Having got feedback from another monitor, not set to display at at least 1024x768, I have noticed, particularly in relation to Bryce images, more or less complete inability to display properly.

Two questions:(1) should the display setting necessary to view the image properly be noted; & (2) is there anything that can be done about it, short of rendering for smaller display (which I am not inclined to do)?

I've always supposed most serious viewers have at least a DA of 1024x768, but having up to this point worked mainly for print, I have no idea.

Thanks in advance.

If...that's IF I understand correctly.... 1. The only thing that you truly should have is your computer monitor set to is "True Color (32 bit)". Otherwise, you probably will see "banding" of the colors (very undesirable). Your Desktop pixel dimensions are entirely up to you, period. 2. I myself only work at Desktop=800x600. And, my Bryce document window is kept at it's default, 480x360 if I want to work/preview bigger I just go to the max recommended, 640x442. You can increase desktop; 1024x768 or higher, but then you need to increase your document window in Bryce which means a bigger area and more data to render to your document window, thus it will take much longer than if I just kept it at desktop=800x600, and document window=480x360. Then, of course, when I do a final render, I use the "Render To Disk" feature and make it as big as I want. In fact no matter what your desktop and document are in dimensions, I HIGHLY recommend always using the "Render To Disk" feature when doing your FINAL render. But, really all of #2 is just really what suits yourself, only #1 should always be done. I REALLY hope that is what you were asking, Sorry if I misunderstood. Agent Smith

Not quite what I was asking, but the reminder about rendering to disk is worth itfor which many thanks. I used to do that for specific reasons in Bryce, but lately I have fallen into the bad habit of saving or exporting as bmps. Since I usually save the Bryce file anyway, I keep open the possibility of rendering again for another medium or purpose.

There's still much about various display screens that is a mystery to me.

As for the Bryce document window, I tend to do about the same, though I usually work at Max Rec, and do a lot of renders, partial and full, often resetting the doc set temporarily for whatever it is I am checking for.

I also thank you for the other comments, which may be connected indirectly.

What I have noticed, howeveronly from actually looking at someone else's monitor (good one but at a different DA setting), is that Bryce seems much more sensitive, mainly lightwise, to display monitor settings than RDS or other programs. Since I use the same compression on all of them (Adobe), it can't be that.

Am I missing something else?

Thanks much again.

No, I don't believe you are missing anything. I have also noticed that it is difficult in general to make different monitors view the same picture the same exact way, as far as color values go. Even if I have what looks like the same exact settings* as my girlfriends computer, they still won't show the same pic in the same way. It's really just because they come from different companies, is all. *By settings I mean everything; dimensions, color depth, brightness, contrast, Kelvin temp, etc.

Are you talking about for presenting your images on another computer? If so, figure that the majority of the users online are working with 800 x 600. Some artists use higher. I use 1280 x 1024, (and 1024 x 768 at work... older monitor) because I like to see more on screen. (plop render's my friend) So, if you are presenting art to someone else, whether it be over the web or not, try to keep your image within the 640 x 480 dimensions. That way, it's sure to fit into the window, and when the user opens your image, they don't just see the top left corner. Unless that's all you want them to see, and you are hopeful that they will tolerate scrolling to see your pic. For me, if I have to scroll around the pic, I don't enjoy it as much no matter how good it is. And if I have to scroll side to side... forget about it. Putting the "best viewed at x resolution" on the page is an absolutely useless endeavour. Honestly, when was the last time you changed your screen resolution to view a page or an image? If you're like me, the answer is never (Star Wars trailers excepted). Some users can't even res up to 1024 x 768. Some have slower video cards. Some have older monitors. What if the user has an LCD monitor and 800 x 600 is all they can do clearly? So, though you may not be inclined to make separate versions of your work for lower res viewers, I think you'd do well to use Photoshop (or equivalent) to size down your pics for on screen distribution. Your viewers will spend more time looking at your work, they will load faster over the web, and you can always provide a larger resolution version for the truly interested viewer that wants more than 640x480. I hope that's what you are asking. And Agent Smith is dead on about color. Windows is a bit behind in color calibration as it is, and when you add in all the crappy displays out there... it's a jungle. If only there was a fix for the crappy monitor....

Thanks very much to you boththat is exactly what I was asking.