[GTALUG] war story: ergonomics [was Re: cheap today: 43 inch UltraHD TV]

[D. Hugh Redelmeier]

| From: o1bigtenor via talk <talk at gtalug.org>

| Sorry, even if I could afford such a beast I likely wouldn't be able to
| read
| everything on it. I used to use 6 point fonts in spreadsheets to get more
| on the screen when I 'only' had a 1600 x 1200 monitor but now need to
| use glasses even with a 10 point font but then with 2 monitors giving me
| a 3820 x 1080 virtual I've got lots of room.

It's great to read specs when designing a system, but you need to pay
attention to your own specs!  I mean both meanings of that last word:

- specifications, i. e. capabilities of ones own body, including
  visual acuity, posture, attention span, and so on.

- spectacles, i.e. eye glasses

Each of us is different, but we can learn from each other.  What works
for me may help you but it isn't guaranteed to apply.

I am near-sighted but aging.

- I can focus on a screen that's up to 50cm away, but not much of a
  39" flat screen would be 50cm away.

- with my "progressive lens" normal glasses, only a small part of the
  screen is in focus at once, causing me to have to crane my neck
  to scan the screen.

- I bought fixed focus glasses for using with my previous monitor (24"
  1920x1200).  Best investment I made.  I sit perhaps 75 cm from the
  centre of my 39" monitor and can see all of it without moving my
  head (but I do move my head when attending one particular area).

- the more light, the larger one's depth of field (the range of
  distances that are in focus at an instant).  I have eight LED pot
  lights in the ceiling of my work room and have not felt the need
  for task lighting (it has only been a couple of months).

Greater resolution can be used two ways:

- to display the maximum possible information.  As you add pixels, you
  increase the amount of visual field that the display takes up.  For
  me, 39" UltraHD seems good. I can read an ordinary xterm on this
  (but it isn't pleasant).  There is a limit to how much of a visual
  field is available.  Perhaps I'd be happy with xterm if my monitor
  were 43".

  Apparently it is good to have some non-screen in your field of view
  since staring at a fixed distance for long periods of time is bad
  for your eyes.

- to improve the quality of what is displayed: add more detail.  On my
  13.3" laptop with 3200x1800 resolution, reading an xterm is a real
  struggle.  But a readable font, with more pixels per character,
  looks really nice.  At some point, added detail will not yield
  an improved experience.

I want lots more resolution and will throw it at both of those.  I
also want High Dynamic Range so that images can improve in yet another
dimension.

Your chair and desk height matter too.  Most desks put your keyboard
too high (mine included; even though it is adjustable the range is
insufficient).  My eyes are at the height of the middle of my screen.

I'm currently sitting in a groovy chair that I bought in 1967 that
happens to be quite comfortable (no, not a bean-bag chair:  those are
for SmallTalk users).  It is like these purple chairs, but with
smaller wings, a tamer colour, and better lumbar support:
<https://www.houzz.com/photos/2873375/Eclectic-Home-Office-eclectic-home-office-toronto>

My wife uses a desk that I also bought in 1967.  We replaced the legs
and sawed the bottoms off the the new ones to make it appropriate
typing height.

The window for my work room is beside my desk, not behind my monitor
nor behind my back.  That's great but sometimes hard to arrange.

With a little thought, one might be able to improve ones computer
environment significantly.

What do you guys find that makes a difference in your physical
environment?