You are reading the article Why Is One Monitor Brighter Than The Other & How To Fix It updated in December 2023 on the website Kientrucdochoi.com. We hope that the information we have shared is helpful to you. If you find the content interesting and meaningful, please share it with your friends and continue to follow and support us for the latest updates. Suggested January 2024 Why Is One Monitor Brighter Than The Other & How To Fix ItWhy Is One Monitor Brighter Than the Other & How to Fix It Here’s how to sync brightness on dual monitors quickly and easily
Same monitor, same settings, different colors. It’s frustrating, we know. So, why is one monitor brighter than the other?
If they’re not the same version or if one is older than the other, you can have your answer on the spot.
However, you can also be dealing with mismatching brightness settings or ports.
Here’s how to adjust brightness on dual monitors effortlessly in order to make dual monitors the same brightness (more or less).
INSTALL BY CLICKING THE DOWNLOAD FILE
Try Outbyte Driver Updater to resolve driver issues entirely:
This software will simplify the process by both searching and updating your drivers to prevent various malfunctions and enhance your PC stability. Check all your drivers now in 3 easy steps:
Download Outbyte Driver Updater.
Launch it on your PC to find all the problematic drivers.
OutByte Driver Updater has been downloaded by
readers this month.
Let’s say you’ve recently bought a new monitor to use for your dual setup. It turns out that more often than not, one monitor is brighter than the other.
If such is your case, you’d definitely want to know how to calibrate dual monitors to match so you can enjoy the best possible experience.
But sometimes, things aren’t as straightforward as they seem.
Despite the fact that the new monitor is maybe identical to the old one or their settings are exactly the same, their brightness is not. Now, we’re not asking why do colors look different on different screens.
The scenario goes as follows: same monitor, same settings, different colors. In comes the big question: why is my second monitor darker?
Realistically, you’re supposed to take things as they are. You always need two identical monitors with identical panels/technologies to get any sort of brightness and color match.
Even so, they can slightly vary between monitors of the same model. One possible solution would be to use display color calibration software if you want to accurately calibrate your monitors.Why is one of my monitors brighter than the other?
Color, brightness, or contrast can be roughly matched by calibrating them, but that’s pretty much all you can get.
We’ll definitely take you through a series of troubleshooting steps. And speaking about that, you might also find the following solutions helpful in these situations:
dual monitor brightness different
one of my monitors is darker than the other
one monitor is whiter than the other
same monitor same settings different colors
one side of monitor is brighter
one monitor is warmer than the other
second monitor dims when not in use
How do I fix the brightness on my second monitor?1. Manually adjust the difference
That’s why we recommend manually adjusting the difference.
You could adjust Gamma/ Brightness and even color correction, either in Windows settings, monitor settings, or the Graphics card Settings Panel.2. Calibrate display via Color Management
Just search for Color Management in the search box.
Then follow the wizard to set up both your monitors.
You need to do the same with both screens.
There is also a Color Management option in Windows which may help you out. With it, you can accurately calibrate your display colors.
Color Management lets you check the proper brightness, contrast, etc. based on the monitor, so give it a try as well and let us know if it works.3. Use the same color profile when dual monitor colors are not matching
You’ve done your best, but it seems that you just can’t reconcile the differences easily. Remember that all monitors use the System’s default color profile.
If you think that the Color profile is the culprit, change the color profile as well. Do the same with the second monitor and check whether it fixes the problem or not.4. Use the same type of ports to connect the monitors
Instead, use either DVI or HDMI port to connect both monitors and see if you notice any improvement. Have a look at these high-speed HDMI cables while you’re at it and pick the one that best suits your needs.
Following the above tricks can bring your dual monitors as close to the brightness and color ideal as technology makes it possible these days.
If you are lucky enough, you may be pleased with the result. Nevertheless, sometimes the differences may still exist even after trying all these methods.
Was this page helpful?
