FCE - FCE HD: resolution independant?

Greetings,
I'm looking for a screencast editor (using iShowU / Snapz Pro to capture clips). Are either FCE or FCE HD capable of resolution independant settings? The main goal is to edit iShowU / Snapz Pro clips, add narration / music, and create a great looking screencast for the web.
I'll be more specific if i need to, just let me know
Thanks for your time!

Tom,
for my target screencast projects i use...
Snapz X Pro for all of my screen shot work for Screen, Objects, and Selections.
iShowU for all of my 'in game' real time compression while inside of a given game application. where Snapz would have to render afterwards, this is done on the fly with little system resources using iShowU. also with iShowU being i use it inside of a game, i can simply set up hot keys and record / stop / pause without waiting for rendering!
i use them both :P

Similar Messages

How to make screen resolution independent in BDC

How to make screen resolution independent in BDC

hi
good
You need to use the CTU_PARAM structure alon with the call transaction statment.
**Sturcture of CTU_PARAM
**DISMODE : Display mode (like the MODE addition 'A' , 'E', 'N')
**UPDMODE: Update mode (like the UPDATE addition 'S', 'A')
**DEFSIZE : Use default window size (Here we are handling those transaction by giving default window size)
**RACOMMIT: Do not end transaction at COMMIT WORK
**NOBINPT : No batch input mode (that is, SY-BINPT = SPACE)
**NOBIEND : No batch input mode after the end of BDC data.
*The components DEFSIZE , RACOMMIT, NOBINPT, and NOBIEND always take the following values:
'X' Yes
DATA : L_OPTION TYPE CTU_PARAMS, "Parameter string for runtime of CALL TRANSACTION
L_SUBRC TYPE SYSUBRC.
L_OPTION-DEFSIZE = 'X'.
L_OPTION-DISMODE = P_MODE.
L_OPTION-UPDMODE = 'S'.
CALL TRANSACTION 'FK01' "FK01-Vendor master creation
USING IT_BDCDATA
MESSAGES INTO IT_MESSTAB
OPTIONS FROM L_OPTION.
thanks
mrutyun^

Matching attributes of imported QT files to FCE

I'm creating some software demo screencasts with video screen capture using SnapZPro. How can I set up the sequence in Final Cut Express so that it exactly matches the attributes of the Quicktime files? It's turning the QT movies into DV-NTSC and destroying their quality. Can I get around this?
Thanks, Rebecca

No. FCE is a fixed resolution editing application. It only works with DV and HDV formats at specific sizes, frame rates and codecs. You either need to convert your material to one of these formats, or use a resolution independent application like Final Cut Pro.

How to get more independent of screen resolution

Read already a number of topics about this in this forum. But I still wonder
how to set up ones Swing components for different screen resolutions. What
I did up to now is checking for the current screenwidth and setting sizes for
each resolution. Worked OK. But nowadays there are so many different
screen sizes, this is getting too complex.
I mean, one has to set the component's size, its location, the fonts used,
possible Icons in the Toolbar, the size of the components internal panels,
the insets, border sizes, and many other things. So, assuming ones window
with all the components looks great in one resolution, the developer still has
to check whether it all looks so great as well in any other thinkable screen
resolution. Even in those which the developer isn't even able to create using
his graphics card.
So, my question is: Is there somewhere a clever tool inside Java which makes
the total layout of components and their sizes inside the user's main window
more independent of the screen resolution?
For instance, it would be great to be able to define the component's size,
location, and so on, using the actual size it should appear on any screen.

You are right. For those using advanced high resolution
monitors, this will be a disadvantage. However, I'm quite
sure, the average user I'm aiming for, still uses rather
standard type of monitors. Of, course, in the (near?)
future, everybody may be using high resolution (same
progress as with our tv-screens). So I may have to include
these screen sizes as well later.
Your presentation made me aware of the great need for
everybody in the graphics business for a solution for this.
Still think, this can be automated in a not too difficult way.
I mean, if I can hard code this in such a way, that nobody
is able to see the difference of the program running on a
different resolution, it must be possible to include an
option in whatever programming language, to create ones
graphics components in a resolution independent way.
At least, I think. May be a good starting point for my next
project.
Thanks anyway for your help an remark. I think you still
deserve your dukes. Here they are.

