Desktop looks bad on Dell U2410

It's strange...movies look great, but the desktop UI itself looks fairly grainy. I've messed with the settings but there isn't really much there to change. Any suggestions?
thanks!

The issue you are having is HDMI to HDMI is not sending the correct Color Space signal to the Dell U2410.
Follow the link below for a software fix, and to read further:
http://www.ireckon.net/2013/03/force-rgb-mode-in-mac-os-x-to-fix-the-picture-qua lity-of-an-external-monitor

Similar Messages

I'm looking at the dell Inspiron Desktop 4th Generation Intel Core i5 Processor for photoshop work versus the Dell XPS 8700 i7 IS IT WORTH SPENDING THE EXTRA $400?

I'm looking at the dell Inspiron Desktop 4th Generation Intel® Core™ i5 Processor for photoshop work versus the Dell XPS 8700 i7 IS IT WORTH SPENDING THE EXTRA $400? my old desktop is a AMD about 5 years old so there will be a huge change in speed to what I am use to
Here are the specks on both:
Inspiron
Processor
4th Generation Intel® Core™ i5-4460 Processor (6M Cache, up to 3.40 GHz)
Operating System
Help Me Choose
Windows® 8.1 (64Bit) English
Memory2
8GB Dual Channel DDR3 1600MHz (4GBx2)
Hard Drive
1TB 7200 rpm SATA 6Gb/s Hard Drive
Video Card
NVIDIA® GeForce® 705 1GB DDR3
Ports
Front
(2) USB 2.0, MCR 8:1, Mic and Headphone Jacks
Rear
Four USB 2.0 connectors , Two USB 3.0 connectors, HDMI, VGA, RJ-45 (10/100/1000 Ethernet), 3-stack audio jacks supporting 5.1 surround sound
Media Card Reader
Integrated 8-in-1 Media Card Reader
(supports Secure Digital (SD), Hi Speed SD (SDXC), Hi Capacity SD (SDHC), Memory Stick (MS), Memory Stick PRO (MS PRO), Multimedia Card (MMC), Multimedia Card Plus (MMC Plus), xD-Picture Card(XD))
Memory Slots
2 DIMM Slots
Chassis
Bluetooth
BT 4.0 via 1705 WLAN card
Chipset
Intel® H81 PCH
Power
300 Watt Power Supply
XPS 8700
Processor
4th Generation Intel® Core™ i7-4790 processor (8M Cache, up to 4.0 GHz)
Operating System
Help Me Choose
Windows 8.1 (64Bit) English
Choose Options
Memory2
12GB Dual Channel DDR3 1600MHz (4GBx2 + 2GBx2)
Hard Drive
1TB 7200 RPM SATA Hard Drive 6.0 Gb/s
Video Card
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 745 4GB DDR3
CPU Thermal
86W
Graphics Thermal
225W/150W/75W
Power
460W, optional 80 PLUS Bronze, 85% efficient, supply available on ENERGY STAR configurations
Ports
Bays
Support for 4 HDD bays: including (3) 3.5” HDDs
–Capable of 1 SSD and 3 HDD configuration
Media Card Reader
19-in-1 Card Reader (CF Type I, CF Type II, Micro drive, mini SD, MMC, MMC mobile, MMC plus, MS, MS Pro, MS Pro Duo, MS Duo, MS Pro-HG, RS-MMC, SD, SDHC Class 2, SDHC Class 4, SDHC Class 6, SM, xD)
Slots
Memory Slots
4 DIMM

From my personal experience, I wouldn't go for an Integrated card. This is one of the most important components for Photoshop, so invest in a decent graphics card (ATI or NVidia). It doesn't have to be a really exepensive one - I have been using ATI Radeon with 256MB of RAM on my Dell Studio for almost two years and it still rocks! (even when I work with 3D in Ps CS5 Extended).
I would also invest in more RAM (this can be added easily - I bought extra 4GB as my Studio came with 3GB).
I wouldn't worry about the processor - I'm on Intel Core 2 Duo - and it works very very well, it's very quick which is very important as I'm training Photoshop.
I hope this helps.

