Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

TatsuTerror

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jan 1, 2008
144
1
I am thoroughly enjoying using the screen real estate that comes with 1920x1200 for web browsing, but when I'm using Aperture or FCP I'd prefer to be in Retina mode. I know I can switch between them from system preferences, but it would be easier just to have a toggle switch. Next to the bluetooth and wireless toggles.

Does apple allow preferences to be changed with an app? If so, anyone else think this is a good idea? Or better, anybody an interested dev?
 

flatfoot

macrumors 65816
Aug 11, 2009
1,010
3
It would be fairly easy to write and AppleScript and put it into the Dock or the AppleScript menu.

Unfortunately, I don't have a MBP Retina at hand to write the script... ;)
 

Simplicated

macrumors 65816
Sep 20, 2008
1,422
254
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
It would be fairly easy to write and AppleScript and put it into the Dock or the AppleScript menu.

Unfortunately, I don't have a MBP Retina at hand to write the script... ;)

Yet thousands of customers would fall for an app that does the same and costs $9.99 on the App Store. :D

BTW OP, great idea. An AppleScript will do though, as the above user mentioned.
 

flatfoot

macrumors 65816
Aug 11, 2009
1,010
3
Yet thousands of customers would fall for an app that does the same and costs $9.99 on the App Store. :D

...

Hm, you're right, but I couldn't justify buying a MBP Retina on the prospect of that towards my wife.

You know what? A friend of mine will receive his MBP Retina in a few weeks. I could get my hands on that and see what I can do.

I hereby declare shotgun on this project! :D

----------

At the risk of shattering my own dreams:

@OP:
Go into Apple Menu->System Preferences->Displays and click the checkbox at the bottom left corner ("Show displays in menu bar").

Under the menu item appearing after that, can you select the different resolutions?
 

macduke

macrumors G5
Jun 27, 2007
12,281
17,574
Central U.S.
I already thought of this idea. I actually went to register as an Apple Developer the other night so I could learn more about this (plus I've been wanting to make an iPhone app for a while and I finally graduated and have the time). But unfortunately something weird happened with my registration and every time I login I get error messages and a note to call Apple but no phone number. Managed to track one down but haven't called yet. Really weird.

I was going to put it as an icon in the menubar that could be selected from a drop down. If it isn't sandboxed I was going to put it on the App Store for a buck. Otherwise I'll just throw it on my website for the world to use along with a PayPal donate button. I also had some other ideas like making keyboard shortcuts, gesture plugins for MagicPrefs, etc to activate it.
 

mkush

macrumors newbie
Aug 24, 2010
24
8
Western North Carolina
I already thought of this idea. I actually went to register as an Apple Developer the other night so I could learn more about this (plus I've been wanting to make an iPhone app for a while and I finally graduated and have the time). But unfortunately something weird happened with my registration and every time I login I get error messages and a note to call Apple but no phone number. Managed to track one down but haven't called yet. Really weird.

I was going to put it as an icon in the menubar that could be selected from a drop down. If it isn't sandboxed I was going to put it on the App Store for a buck. Otherwise I'll just throw it on my website for the world to use along with a PayPal donate button. I also had some other ideas like making keyboard shortcuts, gesture plugins for MagicPrefs, etc to activate it.

Just get SwitchResX. Does exactly what you want and more too, if you want it to. I've got it showing a menu bar icon with only display resolutions listed in it. Lists all of the MBPr "official" resolutions plus unofficial ones, such as native 2880x1800. Boy is that small! It's on sale, today at least, at macupdate.com for $12.75.
 

mkush

macrumors newbie
Aug 24, 2010
24
8
Western North Carolina
Just get SwitchResX. Does exactly what you want and more too, if you want it to. I've got it showing a menu bar icon with only display resolutions listed in it. Lists all of the MBPr "official" resolutions plus unofficial ones, such as native 2880x1800. Boy is that small! It's on sale, today at least, at macupdate.com for $12.75.

I checked, and the sale is good for the next 12 days. It's 25% off the normal price. It may not do all you proposed regarding hotkeys, etc. (maybe it does, I didn't investigate) but it sure makes switching resolutions much quicker. I never cared to do that until this Mac, and now that I care, Apple removes the option from the preferences! How irritating.
 

TheMacBookPro

macrumors 68020
May 9, 2008
2,133
3
@OP:
Go into Apple Menu->System Preferences->Displays and click the checkbox at the bottom left corner ("Show displays in menu bar").

Under the menu item appearing after that, can you select the different resolutions?

I'm not the OP, but there's no show displays in menu bar for me. I'm on ML though.

