Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

27" 2560x1440 Display?

May 26, 2013 3:32 AM

i'm a photoshop novice even though i have used it for many years (for pretty basic stuff), started with 7.0, then cs2 and finally cs4. a couple of months ago i decided to ditch my ancient computer and finally upgrade, went with a 27" hp z1, and decided to also upgrade to cs7 while i was at it, thinking it would absolutely rock on my new 27" 2560x1440 display. well so far i'm hugely disappointed - the ui is absolutely tiny, almost unreadable, and playing around with the font setting (edit > preferences > interface) does nothing. i'm not prepared to adjust my windows ui settings just to use photoshop comfortably given all of my other programs are fine. so is this just life with photoshop and large hi-res displays? or is there a workaround? any help would be greatly appreciated.

 
Replies 1 2 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2013 6:57 AM   in reply to tprothro1

    You appear to need the Photoshop forum

     

    If you go to the Forums Index http://forums.adobe.com/index.jspa

    You will be able to select a forum for the Adobe product you use

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2013 11:30 AM   in reply to tprothro1

    Welcome to the forum.

     

    Unfortunately, as John points out, you are in the Forum Comments Forum.

     

    I will Move your post to the Photoshop General Forum, where you will get assistance.

     

    Good luck,

     

    Hunt

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2013 5:22 PM   in reply to tprothro1

    It's not really an issue with CS6 it’s the way all software is designed whether from Adobe, Apple MS, Corel, ADC, whomever,

     

    As the size of the monitor goes up the size of the Fonts in Menus Toolbars, etc., as it appears on the monitor get smaller as the Size of Monitor goes up. Fonts are based on Relaively fixed numbered pixels as the monitor size goes up the DPI or PPI (number of dots) the become smaller and more Compact.  When I was using a 15" CRT monitor years ago100% showed very large to show the same size on the 17" Power Book I have now, in word, I have to set zoom level to 292% percent.

    No software Company or even Font maker takes into consideration  the smaller pixels size of monitors.

     

    Although 27" monitors are for great Graphics They are not the best reading menus and toolbars.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,456 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2013 2:24 PM   in reply to tprothro1

    There is some configurability in Photoshop for making many of the UI elements a little bit larger.

     

    InterfacePreferences.png

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2013 2:55 PM   in reply to tprothro1


    tprothro1 wrote:

     

    playing around with the font setting (edit > preferences > interface) does nothing.

     

     

    Are you relaunching Ps to enable the change? Something is wrong if you are and it literally does nothing.

     

    Here's what I get for the 3 sizes, and "Large" should be adequate on your 109 ppi display.

     

    small.png

     

    medium.png

     

    large.png

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Trevor Dennis
    5,858 posts
    May 24, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2013 3:59 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    How does the Retina Display support update work, and was it even available for Windows users? This link appears to say Mac users only if I am reading it right:

     

    http://blogs.adobe.com/jkost/2013/01/retina-display-support-and-photos hop-cs6.html

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2013 4:06 PM   in reply to tprothro1

    tprothro1 wrote:

     

    …are you saying i need to put this post in each adobe forum category, photoshop, illustrator, indesign, etc., etc. ?

     

    There is a Creative Suites forum. 

     

    This Forum Comments forum here is to comment (mostly gripe) about how the forums work or not—not discuss Adobe products.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 26, 2013 4:08 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    My sincere thanks to Noel for his clear-interface screen shots!  

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 12:21 AM   in reply to tprothro1

    tprothro1 wrote:

     

    …it seems adobe didn't  prepare for, or foresee, the popularity of large, hi-res displays

     

    Agree with you 100%, but I doubt this development could have been foreseen at the time Adobe started development of Photoshop 13.x, which was a relatively long time ago.

     

    We all hope that this will be rectified in the subscription (CC Photoshop 14.x) due to be released on the 17th of next month, or in a later update available to subscription licensees.  Remember we are all users like you; you're not addressing Adobe here.

