Shallow Thoughts
Akkana's Musings on Open Source, Science, and Nature.
Sat, 15 Nov 2008
Dave and I recently acquired a lovely trinket from a Mac-using friend:
an old 20-inch Apple Cinema Display.
I know what you're thinking (if you're not a Mac user): surely
Akkana's not lustful of Apple's vastly overpriced monitors when
brand-new monitors that size are selling for under $200!
Indeed, I thought that until fairly recently. But there actually
is a reason the Apple Cinema displays cost so much more than seemingly
equivalent monitors -- and it's not the color and shape of the bezel.
The difference is that Apple cinema displays are a technology called
S-IPS, while normal consumer LCD monitors -- those ones you
see at Fry's going for around $200 for a 22-inch 1680x1050 -- are
a technology called TN. (There's a third technology in between the
two called S-PVA, but it's rare.)
The main differences are color range and viewing angle.
The TN monitors can't display full color: they're only
6 bits per channel. They simulate colors outside that range
by cycling very rapidly between two similar colors
(this is called "dithering" but it's not the usual use of the term).
Modern TN monitors are
astoundingly fast, so they can do this dithering faster than
the eye can follow, but many people say they can still see the
color difference. S-IPS monitors show a true 8 bits per color channel.
The viewing angle difference is much easier to see. The published
numbers are similar, something like 160 degrees for TN monitors versus
180 degrees for S-IPS, but that doesn't begin to tell the story.
Align yourself in front of a TN monitor, so the colors look right.
Now stand up, if you're sitting down, or squat down if you're
standing. See how the image suddenly goes all inverse-video,
like a photographic negative only worse? Try that with an S-IPS monitor,
and no matter where you stand, all that happens is that the image
gets a little less bright.
(For those wanting more background, read
TN Film, MVA,
PVA and IPS – Which one's for you?, the articles on
TFT Central,
and the wikipedia
article on LCD technology.)
Now, the comparison isn't entirely one-sided. TN monitors have their
advantages too. They're outrageously inexpensive. They're blindingly
fast -- gamers like them because they don't leave "ghosts" behind
fast-moving images. And they're very power efficient (S-IPS monitors,
are only a little better than a CRT). But clearly, if you spend a lot
of time editing photos and an S-IPS monitor falls into your
possession, it's worth at least trying out.
But how? The old Apple Cinema display has a nonstandard connector,
called ADC, which provides video, power and USB1 all at once.
It turns out the only adaptor from a PC video card with DVI output
(forget about using an older card that supports only VGA) to an ADC
monitor is the $99 adaptor from the Apple store. It comes with a power
brick and USB plug.
Okay, that's a lot for an adaptor, but it's the only game in town,
so off I went to the Apple store, and a very short time later I had
the monitor plugged in to my machine and showing an image. (On Ubuntu
Hardy, simply removing xorg.conf was all I needed, and X automatically
detected the correct resolution. But eventually I put back one section
from my old xorg.conf, the keyboard section that specifies
"XkbOptions" to be "ctrl:nocaps".)
And oh, the image was beautiful. So sharp, clear, bright and colorful.
And I got it working so easily!
Of course, things weren't as good as they seemed (they never are, with
computers, are they?) Over the next few days I collected a list of
things that weren't working quite right:
- The Apple display had no brightness/contrast controls; I got
a pretty bad headache the first day sitting in front of that
full-brightness screen.
- Suspend didn't work. And here when I'd made so much progress
getting suspend to work on my desktop machine!
- While X worked great, the text console didn't.
The brightness problem was the easiest. A little web searching led me
to acdcontrol, a
commandline program to control brightness on Apple monitors.
It turns out that it works via the USB plug of the ADC connector,
which I initially hadn't connected (having not much use for another
USB 1.1 hub). Naturally, Ubuntu's udev/hal setup created the device
in a nonstandard place and with permissions that only worked for root,
so I had to figure out that I needed to edit
/etc/udev/rules.d/20-names.rules and change the hiddev line to read:
KERNEL=="hiddev[0-9]*", NAME="usb/%k", GROUP="video", MODE="0660"
That did the trick, and after that acdcontrol worked beautifully.
On the second problem, I never did figure out why suspending with
the Apple monitor always locked up the machine, either during suspend
or resume. I guess I could live without suspend on a desktop, though I
sure like having it.
The third problem was the killer. Big deal, who needs text consoles,
right? Well, I use them for debugging, but what was more important,
also broken were the grub screen (I could no longer choose
kernels or boot options) and the BIOS screen (not something
I need very often, but when you need it you really need it).
In fact, the text console itself wasn't a problem. It turns out the
problem is that the Apple display won't take a 640x480 signal.