Mac mini with Lindy MDP2DP adapter with Dell U2410

Hello all!
I seem to be having a problem with the following setup. I have a Mac mini (Late 2009) connected using a Lindy Mini DP to DP Adapter into a Dell U2410. When I put the Mac mini into sleep mode, most of the time (99% of the time) the machine does not return from sleep mode. When I trigger a wake, the display wakes up briefly but then enters power save mode. The machine looks as if it is on but is unresponsive and the display remains in sleep mode. In addition to this, the machine does the exact same thing when upgrading the graphics drivers in Bootcamp Windows 7.
This behaviour does not occur when the display is connected by DVI via the mini DVI port. Has anyone else experienced this problem? I have had the mini's logic board replaced to no avail. Can dodgy displayport adapters and monitors attached to the machine really cause this kind of problem?

I have a very similar problem and I would love to find a solution. I have a mid 2001 mac mini (unibody) server, and I am driving 2x Dell U2410s (Rev A01's). I love the screens, and the mini is able to drive them well enough.
I am driving one via the included HDMI->DVI adapter, and the other via a cheapie miniDP->HDMI->DVI adapter. I like to have both run via DVI because the user has much more control over color settings within the display while using HDMI. These settings are not present in HDMI mode. I haven't tried dual DP modes.
The problem I have is that when the computer puts the displays to sleep - only the display connected to the HDMI port on the mini enters power save mode. The display that is connected to the mini-DP does not enter power-save mode, and displays a message that there is 'No DVI-D 1 cable.' (or something equivalent).
I am not sure why one of these ports is able to properly enter sleep, and the other is not - but it is very frustrating. i have to physically turn off one of the displays in order to prevent the backlight from being on 24/7. I use the computer as a server for various things, and it is on 24/7, when I'm only at it for a few hours a day.
I have tried changing DVI-D ports around, and using HDMI instead of DVI - and the outcome is the same. This problem must be with how the computer 'tells' the display connected to to the miniDP to sleep. This problem is quite frustrating, but not enough so to abandon either the mini or the dual U2410 setup - just frustrating.
Does anyone know of a way to change the method by which the computer 'tells' the display to sleep? I am certainly no expert in computer language, programming or otherwise.
I have not tested this with my MBPro, as I forgot it in another state at the moment (it's safe - i live half in TX, half in PA). I will report my findings when I test the MBPro, and perhaps come to some sort of conclusion.
Thanks.

MBPro 2011 15" thinks my Dell U2410 is a TV

I posted this in macrumors.com forums but wanted to see if anyone here had run into this issue yet.
I got a mini displayport to displayport cable from monoprice and hooked it up last night to my 15" 2011 Macbook Pro and my Dell U2410 24" monitor. It immediately looked terrible as if I was hooked up via HDMI @ 1080p. Sure enough I checked the display settings and it listed my monitor as a TV and was set to 1080p. I was able to select 1920x1800 as a resolution but the picture quality did not improve.
I've read other posts elsewhere that this is most likely a software/firmware problem as other users have booted into Win7 on their machines and the display is working fine at native resolution.
Please Apple fix this issue!

From the Apple Support Pages: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3382?viewlocale=en_US#3
11. How is the Apple Mini DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI adapter different from the Apple Mini DisplayPort to DVI adapter?
The Apple Mini DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI adapter works best with displays that operate at dual-link resolutions, which are resolutions above 1920 x 1200. For displays that do not support dual-link DVI resolutions (displays that operate at resolutions of 1920 x 1200 or lower) you should use the Apple Mini DisplayPort to DVI adapter instead.

Color issue only with finder on a dell U2410 screen

Hello...
I've got a macbookpro 15' with snow leopard. I've just connected a second display screen (DELL U2410) through a mini display to DVI adapter.
On te Dell, when i look a photo in the finder/cover flow, the reds are satured. And when i look the picture on "preview", it looks normal.
I've took a capture of this :
http://www.23h00.net/div/capture.jpg
On the left, the picture with preview, on the right the same picture on finder.
It's Amazing ?
thanks.
cyrille

Try creating a new color profile (and then going back, if creating a new one doesn't solve it). Go to System Preferences > Display > Color

Dell u2410 BANDING issues

I use my DELL U2410 as my external monitor and I got some banding issues in some of the color. Especially in Blue and Black. It looks very pixelated.
The driver provided by DELL is only for Windows and I tried to look for somehting online to see if there is a driver out there but couldnt find any.
My display settings are
Colors: Millions
Refresh Rate: 60 Hertz (NTSC) (I cant change to PAL and I am in europe). Could this be it??
Option: Overscan is ticked.
Any idea guys?