You're reading Why Is One Monitor Brighter Than The Other & How To Fix It
Rita El Khoury / Android Authority
When it comes to searching the internet, your mind probably jumps to Google. But what about Microsoft’s search engine — Bing? It isn’t as popular or commonplace, but it’s certainly a viable alternative to Google and offers a handful of exclusive features to sweeten the pot. The latter includes a new ChatGPT-like chatbot that can assist you with complex search queries. But what else separates Google vs Bing and which search engine comes out on top? Here’s everything you need to know.
Google vs Bing usage: Which search engine has the most market share?
Bing captured a third of US searches at one point.
Neither Google nor Microsoft discloses the exact number of searches or active users they serve each day, but third-parties paint a clear picture of who is in the lead. Broadly speaking, nine in every ten searches take place on Google.
According to Statista, Google enjoys an 84% market share in the desktop search engine race and the lead extends to 95% in the mobile market. Bing puts up an admirable fight with a nearly 9% market share in the PC space, but it doesn’t even break past the one percent market share mark on mobile. While these numbers may seem bleak, it’s worth keeping in mind that Bing gets over 12 billion searches every single month.
Google vs. Bing: Functionality and quality of results
It’s difficult to gauge the quality of results for the billions of possible search terms out there. Generally speaking, though, Google and Bing will both meet the needs of the average user. Both search engines allow you to search for text, videos, images, news, and even popular shopping websites.
In our use, we found that both search engines delivered reasonably accurate results. Both offer a list of links to relevant web pages as you’d expect from a search engine. In fact, the result pages don’t look that different from each other too. Bing and Google will sometimes pull snippets of text from trusted sources like Wikipedia. Finally, Bing will often also provide a visually rich infographic alongside the search results, as shown in the above screenshot.
Does Bing or Google have the better AI chatbot?
In 2023, Microsoft announced Bing Chat — a conversational chatbot that makes searches seem more personalized and interactive. It’s based on the same technology as ChatGPT, which Microsoft has poured over ten billion dollars into so far.
AI chatbots like Bing Chat shine when you need answers to complex questions. Some examples include planning a holiday or picking out a gift for a close one. Here’s a sampling of Bing Chat in action on mobile:
The difference between ChatGPT and Bing Chat is that Microsoft allows its chatbot to search for live information on the internet. This makes it incredibly powerful in practice — you can use it to find matching pieces of furniture or compare various products from a certain standpoint. With traditional search, you’d need to perform multiple individual searches and do your own research.
Google does have a rival in the form of its Bard AI chatbot, but you cannot use it yet. Even though we saw the company demo this technology a couple of years ago, we’re still waiting for it to make its way to the broader public. Even when Google’s chatbot does arrive, it’s unclear how it will compete vs Bing Chat or ChatGPT. The latter’s underlying GPT-3 model benefitted from years of fine-tuning, both publicly and behind the scenes.
The Bitgert chain has addressed the cost of the gas and the scalability issue, which are big blockchain problems.
Bitgert’s fast development and growth are already causing shockwaves across the crypto industry. The team has delivered so much in just seven months, which makes Bitgert the fastest-growing crypto project of 2023. The delivery of the projects has made Bitgert stand out from the rest, but it is the recently launched BRISE BRC20 blockchain that has made the biggest impact so far. The launch of the Bitgert blockchain has made it better than Terra (LUNA) and Polygon (Matic), according to the crypto community. But why? Well, here is more about Bitgert and why it is better than these crypto projects:Bitgert
The fast delivery of theCentcex
Though still getting competition from Bitgert,Terra (LUNA)
The Terra (LUNA) project has been doing very well in the crypto industry. The coin is providing the market with stable prices as well as offering faster and affordable payment settlements. Therefore, the Terra team has been working on a faster chain as well as cheaper transactions by reducing gas and so on. But Bitgert is proving a better payment platform by outperforming Terra (LUNA) speed and cost of the transaction. The Bitgert chain is offering users the fastest chain in the history of blockchain at 100k TPS. The gas fee at Bitgert is also free, which makes the platform cheaper than Terra.Polygon (MATIC)
The Polygon (MATIC) has been one of the cryptocurrencies that have experienced one of the highest adoptions. This is because the smart contract is solving some of the biggest problems on the Ethereum chain- scaling and the high gas fee. The Ethereum blockchain has one of the most expensive gas fees and is also very slow.