     

    tprothro1 wrote:

     

    …here's a screen grab of how ps looks on my display, with text set to the largest ("large") setting…

     

    Holy cow!  No wonder you're complaining.  I feel for you. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 3:39 AM   in reply to tprothro1

    tprothro1 wrote:

     

    i think a lot of (most?) software developers respond fairly quickly…

     

    You underestimate the elephantine, unresponsive nature of the Adobe bureaucracy, I'm afraid.  Adobe has been bloating exponentially, especially after the Macromedia merger.  Adobe is not the company it used to be.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,456 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 7:15 AM   in reply to tprothro1

    I'm sorry, but I can't accept your premise that there is something egregiously wrong with the product, just because one can't set it to display its UI in 30 point fonts..

     

    I happen to use two 1600 x 1200 monitors at 100 ppi.  I choose to minimize the UI font size (as well as to minimize all the OS UI chrome settings as well),  That's a 3200 x 1200 desktop on about a 34" diagonal.

     

    PsDesktopLayout2.jpg

     

    Frankly I find the UI perfectly readable at this size, which I imagine is very nearly the same as what you're seeing (since I haven't switched to the larger font size setting).  I don't even have good eyes.

     

    Thing is, every pixel is discretely rendered.  It's utterly crisp and sharp, which is of course necessary to get every last bit of utility out of all those desktop pixels.  Photoshop is complex and can use all the screen space you can give it.  If I had a third monitor there are more panels I'd choose to display full-time.  We can't afford to waste space on larger UI elements.

     

    Your polar opposite opinion of whether your Photoshop display is acceptable with the slightly larger UI font setting on a slightly higher density display tends to make me wonder whether you're possibly getting an unclear rendition of your desktop pixels.

     

    Any chance you could take a macro photo of a part of the UI you feel is hard to read, and post it here?  Perhaps there is something that can be set or changed that might help with the quality of what you're seeing.

     

    This is the kind of sharpness you should be experiencing:

     

    ScreenMacro.jpg

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 2:16 PM   in reply to station_two

    station_two wrote:

     

    tprothro1 wrote:

     

    …it seems adobe didn't  prepare for, or foresee, the popularity of large, hi-res displays

     

    Agree with you 100%, but I doubt this development could have been foreseen at the time Adobe started development of Photoshop 13.x, which was a relatively long time ago.

     

    Although I disagree that there actually is a problem with Photoshop's UI fonts (especially the "Large") on a 27" 2560 x 1440 display (that's a density of 109 ppi), such displays have been available for quite a while now. For example, Dell and Apple were providing them three years ago.

     

     

     

    station_two wrote:

     

    We all hope that this will be rectified in the subscription (CC Photoshop 14.x) due to be released on the 17th of next month, or in a later update available to subscription licensees.

     

    "We all"? Where are you getting that idea from?

     

    And how will a CC update rectify anything for you when you've repeatedly protested that you won't be subscribing to CC?

     

     

     

    station_two wrote:

    tprothro1 wrote:

     

    …here's a screen grab of how ps looks on my display, with text set to the largest ("large") setting…

     

    Holy cow!  No wonder you're complaining.  I feel for you. 

     

    That screenshot has been reduced to about 3/4 size with nearest neighbour resampling. Nobody could work with an interface that really looked like that.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 7:46 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    tprothro1,

     

    I am surprised that you consider even the "Large" size UI font to be minuscule on your 109 ppi display.

     

    Why did you post considerably downscaled and horribly resampled "full screen" grabs as an illustration of the interface which you find uncomfortable? Why not the real thing?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 9:20 AM   in reply to tprothro1

    I have a 27" 2560x1440 NEC display.  I found everything a little too small to read comfortably and have increased the Windows text size so that text is generally comfortable (now a whopping 119%).  However, Photoshop, with even its text set to "Large", is still a bit small. Both the size of the tool icons and text. An "Extra Large" setting would be nice.  Perhaps in a future CC update.... 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,456 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 10:19 AM   in reply to nickna12

    I can appreciate the difference in price, but the answer to those who find the higher density displays not to their liking seems to be to get one of the lower ppi 30" monitors at 2560 x 1600.

     

    I was ready to buy one of the new Dell U3013 models, to keep my current 100 ppi, but then I found out they hadn't really implemented the uniformity calibration correction properly and so I'm still in a holding pattern.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 9:35 AM   in reply to tprothro1

    MicroSoft updated Office 2010 and 2011 to use Retina type displays last year.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,456 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 10:16 AM   in reply to Phillip Jones

    Phillip Jones wrote:

     

    MicroSoft updated Office 2010 and 2011 to use Retina type displays last year.