MBP 15' 2011 Mini display port to LED monitor/TV resolution issue

Hello,
I have just bought a Mini Display - VGA adaptor which I am plugging to a Samsung 23' LED monitor via a VGA/DVI adaptor. I manage to get a clone view but unfortunately, the maximum resolution offered is 1650x1050 when my Samsung LED monitor has resolution of 1920x1080. Therefore, part of the screen remains black.
... also, when I plug the Mini display port to VGA to my Philips 47' VGA port, I got a message that there must be a problem with the connection and again, maximum resolution offered if 1440x10.. and therefore 20% of my TV screen space remains black.
At last, when I launch Windows7 via bootcamp, this is even wost : when I select the max resolution (1440x10..), the pictures remains freezed on my TV and I can't even move the mouse (while the mouse is moving on the MBP screen...). Only coming back to a very small resolution 800x600 or so will enable me to get control of the win7 desktop on my TV...
Thank you in advance for your help
Greg

I have just bought a Mini Display - VGA adaptor which I am plugging to a Samsung 23' LED monitor via a VGA/DVI adaptor. I manage to get a clone view but unfortunately, the maximum resolution offered is 1650x1050 when my Samsung LED monitor has resolution of 1920x1080. Therefore, part of the screen remains black.
If you are using the monitor in Mirrored mode, its resolution setting will always be exactly the same as that of the built-in display. I presume you have the high-res 15" MBP display, with a native resolution of 1680 x 1050. If that's true, I suspect your monitor is indeed in Mirrored mode, and that's why you can't set the monitor to its native 1920 x 1080 resolution. If you press Command+F1 to toggle the mnitor into Extended Desktop mode, you'll be able to set its resolution independently of the built-in display. Or if you use only the external monitor, with the MBP display closed, you'll be able to set the monitor's resolution to whatever it supports.
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3131
Stacking one video adapter on top of another is usually a recipe for trouble. It's always best to keep things as simple as possible. Use one adapter that gets you from mini-Displayport to whatever input you want to use on the TV or monitor.

Resolution problems with Swing, MigLayout, and Substance.

I've got some testers trying out my application on various systems. One computer is a Dell Mini and it is giving me some trouble with resolution. I am using MigLayout as the layout manager for every JPanel and for everything. I am also using Substance L & F. I thought this would be all I need to do to keep my application resolution independent. It appears that I have too many rows. The extra rows are getting cut off.
I''ve edited my code and posted the relavent part of my code in the following post.