Bitgert’s fast development and growth are already causing shockwaves across the crypto industry. The team has delivered so much in just seven months, which makes Bitgert the fastest-growing crypto project of 2023. The delivery of the projects has made Bitgert stand out from the rest, but it is the recently launched BRISE BRC20 blockchain that has made the biggest impact so far. The launch of the Bitgert blockchain has made it better than Terra (LUNA) and Polygon (Matic), according to the crypto community. But why? Well, here is more about Bitgert and why it is better than these crypto projects:The fast delivery of the Bitgert project is one of the reasons the crypto community loves this project. The team has delivered a lot on products than any other project of its age. But it is the launch of the now popular BRISE BRC20 blockchain that has put Bitgert far ahead of the competition. The Bitgert chain has addressed the cost of the gas and the scalability issue, which are big blockchain problems. The Bitgert blockchain has zero gas fee, making it the first gasless chain in the industry at $0.0000000000001 per transaction. This is one of the biggest reasons Bitgert is increasingly growing popular in the market. The Bitgert blockchain is right now the fastest chain with a 100k TPS. These are the reason why the Bitgert project is said to be better than most cryptocurrencies.Though still getting competition from Bitgert, Centcex has a lot of developments and growth that has already been achieved so far. The development of the products has already started with the Centcex crypto exchange already in the development stage. The Centcex team plans to have the staking program started soon, and this means the staking process might start soon. The most exciting thing about Centcex is an unlimited number of products and the 100% APY staking revenue. These are two factors making this project stand out. The start of the launch of the product is expected to explode Centcex chúng tôi Terra (LUNA) project has been doing very well in the crypto industry. The coin is providing the market with stable prices as well as offering faster and affordable payment settlements. Therefore, the Terra team has been working on a faster chain as well as cheaper transactions by reducing gas and so on. But Bitgert is proving a better payment platform by outperforming Terra (LUNA) speed and cost of the transaction. The Bitgert chain is offering users the fastest chain in the history of blockchain at 100k TPS. The gas fee at Bitgert is also free, which makes the platform cheaper than chúng tôi Polygon (MATIC) has been one of the cryptocurrencies that have experienced one of the highest adoptions. This is because the smart contract is solving some of the biggest problems on the Ethereum chain- scaling and the high gas fee. The Ethereum blockchain has one of the most expensive gas fees and is also very slow. Polygon improved these two problems, and that’s why its adoption has been growing fast. But Bitgert is proving more powerful than Polygon (MATIC). It is faster and cheaper than Polygon, which makes it a better chain for developers.
Hristo Bojinov wants you to forget your password. More precisely, he wants you to never really know it in the first place. Bojinov, a computer scientist at Stanford, and his colleagues have developed a computer program that can implant passwords in a person’s subconscious mind–and retrieve them subconsciously too. The technique could make it impossible for, say, a high-security government agent to reveal his password; the agent wouldn’t actually know the secret code. Eventually, the use of subconscious passwords could even trickle down to the rest of us. And considering the precarious state of password protection, that probably can’t happen soon enough.
“The problem with passwords is that they are easy to breach,” says Ram Pemmaraju, the CTO of security company StrikeForce Technologies. The tools for cracking them, such as malware, are easy to come by. New processors and open-source software can break an encrypted password in days, if not hours or minutes. Take a seven-character password with upper- and lowercase letters, numbers, and symbols. Five to 10 years ago, the average computer would have needed more than 1,000 years to guess it. Today’s home computers can do it in about a month. Because of this increasing computer power, some experts recommend 20- to 30-character passwords. But human laziness is also a huge problem. Who wants to remember a 30-character password? One recent study found that 5 percent of passwords are some variation of “password.”
Researchers use a computer game to subconsciously teach passwords. The game adjusts its speed to match player performance.
