Opinions on Aspect Ratio
vining
Posts: 4,368
This is a general question to get other folks opinions on the 2 available TP aspect ratios. I personal don't like the 16 x 9 and prefer the 4 x 3. Maybe if we were to watch movies on it 16 x 9 would be nice but that's not it's purpose. To me the main andvantage TPs have over other devices is their ability rapidly display and update lists (movie, music etc) and the 16 x 9 does a poor job at that. Sure we could make shorter lists and change and modify code to display something other than multiples of ten, but that's a nice number. Plus most TP designs made to fit 4 x 3 just don't work on 16 x 9, you just can't shorten and stretch some designs enough to make them work, so on a mixed system you have to do double the graphics. On the larger 16 x 9 displays, sure they're big enough to make lists or matrixs work but the smaller 5, 7 & 10 are a pain in the a$$.
I personally would like to see everything 4 x 3 and I think the engineers and designers at AMX just got caught up in the 16 x 9 TV HD craze. I see no real advantage to widescreen TPs, only disadvantages.
What's every one elses thoughts? Am I just missing something?
I personally would like to see everything 4 x 3 and I think the engineers and designers at AMX just got caught up in the 16 x 9 TV HD craze. I see no real advantage to widescreen TPs, only disadvantages.
What's every one elses thoughts? Am I just missing something?
0
Comments
In my opinion the 1200VG is overall the most useful panel. For installations with big switches and video walls, the 1700VG has its uses in terms of additional space. And for hand-held units the MVP-8400 is the way to go in spite of its more obvious faults.
We use both 4:3 (CV6) & 16:9 (CV7) touch panels in our lecture theatres. I initially had the same reaction when the CV6 was discontinued. However, I have since adjusted to the new ratio quite happily. Knowing that I would really have no choice, I opted to see the CV7 as a wider version (rather than a shorter version) of the CV6. Given that the resolution is also greater in each direction, I haven't had to crop any designs.
Admittedly, our TP designs are not menu-driven, so I can't comment on that one.
Roger McLean
I have yet to use a wide screen panel for displaying 16x9 media. I never felt that touch panels were the best viewing device; they are controllers. At most, I use them for a customer to "preview" program material or for cameras.
I prefer the 4:3 for a user interface but I?m sure the wide screen glass is cheaper since that?s the trend these days. I just hope computer monitors don?t follow along; I can?t get enough lines of code on the screen as it is.
Orange!
Heh, you are right, it's not that much of a difference really, but perception-wise it seems to make one, at least to me. For strictly aesthetic reasons, I just feel like I have more room to spread things out nicely and put more buttons in without cramming them. For example, if you have a strip along the bottom of the panel to select system modes, or choose a source device, you can get one or two more buttons across a wide screen without shrinking them or cramming them, or resorting to a second row. It just might be the Cool-Aid talking though
Sry, I was using the G3 AXD-MCP panel before the CV7 so to me there is more room. Didn't mean to freak you out too much.
I tend to think of it as 640x480 vs. 800x480. Guess it's a glass with 50% of it's capacity filled with water type question. Is the glass half empty or half full? (My smart *** answer is usually: "The glass is full, half with water and half with air." :P)
I tend to use the extra space on the 16x9 format for additional quick access buttons if we have both formats in a job. I bill it as a feature, not a flaw. If you tell the customer that the extra width is great for quick access features, they'll be happy. If you tell them that they loose space, they won't be happy.
Jeff
It kind of reminds me of a semi-famous hot dog chain here in the Midwest called Portillos. I read once that the owner D.ick Portillo said the secret to his success was to use smaller hot dog buns than his competitors so that the hot dog stuck out of both ends. This way people thought they were getting a bigger hot dog when in fact all they were getting was a smaller bun. I don?t know if that?s just legend or true but that?s the way I feel about the wide screen. We?re just getting a smaller bun.
If you guys are comparing G3 panels to G4 then that?s a different story and I?ll shut up, take a swig of the orange myself and try not to freak out.
Joe - you always have a way to put a little grin / smirk / smile on my face with either you wittiness or your technical insight. Thanks!
While I'm writing though - I'll put in my two cents - I prefer the 4x3 screens. I haven't had a chance to work with a 17" (yet) and have only worked with the CV5,7, and 10 - don't care for any of them - especially the 5" >:|
LOL, OMGosh Joe, offendded never even crossed my mind( I am Canuck, its almost impossible to offend us
Okay as for the 16:9 4:3 debate. Here is a big design nightmare that we are now facing at work. To maintain the same image height for clients we now have a much longer screen. Maybe not a huge issue for a home but in a classroom where the profs. want the capability to use the blackboard, whiteboard, overhead and proj. all at the same time it's becomes a big problem with space.