OT: one huge monitor or 2 smaller or bigger ones ? SOLVED.

Tim ignored_mailbox at yahoo.com.au
Sun Apr 3 16:51:00 UTC 2011

On Sun, 2011-04-03 at 07:46 -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
> Normally, I don't see the point of having multiple monitors in Linux 
> because so much of what you need them for can be done with multiple 
> desktops on one screen.  However, I can see where this is a special 
> case, especially if you need to have two photos visible at the same
> time for comparison or copy/paste work.

Copy and paste could be useful, but comparison of two pictures on two
displays has this problem:  If the displays are not producing an
identical response, and they won't be, you may produce errors in your
picture when your using one monitor and tweaking it against the picture
on the other.  Just how close you can get two monitors to look the same,
for crucial comparisons, depends on the monitors.

This is a long standing problem in television production, and it takes
expensive, and identical model, monitors, and frequent re-alignment,
before you get them producing close enough similar pictures that you
don't get really annoyed about it.  The long standing solution was using
monochrome preview monitors for your cameras, you only have two
variables with them (brightness and contrast), rather than set up and
gain of each colour, plus different phosphors in different monitors.

[tim at localhost ~]$ uname -r

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.  I
read messages from the public lists.

More information about the users mailing list