Is it stretching the image? I mean, as soon as you switch to 1920 x 1080, the desktop appears smaller. It's in between two black bars on the top and bottom of the screen.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Is there a way to change Macbook Air resolution to match retina display?
- Thread starter bonskovsky
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Okay... you are not understanding how images are represented on screens given a screen resolution.
So, your MBA has a screen resolution of 1440 x 900. If I want to view an HD image that has a resolution of 1920 x 1080 on your MBA the screen needs to scale the image to fit to your screen. So, take 1920 / 1440 and you get 1.3 repeating. That means for your MBA to show you the whole image of the picture it needs 1 pixel on your MBA to represent 1.3 pixels of the image. Then you do this for the other number.
So, now that you understand how screen resolutions scale pixels with it's physicals pixels you need to understand retina. What retina is because there are so many physical pixels in a given area at certain distance, the eye cannot make out the tiny dots that produce colors we see.
Screen resolutions and the ability for the eye to detect the small dots that produce the images we see are two different things.
So, your MBA has a screen resolution of 1440 x 900. If I want to view an HD image that has a resolution of 1920 x 1080 on your MBA the screen needs to scale the image to fit to your screen. So, take 1920 / 1440 and you get 1.3 repeating. That means for your MBA to show you the whole image of the picture it needs 1 pixel on your MBA to represent 1.3 pixels of the image. Then you do this for the other number.
So, now that you understand how screen resolutions scale pixels with it's physicals pixels you need to understand retina. What retina is because there are so many physical pixels in a given area at certain distance, the eye cannot make out the tiny dots that produce colors we see.
Screen resolutions and the ability for the eye to detect the small dots that produce the images we see are two different things.
I think if you asked most people if their eye can see the tiny dots used to make up the colors of an image, most people would tell you that they couldn't see that.
All we care about is standard definition vs. high definition, whether the image is grainy or crisp.
How is it possible that text on a retina display could be sharper than a printed page, when a printed page doesn't have any pixels at all?
All we care about is standard definition vs. high definition, whether the image is grainy or crisp.
How is it possible that text on a retina display could be sharper than a printed page, when a printed page doesn't have any pixels at all?
Sorry to revive this, but printers still print in DPI (dots per inch). They are just much smaller than pixels on a screen, but basically, a printer is still printing a bunch of super tiny pixels. The retina display is as close as you can get in Apple products to reproducing the look of a printed page. Text on the screen isn't sharper than a printed page. It's just that some (possibly most) are able to see the difference between screen printed text and printed text in a book or a magazine.
While this is true to some degree, all eyes are different. Some can see detail better than others. I have 20/15 vision myself and I can make out the pixels on the MacBook I'm using right now sitting a normal distance from it (easily noticeable on round objects like icons and such). My resolution is 1280x800 which makes it slightly higher in resolution than 720p. This is, as you would seem to be implying, a high definition image and is certainly crisp compared to what you would say is standard definition. That said, the difference between the 1280x800 panel of my machine and the 2560x1600 panel on the retina model 13" is drastic. Gone are the usual jaggies and overall "graininess" as you are stating and the higher resolution allows for everything to be "crisp."
You can imagine how "retina works" by imagining a word spelled out by large blocky legos and then spelling out the word with a lot of smaller legos. The text would look "smoother" with the smaller, more fine legos.
Basically retina is achieved by packing more pixels in the same size/resolution. A 13" 1440x900 MBA still has a higher working/desktop resolution than a 13" 1200x800 rMBP but the rMBP has "retina" or smoother images due to more pixels being packed in. You can do what you did on your MBA which is scaling and this will give the MBP the edge of ultra high res at 2,560 x 1,600 at the cost of readability and loss of "retina".
You mention you are a photo editor and want things retina compatible. If you make your things at the resolution you plan to display them in they will always look crisp on that display even if you made it on a display thats smaller.
What you essentially did by using the quickres program is change your monitor resolution and thats it. This gives you more work space at the expense of grainer smaller text. This used to be more popular back in the CRT monitor days because you can change resolutions without funny things happening. When done to a LCD which supports only a native resolution usually things get fuzzy very quickly.
Basically retina is achieved by packing more pixels in the same size/resolution. A 13" 1440x900 MBA still has a higher working/desktop resolution than a 13" 1200x800 rMBP but the rMBP has "retina" or smoother images due to more pixels being packed in. You can do what you did on your MBA which is scaling and this will give the MBP the edge of ultra high res at 2,560 x 1,600 at the cost of readability and loss of "retina".
You mention you are a photo editor and want things retina compatible. If you make your things at the resolution you plan to display them in they will always look crisp on that display even if you made it on a display thats smaller.
What you essentially did by using the quickres program is change your monitor resolution and thats it. This gives you more work space at the expense of grainer smaller text. This used to be more popular back in the CRT monitor days because you can change resolutions without funny things happening. When done to a LCD which supports only a native resolution usually things get fuzzy very quickly.
It almost makes me wonder this. What resolution is real life resolution? What does the human actually see in real life with their natural eyes?
I think the proper question would be what DPI/PPI we see. The eyes have a varying "resolution" since we can move our eyes and our heads and resolution is just a measurement of size while DPI would be something thats closer to the rods and cones in your eyes and what they see.
Yeah the Mbp is hot and heavy and after coming from a Dell I pretty much had PTSD so I went for thin. The skinny.
