olenberger

I found the following review on the HP F2105 21" monitor. Does this

mean if I have a photo cropped to an aspect ratio matching this

monitor (16:9), I can't fill up the screen (using PhotoShop 6.0)with

an undistorted photo? (I was thinking about getting the HP A1250N PC

and using the video driver that comes with it, if this matters).

Fritz

Review follows:

"I really loved this monitor even thought I returned it. If you are

working in video or anything which reqires a 16:9 ratio I would think

this is the monitor for you. Unfortunately, what I use the monitor for

is mostly internet and graphics and a more traditional monitor would

be better for my needs. With this monitor if you use the traditional

aspect ratio you get black bars on both sides of the screen

(effectively making it a 17 inch monitor) and if you use the 16:9

setting many things will appear streached. The image quality is super

and the cabinet is beautiful. Unfortunately, I am not ready for the

wide screen world just yet."

Both of these are new wide-format printers, the Epson around $1700USD

and the HP cheaper at around $1300USD. The Epson is much bigger and

weighs around 80lbs, and accepts paper up to 17" wide, using pigment-

based inks. The HP accepts 24" wide paper, is lighter-weight, and

uses new HP dye-based inks that are claimed to last 80 years. Dye-

based probably has a larger color gamut. It may be too early, but

has anyone had experience with either of these? The HP sounds like a

better deal. My application is very-high-quality wide-format photos

printed from scanned medium-format tranparancies. Thoughts?