Have you tried a new cable?

Dell u2410 with mac book pro - ports in the monitor does not work....

Hi,
I got a DELL u2410 with my mac book pro and the reader or the USB port is not working. How come the laptop doesnt detect this even if the screen works?

Not seen the 2410 - but previous USB devices in the screens required a standard A-B usb cable from the computer to the screen - look for the squarish USB socket on the monitor somewhere, probably tucked up under the lip where all the connectors push in vertically upwards (on previous Dell WS screens)

12 bit output with Dell U2410?

Hello,
Can anyone tell me if I can get the full 12-bits per channel output afforded by the new Dell U2410 with my late 2008 Unibody Macbook Pro? Dell claims it can produce 1.07 billion colors, which I assume to mean that it has 12 bit output and not just 12 bit internal processing, or am I wrong to assume that?
My plan would be to connect it via a mini-displayport to displayport cable.
Just the other day i could swear that the tech spec page for the U2410 claimed it had full 12 bit output, but they've redesigned the page and it claims 12 bit 'internal' processing, but they're still claiming over a billion colors.
Here is a link to the Dell page for the monitor:
http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/products/Monitors/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=e n&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-8277
Thanks,
Scott

I didn't really expect it to work, but figured it was worth a try. It's very sad to me that Apple still wants to command a lead in the graphic design design industry and yet they aren't supporting a greater bit depth for their displays. When photoshopping images, I have to make guesses about what the output will look like in the darker color ranges because of posterization that occurs on my display but not in the final output. Printers today can and do support 16 bit output but the display hardware does not.
Perhaps I can find a graphics card/drivers that can work on the Mac Pro that supports > 8 bits per color channel, but I don't even know how to go about figuring that out. I suspect it'll require many hours of research and it might be for naught. I'd hate to buy a Windows box just for editing images.
So, for anyone coming across this message: You cannot, at this time and to the best of my knowledge, get 12 bit color depth with the Dell U2410 display. The display looks great, so I think it's a great alternative to the super-reflective Apple 24" Cinema display, but don't expect to get any additional color range.

Subject : Slideshow looks bad Hello guys I have a project in my Final Cut just about done. I want to add my slideshow as part of the project and burn it to DVD. In my slideshow, there are some stills from the movie clips and some downloaded from the i

Subject : Slideshow looks bad
Hello guys
I have a project in my Final Cut just about done. I want to add my slideshow as part ofthe project and burn it to DVD. Inmy slideshow, there are some stills from the movie clips and some downloadedfrom the internet but they all look blur when playback and even worse if Iapply Ken Burn to it. Pleasesome one can tell my how to do it right or it can’t be done because thedownload quality and stills from the clip are not suitable or slideshow. Thank you
PSC

Thank you Ross.
The entire DVD containing Quick Time movies (Final CutExpress project) and slideshow was done in iPhoto. The Final Cut project was rendered prior to export to QT, the slideshow was sent to iDVD withoutrendering. The slideshow with most of the pictures from my still camera incombination with stills from movie clips and some downloaded from the Internet.After burning, the movie playback is perfect but the slideshow is not. The slideshow containing 3 differentkinds of pictures; those from my still camera looks OK; the stills from themovie clips and from the Internet are not. I don’t have much knowledge in this game, but I think NTSCwith frame size 720x480, and the downloaded picture Item Property shows most ofthem are between 400 to 500 x 300 to 600, may be both of them are not suitablefor TV screen while the stills from my still camera looks OK because they are2048x1536. Please enlightenme. Once again, thank you so much,I really appreciate the time you offered.
psc

Why does my 24fps look bad on my TV?