You do realize the macbook pro with retina display is a actually thinner than the macbook air at it's thickest point? Is it really too heavy? Even the 13inch version?
Well clearly looking back at the WWDC conference I said the statement wrong. "It's about as thing as a macbook air". .1mm - .2mm thicker than an air is just an incredible and to call it chunky is an over exaggeration. But it's pretty obvious now you care more about weight which is fine.
You aren't the only one, I heard that statement quoted wrong before. I highly inspected both devices before I bought it. Having your laptop die on you is a traumatic experience.
After years of indecision, the event made me switch from Windows to Apple platform in a split second.
I couldn't stand for loud fans, short batteries, inferior sound quality, plastic build, heat or heaviness. I swear I will never buy another product with any of those. I have a severe aversion to it.
After years of indecision, the event made me switch from Windows to Apple platform in a split second.
I couldn't stand for loud fans, short batteries, inferior sound quality, plastic build, heat or heaviness. I swear I will never buy another product with any of those. I have a severe aversion to it.
Absolutely. That's why I have been building my own PCs for years. AND also why I now also have a MacBook Air. Never again will I have a unit with a mechanical drive operating in the same room (except occasionally a DVD drive).
Lol, I even liked the idea that I could go without having a disc drive. Really? Who needs those things??
You will always be limited by your actual screen resolution. Scaling up will help a tiny bit, but your actual resolution will always limit you in the end. Viewing distance will not make up for the fact that the one pixel you're viewing cannot properly represent that data that was contained in 4 pixels. Increasing view distance will indeed give you the retina effect of not being able to see your pixels (that's the definition of retina) but your initial resolution will still be the same. It's like the retina display of an iphone vs that of an ipad. They are both retina, but the ipad can show you much more data, because it actually has more pixels.
Since you work with photos, let me put it this way: scaling on a non retina display is just like taking a photo of a detailed high resolution photo, but you're taking that photo with a low megapixel camera. Those low megapixels will always mean you're losing visual information from your initially high resolution image.
You're talking about interpolation and sampling. The up-res would need to interpolate the current display, which means some data is "made up". Then it would have to sample it down to 1440x900 again, probably getting a worse result than if you just left it alone to begin with. The Air screen just isn't that great. The Air itself is fine, but hardly a match for 1080p movies. You probably should have got the retina. It's so close in size I can't believe anyone really notices the difference. I had a 13" Air and now have the 13" retina and I would never go back. It's actually a bit smaller than the Air in width and length.
If you can find...
If you can find an App or PrefPane, that will extend your screen size to a "virtual" screen size, of say 2560 x 1440, then enable HiDPI, on your MacBook which is easy, with a terminal command. You will be able to have double resolution retina graphics on your MacBook Air 11"
You will end up only being able to see 1/4 of the screen at a time (1 corner). But you will have the machine in Retina mode. It will be zoomed up too/tho...
I am going to find an App that does this it's fun. I like the way retina graphics look with 4:1 pixels...
Laters...
If you can find an App or PrefPane, that will extend your screen size to a "virtual" screen size, of say 2560 x 1440, then enable HiDPI, on your MacBook which is easy, with a terminal command. You will be able to have double resolution retina graphics on your MacBook Air 11"
You will end up only being able to see 1/4 of the screen at a time (1 corner). But you will have the machine in Retina mode. It will be zoomed up too/tho...
I am going to find an App that does this it's fun. I like the way retina graphics look with 4:1 pixels...
Laters...
newrez for linux
I found one program that does it. For linux you can use this called newrez
http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/increase-resolution-monitors-limit-newrez-linux/
But it would be nice for Mac, I am going to look for another 10 then move on... cause you can't get retina mode while using Linux as far as I know, maybe there is something out there who knows. Would like to wrap this up.
Like I said before the App that used to do it on Mac was called SuperRes. But we're in the 10.8's now days
There are a couple of ways with windows, 360Desktop does it, but not with "smooth panning"
One thing that pisses me off, is when you use the Accessibility->Zoom feature in System Prefs, it doesn't kick in the hidden Retina Pixel/Data/Bits bummer
Well that's enough on this, I'll have to google myself to death on some other topic. Give it 3 months to 6 months maybe someone will write a hack or come up with a terminal line that changes the
viewport or view or whatever is the exact screen port you have to change to get what you are looking to do. I wouldn't mind doing it too
Laters...
I found one program that does it. For linux you can use this called newrez
http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/increase-resolution-monitors-limit-newrez-linux/
But it would be nice for Mac, I am going to look for another 10 then move on... cause you can't get retina mode while using Linux as far as I know, maybe there is something out there who knows. Would like to wrap this up.
Like I said before the App that used to do it on Mac was called SuperRes. But we're in the 10.8's now days
There are a couple of ways with windows, 360Desktop does it, but not with "smooth panning"
One thing that pisses me off, is when you use the Accessibility->Zoom feature in System Prefs, it doesn't kick in the hidden Retina Pixel/Data/Bits bummer
Well that's enough on this, I'll have to google myself to death on some other topic. Give it 3 months to 6 months maybe someone will write a hack or come up with a terminal line that changes the
viewport or view or whatever is the exact screen port you have to change to get what you are looking to do. I wouldn't mind doing it too
Laters...
Last edited:
I can't tell you how many times I've tested the Macbookd, but I just determined that a 15 inch is way too big and the 13 inch is just a little too chunky.