import java.awt.Color;
import java.awt.EventQueue;
import java.awt.event.ActionEvent;
import java.awt.event.ActionListener;
import java.awt.event.KeyEvent;
import java.awt.event.KeyListener;
import java.text.NumberFormat;
import javax.swing.*;
import org.jvnet.substance.skin.SubstanceCremeCoffeeLookAndFeel;
import net.miginfocom.swing.MigLayout;
public class SiteInfoPanel extends JPanel{
    private JTextField swisNumber;
    private JTextField siteName;
    private JFormattedTextField lat;
    private JFormattedTextField lon;
    private JFormattedTextField openYear;
    private JFormattedTextField closeYear;
    private JFormattedTextField waste;
    private JFormattedTextField footprint;
    private JButton searchName;
    private JButton searchSWIS;
    private JLabel or1;
    private JLabel siteInfo;
    private JLabel swisNumberL;
    private JLabel nameL;
    private JLabel county;
    private JLabel latL;
    private JLabel lonL;
    private JLabel openYearL;
    private JLabel closeYearL;
    private JLabel wasteL;
    private JLabel footprintL;
    private JLabel searchBy;
    private JSeparator sep1;
    private JSeparator sep2;
    public SiteInfoPanel(){
        initComponents();
    private void initComponents(){
        swisNumber = new JTextField();
        swisNumber.setHorizontalAlignment(JTextField.CENTER);
        swisNumber.setColumns(25);
        siteName = new JTextField();
        siteName.setHorizontalAlignment(JTextField.CENTER);
        siteName.setColumns(40);
        NumberFormat yr = NumberFormat.getInstance();
        yr.setGroupingUsed(false);
        yr.setMaximumIntegerDigits(4);
        yr.setMaximumFractionDigits(0);
        NumberFormat loc = NumberFormat.getInstance();
        loc.setGroupingUsed(false);
        loc.setMaximumIntegerDigits(3);
        loc.setMaximumFractionDigits(2);
        NumberFormat rest = NumberFormat.getInstance();
        rest.setGroupingUsed(false);
        rest.setMaximumFractionDigits(2);
        rest.setMaximumIntegerDigits(9);
        lat = new JFormattedTextField(loc);
        lat.setColumns(8);
        lon = new JFormattedTextField(loc);
        lon.setColumns(8);
        openYear = new JFormattedTextField(yr);
        openYear.setColumns(4);
        closeYear = new JFormattedTextField(yr);
        closeYear.setColumns(4);
        waste = new JFormattedTextField(rest);
        waste.setColumns(10);
        footprint = new JFormattedTextField(rest);
        footprint.setColumns(10);
        swisNumberL = new JLabel("SWIS number:");
        nameL = new JLabel("Site name:");
        county = new JLabel();
        latL = new JLabel("Site Latitude: ");
        lonL = new JLabel("Site Longitude: ");
        openYearL = new JLabel("Opening Year");
        closeYearL = new JLabel("Closing Year");
        wasteL = new JLabel("Waste in place (tons)");
        footprintL = new JLabel("Site footprint (acres)");
        or1 = new JLabel("OR");
        siteInfo = new JLabel("Site Info:");
        siteInfo.setForeground(Color.blue);
        searchBy = new JLabel("Search for site by: ");
        searchBy.setForeground(Color.blue);
        sep1 = new JSeparator();
        sep2 = new JSeparator();
        searchName = new JButton("Search by name");
        searchSWIS = new JButton("Search by SWIS #");
        buildComponents();
    private void buildComponents(){
        this.setLayout(new MigLayout("wrap 4", "[grow]", "[]25[]"));
        this.add(searchBy, "span 4, split 2");
        this.add(sep1, "span 3, growx");
        this.add(swisNumberL, "right");
        this.add(swisNumber, "span 2, center");
        this.add(searchSWIS, "wrap");
        this.add(or1,"skip 3");
        this.add(nameL, "right");
        this.add(siteName,"span 2, center");
        this.add(searchName);
        this.add(county,"skip 1, right");
        this.add(new JLabel(" County"), "wrap");
        this.add(siteInfo, "span 5, split 2");
        this.add(sep2,"span 3, growx");
        this.add(latL,"right");
        this.add(lat, "wrap");
        this.add(lonL, "right");
        this.add(lon, "wrap");
        this.add(footprintL, "right");
        this.add(footprint, "wrap");
        this.add(new JLabel("BLAH"), "span 2, split 2");
        this.add(new JSeparator(), "growx, wrap");
        this.add(new JCheckBox("BLAH"), "center, wrap");
        this.add(openYearL,"right");
        this.add(openYear, "wrap");
        this.add(closeYearL, "right");
        this.add(closeYear, "wrap");
        this.add(wasteL,"right");
        this.add(waste, " wrap");
        this.setVisible(true);
    public static void main(String args[]){
        try {
            UIManager.setLookAndFeel(new SubstanceCremeCoffeeLookAndFeel());
        } catch (UnsupportedLookAndFeelException e) {
            // TODO Auto-generated catch block
            e.printStackTrace();
        EventQueue.invokeLater(new Runnable(){
            @Override
            public void run() {
                JFrame f = new JFrame();
                f.setDefaultCloseOperation(JFrame.EXIT_ON_CLOSE);
                f.getContentPane().add(new SiteInfoPanel());
                f.pack();
                f.setVisible(true);
}

Custom book export resolution problem in PDF - only 150DPI!?

