the unique old-school feel of chip music.

And the simplistic approach of Pixel Art doesn"t mean it"s easy to achieve. There"s certainly a challenge in making characters, UIs, and fictional worlds look pleasant and distinguishable while keeping the pixelated look. Reaching the sweet spot that allows the player to interpret what he"s seeing while not giving it all away can be a real challenge. Lastly, Pixel Art games age better. While games trying to look "new" look old after a few years, the retro aesthetic holds up better because it"s not trying to look new - the opposite.

Weekend Project Build a Giant LED Pixel Display MUO Weekend Project Build a Giant LED Pixel Display I love LED pixels: bright, easy to control, cheap, and so versatile

Today, we"ll be turning them into a big pixel display that can be hung on the wall of your office; either to serve a useful purpose, or just look incredibly pretty

From there, it"s mostly a question of which software to use, depending on your needs – I"ll get you started with some demo code and pointers, then revisit the software angle in a later article as we figure out how to pull information like notifications and stock prices onto the display

In terms of tools, you"ll also need: Soldering iron and solder Hot glue gun Knife or scissors Wire stripper Be sure to read through our guide first! Step 1 Do the Math If you"ve purchased the same 50cm x 50cm Ikea photo frame and LED strands as me, you should be able to fit 15 strands of 15 LEDs

Measure twice, and double check: I must have left a small difference between lines, because by the time it came to sticking everything down, I realised I could only fit 14 strands of 15 LEDs

The first is called the , originally designed for working with TFT and LCD displays; the is a modification to this which makes all the functions work with NeoPixel LED matrices

In a future article, we"ll look at using the library to display useful information such as stock quotes or Twitter streams, but for now you should be able to play around with my sample code and load your own images

Pixels per inch is essentially the digital equivalent of dots per inch - it"s an arbitrary measurement that lets you know how sharp an image is. A pixel itself isn"t "standard" on a modern LCD screens - there"s different arrangements of "subpixels" that make up colours, like rgb LCDs, which consist of equal red, green and blue sub pixels; rgbw, which adds a white subpixel to that; or pentile.

A third point of reference would be black and white screens - like e-ink or high resolution medical displays. Here, each pixel would be a single colour, black.

As such, there"s no such thing as a standard pixel, or a standard size for said pixels. PPI is a measure of how small pixels in terms of pixels per square inch but these pixels need not be a standard size, or even shape or arrangement. PPI also doesn"t really mean anything unless it"s the same display layout. An rgb screen would have higher effective resolution/sharpness than a pentile screen in many situations.

Personally, I consider pixel pitch a complimentary measure since it also takes into account the spaces between subpixels and the fact that there are subpixels. Gaps between pixels affect the perceived quality of a display a fair bit. Two displays with the same DPI and different pixel pitch will have very different qualities.