I tried building a kernel with framebuffer enabled, and indeed,
that gave me back my boot messages and text consoles (at 1280x1024),
but still no grub or BIOS screens. It might be possible to hack a grub
that could display at 1280x1024. But never being able to change BIOS
parameters would be a drag.
The problems were mounting up. Some had solutions; some required
further hacking; some didn't have solutions at all. Was this monitor
worth the hassle? But the display was so beautiful ...
That was when Dave discovered TFT
Central's search page -- and we learned that the Dell 2005FPW
uses the exact same Philips tube as the
Apple, and there are lots of them for sale used,.
That sealed it -- Dave took the Apple monitor (he has a Mac, though
he'll need a solution for his Linux box too) and I bought a Dell.
Its image is just as beautiful as the Apple (and the bezel is nicer)
and it works with DVI or VGA, works at resolutions down to 640x480
and even has a powered speaker bar attached.
Maybe it's possible to make an old Apple Cinema display work on a Mac.
But it's way too much work. On a PC, the Dell is a much better bet.
Tags: linux, tech, photo, graphics, monitor, S-IPS, TN, ADC, DVI
[
20:57 Nov 15, 2008
More tech |
permalink to this entry
]
Tue, 02 Sep 2008
I thought it would never happen ... I've finally joined the
Digital SLR world.
Why would it never happen? I enjoyed film SLRs for years ...
from the Olympus OM-1 (great little manual camera) I had as a teenager
to the Nikkormat EL and Nikon FG I used a decade ago. I only stopped
because processing and scanning slides was such a hassle compared
to the ease of uploading digital images. So why not a DSLR?
The problem was that when Nikon went digital, they orphaned all their
old manual-focus lenses. They're still physically compatible (they'll
screw on to the DSLR body), but peeved Nikon DSLR owners inform me
(and camera store clerks agree) that the Nikon cameras won't meter
with the old lens attached.
I don't mind doing my own focusing (manual focusing is one of the
prime advantages of an SLR, not a disadvantage) but having
to guess at the exposure setting too? "Oh, just carry a light meter,"
people say. On a camera that costs over $600? That bothers me.
So I was peeved at Nikon and not about to buy anything from them ...
but meanwhile I had all these lenses, and hated to buy some other
brand where the lenses wouldn't even screw on. So, no DSLR for me ...
Until I was pouring out my lens-mount frustrations during a camera
discussion one night on #gimp and one of the regulars (thanks, Liam!)
said "Well then, why don't you just get an adaptor that lets you use
Nikon MF lenses on a Canon?"
A what? said I.
Sure enough, there are lots of them on Ebay ... search for
canon nikon adaptor or look at
Gadget
Infinity's "lens adaptor" section. You can even (for a little more
money) get a "confirm" lens that lights up the autofocus-confirm
points in the viewfinder to tell you when the camera thinks you're
in focus.
A few months passed (too busy to do camera research) but eventually I
found the time and budget ... and now I have a 5-day-old Canon Rebel
Xsi, which indeed takes excellent photos (correctly metered) through
my old Nikon AI-mount Sigma 70-300 APO zoom macro. And the 18-55 kit
lens (the equivalent of a 29-88 in a 35mm camera) isn't bad either --
a little slow (f/3.5 at the widest) but decently wide at the wide end
(in the years of using pocket digicams I'd forgotten how much nicer
it is to have a true wide-angle lens) and with a nice close focus
for macros at the long end.
Even the autofocus isn't bad -- there are still plenty of times when
I need manual, but the Rebel's autofocus is
much faster and more accurate than any I'd seen on earlier cameras.
It's such a great feeling to use an SLR again. The morning after the
camera arrived, I looked up and saw goldfinches at the feeder just
outside the window. I picked up the camera, switched it on, pointed,
zoomed, focused and snapped. No worries about whether the camera
might have decided to focus on the window, or the window frame, or
the tree, or the bush -- just focus and shoot. What a pleasure!
And the best part: this must be a camera made by geeks,
because when it has the Nikon lens attached ... it says F00!
Tags: photo
[
19:59 Sep 02, 2008
More photo |
permalink to this entry
]
Thu, 25 Aug 2005
I was contacted months ago regarding a
photo
on my web site
asking whether it could be used along with an article on
molting patterns in Dowitchers in
Birding magazine.
Months went by (print magazines are slow) and I wondered if
the plan had been dropped, but last week I heard from the author,
Caleb Putnam, and the article is in the current (July/August) issue!
Yesterday I received a copy of the magazine and a modest payment.
Cool!
Even cooler, the photo is the frontispiece of the article.
The author says he's received many comments about how great a shot
it is for illustrating molt gaps. That's a pull quote if I ever
heard one: "Great shot for illustrating molt gaps."