I just got the Panasonic AG-HMC150. I have shot some footage at both 1080p24 and 720p24. I transcode the files to Pro Res in FCP and they look pretty good, I realize the panning isn't as smooth as 60i. I drag one of the files into the FCP timeline and let it automatically "optimize my settings" for the sequence. I have verified that it is 23.98fps and field dominance is none. I have tried selecting "share" and going straight to AVCHD from FCP, and also taking the original MTS file, and Apple Pro Res and dropping into Toast and trying that way. The footage just looks choppy, jiddery and unsmooth. I have seen enough movies in my life to know that when they pan, or have cars drive by, that movies 24fps looks a million times better. My Sony HDTV even accepts and displays 24fps, and when I press info on the TV remote when watching one of these AVCHD discs it in fact says 1080 (or 720) 24p. It just looks bad. Even taking the HDMI output from the camera and hooking up to the TV and playing from the camera looks lousy.
What am I doing wrong? I know a ton of post work goes into Hollywood movies, but why does their 24fps look nice and smooth and mine looks horrible? Do I need to render with pulldown in FCP or something. I can't figure it out. Any advice, suggestions?

I transcode through FCP to apple pro res, the files shows up as 1920x1080 24fps. Field dominance is none. I edit the video and then export as quicktime movie using current settings. The Pro Res file says 23.98 when played in quicktime so I know that's good. I simply then drop the file into Toast (10.0.4) and burn blu-ray disc, selecting DVD as the media. I noticed too I need to change the field dominance under the encoding tab in Toast to progressive, as automatic doesn't work. It only burns the top half of the image. Regardless, when I make these discs and play them on PS3, my TV's info says 1080/24p. Maybe my eyes aren't use to seeing 24fps. Does it sound like I am doing anything wrong in my workflow/encoding process.
Again, good tip on the shutter speed Jerry.

Fonts look bad in OSX jagged text

Hello
I thought apple gave us font smoothing in OSX! My fonts look terrible in QuarkXpress6.0. Is this what I have to look forward to? I miss my ATM.
I did the "font smoothing thing" in appearence-no change.
Also will all my older fonts from when I used OS 7 +8, will these still work in OSX? and by Quark XPress?
Please enlighten me!
all fonts look bad; Goudy old style, bellvue etc. (postscript type 1)
imac G5 Mac OS X (10.4.4) 21" screen

if I zoom out in Quark to view document at say 125% the 45 pt type really looks bad
Hmm. I'm unable to duplicate your problem. I've pasted some random text into Quark, sized it to 45 pt and set the zoom to 125%. No matter if I go up or down, the fonts look very smooth with both Goudy Old Style and News Gothic (I have the Adobe version, not MT, which is from MonoType). Well, if I look real close, I can see a little bit of jaggies around curves. But nothing very noticable.
Is your 21" monitor a CRT or LCD? LCD always produce the best image when used at their native resolution. A CRT's best display varies depending on whether it has a shadow mask or aperture grill tube. If your monitor has an independent control for sharpening, it may be too high.
I have some fonts installed that I don't know where they came from ex: News Gothic MT (Microsoft I think) Will these view and print okay in any program?
As long as it's a standard Mac suitcase style TrueType font, or a complete and proper Type 1 PostScript font, it should just as well as any other.
I keep all my fonts in classic folder and manage w/font book (thats another story) It seems that my classic apps, Illustrator, see most of the fonts all the time eventhough I turned many off in fontbook. Also illustrator doesn't see ALL the fonts.
That's a handful. When it comes to Classic, the rules are a little different. Fonts you manually place into the OS 9 Fonts folder, or are put there by the OS when activating them from Font Book with OS 9 as the choice to be activated for, fonts are then available to both Classic and OS X.
If you deactivate them in Font Book, the fonts will become unavailable to OS X apps. However, any Classic apps will continue to see them until you shut down all OS 9 applications and Classic. In other words, once you open fonts for Classic, they can't be closed to Classic without shutting the entire environment down. Confused yet?
As far as Illustrator not seeing all the fonts, that relates to this part of your question:
Please explain the limitations of classic apps and fonts.
Classic can use any fonts that were in existence for the Mac before OS X. All of your older Mac TrueType and Type 1 PostScript fonts will work in OS X and Classic. Fonts that will work as is in OS X that you couldn't use before on a Mac are PC TrueType fonts. If you have copied any of the OS X .dfonts into the OS 9 Fonts folder, those will not work. A .dfont is a variation of a TrueType font, with the data in the data fork rather than the resource fork as they are with the older Mac TrueType fonts. Neither OS 9 or any Classic apps can read these fonts. Those are likely the ones not showing up in Illustrator.
It sounds like you do a lot of work with fonts. While Apple has improved Font Book quite a bit in Tiger, it's still very much a consumer font manager for those who handle fonts only occasionally. You'd be much better off using a font manager such as Suitcase X1 or Font Agent Pro.

