Dell E228WFP 22" Widescreen (16:10) Flat Panel Monitor review

[tgies]

Do not buy it.

If a digital signal is provided (i.e. DVI), the monitor itself will scale the image to fill the whole LCD, with no regard for the original aspect ratio of the image whatsoever. So, for example, if you attempt to view a 4:3 image (note that this is the aspect ratio everything not specifically designed for widescreen display uses, so if you want to watch videos or play video games in full-screen mode, you are screwed) or even a widescreen 16:9 image (this monitor has a 16:10 aspect ratio), it will be severely distorted. Even 16:10 images which are smaller than the native display resolution will be resized, reducing their clarity significantly.

To illustrate, you basically go from something like this (click and then click again on the next page for actual size):

to something like this (not to scale because lj scrapbook sucks; again, click for big):

Most decently-designed LCD monitors "letterbox" or otherwise frame images having dimensions other than the monitor's native resolution, providing a scaling mode as an optional feature. This one does not offer that letterboxing mode, and thus there is no way to view an image which is not 1680 by 1050 pixels in size without the image being either distorted (stretched) or blurred (haphazardly upscaled/resampled). This is pretty crappy.

It seems to me that if Dell is going to add an extra image processing stage within the monitor itself which is going to significantly affect any information one sends to it, it should be possible to turn this processing off, but here it is not. I mean, come on, the scaling is an extra processing step. It would be easier for the monitor to simply display the exact image it is receiving, but it does not. This is a little like a CD player forcibly applying a certain equalization curve every time you put a classical music CD in.

In addition, the scaling algorithm employed looks really bad — it's nearest-neighbor resampling followed by some kind of horrible half-hearted trashy-integer-math blur. Not remotely pleasant to look at. I tried to watch TV on my computer and I almost threw up.

This is a really annoying design flaw, and for pretty much every user it is going to rear its ugly head enough to be a total dealbreaker. The only way I can see anyone not minding this is if they were unable to perceive the distortion caused by screwing with the aspect ratio like that. To be fair, I know a few people like that. Maybe they'll buy this crap off me :O?

I am going to fix up my old Trinitron and use that instead screw you guys >:(

Comments

[tgies.livejournal.com]

Ain't no such thing as burn-in any more, though, and there never was on LCDs.

I haven't seen any LCD scaling I didn't kinda hate D:

The least offensive scaling would probably be some kind of bilinear or bicubic interpolation but even assuming you can somehow spare the processing power (an image processing thing embedded in a monitor is likely not going to be able to pull this off.) that is just going to not look too good anyway :/!

pixels!!!!

To be honest just straight nearest-neighbor scaling would look better to me than that horrible blur mess they do

[tgies.livejournal.com]

oh yeah and in addition to there being no such thing as "burn-in" in "lcds" and in "modern display" there's no such thing as "burn-in" in "black bars"

else it would be bad to ever turn your tv off

[tgies.livejournal.com]

Which is why you don't make a 19" monitor at 14720x11040 pixels.

Or alternately: Which is why LCDs are a nice idea that winds up a little problematic in practice if you ever want to change the format of the display even slightly.