computer damages eyesight- therefore. . .

Page 1 of 2 [ 24 posts ] Go to page 1, 2 Next

toto
Butterfly

Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 15

13 Oct 2009, 5:34 pm

computer damages eyesight- therefore..  How about: Get a projector (computer LCD) -- for 250quid second hand. 1024x720pixels 300inch area  Number 2: Stop using glasses... I believe my eyesight is getting progressively better... especially when you are young- your body can recover. And interestingly- why not your mind. Don't glasses have a psychological effect... like medication? I've heard such things said.. that is a conspiracy theory.

think lcd is the problem... I see blue/green/red/white fuzz at night because of the damage to eyesight.  What about monotone projector, something not harsh. something projecting here.

got it... reduce the contrast... have grey and black not white and black

Is it better to use a lower resolution also?...even if the picture is washed out on lcd.. easier on the eyes... less stark definition

---
walking barefooted
I also think walking barefoot when you can, is good for strenghtening muscles in feet.. preventing injury. you can buy shoes with thin soles.

X_Parasite
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Nov 2006
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 716
Location: Right here.

13 Oct 2009, 7:20 pm

Whoa, there. Slow down. Focus. You seem to have started in the middle of the conversation.

What sort of eyesight damage? I stare at screens all the time, but my vision is excellent.

1,024x720 seems sort of low-res.

Monotone? WHAT!? Society as a whole is so over that.

gramirez
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Nov 2008
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,827
Location: Barrington, Illinois

13 Oct 2009, 7:30 pm

X_Parasite wrote:

1,024x720 seems sort of low-res.

No, 640x480 is low-res.

_________________
Reality is a nice place but I wouldn't want to live there

X_Parasite
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Nov 2006
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 716
Location: Right here.

13 Oct 2009, 7:55 pm

1,024x720 is lower than 1,280x720, which is lower than 1,280x1,024, the minimum that I would ever run my desktop at.

640x480 is low-res, but does anyone make monitors at that resolution anymore?

AspieFireMan
Blue Jay

Joined: 5 Sep 2009
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 90

13 Oct 2009, 7:58 pm

I just dont open the eyes when using my computer

:roll:

_________________
http://www.aspieweb.net/resources/aspergers-news/
http://www.buyautism.com
http://www.disabledchristians.com

pat2rome
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 29 Jun 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,819
Location: Georgia

13 Oct 2009, 8:51 pm

Toto, you seem to be a bit disoriented. Are you perhaps not in Kansas anymore?

_________________
I'm never gonna dance again, Aspie feet have got no rhythm.

Keith
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Aug 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,321
Location: East Sussex, UK

13 Oct 2009, 10:32 pm

nope 160*200 is low res :roll:

toto
Butterfly

Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 15

14 Oct 2009, 4:32 am

My orientation is excellent.
In fact I have better internal navigation than most people- anyone.
true my thinking is a bit fuzzy...theres a lot of guessing going on...but my general direction is very strong.

I am still on the yellow brick road.

Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

14 Oct 2009, 7:31 am

gramirez wrote:

X_Parasite wrote:

1,024x720 seems sort of low-res.

No, 640x480 is low-res.

No, 640x480 is a thumbnail.

_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.

AspieFireMan
Blue Jay

Joined: 5 Sep 2009
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 90

14 Oct 2009, 8:54 am

pat2rome wrote:

Toto, you seem to be a bit disoriented. Are you perhaps not in Kansas anymore?

I can't open my eyes to tell you where I'm at sorry.

_________________
http://www.aspieweb.net/resources/aspergers-news/
http://www.buyautism.com
http://www.disabledchristians.com

lau
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Age: 75
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,795
Location: Somerset UK

14 Oct 2009, 8:58 am

Fuzzy wrote:

gramirez wrote:

X_Parasite wrote:

1,024x720 seems sort of low-res.

No, 640x480 is low-res.

No, 640x480 is a thumbnail.

My thumbnails are about 16000000x17000000.

(In nm, that is.)

_________________
"Striking up conversations with strangers is an autistic person's version of extreme sports." Kamran Nazeer

richie
Supporting Member

Joined: 9 Jan 2007
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 30,142
Location: Lake Whoop-Dee-Doo, Pennsylvania

14 Oct 2009, 4:59 pm

lau wrote:

Fuzzy wrote:

gramirez wrote:

X_Parasite wrote:

1,024x720 seems sort of low-res.

No, 640x480 is low-res.

No, 640x480 is a thumbnail.

My thumbnails are about 16000000x17000000.

(In nm, that is.)

And what about the nails on your pinkies?

_________________
Life! Liberty!...and Perseveration!!.....
Weiner's Law of Libraries: There are no answers, only cross references.....
My Blog: http://richiesroom.wordpress.com/

pakled
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Nov 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,015

14 Oct 2009, 10:15 pm

Trust me, years of looking at CGA and EGA monitors definitely ruined my eyesight. Yeah, when you're young, it's easy, but time does take it's toll. Maybe it won't be so bad for younger folks.

computer screen user for 24 years....need cane and dog...

_________________
anahl nathrak, uth vas bethude, doth yel dyenvey...

gramirez
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Nov 2008
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,827
Location: Barrington, Illinois

14 Oct 2009, 11:11 pm

Fuzzy wrote:

gramirez wrote:

X_Parasite wrote:

1,024x720 seems sort of low-res.

No, 640x480 is low-res.

No, 640x480 is a thumbnail.

Uh no, 100x100 is a thumbnail. Way back when, people used 640x480 and were fine with it...nowadays, everyone is so technologically spoiled.

_________________
Reality is a nice place but I wouldn't want to live there

Tollorin
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Jun 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,178
Location: Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada

14 Oct 2009, 11:22 pm

pakled wrote:

LCDs are less tiring for eyes that cathodic screens, and in a few years everyone will get OLEDs screen. So I guess it won't be too bad...

Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

15 Oct 2009, 1:14 am

gramirez wrote:

Fuzzy wrote:

gramirez wrote:

X_Parasite wrote:

1,024x720 seems sort of low-res.

No, 640x480 is low-res.

No, 640x480 is a thumbnail.

Uh no, 100x100 is a thumbnail. Way back when, people used 640x480 and were fine with it...nowadays, everyone is so technologically spoiled.

I'm extra technologically spoiled, 'kay?

_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.

Page 1 of 2 [ 24 posts ] Go to page 1, 2 Next

Jump to:

computer damages eyesight- therefore. . . Post Reply New Topic

computer damages eyesight- therefore. . .