The article is interesting as well -- I didn't know that molt patterns
could identify the two species of dowitcher. Telling long-billed and
short-billed dowitchers apart has been beyond my modest birding
skills, but perhaps I'll have better luck now. I'll be heading out
to Baylands today at lunch to see what the dowitchers are doing ...
Tags: photo
[
10:49 Aug 25, 2005
More photo |
permalink to this entry
]
Tue, 28 Jun 2005
Some jerk decided it would be funny to throw a lit firecracker
into the dry brush beside the freeway a few blocks away from where
I live, with
predictable
results.
Fortunately the fire department responded incredibly quickly (must
have been less than five minutes from when I heard the bang to
when the fire truck arrived) and they were able to put the fire out
before it spread far.
I hope someone saw whoever threw the firecracker, and got a license
plate.
Tags: photo
[
22:12 Jun 28, 2005
More misc |
permalink to this entry
]
Sun, 04 Jul 2004
Dan's party was last night,
including an group which was giving an informal workshop
on night photography.
The presentation was a little disappointing, just people
showing slides of recent photographs.
No discussion of techniques or interesting ideas for night
photography, things to try out that night.
It was mildly fun for the couple of us who were Linux users
to watch the Windows people fumble with their
JASC slideshow program trying to get it to present photos at a
reasonable size. Whenever I wonder why I bother to keep maintaining
pho,
I look at what Windows and Mac people have to go through to look
at photos and am amazed all over again.
But strangely, before heading off to Marin yesterday, I did some
searching for other linux image viewing programs, to see if they'd
solved the window manager problems I've been wrestling with for pho.
Amazingly, I couldn't find a single free program in Debian that did
what pho does (namely, view a list of images serially, at full size
or screen resolution). I had to search for xv source (not in
Debian,
probably licensing issues), which requires a couple of tweaks to get
it to build on linux, and which has the same window management
issues pho has. I guess I'll keep maintaining it after all!
After dark we trooped up the hill to photograph lights (Richmond
and the Richmond-San Rafael bridge were visible, along with parts
of Marin) and wait for moonrise. I took an SLR and the Minolta,
and wish I'd taken the Olympus -- nearly everyone else had digital
SLRs (Canon) and I wished for something with a decent zoom which
would still give me exposure feedback. It's not as if bay area
skies can support long star-trail exposures anyway. Moonrise was
lovely, a sliver of moon emerging above a thick cloudbank centered
over the San Rafael bridge, and growing into a full-sized moon.
I hope some of the film photos (on old expired PJM multispeed film!)
come out.
Most of the photographers there knew each other from previous
classes (I wasn't clear how many are students versus
instructors) and most of the group spent the hour before moonrise
clustered together taking turns taking the same shot, a person
silhouetted against the lights of Richmond while someone else fired
a flash from behind the person, back toward the camera, giving an
"aura" effect around the silhouette and lighting the nearby grass
a bit. Not really knowing anyone, I hung back and instead worked on
photos of the various photographers silhouetted against the sky
(which may or may not come out; I was shooting from 10 sec to about
3 min, betting on the Marin sky being too bright for longer star
trails, but we'll see. One of the other solo shooters was shooting
10 minute exposures and people kept walking into her frame.)
Dave shot a few Canon digicam images before the sunset light was
completely gone, then the wind got to him and he went back to the
house and didn't wait for moonrise.
I'd wondered about maybe taking one of their regular workshops,
but this outing was a bit like the couple of other photo workshops
I've done: no real instruction or sharing of ideas, basically just
a bunch of people wandering around taking photos. If you have
specific questions or know the instructors already you might be able
to get questions answered, but as a person new to the group, I felt
like I'd probably do just as well just going somewhere on my own and
taking a lot of photos.
It may be that their multi-day pay workshops involve more
instruction, and more feedback the next day on images taken at the
workshop. I'm curious about that; the few photo seminars and
classes I've taken have also promised feedback afterward, but
haven't
had much, if any.
Sometimes I think that the ideal format for a photo workshop is an
online class: give assignments, then people post their photos a few
days or a week later, and everyone discusses them, then you go off
to the next assignment with what you learned based on the feedback.
The important parts are the discussion and the feedback, not being
in the same physical place during the shooting (since not much
instruction seems to take place then, for most participants, and if
it does it seems to be of the type "everybody line up and take
exactly the same photo").
It's hard to do feedback in a several-day workshop at a place like
Death
Valley when people are shooting film and you can't get it developed
quickly enough; a digital camera might be a prerequisite to getting
much out of that sort of workshop.
Tags: photo
[
10:00 Jul 04, 2004
More photo |
permalink to this entry
]