posted
After years of looking at a green screen monitor, I feel your pain. The government is very slow about updating some systems and believe it or not I'm sitting next to a dumb terminal system with a green screen monochrome monitor that I use every day. My personal solution was to purchase the largest laptop screen I could afford, set the font to Arial and the size to 12. Reducing the intensity of the the back light and lowering the contrast a bit also helps. If you are still using a cathode ray tube monitor reducing intensity and contrast will also help but turn on the light in the room as well. Remember, flat screens emit less light and radiation and are easier on the eyes.
I would look at a screen then within half an hour I'd be squinting and rubbing my eyes. I'd then have to look away and not read any small text for a while. Then I'd come back to the computer and find I'd have a lot less time to look at the screen.
I went to the optometrist (sp?) and realised I had Lazy Eye Syndrome. So I was made to wear special glasses to correct my vision.
Since receiving those glasess, which ironically I still wear now, I am able to watch and look at a screen at any different contrast, brightness or intensity levels for at least 3-3.5 hours now
So, my suggestion is go see an optometrist and check your eyes looked at. You may require glasses, if you don't already have them. If you do have them then well, I'm at a loss of words.
posted
I was about to say the same thing, but then I thought it over. If white text on a black background is easier on your eyes, well, I can't advise you differently. It would make you far too unique for any suggestion we could make to apply to your situation.
A flat panel display isn't a bad idea at all, though. A number of features of CRT displays make them hard on the eyes, and flat panels naturally address many of those difficulties. Screen geometry, light intensity, the thickness of translucent material between you and the actual image, all of these play a role.
The most important is probably that pixels in an LCD are fixed in place and the refresh doesn't flicker. It was actually a problem with the old LCD because you could easily see the individual pixels and the response time for a pixel to change color weren't good enough for viewing a moving image. But both are perfect for preventing the most common kind of eye strain that comes from scrutinizing a static image on a CRT. LCDs are naturally better for static images than moving images, CRTs are naturally better for moving images than static ones. When you read or do most other things with a computer, the display is relatively static. Only when playing games or watching anime is it better to have a CRT, and the new generation of LCDs is seriously challenging that (though they still aren't quite there). And only better in the sense that your eye more naturally accepts the input as a moving image, it's still bad for your vision.
One thing I will suggest, get some reading glasses if you aren't severely nearsighted (if you can focus on objects more than a couple of feet from your eyes, you aren't nearsighted enough ). This applies whether you get an LCD or not, and also applies to reading printed material for long periods of time. They don't need to be prescription, though it's a good idea to check with an optometrist if you're having severe problems. But they should make you feel that the image is at the limit of your focusing range, you should need to take them off to focus on anything further than a few feet away.
posted
I was just thinking...would it help to have a program that simulates a 'background' and book held in one's hand, with average light source conditions and object placement factored in? For example...the e-book or whatever you're reading is displayed on a 3D model's page, set in a video game-like atmosphere (almost as if you were holding a hardback in front of you). I know this is possible, just by converting current VG technology to run constantly with the same parameters. Think of an old Myst game, only with near-photorealistic graphics. Come to think of it, the overall graphics load would be less, since there would be no real-time variances to compute...unless you want to include user background options (like a stereotypical "Sherlock Holmes" library complete with fireplace and realistic audio channels, or a beach in Bora Bora with hours of relaxing ocean surf SFX).
Not sure if the physical properties of both CRT and LCD screens would make this concept moot, though. Just an idea I've been kicking around for a while.
Inkwell ------------------ "The difference between a writer and someone who says they want to write is merely the width of a postage stamp." -Anonymous
[This message has been edited by Inkwell (edited May 09, 2006).]
Right-click on the desktop (any blank space will do) and select Properties.
Go to the Appearance tab, then the Effects button.
Check "Use the foloowing methog to smooth edges of screen fonts" and select ClearType from the drop down.
For all OSs, follow Survivor's advice and bump up your refresh rate for CRT (old fashion tube) monitors. You can with LCDs (flat panels) as well, but it's not as important as the screen refresh is done completely differently. For CRTs I recommend a refresh rate of 85 Hz. To get to the refresh rate in Windows:
Select the Settings tab (from above steps), then the Advanced button.