I've been using the custom book option and when it came to exporting my PDF I have run into a problem involving the undocumented output resolution of a PDF at a given size. The custom book dialog allows you to create a book with a certain size in inches, but this really has no real meaning since the resolution of that output cannot also be specified in either the layout option or the print dialog. For example is it 150dpi or 300dpi? From some investigation it appears to be locked at 150DPI.
Now I would have thought that Aperture was intelligent enough to just treat the album layout (this is my assumption) as some kind of smart object, where the layout is resolution independent and the final output resolution can be determined when printing to a printer or PDF. In that case the dialog for the setup of the custom size is correct. However, there is no option that I can see in the print dialog to actually specify the output resolution; Aperture is left to its own devices to specify an output resolution, which is undocumented.
I use a printer that accepts JPG or TIF files and I need 300dpi for an album size of 10x13 inches. This equates to 3900x3000 pixels per page. I am able to export to PDF in the print dialog and then used an automator action to export each page of the PDF as JPG and reimported back into Aperture 2 in the same action. In the PDF>JPG conversion option there is the ability to set the DPI to 300. That works fine and the resulting JPG images show as 300dpi (3900x3000px). When looking at the images though they look a little soft, which leads me to believe that my action was simply interpolating a 150dpi image in the PDF into 300dpi.
So to test this, I noticed that if I exported just one page of the album as a PDF and opened the PDF in Preview it does indeed tell you that it is 13x10 inches (no mention of the pixel resolution though). So, you can actually reimport a single page PDF into Aperture and if you do this it appears that the actual resolution is 1950x1500 and that equates to 150dpi for a 13x10 inch layout.
So there are two things that could possibly be going on here:
1. The actual layout of the album is locked at 150DPI and the save to PDF simply takes that and exports a PDF at that resolution.
2. The layout of the album is resolution independent, the size of the album (in the custom dialog) simply controls the aspect of the page layout, and the print dialog (save to PDF) is exporting as 150DPI as default. When I run my automator action (these are the Leopard PDF actions), the save each page to JPG action is up-res'ing the image to 300dpi.
This is where I need help. Is 1 or 2 (or something else?) happening. Also, does the PDF save as JPG12? That too is undocumented.
If number 1 is happening I may have to set my album size to 26x20inches to get a 10x13 inch page at 300dpi.
If number 2 is happening I need to find a PDF/TIFF/JPEG print driver to enable me to export at 300dpi as the print dialog in not standard (and we don't get the nice 'save as' drop down where we could do other things. So far my search has led me to CUPS-PDF, but that still doesn't allow for resolution to be set: http://www.codepoetry.net/projects/cups-pdf-for-mosx
Why can't Apple just figure this thing out correctly and allow the resolution to be specified by the user - what an oversight given all of the feedback requests for the custom album tool. We need 300dpi as a minimum as we can always down-res if we want.
Any ideas? I've got albums to send to clients! Help!
Thanks

When you import any PDF into Aperture, I think it rasterizes any PDF you import to a 150dpi flat image on import, even if it was a high res PDF to begin with. But theres the thing, PDFs don't have dpi (as such). Any shapes or text is a vector so don't have a DPI as they'll scale when printed. The images use their DPI when they were imported from the program that created the PDF.
So I did a quick test and put a page I made from Aperture in to Acrobat and ran a preflight check on all images to check the resolution. It came back at 349.956 ppi, so this example was over 350dpi.
I've attached the screenshot
Jason

How do I set document resolution

I'm trying to create a pages document that can be exported as a pdf, then converted to an ebook for uploading to an iPad. I've set the document size to 5"x7.5" (2x3 ratio) but can't find a method to set the document resoluton to 120 dpi. When I create the files and convert them (regardless of which PDF quality I use), the pdf file is fine and displays properly, but the conversion splits each page of the pdf file into four separate pages. I'm guessing that's due to the difference in the resolution between 300 dpi and 120. Any ideas?