If a person could subconsciously learn a password, though, he would never have to bother memorizing it. He wouldn’t forget it by accident. And he’d never write it down on a Post-it note for others to find. Those are the benefits Bojinov had in mind this summer at the prestigious USENIX Security Symposium, where he presented his study–the first to show that people can subconsciously store passwords and retrieve them from their minds. In the experiment, participants learned a password by playing a computer game. On the screen, black circles fell one after another from the top to the bottom of six columns labeled S, D, F, J, K, and L. When a circle reached the bottom, the player typed the letter corresponding to that column. The game, which is nearly 4,000 keystrokes long, took about 30 to 45 minutes to complete. The players didn’t know it, but the game contained a password–a sequence of 30 letters that they typed in 105 times. By the time players finished the game, they knew the password well enough that it seemed slightly familiar, but they still couldn’t recognize it, let alone recite it. (On average, they rated the password’s familiarity as a 6 out of 10, and a random password as a 5 out of 10.)
Five percent of passwords are some variation of “password.”To use the password, the participants played a 5- to 10-minute version of the game. This time, the software compared how accurately they typed the actual password versus randomly generated 30-letter sequences. Seventy-one percent of participants scored better on the real passwords than the fake ones. Playing the game two weeks later, 61 percent did.
In the future, people could use a similar game to log into their computers in the morning. But Bojinov cautions that the work is still preliminary. The learning process takes too long for the majority of people, he says, so he’s currently focused on honing the technique for high-security situations–the kinds of applications in which a 45-minute password ritual would be worth the trouble. He suggests that the system could be used as a form of secondary authentication, a substitute for the security questions now required to reset a password on an e-mail account. No matter what the application, Bojinov says researchers still need to answer critical questions about the technique. How can they make it work for more people? What’s the best way to speed up the process? And how long do subconscious passwords last?
The answers to those questions could lead to an interesting twist in password protection. Russell Dietz, CTO of data protection company SafeNet, says the current strategy is to secure a system against both human cleverness and human failure. “You want to prove that someone is who they are while eliminating the weak link—the human users themselves,” he says. But as Bojinov’s research demonstrates, human experience might be the thing that no other person, or computer, can fake.
My first attempt at Jupiter [left] demonstrates why it’s a tricky first target–the brightness of the planet against the darkness of space casts a wide dynamic range for the novice to capture. But it’s possible, as a photo taken with the same camera provided by the SBIG folks shows [right].
Astrophotography is hard. Astronomically hard. Everything has to be perfect. Your telescope, with camera attached, must track your target in precise synchronization with the rotation of the Earth. It can’t shake. It can’t even vibrate. You have to nail your camera’s exposure settings or you’ll be rewarded with an incoherent mess. Your targets are often so dim you can’t even see them until after the image has been made, so focusing is a nightmare.
So why try? Because it makes the entities floating in the vastness of the universe much more real than any Hubble wallpaper on your computer desktop can.
Those images, as spectacular as they are, don’t capture personal experience. Marvelous photos have been made of Yosemite, Monument Valley, and the Grand Canyon, but people still trek to see them in person. Similarly, astronomy—for me—is best experienced first-hand. No shot of Saturn, Jupiter, the Orion Nebula, or the Whirlpool Galaxy from the Hubble can equal–intellectually or emotionally–my own experiences at the eyepiece. The scenes, when delivered by nothing more than a few layers of precision-ground glass, are reality. Saturn is an actual object, floating in the blackness of space. Star clusters sparkle like diamonds on black velvet. Everything has scale, depth, and context. They’re actual things, not abstractions. And far from making me feel like I’m an insignificant little nothing–unlike, say, watching an episode of Entourage–I actually feel like I’m part of something spectacular. Capturing images myself would be an extension of that first-person experience. I want to record these things, and share them, as I see them.
Astrophotography is a black art of the first order, and, frankly, I suck at it. Every one of my previous efforts over the last 10 or so years has ended in frustration, usually after sitting stock-still next to my scope for hours, shivering to death on fantastically cold nights. Fortunately, though, technology may finally be catching up with my own incompetence. The digital revolution swept amateur astrophotography a decade ago, and new cameras are more powerful and much easier to use than they were when CCD’s first crashed in from outer space back then. You can now shoot the universe with everything from consumer DSLR’s to $100 “planet cams” to ultra-sensitive, ultra-expensive CCD cameras that come with cooling fans, cryogenics, and finely tuned sensors. You also have exceptionally capable image-capturing and processing software that allows you to better control the camera and pull out the hidden details in these usually very dark shots. So with this in mind, I decided to finally commit myself to conquering my demon, to making an astro-image truly worth showing off.
