Give me pixel-for-pixel or give me death!

Question

Level 4

1,247 points

Give me pixel-for-pixel or give me death!

On Apple's product web pages for the Macbbok Pro with Retina Display we see examples of Aperture and Final Cut Pro X showing pixe;-for-pixel reditions of a high resolution photograph and an HD (1920x1080) video in the view window of the editor. This is marvelous. I'm told Diablo III is 'retina ready' and has an option to select 2880x1800 graphics and it looks glorious. This too is marvelous. In the System Preferences/Display panel, there are options to scale on the screen to make things look bigger and too show more apparent real estate than the standard 1440x900 screen. That's nice. But there's also the Retina option which when selected scales every application window up from 1440x900 to 2880x1800 and is the system default I assume. That's okay.

But when I display a photo in 'actual size', I want it to be actual size within the physical screen limit of 2880x1800, I don't want it pixel-doubled autiomatically. This should apply for example when I view a photo in Preview When I run a video, in actual size, I want to see it pixel-for-pixel with the limits of the physical screen (2880x1800). This should apply at least when I use Quicktime to view it.

Can anyone confirm that Apple programs other than Aperture and Final Cut Pro show me actual size photos and video within the physical limits of the screen? It may not work now in Lion, but can any developer test in Mountain Lion beta and report back? Even if it doesn't work in Mountain Lion beta, do you know it will work in the final release or can you log it as a problem then?

Thanks so much. If Apple can't show us pixel-for-pixel pretty much everywhere (without any scaling when scaling is not requested) photos and video as advertized now and on a machine currently selling, then I think I'll end it all, hence my topic title. Forget saving the planet, plerase someone save us.

iMac 27, Mac OS X (10.7), iPod touch 4G, iPhone 4S, Powerbook

Posted on Jun 14, 2012 10:23 AM

Reply

Answer 1

Rick Lang Author

Level 4

1,247 points

Jun 14, 2012 10:46 AM in response to Rick Lang

If I create an image that I define as 1920x1080 (for example in Photoshop) and I capture a display of the image, I want to be able to work with the actual size of the image, say for example when I post it FCP X 10.0.5.

As a supllementary question, if I use software to capture a photo or video window contents, will it all capture the true original pixel-for-pixel image size?

Reply

Answer 2

Jun 16, 2012 11:32 AM in response to Rick Lang

Hi Rick, I wondered the same thing. What does a 1920x1080 72dpi Photoshop document look on the retina display? I went to an Apple Store and played around and the answer is that in Photoshop, the physical size of the document at 100% is the same on the 2880x1800 Retina Display as it is on the 1440x900 legacy 15" MacBook Pro. But the content within that document is jaggy and pixelated as if you were viewing it at 200%.

For some silly reason, the Apple Store employees hadn't bothered to install the Aperture and Final Cut Pro X software updates that grant those Apps retina display support, so I wasn't able to see this 1080p video at 100% they were raving about at WWDC, and photos in Aperture looked blurry.

It seems that for content creators building 72dpi screen images for video and web, the retina display is going to be a hindrance as all of your content will look low res when viewed at 100%. I guess my question is how will this change when Photoshop and other Adobe apps get updated for retina display? Will a 1920x1080 72dpi document at 100% take up half as much screen space as it does now, so that you're viewing it pixel for pixel? This to me would seem like the ideal situation; then if I were designing a 728x90 web banner I could build it at 1,456x180, then just save it out at half-size when finished.

Reply

Answer 3

Rick Lang Author

Level 4

1,247 points

Jun 16, 2012 12:29 PM in response to Cory Bauer

Cory, the Photoshop you were using has not been updated to be retina-ready so everything is being pixel-doubled with the exception of text if Adobe is using Apple's text API. Same for Chrome and any third-party that was not using Apple's text. All other screen elements are doubled in both dimensions until they are ready for the retina screen by defining graphic elements that are doubled properly. Will be frustrating for the early adopters of the technology as it could take months for most programs to make the necessary changes. Of course all your retina-aware Apple software is going to look good from day one.

Pity Apple can't get their retail act together and update their in-store demo machines with the latest versions of Aperture and Final Cut Pro X. Not the first time one can't see the features of new machines in the store displays. Thought maybe the new SVP of Retail (Ron Johnson's replacement from Dixons) would be all over this update to look good on one of his first tests. But he must be too busy counting his millions that he received for doing nothing but signing on.

Once the Photoshop program is retina-ready, it will display pixel-for-pixel in the 100% view. Same as Aperture and FCPX do now when you view video and graphics in their 'actual size.'

Reply

Answer 4

Rick Lang Author

Level 4

1,247 points

Jun 16, 2012 4:31 PM in response to Cory Bauer

Cory, I talked to an Apple Sales specialist about Aperture and FCPX not being retina aware on the MacBook Pro Retina computers in the store and he said to file formal feedback to Apple, Cupertino. Which I did. I should have signed it Franz, so Tim Cook would respond directly.

By the way, I found a post on another forum by someone who has the machine and I believe he said QuickTime does display pixel-for-pixel video!

Reply

Answer 5

Rick Lang Author

Level 4

1,247 points

Jun 17, 2012 5:29 PM in response to Cory Bauer

Cory, Dave Jenkins on the Creative Cow forum has answered this question and it's good news that an image can be displayed and grabbed pixel-for-pixel after all. Here is hîs message from the following thread:

http://mobi.creativecow.net/thread/335/37515p

If I capture the desktop the size is 2880 x 1800

If I open a video in QT 1920 x 1080 it show up edge to edge of the screen as 1440 x 810

If I record the screen in QT the size is 1440 x 900

If I do a screen grab it captures a 1920 x 1080 image at 1920 x 1080

This is with the Display set to "Best for Retina display"

I think some of there program need updating, see images below

screenshot2012-06-17at10.21.11am.png

screenshot2012-06-17at10.33.18am.jpg

screenshot2012-06-17at10.47.15am.jpg

Dajen Productions, Santa Barbara, CA

Reply

Answer 6

Rick Lang Author

Level 4

1,247 points

Jun 17, 2012 5:36 PM in response to Rick Lang

Not sure if the links to the jpgs worked. Here is the link showing the 1920x1080 screen grab:

http://images.creativecow.net/1437/screenshot2012-06-17at10.33.18am.jpg

Reply

Answer 7

SoldOnMac

Level 1

119 points

Jun 17, 2012 8:25 PM in response to Rick Lang

"Give me pixel-for-pixel or give me death!"

So ... there is a choice involved. 😀

Reply

Answer 8

Almir.R.

Level 1

10 points

Jul 22, 2012 4:12 PM in response to SoldOnMac

Add me to the list. Screen shots no longer server the purpose for me. They may work for non-professionals to brag about their Macs, but I lost the ability to capture images and edit them as they are. Luckily I still have this option when hooked up to an external monitor, but I will keep whining about being able to get pixel-for-pixel...

Reply