> I'm trying to create a pages document that can be exported as a pdf, then converted to an ebook for uploading to an iPad.
There are several formats for e-paper and e-book interchange, and the several formats are in two main document models. One set of formats follows from ISO 8879 Standard Generalized Markup Language and the other set of formats follows from ISO-IEC 10180 Standard Page Description Language. For instance, the e-Pub and HTML formats follow from ISO 8879 and the PostScript and PDF formats from ISO-IEC 10180.
> I've set the document size to 5"x7.5" (2x3 ratio) but can't find a method to set the document resoluton to 120 dpi.
In the PS and PDF family of formats, document co-ordinate space has no resolution (: it is resolution indepedent). Objects in the co-ordinate space can either be resolution-independent (: scalable shapes that only get a resolution when they are rasterised to a specific device, for instance, TrueType typography, Type 1 typography, lines, and boxes), or resolution-dependent, for instance, photography.
For resolution-dependent objects, applications support two workflows. Some applications such as Apple Pages work on the assumption that you set the resolution in the software you use for exposure correction, other applications such as Adobe InDesign and QuarkXPress work on the assumption that you can do this later when the publication is processed. However, since you can't upsample from a lower to a higher resolution successfully in QuarkXPress or InDesign, it makes no difference if you don't save the resolution you need from the source application software.
So, begin by selecting the photographs you want, correct the exposures, and save the exposures with the ICC profile for the colour correction space into a named folder at the resolution you want. Then place them in whatever application you want, and save into PDF.
> but the conversion splits each page of the pdf file into four separate pages. I'm guessing that's due to the difference in the resolution between 300 dpi and 120. Any ideas?
Since the document co-ordinate space in PostScript version twenty-something in the original Apple LaserWriter of January 1985 is always resolution-independent, it has been possible to tile several pages in the document space onto a single page in the device space of the printer. The number of pages you can tile depends in principle on the tiling geometry in the application that writes the page description program (2-up, 4-up, 8-up, 16-up and so forth), and in practice on the size of the printer format (A4, A3, A3 and so forth).
If a single page is split into several pages, then either the user has to have asked for this (for instance, when proofing a very large document co-ordinate space by tiling it onto a very small device space for a poster on a LaserWriter), or the user has to have accidentally made the settings for the printing system assume that this is the case. Without knowing what printer or what printer driver you have installed, a suggestion might be that your printer driver is passing the wrong information backwards to the system software. Printer drivers are made by printer manufacturers and may be specific to the printer model. You might have more luck if you ask the printer manufacturer's list. Otherwise, try the formatting option 'for any printer' when you write out your PDF page description program, open the page description program in Apple Preview, and then let the printing system do what it does - hopefully to your satisfaction.
Best,
Henrik

Higher Screen Resolutions on MBP

I dont post many questions here on the forum... But heres my rant of the day.
I have been a mac user for only a short while... making my first hardware purchase a few months ago (iMac 20").
After using the iMac for a while i realized that I wanted to upgrade my 3 year old Dell Inspiron 8600. But there lies the problem. The hardware specs on the new MBP's are outstanding except one thing, display resolution.
On my Dell I purchased the WUXGA screen that runs 1920x1200 natively on a 15.4" screen. I dont understand why apple decides to put these cheaper/lower resolution panels into there hardware?
Wouldnt it make since if you are going to release a top of the line machine you would follow suit with the LCD panels?
Just my two cents, please set me straight if I have crossed a line posting this here at an apple forum.
Adam

No, you're not out of line. And I think a fair number of people agree with you.
However, I think Apple's position is that any display/resolution combination that results in a pixel density much more than about 100-120 dpi simply makes things appear too small for most people and reduces visual consistency and usability. I happen to agree with them.
Sure, you can fiddle with font sizes and other settings in an attempt to offset the high pixel density, but most graphics used by the OS and on web sites don't scale well (in Windows and Mac OS X). As a result, you can get normal-sized text but everything else appears tiny. It looks odd and it's harder to use.
What we need is resolution independent scaling of the entire UI, and this needs to happen in the OS, in applications, and in web content. This would allow you to resize everything in the interface, making it as large or as small as you want regardless of the actual pixel density of your hardware. Of course, higher density displays provide sharper visuals, so manufacturers would naturally start increasing resolutions, even beyond today's densities, limited only by cost and GPU performance.
The good news is that Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger already has the underpinnings in place for this resolution independent UI, and 10.5 Leopard is reportedly going to bring it out as a mainstream feature. But we'll still need to wait for the application developers and web developers to catch up, which will probably take a while.
So Apple's current use of 100-120 dpi displays isn't so much a question of "cheap hardware" but rather one of usability. I think Apple is biding their time until all the technology pieces are in place so this can be done right rather than the haphazard, incomplete approach currently taken by the Windows community.

Opinions About New High Resolution Displays

Does anyone have an opinion about the MacBook Pro's new high resolution display option. The price doesn't seem to be that big of a deal. My concern is that the higher number of pixels for the same screen area will mean smaller text display. Am I correct about this?

Yes, you're correct about the text getting smaller, however that may not be the case for much longer. What I'm speaking of is the resolution independent ui in Leopard - where your ui can still remain the "regular" size that you're used to, but everything is still at a higher resolution...
ummm don't really know how to explain it any better - take a look at this wiki article - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resolution_independence
So I personally wont even think about upgrading till Leopard comes out - I used 1920x1200 displays on some laptops in the past, and everything is WAY too small for comfortable use.

