But, in the absence of such a display, or especially in the absence of video drivers to support it on OS X, I wanted to add to the discussion that stacking displays is certainly a helpful option. I know it makes my life a heck of a lot easier than when I was doing so much scrolling up and down.
Tim
On Wednesday, August 20, 2003, at 10:18 PM, Robert Patterson Finale wrote:
Of course, to each his own. But the disruption of that 1.5 inches (for me) is simply not the same as no disruption at all. No disruption at all is like paper: completely natural and effortless. I tried all those other kinds of ways of skinning the cat, but nothing matches the real thing.
I dare you to try it.
-----Original Message----- From: Tim Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2003 03:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Finale] screen rotation
I've been out of the loop for the last couple of days, and am really surprised by this big discussion of screen rotation--and have to say I agree with the initial response of "what does that have to do with anything?"
True, 4x3 monitors are not great for working on tall scores, and a
portrait deal works better. But there are other ways of getting at
that. In my studio, I use one 1600x1200 display positioned just above
another at the same resolution, both with pretty much the same screen
dimensions. There is about an inch-and-a-half between the bottom edge
of the top screen and the top edge of the bottom screen, which is not
an issue at all. What I get is a single desktop that is 3200 pixels
tall by 2400 wide. Of course, I can view most tall scores at 100% in
scroll view. Even with the displays set to the next resolution down, I
can do most of a tall score at 100%, or the whole score at 84%.
(In case you are trying to picture how this works, I have a CRT on top sitting on the monitor shelf of my workstation furniture, and an Apple LCD sitting at desk level. The top of the LCD come just in front of the bottom of the CRT, and the screens line up beautifully).
Screen rotation isn't the be-all solution, as there are other ways of skinning the same cat.
Tim
On Tuesday, August 19, 2003, at 07:28 PM, Robert Patterson Finale wrote:
Many have answered this question quite well. It seems (in my defensive
state before discovering ATI Radeon 9800 Pro VERSAVISION mumbo jumbo)
I may have misinterpreted ignorance as skepticism in at least some
cases, so sorry if so. Email is extremely bad at nuance.
To help illustrate screen rotation, I've put up a couple of photos of my setup. Reducing it to a 3x5 72 dpi photo saps a great deal of its impact. You probably won't think these photos are at all x-rated. But for the interested...
http://robertgpatterson.com/techtipsfaq.html#anchor#MPRT.5
One additional benefit of the monitor arms is that I can float the
monitors in front of me without blocking access to the midi keyboard.
I will admit that when the big 24" is in portrait mode, being able to
see what I'm playing on the midi keyboard requires contortions. I
could move the keyboard forward, but then I would have no writing area
in front of me.
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