Custom white balance looks bad/off when set on the 5d Mark iii

I got my Mark iii in June and every time I set a custom white balance it doesn't look right. I have used both a purchased grey card and a white piece of paper, both look bad. When I set it on my Rebel Xs it looks perfect, no adjustments needed in post processing, but not the case with the Mark iii. Shouldn't it be the other way around, considering the price tag on the iii ?

Canon "tags" RAW images with meta-data regarding white balance (and other info) but does not actually alter the image. Depending on what you use to process the images on the computer, it can read those tags and decide to apply it's interpretation. But those white balance adjustments would be applied by your computer software (assuming they are being applied -- not all software does this) -- and not by the camera.
I use Aperture (Apple's pro photography software), which has a camera profile for each camera. The profiles can compensate if, for example, one camera is naturally "cooler" than another.
Tim Campbell
5D II, 5D III, 60Da

Graphics look bad on pause at end of chapters

I've created a presentation in Keynote that I've exported as a QT movie and imported into DVDSP. Since the presentation will be manually advanced via remote control, I've set infinite pauses at the start of each chapter. My problem is that when the pause occurs, the still graphics look really bad. I realize this probably has more to do with the DVD player itself but I was wondering if anyone has found a work-around for this issue. Thanks in advance.
Mac OS X (10.4.4)

Thanks EJP. I need to keep the transition effects though from Keynote so still images won't work. One thing that is kind of weird though it that the still frame at the end of a track looks fine. Its only the pauses at the chapter markers that the video looks bad.

DV clips look bad, good when converted to H.264 in QuickTime and reimported

Still a problem after 7.0.1:
DV camera -> iMovie 08 -> looks bad when playing and exporting/sharing
DV camera -> iMovie 08 -> "reveal in finder" -> clip opened in QuickTime -> looks good -> export as H.264 -> re-import to iMovie 08 -> looks good when playing and exporting/sharing.
In plain words: Importing DV clips from my DV camera into iMovie gives bad results when playing and exporting/sharing. Have tried everything, but the clips look blurry and not sharp at all. The actual DV clip in the events folder looks sharp and clear.
If I take the very same DV clip from the events folder ("reveal in finder"), open it in QuickTime, export it as H.264 and then re-import to iMovie 08, it looks brilliant, retaining the quality the DV clip in the events folder has.
Why can't the DV clips look good in the first place? What is it that iMovie 08 does to these poor clips? Some have suggested re-encoding, re-rendering and so on, but if I do just that in QuickTime and re-import it to iMovie 08, it still looks razor sharp and crystal clear. No reason that iMovie 08 shouldn't handle the DV file in the same manner.
Some have suggested that this is because iMovie 08 internally re-encodes to AIM or H.264, enabling edits with different kinds of formats, but if I do this myself in QuickTime before importing to iMovie 08, the problem isn't there!
If this is difficult to achieve, why not add the option of importing from a DV camera as H.264 and not DV? That would make my day!
(I have posted this to Apple using the feedback menu item in iMovie 08.)
(Background here in these threads:)
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1088568
Sample clips in Apple TV format here:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=5173005

