LCD display for user with reduced vision: seeking recommendations

[jfaughnan]

I am looking for an LCD display for use by a person with limited visual
acuity. They've used an 15" CRT at 800x600 with good results.

I'd like to try a 17" to 19" display at 1024x768 (or a similar pixel
spacing in a different aspect ratio). I would prefer an LCD over a CRT.

The problem, of course, is firstly that LCDs typically do not produce a
sharp display at anything less than their maximal (optimal) resolution
and secondly that I doubt anyone sells a new 17-19" LCD with an optimal
resolution of 1024x768. I think there were probably such low res
displays in the past, but by now they would be either faded or
incompatible with modern hardware.

Does anyone have any advice or thoughts? Is there an LCD that will
display well at a submaximal resolution (larger dot pitch)? Should I
simply resign myself to a second hand CRT?

Thanks!

john

meta: jfaughnan, jgfaughnan, CRT, macular degeneration, diminished
visual acuity, dot pitch, pixel spacing, raster UI, LCD, advice

[rjn]

jfaughnan wrote:

> I am looking for an LCD display for use by a person with limited visual
> acuity. They've used an 15" CRT at 800x600 with good results.

> The problem, of course, is firstly that LCDs typically do not produce a

> sharp display at anything less than their maximal (optimal) resolution

LCDs produce sharp results at their native res, and
also typically at integer fractions thereof, if you use
a digital connection, like DVI or HDMI.

Get a 1600x1200 and run it 800x600, or
1920x1200 wide* and run it at 960x600.

* First make sure the graphics card/chip can be configured
to emit custom resolutions, as 960 horizontal isn't exactly std.

Using a 30in 2560x1600 at 1280x800 is also a possibility,
and you wouldn't even need a dual-link DVI card.

--
Regards, Bob Niland mailto:na...@ispname.tld
http://www.access-one.com/rjn email4rjn AT yahoo DOT com
NOT speaking for any employer, client or Internet Service Provider.

[jfaughnan]

That's very helpful and interesting. I didn't realize integer fractions
worked with DVI. I've added your comment to my blog post in this topic:

http://bestyoucanbe.blogspot.com/2006/12/seeking-lcd-with-60-80-ppidpi-at.html

In the post I list what I was able to find in the 19" 1280 pixel
horizontal space. A comment there also mentioned, though it's not an
option for me at the moment, that the 20" iMac display is more readable
than I might have guessed based on the pixel/inch measure.

john

[rjn]

jfaughnan wrote:

> That's very helpful and interesting. I didn't realize integer fractions
> worked with DVI.

It's fairly obvious when you consider that DVI-connected
PCs still boot in VGA (640x480) mode, so the monitor
must know how to deal with at least that sub-res.

> They've used an 15" CRT at 800x600 with good results.

Which is actually likely only 14in active phosphor region,
for purposes of calculating the baseline dpi needed in the
LCD replacement.

--
Regards, Bob Niland mailto:n...@ispname.tld

[louise]

Have you heard anything about Eizo? Supposedly their
monitors are a cut above but I've been unable to find one to
look at.

Louise

[jfaughnan]

I found a 19" CRT in a friend's basement and installed that at
1024x768. It seems to work, especially since her key apps can be run
with user-specified font sizes.

So I gave up on an LCD solution ...

john
meta: monitor; visual limitation; macular degeneration; display;
computer; selection; resolution; ppi; dpi; disability, jfaughnan,
jgfaughnan

rjn wrote:

> jfaughnan wrote:
> > That's very helpful and interesting. I didn't realize integer fractions
> > worked with DVI.
> It's fairly obvious when you consider that DVI-connected
> PCs still boot in VGA (640x480) mode, so the monitor
> must know how to deal with at least that sub-res.
> > They've used an 15" CRT at 800x600 with good results

> Which is actually likely only 14in active phosphor region,
> for purposes of calculating the baseline dpi needed in the
> LCD replacement.

> Regards, Bob Niland