     

    As did Adobe update Photoshop.  Your point?

     

    It doesn't make any sense to make the UI elements so big that there's no room left for the work.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 1:48 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Have been following this issue?  Obviously you have great eye sight (can see Mosquito wings a mile away). Obviosly you don't understand that the Monitor size goes up the apparent size of the fonts goes down.

     

    If the fellow has a 30" screen if Fonts were increased 24 pt would look the same as 10 point on a 17" screen.

     

    Also with the advent of Retina Apps that are not updated, They look exacly like the illustration give in the thread. 

     

    If you want to see what Retina looks like borrow someone's Retina equipped PowerBook or iPad.  Makes Print look better than printed page.  Applications that can't deal with retina look to put it mildly like a bad Fax from old type fax machine or a Poorly scanned document.

     

    As I stated before the size issue has more to do with ethe way fonts are designed and not necessarily applications. they use relatively same number of points. but as screen size goes up the size of those points get smaller and smaller.

     

    Just wait until you have to start wearing glasses and have to squint at the screen to see what the heck is going on.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,456 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 2:00 PM   in reply to Phillip Jones

    Hi Phillip,

     

    We are not discussing a "retina issue".  Adobe has already updated Photoshop to handle 200+ ppi retina displays.  That happened with 13.0.1 and 13.1.0 if I recall correctly.  As has been discussed, the captured image above is NOT at 100% original size.

     

    I don't have great eyes.  I have astigmatism and I DO wear glasses, and though I have had a special pair made just for computer use, I don't see everything pin sharp.  BUT, even with the smallest font setting everything is more than plain and clear enough to use Photoshop.

     

    I assure you I do understand ppi, display sizes, and whatnot - quite likely as well as or better than you.

     

    What we are discussing is whether Adobe's UI adjustments are sufficient, and whether making them any larger would get into the territory of "the operation was a success but the patient died".

     

    Photoshop is all about getting a HUGE amount of information on the screen.  It's a PROFESSIONAL application, not a "big button" quick photo editor.  It already has tons of features like self-collapsing panels to overcome problems with there not being enough screen space to work.  If they made the font sizes MUCH larger, I can imagine people being upset that now the panels can't be fully displayed on the available screen space.  Where's the benefit in that?

     

    I'm sorry to be blunt, but rather than getting all upset with Adobe for not making the UI elements of their professional software package big enough, if you are so visually challenged that even Adobe's "Large" setting is just too small, perhaps it's time to re-evaluate the decision to buy a high-ppi monitor, and possibly invest in even better computer hardware to help compensate.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Trevor Dennis
    5,858 posts
    May 24, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 2:40 PM   in reply to tprothro1

    After you've opened the Reply window, the 'Quote' icon is on the right end of the options bar above that window.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 4:01 PM   in reply to tprothro1

    tprothro1, I'm with you on this issue.  An optional Extra Large UI font size would be nice.

     

    Whether Adobe listens is extremely doubtful, as they've never been fazed by any criticism of any part of their UI at any given time in their release history.

     

    What's interesting is the time, effort and zeal spent by others with a different point of view criticizing requests by other users  for an option that can't possibly impact their workflow or the performance of an application on their machines.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 4:34 PM   in reply to station_two

    station_two wrote:

     

    tprothro1, I'm with you on this issue.  An optional Extra Large UI font size would be nice.

     

    Whether Adobe listens is extremely doubtful, as they've never been fazed by any criticism of any part of their UI at any given time in their release history.

     

    What's interesting is the time, effort and zeal spent by others with a different point of view criticizing requests by other users  for an option that can't possibly impact their workflow or the performance of an application on their machines.

    i feel same way as well, and exactly same issue with AUDITION UI - it used to be nice in AA1.5 (easy to read fonts, and change color of backround, went down to tube with AA3 .) Sometimes it feels like ADOBE owns shares in VIEWSONIC (or similar) and they work together to keep economy going - USER is not important.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,456 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 5:28 PM   in reply to station_two

    station_two wrote:

     


    What's interesting is the time, effort and zeal spent by others with a different point of view criticizing requests by other users  for an option that can't possibly impact their workflow or the performance of an application on their machines.