My SBIG Camera
I turned to one of the leaders in the astro-photo biz, the Santa Barbara Instrument Group, or SBIG. They sent over an ST-4000XCM, a 4.2 megapixel color camera with an integrated cooling fan–this minimizes visual “noise” in your images that an overheated sensor can cause–and a built-in autoguider. This technology helps compensate for minor errors in your telescope’s alignment, which is critical when you start taking exposures longer than a minute or so. Essentially, the autoguider analyzes the view, locks on to specific stars, and makes constant adjustments to the telescope to keep everything in alignment. You won’t have images with stars burning streaks across the frame–they’ll remain fine points.
My Celestron Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope
Having been an avid telescope consumer my entire adult life–I have, like, nine–I had a good head start in terms of the rest of the basic equipment. One of my scopes happens to be great for astrophotography. It’s a computerized, 8-inch aperture Schmidt-Cassegrain from Celestron. (Schmidt-Cassegrains use a combination of mirrors and lenses to cram a lot of focal length and aperture into a compact tube. And the more aperture you have, the more light, and detail, you can bring in.) I’m able to align the motorized mount so that it can track smoothly, and I’ve got the super-sturdy mount option to minimize the shakes.
The Camera Mounted
One my first night, my target was Jupiter, which is positioned nicely in the sky right now–fairly low on the horizon and centered along the ecliptic in the early evening. After spending about an hour installing and experimenting with SBIG’s CCDOPS software, I wired everything up to the scope. The computer recognized the camera and began pulling in data about its temperature and various other parameters that I’ve yet to fully comprehend. Before I attached the camera, I’d centered the scope on the planet, and she looked beautiful through the eyepiece–three moons visible, nice detail in the cloud bands. When I took the eyepiece out and put the camera back in, the image on my laptop showed barely a hint of yellow blob. Since the eyepiece and camera focus at different points, the crisp view was long gone. The CCDOPS software solves this with a Focus function–it takes a steady stream of quick images so you can make adjustments between each shot. Within a few minutes, I was pleased to see a much more defined yellow blob. It was obviously overexposed, but I figured the camera would help me tame the shot in good time.
Finally, I started grabbing images. I tried exposures from 1/30th of a second down to 1/60th and up through a full second. Each time the image came back looking roughly the same. I also tried the software’s Planet Master function, in which the computer takes over and tries to grab the best shots in a rapid sequence. I had no better luck. This, however, I’d anticipated. It was my first night with an extremely sophisticated and complicated camera. I was just going to learn its rough functionality and then dive in with the manual once I’d had some degree of familiarity with it. So I packed it in, sent my shot to Michael Barber, an engineer at SBIG, and cracked open the book. Within a few minutes, Michael got back to me. I’d assumed that my shot was badly out of focus, but I was actually just being too ambitious. “That shot’s actually pretty well focused,” Barber told me. “The problem with planets is the great dynamic range and the brightness. The exposure is too long and the planet is saturated and burned out. You need to shorten the exposure time for Jupiter.”
A glob? No problem–globular clusters are among my favorite sights. These clusters of tens of thousands of stars are fascinating targets. You can stare at M13 in Hercules for hours and watch it unpack more and more individual stars as your eyes adapt to the sight. The next night, I went straight for Hercules.
My Shot of the M13 Cluster
My luck improved. I focused the camera and started experimenting with exposures. I tried three minutes, two minutes, 60 seconds, and 45 seconds. Each time, I got something that actually looked something like my view at the eyepiece. There are clearly still problems with my technique–the image still needs a few focus tweaks, and I suspect that there are settings I’m not familiar with that will help refine my shooting. But it’s my first successful, coherent astrophotograph. It’s a fine image, if I do say so myself–thanks to some contrast adjustments to darken the background–but it’s still a first try from a CCD novice, and it doesn’t quite capture the experience the way I want it to. Plus, I haven’t even scratched the surface of this camera’s capability–there are plenty of other features that can enhance my imaging, and plenty of ways I can tweak the image on the computer to get the best possible results.