BDC screen resolution

How to do screen resolution in BDC table control ?

so there so many threads for screen resolution check it
how to solve screen resolution in bdc
Screen Resolution in Bdc
How to make screen resolution independent in BDC
Re: Screen Resolution problem in BDC
screen resolution problem in table control
whats the screen resolution problem with bdc's how to solve it?
Screen Resolution Problem in Session Method

Image Sizes and Resolution standards?

are there any standards for image sizes and resolution for mobile games specifically: backgrounds and backdrops?
i will be porting my game for various cell phones and i'd like to resize images to fit perfect on all cell phone screens, so what would be the best way to do this and what should my image attributes (height, width) be?
i've tried researching on google to see if there were any standards and couldn't seem to find any. if these standards are non-existent what image sizes have you used that you found worked best on various mobile phones?
thanks
Edited by: sassy on Jun 2, 2008 1:49 PM

Google's right, there are no real standards for screen sizes. Some are more common than others, but there are dozens of common screen sizes.
The most common are...
176x208 (same as 176x220, but with no status bar)
240x320
176x220
[Getjar resolution stats|http://www.mobref.com/statistics/world/gDispResolution]
Unfortunately, many phones are slightly more or slightly less than those. If you cover those, you're fairly well off though. If you can make your game resolution independent, that's your best option, though with intricate overlays it may be nearly impossible to do.

Screen resolution question: wysiwyg?

Hi all,
my screen is set to 1680x1050, i.e. I get 80ppi, which means that all A4 pages are shown too big.
Can I correct that in any way? I need to see layout pages exactly in the size that they will look like in print, wysiwyg. It's cumbersome and annoying to muddle around with the page display in each and every app to downsize it by visual judgement to what might be the correct output size.
Thanks a lot!
Peter

Actually "wysiwyg" these days refers more to relative dimensions, not exact dimensions. After all, how big something looks on the screen depends partly on far away you are from the screen, and the trend is to put more pixels on the screen per inch. Currently, there is no way to adjust the exact resolution precisely enough so that what is printed out is exactly the same size as the displayed image, unless one of the standard non-native resolutions just happens to produce this effect with the program you are using to print.
But what you want may be in store at some point, once the display pixels take the next quantum leap in smallness, where the pixels become so small that the native resolution is useless and irrelevant. It's called +Resolution-Independent User Interface+, and it is publicly known that Apple already has the foundation for it in Mac OS X. How and when they will use it, we're not supposed to discuss or speculate about in the forum.

Resolution independece in JavaFX

I'm doing a study over resolution independence of web technologies.
How does JavaFX handle resolution independence? Does it use vector graphics?
Let's say I have one device with screen size 480x600 px and another with 1200x900 px. Can I tell the application to automatically scale its GUI to the screen size. And that it is done without loss of detail?
Thanks,
Jocke

The JavaFX scene graph is all about vector graphics (unless you explicitly use some image based graphic) but that is probably not the answer you are looking for. Supporting a resolution independent GUI takes much more than that and JavaFX currently does not support that out of the box but I think it could be done manually via CSS and a clever layout design.
There is a JIRA request for this featrue:
http://javafx-jira.kenai.com/browse/RT-14020
Michael

Why low screen resolution?

can anybody explain why apple chooses to continue the low resolution on it's new macbook pro's?
i mean come on... my old 15,5'' sony vaio could display 1600x1200 and the apple macbook pro 17'' can only display 1660x1050. what a joke, isn't it? i'm disappointed.
why can't they put in a higher option? i'm sure those screens could handle it.
just because a screen isn't necessarily meant to display higher res it doesn't mean it can't run. i also got a 21 mitsubishi screen that's meant for not more than 1600x1200 but i run 1920x1200 and it works perfectly and smooth.
so what's the deal with apple?

You seem to be operating under the assumption that
GUI features have fixed pixel sizes. That’s really
not true. It’s especially not true for fonts, but
applications can choose to draw in absolute sizes
(inches or milimeters) instead of physical device
units (pixels).
Actually, for the majority of apps on OS X Tiger, it IS true. Almost all interface elements are made up of bitmap images, and will pixelate badly if enlarged. If you have the developer tools installed you can turn on some stuff in Quartz Debug that make the GUI resolution independent on a per-application basis, but until all the apps are re-written, they mostly look crap or even put elements in the wrong place.
http://media.arstechnica.com/images/tiger/safari-scaled-2x-big.jpg
You're spot-on about font sizes, though.

FCE - FCE HD: resolution independant?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for