There are issues with switchresx deleting a very important file and your better off using setresx

http://www.reddit.com/r/apple/related/v7flz/set_your_retina_macbook_pros_resolution_to_its/

That issue was fixed with a recent update. With that said though, I second the SetResX (now renamed Retina DisplayMenu) recommendation. It's is a great alternative and it's free.
 

daleski75

macrumors 68000
Dec 10, 2008
1,907
402
Northampton, UK
I'm not the OP, but there's no show displays in menu bar for me. I'm on ML though.



That issue was fixed with a recent update. With that said though, I second the SetResX (now renamed Retina DisplayMenu) recommendation. It's is a great alternative and it's free.

Free is good and it does the same thing as switchresx so why pay?
 

mkush

macrumors newbie
Aug 24, 2010
24
8
Western North Carolina
Free is good and it does the same thing as switchresx so why pay?

Just tried SetResX / Retina Display Menu (RDM) and I agree, works well and is very simple. Just drag the app to Applications, then set it as a log on item and it will run every time you log on. But now that I already have SwitchResX installed and configured, I decided to leave it. It has many more options, but I pared it down to a really simple config, simpler in fact than RDM. See attached screenshot. I like it because I only see what I care about seeing, not a bunch of options or resolutions I'll never use. I'm sure the developer of RDM could do the same if desired.

Oh, and it does support hot keys too, haven't tried that yet.
 

Attachments

  • Screen.png
    Screen.png
    125.7 KB · Views: 139

Pipper99

macrumors 68040
Aug 14, 2010
3,571
3,073
Fort Worth, TX
@OP:
Go into Apple Menu->System Preferences->Displays and click the checkbox at the bottom left corner ("Show displays in menu bar").

Under the menu item appearing after that, can you select the different resolutions?

unfortunately, this option is gone on the retina MBP. :(
 

zoomcityzoom

macrumors newbie
Feb 28, 2013
2
0
Here's an applescript to toggle between "Best (Retina)" and "Looks like 1680 x 1050" on the MacBook Pro Retina. I call it from a keyboard shortcut with FastScripts. Modify to toggle between "Best (Retina)" and "Looks like 1920 x 1200" by changing click radio button 4 to click radio button 5.

Code:
tell application "System Preferences"
	activate
	set current pane to pane "com.apple.preference.displays"
end tell

tell application "System Events"
	tell process "System Preferences" to tell window "Color LCD"
		click radio button "display" of tab group 1
		--Ensures Resolution preference is "Scaled" to select resolutions
		click radio button "Scaled" of tab group 1
		tell radio group 1 of group 1 of tab group 1
			set isRetinaOptimized to get value of radio button 3
		end tell
		if isRetinaOptimized then
			click radio button 4 of radio group 1 of group 1 of tab group 1
		else
			click radio button 3 of radio group 1 of group 1 of tab group 1
		end if
	end tell
end tell
--tell application "System Preferences"
--	quit
--end tell
 
Last edited:

VirtualRain

macrumors 603
Aug 1, 2008
6,304
116
Vancouver, BC
Sorry to side-track this thread, but I gather from the OP's statements, that you don't get 1:1 pixel mapping in videos and images when you're running a scaled resolution? Seems odd (and a shame) that Apple's API couldn't keep the images and video's at 1:1 regardless of the resolution setting.
 

leman

macrumors P6
Oct 14, 2008
17,009
14,739
Sorry to side-track this thread, but I gather from the OP's statements, that you don't get 1:1 pixel mapping in videos and images when you're running a scaled resolution? Seems odd (and a shame) that Apple's API couldn't keep the images and video's at 1:1 regardless of the resolution setting.

Are you sure you want to have tiny images all over the place? The scaling is there to make sure that the pictures look just like they would have looked on a 'normal' screen. Applications are free to implement whichever scaling they want though.
 

VirtualRain

macrumors 603
Aug 1, 2008
6,304
116
Vancouver, BC
Are you sure you want to have tiny images all over the place? The scaling is there to make sure that the pictures look just like they would have looked on a 'normal' screen. Applications are free to implement whichever scaling they want though.

I know... I believe apps like Aperture and FCP will display your photos and video at 1:1 so that in "Best for Retina" mode your images/video are taking advantage of the full native resolution of the display, allowing you, for example, to see your 1080p video in all its glory while the app chrome is running in retina mode.