Next, after some further schooling, I’ll go back to Jupiter, try M13 again, and then, hopefully, go intergalactic.
How cold is space? And how hot is the sun? These are both excellent questions. Unlike our mild habitat here on Earth, our solar system is full of temperature extremes. The sun is a bolus of gas and fire measuring around 27 million degrees Fahrenheit at its core and 10,000 degrees at its surface. Meanwhile, the cosmic background temperature—the temperature of space once you get far enough away to escape Earth’s balmy atmosphere—hovers at -455 F.
But how can one part of our galactic neighborhood be freezing when another is searing? Scholars (and NFL players) have puzzled over this paradox for time eternal.
If the sun is hot how is outer space cold ?
— Jacoby Brissett (@JBrissett12) July 10, 2023
Well, there’s a reasonable explanation. Heat travels through the cosmos as radiation, an infrared wave of energy that migrates from hotter objects to cooler ones. The radiation waves excite molecules they come in contact with, causing them to heat up. This is how heat travels from the sun to Earth, but the catch is that radiation only heats molecules and matter that are directly in its path. Everything else stays chilly. Take Mercury: the nighttime temperature of the planet can be 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit lower than the radiation-exposed day-side, according to NASA.
Compare that to Earth, where the air around you stays warm even if you’re in the shade—and even, in some seasons, in the dark of night. That’s because heat travels throughout our beautiful blue planet by three methods instead of just one: conduction, convection, and radiation. When the sun’s radiation hits and warms up molecules in our atmosphere, they pass that extra energy to the molecules around them. Those molecules then bump into and heat up their own neighbors. This heat transfer from molecule to molecule is called conduction, and it’s a chain reaction that warms areas outside of the sun’s path.
[Related: What happens to your body when you die in space?]
Space, however, is a vacuum—meaning it’s basically empty. Gas molecules in space are too few and far apart to regularly collide with one another. So even when the sun heats them with infrared waves, transferring that heat via conduction isn’t possible. Similarly, convection—a form of heat transfer that happens in the presence of gravity—is important in dispersing warmth across the Earth, but doesn’t happen in zero-g space.
These are things Elisabeth Abel, a thermal engineer on NASA’s DART project, thinks about as she prepares vehicles and devices for long-term voyages through space. This is especially true when she was working on the Parker Solar Probe, she says.
As you can probably tell by its name, the Parker Solar Probe is part of NASA’s mission to study the sun. It zooms through the outermost layer of the star’s atmosphere, called the corona, collecting data. In April 2023, the probe got within 6.5 million miles of the inferno, the closest a spacecraft has ever been to the sun. The heat shield projected on one side of the probe makes this possible.
“The job of that heat shield,” Abel says, is to make sure “none of the solar radiation [will] touch anything on the spacecraft.” So, while the heat shield is experiencing the extreme heat (around 250 degrees F) of our host star, the spacecraft itself is much colder—around -238 degrees F, she says.
[Related: How worried should we be about solar flares and space weather?]
As the lead thermal engineer for DART—a small spacecraft designed to collide with an asteroid and nudge it off course—Abel takes practical steps to manage the temperatures of deep space. The extreme variation in temperature between the icy void and the boiling heat of the sun poses unique challenges. Some parts of the spacecraft needed help staying cool enough to avoid shorting out, while others required heating elements to keep them warm enough to function.
Preparing for temperature shifts of hundreds of degrees might sound wild, but it’s just how things are out in space. The real oddity is Earth: Amidst the extreme cold and fiery hot, our atmosphere keeps things surprisingly mild—at least for now.
This story has been updated. It was originally published on July 24, 2023.
Update the detailed information about Why Is One Monitor Brighter Than The Other & How To Fix It on the Kientrucdochoi.com website. We hope the article's content will meet your needs, and we will regularly update the information to provide you with the fastest and most accurate information. Have a great day!