so there is no driver for me (
so there is no driver for me (
My laptop which is also on Windows 8 (after being on Windows 7 with identical hardware and having perfectly fine wallpapers) suffers from the same problem at a resolution of 1366x768. Honestly the quality of the wallpapers are fine as I can view them in a photo editor and they will be crystal clear. When set as a wallpaper Windows decides to compress it...
It is possible that windows compresses ALL file formats for wallpapers as when I go to C:\Users\USER_NAME\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Themes\CachedFiles my wallpaper despite now being a PNG file has been changed to a JPEG file of a much smaller size. So windows is still compressing the PNG files but the quality isn't as poor. It is likely that when someone uses a JPEG as a wallpaper, because of the already poor quality of the jpeg it gets further compressed and a low quality wallpaper results (kinda like a double effect). HOWEVER, I used to use JPEGs in windows 7 and they weren't compressed so much. SO maybe in windows 8, MS has decided to increase compression of the cached file/transcoded wallpaper?
Also this has nothing to do with the graphics card or the driver as I used the Intel HD 4000 graphics and I saw the same thing. The fact that it happens on my laptop as well on both Intel HD 3000 graphics and the nVidia GT555m (switchable graphics) rules out that it is a driver problem me thinks!
I ask anyone with Windows 7/8 to do a test. On your Windows 7 computer browse to C:\Windows\Web\Wallpaper\Windows and grab img0.jpeg which is the default windows 7 wallpaper that I've used in my posts above. Set this as your wallpaper in Windows 8 and tell me how the quality is (look around the windows logo especially for artifacts and quality reduction).
Onto your other point: When I had a JPEG file and I simply renamed the extension to .PNG it made no difference to the quality when set as a wallpaper (i.e. win8 still compressed it too much). However when I opened the JPEG in MS Paint and saved it as a PNG file then set it as the wallpaper it came out as nice quality. I'm not 100% sure but I think MS Paint does a file conversion in this case. I simply used Irfanview so that I could convert all my JPEG wallpapers to PNG in a batch (haha converting them all in paint would take a looong time ). As for whether there is a quality difference between re-saving them as a PNG in MS paint and converting them with an actual converter (like Irfanview), I have no idea (I'm hardly an expert on image files haha). I know that when you just simply rename the extension there is no conversion...
It is important to note that even as a PNG file Win8 still converts it to JPEG when using it as a wallpaper (the quality is still reduced sever so slightly but it is hardly visible to my eye). I also know that in Irfanview, you can set your windows wallpaper as any image file format you want and it avoids windows from compressing it to a jpeg. However you have to do it manually so it kinda defeats the purpose of a slideshow/rotational desktop wallpaper and when I tried to set my wallpaper using Irfanview it didn't seem to do its job by upholding the quality of the image file (maybe I was doing something wrong..).
Welcome to Classic Shell) for my start menu in Windows 8...funnily enough I don't use the start menu that much but it is nice having it there.
How did you get all your icons to be "metro" style btw? That suits windows 8
how the start menu looks like with that classic shell on windows 8 ? Show a capture pls!!. I just instaled the latest version and I my metro start button doesnt look like yours : its blue and when i click it its microsft multicolor style. Do you use a custom one to have it plain white? How to do that?
Free is better but the cheap products from Stardocklike start8 or decor8 are making this thing enough customizable for evryone unless if you are a customization whore
Last edited by Orphydian; 18 Dec 2012 at 11:10.
I also have Intel HD 4000 graphics on a laptop with a Nvidia 630M and resolution 1366x768...Also this has nothing to do with the graphics card or the driver as I used the Intel HD 4000 graphics and I saw the same thing. The fact that it happens on my laptop as well on both Intel HD 3000 graphics and the nVidia GT555m (switchable graphics) rules out that it is a driver problem me thinks!
I'll do this test... we'll see. I guess you never know for sure until you test.I ask anyone with Windows 7/8 to do a test. On your Windows 7 computer browse to C:\Windows\Web\Wallpaper\Windows and grab img0.jpeg which is the default windows 7 wallpaper that I've used in my posts above. Set this as your wallpaper in Windows 8 and tell me how the quality is (look around the windows logo especially for artifacts and quality reduction).
Do I need to test that jpg on Win8? (copy it from my win7 install).
Yeah something like that I got here installed as well... doesn't seem to do much but is installed just in case.I already had this driver installed along with the .ICM file.
But it's no it, so it seems.
I'll look into what you described here about the JPG compression, to see it I happens or not.
What about my monitor driver? Its mandatory that every monitor to have a special driver. Ive got just a disk with manuals.If at device manager undr Monitor say Generic Plug and play monitor this means I dont neeed a special driver right? In ay case there is no such driver on my manufacturer page.
That's why the generic profile/drivers suits most cases.
Just give it a try with the color profile in the link I gave you for your monitor. But as Paulo mentioned in a previous post, It's the compression in Windows that's to blame so I'll check that out too.
Installing a color profile doesn't do any thing wrong and you can switch between profiles and generic version anytime.
In some cases, it really helps. Especially if the monitor's manufacturer make such profiles.
The one I mentioned in your case suits the 22x series (you know what the x stands for right?) and you have 220 so that's good if you ask me.
That's all Packard Bell gives us so blame them. It's possible that it doesn't help but just apply it to make sure.
-laptop GFX: Intel 4000
-native resolution: 1366x768
img0.jpg on desktop (fill mode)
Took just the center so you can see.
What do you think? There is some heavy blur on red and yellow but looks OK to me (it's a normal procedure applied here, I don't think PNG will do better because it still has to resize to 1366x768). But you were right: looks bad... compared to original.
Well, I'm affected as well but didn't payed attention to it. Because desktop is full with icons, pretty messy.
Still weird compared to Win7 but logically:
You get a blur because the size is not native (wallpaper has 1920x1200). The blur has more affect on red and yellow so it appears.
The same thing is seen in your picture as well.
As a conclusion I can say that this is not the fault of JPG compression but the theme applier which has to fill or fit the image on screen.
It is also not due to the monitor so I can stop wasting time giving you guys color profiles. Sorry for that.
(Since you can print screen the lags means is not the monitor but the actual scaling on the desktop).
In other words the image from Windows (img01) is easily explained: 1920x1200 is not 16/9 HD or 1080p.
By one or another fill modes it will blur it on another resolution.
Therefore I suggest you try this:
Don't mind the preview, it's good quality. It's NOT scaled.
It's cropped to 1080p, should provide best quality on native HD screen. It is JPG alright so you can see it's not due to the compression (99% in this case).
For Stefan's picture, there is a bit harder to understand the lags there because I don't know the image's native resolution but with one or another trick, JPG should do fine as well. Cropping that to (1050p) native should give best results indeed. I use GIMP for this but other tools like Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro can do the trick as well.
In my opinion you don't need to replace JPG with PNG, you just need to remove the rescaling/resizing.
This issue It seems to happen all the time and on bigger monitors with higher resolutions it looks worse.
But the question still remains: why in Win7 it looked better (at least for you guys)?
Does Win8 use different codecs for images?
Do probably newer image codecs need updates?
Do our eyes need replacement?
We'll see... In the meantime, just crop the images if they look annoying.
no dude it doesnt work. Neither you scale to your native resolution or you croped it. I have downloaded the 1680x1050 versions of those wallpapers ( my resolution) so usnt nothing to scale. And anyway I dont need to crop the 1920x1200 to 1080 since its exaclty my monitor ratio 16:10.
Last edited by Orphydian; 19 Dec 2012 at 08:06.
Last edited by pauloz1890; 19 Dec 2012 at 02:35.