Select the Monitor tab.
Make sure your monitor is selected in the "Monitor type" (if more than one display is used), and then change the refresh rate from the drop down box below.
You can also play with the resolution and color quality. I recommend 1024x768 at 32-bit color for 17" screens, and 1280x1024 at 32-bit color for 19" displays.
If you have MS Office 2000 or greater:
Go to View from the program menu (File, Edit, View, ...) and the Zoom. If Zoom does not appear, click the double down arrows to expand the menu.
Change the "Zoom To" to "Text width," OK.
You can then hover the mouse over the top of the "virtual page" until the cursor changes into two vertical arrows pointing at each other. Click the mouse and the margins between pages disappears, so the text flows easily from one page to the next.
You can also go to View -> Full Screen, to drop all the toolbars and whatnot and ustilize the entire screen for reading.
If you do not have an advanced word processor, such as Microsoft Office Word or Apple iWork Pages, you can download one for free from:
It is available for just about every OS under the sun. The OpenOffice.org (OOo) suite is 100% free, 100% spyware/malware free, 100% nag free, no registration or financial information needed to download, and is fully functional and MS Word compatible (sans some of the very advanced table features). If you use it and like it, they ask that you make a donation to the OOo development fund, and even that is optional.
You cannot get rid of the space between pages and margins in OOo, but it does have an "Optimal" zoom which is decent, and a Full Screen mode. Both accessed from the View menu.
This is how my system is setup. This makes the text large, without sacrificing number of words per page, and easy to read.
posted
What worked for me was purchasing what would turn out to be the best electronic related purchase I've ever made. A new monitor. Most manufacturers make special lines of monitors that are sold through brick & mortar retail channels, and different lines are available elsewhere (i.e., online).
After looking at several models available via brick & mortar, across a varying price range, I couldn't find any that seemed to be "good." I tried an expensive (at the time) 19" LCD, but decided it wasn't good enough for overall use (for text only, it probably would've been great). I did some more research, based on recommended resolution ("max" is irrelevant), dpi and some other CRT factors (dpi isn't useful for LCDs). I wound up with a SyncMaster 950p (bought online) for just under $300, and it is the best monitor I've ever worked with (and I've been in IT since 1989). I spend a lot of time in front of this monitor, and my eyes do not water or get tired like they used to.
A temporary solution in lieu of purchasing a new monitor MIGHT be to increase the vertical refresh rate of your monitor. A lot of eye strain is a direct result of a low vertical refresh rate.
WARNING: Before you try this, find out what your monitor is capable of. Don't do what I did once, and push your monitor too hard... it'll die earlier than it should. Monitors usually have recommended settings, but if you increase the setting a small about (10-20Hz) it should be OK.
If you spend a lot of time in front of your computer, consider upgrading your monitor (and likely video card, which must be capable of producing what your monitor needs).
Another "quick fix" that might help, is to change the minimum font size in your browser. I find sites that use an 8pt font to be irritating, so I usually set the minimum to 10pt or 11pt.
[This message has been edited by pjp (edited May 09, 2006).]
posted
What worked for me (I hate reading from a monitor as well) was getting a laptop. I think that for some reason it's just easier for me to read from the screen when I can find a comfortable place to sit (like a big chair or whatever) and relax. I always hated having to sit at my desk and reading from there because it's probably one of the more uncomfortable places I can think of for me to sit for long amounts of time.
Posts: 107 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you have an older CRT monitor, the refresh rate probably won't go above 75 Hz. And pushing a monitor to its limits will kill them sooner or later. But CRT's die sooner or later anyway.
But I'm serious about the reading glasses. If you can lean back a couple of feet and still focus on your screen, then you're normally too close, and that damages your eyesight.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
). This applies whether you get an LCD or not, and also applies to reading printed material for long periods of time. They don't need to be prescription, though it's a good idea to check with an optometrist if you're having severe problems. But they should make you feel that the image is at the limit of your focusing range, you should need to take them off to focus on anything further than a few feet away.