What I'm wondering, is if this benefit of viewing your photos and video at their native 1:1 resolution works in Aperture and FCP at scaled screen resolutions, the same way it works at "Best for Retina". I would like to think it does. But the OPs preference to work in these apps only in "Best for Retina" has me concerned that this may noy be he case. But I could be jumping to conclusions about why the OP prefers "Best for Retina" in these apps. I'm hoping someone can confirm one way or the other. I would do it myself, but I'm still waiting to receive my rMBP. :)
 

Ploki

macrumors 601
Jan 21, 2008
4,250
1,510
Sorry to side-track this thread, but I gather from the OP's statements, that you don't get 1:1 pixel mapping in videos and images when you're running a scaled resolution? Seems odd (and a shame) that Apple's API couldn't keep the images and video's at 1:1 regardless of the resolution setting.

It is 1:1, in most optimized apps that deal with image.

Are you sure you want to have tiny images all over the place? The scaling is there to make sure that the pictures look just like they would have looked on a 'normal' screen. Applications are free to implement whichever scaling they want though.

Actually 1080p does look "tiny". :)

I know... I believe apps like Aperture and FCP will display your photos and video at 1:1 so that in "Best for Retina" mode your images/video are taking advantage of the full native resolution of the display, allowing you, for example, to see your 1080p video in all its glory while the app chrome is running in retina mode.

What I'm wondering, is if this benefit of viewing your photos and video at their native 1:1 resolution works in Aperture and FCP at scaled screen resolutions, the same way it works at "Best for Retina". I would like to think it does. But the OPs preference to work in these apps only in "Best for Retina" has me concerned that this may noy be he case. But I could be jumping to conclusions about why the OP prefers "Best for Retina" in these apps. I'm hoping someone can confirm one way or the other. I would do it myself, but I'm still waiting to receive my rMBP. :)
Thats true.

As for the 2nd part... If you use scaled mode, the image is displayed smaller than 1:1. The actual desktop is 3360*2100 or 3840*2400 or whatever scaled resolution, downscaled to 2880*1800, so native 2880*1800 photos actually get displayed smaller at 100% view.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6023/the-nextgen-macbook-pro-with-retina-display-review/6

I know what you are saying though : But Apple made a mistake here. Instead of rendering the *whole* desktop in order to gain workspace, they'd only need to implement the API to scale only GUI elements, meaning you still have a 2880*1800 rendered desktop but with UI elements at lets say 150% instead of 200% size.

Just one possible solution for that.

edit: but I have to stress, while that's theoretically not 1:1, i'm currently 20cm/7" from the screen, and the image looks as sharp in either scaled or 1:1.

Pixels are a very odd way of thinking on something that perceptively doesn't have a resolution, there is a need for a better system at this point.
 
Last edited:

VirtualRain

macrumors 603
Aug 1, 2008
6,304
116
Vancouver, BC
It is 1:1, in most optimized apps that deal with image.



Actually 1080p does look "tiny". :)


Thats true.

As for the 2nd part... If you use scaled mode, the image is displayed smaller than 1:1. The actual desktop is 3360*2100 or 3840*2400 or whatever scaled resolution, downscaled to 2880*1800, so native 2880*1800 photos actually get displayed smaller at 100% view.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6023/the-nextgen-macbook-pro-with-retina-display-review/6

I know what you are saying though : But Apple made a mistake here. Instead of rendering the *whole* desktop in order to gain workspace, they'd only need to implement the API to scale only GUI elements, meaning you still have a 2880*1800 rendered desktop but with UI elements at lets say 150% instead of 200% size.

Just one possible solution for that.

edit: but I have to stress, while that's theoretically not 1:1, i'm currently 20cm/7" from the screen, and the image looks as sharp in either scaled or 1:1.

Pixels are a very odd way of thinking on something that perceptively doesn't have a resolution, there is a need for a better system at this point.

Thanks! So if you prefer the extra real estate of a scaled mode, you're not sacrificing much in the way of noticeable image/video quality when working in Aperture/FCP. That's good because I see myself using the 1680 mode as much as possible on my 13".
 

Ploki

macrumors 601
Jan 21, 2008
4,250
1,510
Thanks! So if you prefer the extra real estate of a scaled mode, you're not sacrificing much in the way of noticeable image/video quality when working in Aperture/FCP. That's good because I see myself using the 1680 mode as much as possible on my 13".

Nope, the perceptive quality is pretty much there. If you don't know what happens when you use "more space" you won't notice degradation in quality. If you do know however you're always left with *that feeling*, although completely illogical.

13" has even higher PPI than 15" so it should be even less noticable.

If you ask me once they up to 260 ppi (native 2880*1800 on the 13" and native 3360*2100) the term "resolution" well become essentially obsolete regarding screen real-estate.

Perhaps it already is and I just don't want to admit it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.