     

    That's a fair point.  I didn't start out arguing so much against a new option as trying to understand why something I feel the smallest choice of is acceptable, while others don't feel the largest of works well enough.  I can certainly understand some of the difference being that my display is 100 ppi vs. 109 ppi, and I also know that there are at least some monitors with more than 109ppi (seems to me there was a Dell model in the 120 range).

     

    I have nothing against Adobe making an "Extra Large" option available, assuming they can spare the time from working on bona fide features and don't risk screwing something else up in the process.  I'm a little surprised they didn't take the time to do that when they added Retina support.  They had to touch pretty much all the same things in the process.

     

    I admit to having a general pet peeve against making everything bigger (and dumbing it down - e.g., the way Windows is going).  I don't want my computing experience to be like watching a TV.  But then I'm a dyed-in-the-wool computer geek who likes stuff like this:

     

    ScreenGrab_05_27_2013_202802.png

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 5:37 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Noel Carboni wrote:

     

    …But then I'm a dyed-in-the-wool computer geek who likes stuff like this…

     

    I know that well, Noel.  I don't see how that is humanly possible just as I don't understand how troubled, young kids can go for the "Gothic look" in their appearance, but I wouldn't object to their right to do it, nor do I object to your wanting to keep your abominable black and green geek screen. 

     

    Nevertheless, your recent screen shots showing Photoshop's light interface are much, much appreciated. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 5:38 PM   in reply to tprothro1

    tprothro1 wrote:

     

    conroy wrote:

     

    tprothro1,

     

    I am surprised that you consider even the "Large" size UI font to be minuscule on your 109 ppi display.

     

    Why did you post considerably downscaled and horribly resampled "full screen" grabs as an illustration of the interface which you find uncomfortable? Why not the real thing?

     

    what size display are you using? perhaps this is a windows issue? i'm using windows 8/64, it appears that you're using a mac? also, what's the best way to post a screen grab that reflects what i'm talking about, what you feel needs to be shown? i just posted a few more but they really don't seem to tell much of a different story compared to my previous, size-reduced, screen grabs....

     

     

    My display is 85 ppi and I use Photoshop's "Small" UI font. The "Large" font would be more than adequate for me on a 109 ppi display but we all have different vision, so I have no trouble accepting that you and some other people find "Large" to be not large enough.

     

    Your newest screenshots, the real size ones, are perfect. The earlier 75% (nearest neighbour resampled) ones were quite useless - they completely mangled the fonts in the UIs in addition to simply not being the real size. I'm seriously shocked that you say: "[...] they really don't seem to tell much of a different story compared to my previous, size-reduced, screen grabs....".

     

    Regarding InDesign on your large display - it's interface is horribly fuzzy, whereas Photoshop and Illustrator are crisp. Do you see that?

     

    The InDesign UI is drawn beautifully crisply on "smaller" displays, so it appears that InDesign is bilinearly resampling its interface to make it larger but fuzzy on your display. Not a pleasant sight.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,456 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 5:39 PM   in reply to station_two

    station_two wrote:

     


    Nevertheless, your recent screen shots showing Photoshop's light interface are much, much appreciated. 

     

    I appreciate the kudos, but you should realize it's impossible for the various preferences dialogs to be made any color but "black text on white background", so I really can't take credit.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 5:41 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Rats!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,456 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 5:46 PM   in reply to conroy

    conroy wrote:

     

    The InDesign UI is drawn beautifully crisply on "smaller" displays, so it appears that InDesign is bilinearly resampling its interface to make it larger but fuzzy on your display. Not a pleasant sight.

     

    That can happen if Windows is set to display its UI at 150%.

     

    ScreenSize.png

     

    But your comment about that not being noted before leads me once again back to the question: Is what tprothro1 is seeing really as crisp as it ought to be?

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 27, 2013 5:52 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    tprothro1's Photoshop and Illustrator UIs are being drawn perfectly and only InDesign looks upscaled with bilinear resampling. Wouldn't the system adjustment you show be similarly affecting all three apps?

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 Previous Next
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points