iMovie '08 stores rendered projects in H.264 form. This happens when you render to the Media Browser. The rendered file(s) (you can have several different sizes) are in the iMovie '08 project package. The original flies in your Events folders stay in whatever format they were in.
Yes, the movies exported to the Media Browser use the H.264 format, the same as iMovie HD 5/6 did when we exported using the presets Email, Web, Web Streaming and CD-ROM. They were all H.264 too. Apple is obviously putting the (powerful) H.264 to good use to prepare movies for Web pages and other purposes.
As you know, the Full Quality export in 5/6 was to the project's native format, which varied according to the type of project. For DV projects, that was DV video. Everything was converted to DV when imported into the project, and to preserve the original quality we could export to a Full Quality DV movie.
There is nothing like that in iMovie 7, at least that I've seen. As you said, nothing is converted to a "native format" when imported to the project. (Still images are added to the project's single Apple Photo - JPEG "Still Images" movie, which is a nice twist.)
So I think of iMovie 7 as having no "native" format, but a nicely-designed path for using H.264 as the delivery format. The Media Browser — a virtual library of movies with no shared place — is a nice invention.
When I export slideshow movies in DV format out of FotoMagico I always select 'Best' and it DOES make a difference in iDVD.
I think of iMovie 7's problem with DV as more profoundly flawed. Exporting ANY DV video that's in the project to DV or ANY OTHER format is messed up. It's the handling of the DV inside iMovie that's messed up, not just the export to DV.
My guess is — and it's only a guess — that FotoMagico's Best setting adjusts the content of the image delivered for iDVD. Put another way, it prepares an image that works best with iDVD's own encoding algorithms.
One long-standing diappointment I've had with iLife is that Apple has never coordinated the image it prepares for iDVD with what(ever) iDVD does best. It's as if the programmers never talk to each other. iMovie engineers have never asked the iDVD engineers how best to deliver the image to deliver the best quality on the DVD.
Given Apple's emphasis on H.264, one would think that iDVD would be written to embrace any H.264 video and deliver great quality on the DVD. It doesn't. And with iLife '08 it doesn't even embrace iMovie's own DV exports!
I suppose Blu-Ray will change all that, but for now we're stuck with a version of iLife that can't deliver a quality DVD of our home movies.
Karl

Resizing image and looks bad afterward

So image manipulation in java is not my bag. I wrote a program to help save me time with my photography, the idea was that I could point it at a directory and then it would read all the files in that folder that are jpgs and resize them to blog ready sizes. This works really well cept the final images that are produced are not of same quality as say when I used GIMP to resize to the same size/aspect ratio the quality is much different. It looks like its a problem with setting my type perhaps to an only 8bit file? Maybe I am wrong, also goofed with the compression stuff (found code online) to turn the compression to 0 (i.e. no compression)...still no avail. Some code I am using:
    public static BufferedImage scaleImage(BufferedImage image, int imageType,
                 int newWidth, int newHeight) {
             // Make sure the aspect ratio is maintained, so the image is not distorted
             double aspectRatio = (double) image.getWidth() / (double) image.getHeight();
              if(newWidth==-1)
                   newWidth=(int)(newHeight * aspectRatio);
              if(newHeight==-1)
                   newHeight = (int)(newWidth / aspectRatio);
             // Draw the scaled image
             BufferedImage newImage = new BufferedImage(newWidth, newHeight,
                     imageType);
             Graphics2D graphics2D = newImage.createGraphics();
                //I admit little clue as to what im doing with the rendering hints.
             Map map = new HashMap();
             map.put(RenderingHints.KEY_INTERPOLATION,
             RenderingHints.VALUE_INTERPOLATION_BILINEAR);
             map.put(RenderingHints.KEY_RENDERING, RenderingHints.VALUE_RENDER_QUALITY);
             map.put(RenderingHints.KEY_ANTIALIASING, RenderingHints.VALUE_ANTIALIAS_ON);
             RenderingHints hints = new RenderingHints(map);
             graphics2D.setRenderingHints(hints);
             graphics2D.drawImage(image, 0, 0, newWidth, newHeight, null);
             return newImage;
    then the call to it looks like:
public BufferedImage processLandScapeImage(BufferedImage img)
              int width = Integer.valueOf(theHeight.getText()).intValue(); //my desired width
              return scaleImage(img, BufferedImage.TYPE_INT_RGB, width, -1);
         }So this is close, the files dont look bad but alas... they still aren't the same quality. Should I post a sample of what I get with GIMP and what I get with my little program?
Thanks to anyone who has some pointers...
-Shane

If you don't care about the original source BufferedImage, then you should be able to draw the image onto itself in an incremental fashion. That would avoid the use of intermediate images and consequently not throw the OOM.
Also note that the code in that article has a slight hiccup. If you specify you want higher quality and targetWidth > w || targetHeight > h, then you'll get an infinite loop. So it needs to be structured slightly different (indeed, the intermediate images should probably be flushed since they're being draw to and from at least once).
I didn't realize such a task was so non-trivial.If you're not worried about the speed, then I guess the trivial good-result way would be to use Image#getScaledInstance with the area average parameter. It's not so much that it's too slow for normal consumption (it isn't), it's just that the Graphics way is so much faster.
GIMP probably uses a more sophisticated resampling technique like Lanczos or something.

Desktop looks bad on Dell U2410

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for