How does it work?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Emil889, Jul 19, 2012.

  1. Emil889 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2012
    #1
    I want to know is how the resolution-scaling works on the new rMBP.

    Have i got everything correct if i say that the least resource-demanding setting is to use it as it's native resolution with the help of some app that sets the resolution to 2880x1800? With that setting the OS does not need to scale anything and it should be alot easier for the GPU to handle, right?

    Also, every picture/graphic should look perfect since nothing get's scaled up?

    I don't really bother having everything very tiny since i'll mostly will be working with editing photos.

    The display is always at it's native resolution, it's just how the OS scale and handle different GUI-objects etc, right?
     
  2. Emil889 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2012
    #2
    Anyone with a retina macbook pro that can comfirm this?

    I really want to know how Adobe Photoshop/Indesign/Illustrator looks with the screen at it's native resolution, i dont think there should be any issues and everythink should look perfect since no scaling is done by OS?
     
  3. ryane67 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    #3
    I'd think that would be the best option if you don't mind tiny text or icons.
     
  4. pgiguere1 macrumors 68020

    pgiguere1

    Joined:
    May 28, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    #4
    There is not a big difference between 1440x900 (HiDPI) and 2880x1800 since both output the same number of pixels. The HiDPI (Best for Retina) will however use higher-resolution bitmaps for the UI taking more RAM/VRAM but I doubt this will really make a difference since the number of pixels is the same and there is no scaling process.

    The real difference is when you go to 1680x1050 (HiDPI) or 1920x1200 (HiDPI) since those output at higher resolutions before they are downscaled. 3360x2100 and 3840x2400, respectively. I don't know if the downscaling process takes significant resources, I think it's mostly the number of pixels being outputed that matters.
     
  5. Emil889 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2012
    #5
    What about pictures in PS/Camera Raw etc when using native resolution? You should not experience any pixelated images since no salong is done?
     
  6. WarrenFields Guest

    #6
    The UI in Photoshop and the other Adobe applications looks fine at the native resolution. Lots of work area too :D That said Photoshop does sometimes have problems displaying an image properly and you cannot accurately judge the quality of the image you are working on without working at the actual pixels zoom level or messing around with other zoom levels. I haven't experienced this running at native res though, so it might only be a problem when you have the display running in scaled mode. But Photoshop should be updated soon, dunno about the other apps.
     
  7. stevelam macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2010
    #7
    unless you're fine with extremely tiny text and UI elements, using 2880 natively on a 15" screen is just silly.
     
  8. Emil889 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2012
    #8
    Untill adobe makes some update on their software i think it seems like a pretty good solution. When you are working with photos it really doesnt matter to me if the UI are tiny. What matters to me is how images are rendered.

    Of course the best option is to use the "best for retina" choice but since photoshop is not updated it looks kind of ugly today if you should believe the reports coming from users who have tried.

    WarrenFields, thanks for the report! Sounds promising :)
     
  9. ryane67 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    #9
    also if you're using the best for retina, with photoshop not updated, is OSX scaling the pixels of the image? so if photoshop says you're displaying at 100% zoom, on a normal monitor it would be a 1:1 pixel map, but on the retina it's not.. correct it's actually scaling? If so I would not want to work on images in photoshop unless I was in 2880x1800 native.
     
  10. Emil889 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2012
    #10
    That's how i think it is but i'm not sure. Kind of that i wanted to know starting this thread.

    So, does anyone know the answer to the qoute above? :)
     
  11. WarrenFields Guest

    #11
    If you're running the display in the "Best" scaled mode, Photoshop thinks it a has 1440x900 resolutions screen to work with. So each pixel of an image that Photoshop draws is pixel doubled, meaning that one pixel shown on screen is really 4 pixels on the Retina display. And that's what can make images look weird in zoom levels other than actual pixels. I've seen this happen a few times when working in Photoshop in the scaled modes. I use the computer at native res now and problem solved.

    And NP :)
     
  12. ryane67 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    #12
    Great thanks, I'll plan to use photoshop in 2880x1800 once my rMBP arrives :)
     
  13. WarrenFields Guest

    #13
    Yeah I love working like that. It's great.
     
  14. Emil889 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2012
    #14
    Ah great, many thanks for that report. That's everything i wanted to know! :)
     
  15. WarrenFields Guest

    #15
    You're welcome! I was curious too so I looked it up a while ago haha :)
     
  16. Emil889 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2012
    #16
    Yeah then the update from adobe isn't so critical as i first thought. It's almost like it's a plus that it looks great in native resolution because you get alot of space when working with images and that's always a good thing.

    Good UI scaling enabled photoshop would be great but i can sure wait for that update in this case.
     
  17. WarrenFields Guest

    #17
    Yupp, it's definitively usable for now and I can wait for the update to be released whenever.
     

Share This Page