A few questions regarding 4K vs 2K vs 1080

IndyFab
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · A few questions regarding 4K vs 2K vs 1080

1) If you edit on 1080, and view it on 4K or 2K will your sharpening look over sharpened on those monitors
Conversely if you sharpen on 4K or 2K and view on 1080 will your sharpening look less sharp on 1080.

2) Regarding both Mac & Windows OS, when using 2 or 4K monitors using Adobe LR & PS will there be a scaling issue. I remember reading folks using 4K complained about scaling issues. Has that now been remedied?

Thanks !!

Nov 20, 2023 at 04:14 PM

RoamingScott
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · A few questions regarding 4K vs 2K vs 1080

How are you actually viewing? Are you playing the file itself on various screens, or uploading to various streaming sites?

Nov 20, 2023 at 04:16 PM

IndyFab
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · A few questions regarding 4K vs 2K vs 1080

RoamingScott wrote:
How are you actually viewing? Are you playing the file itself on various screens, or uploading to various streaming sites?

I presume you are referring to video, my question was regarding viewing a single image file.

Sorry I didn't make that clear.

Nov 20, 2023 at 05:12 PM

CanadaMark
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · A few questions regarding 4K vs 2K vs 1080

IndyFab wrote:
1) If you edit on 1080, and view it on 4K or 2K will your sharpening look over sharpened on those monitors
Conversely if you sharpen on 4K or 2K and view on 1080 will your sharpening look less sharp on 1080.

2) Regarding both Mac & Windows OS, when using 2 or 4K monitors using Adobe LR & PS will there be a scaling issue. I remember reading folks using 4K complained about scaling issues. Has that now been remedied?
Thanks !!

I thought you were talking about video as well but I think I understand your question now.

4K monitors are not ideal for certain editing tasks (particularly sharpening or any pixel level adjustments) because the pixels are so small that you lose acutance unless you have superhuman vision and can see the individual pixels. If you are zooming into 200-300%, each pixel in your image is being displayed by more than one monitor pixel and you are no longer looking at an accurate representation of the image in terms of acutance. Lots of people still use 4K monitors for these purposes, but it's just not ideal - the difference is being able to discern almost sharp from critically sharp and for some people that will not matter depending on their thresholds for what they think is acceptable image sharpness or even how good the individual's own vision is. This is the reason many editors have a higher quality 1440P monitor in addition to their high resolution display - the lower resolution monitor is used for critical editing tasks, the higher resolution monitor for general use because they make everything look artificially better. 99% of your audience viewing your photos will also not be viewing them on 4K displays, so they may not look as you've intended them to if your editing was done to look a certain way on a 4K display.

To answer your question, 4K displays make everything look sharper, so you are more likely to under-sharpen your images if editing on a 4K display. Ideally, you want to be doing your sharpening on a monitor that can show you 1:1 pixel display at a reasonable size that is comfortable for you view. This will give you the most accurate representation for critical work such as preparing a photo for print.

Scaling issues are also annoying with 4K+ displays, but that is software and OS dependent - some software deals with it better than others. Photoshop allows you to scale the interface to 200% or whatever so it is actually legible. It's not as annoying as it used to be but it still isn't perfect. In my opinion anyway, it somewhat defeats the purpose of a high resolution monitor for editing if you are always having to do something to deal with the fact that the resolution is so high, such as scaling (which in itself isn't always done well) and having to zoom into 200%++. YMMV.

If I were you, I would spend whatever premium you would be paying to go from 1080P or 1440P to 4K and put that into a better quality panel instead for color accuracy, but again YMMV depending on your own preferences and the end use of your images. If you're just sharing with family or posting web sized images online, frankly it doesn't really matter. 27" 1440P is the sweet spot for editing for most people, but if your primary use is media consumption then it's a lot easier to make an argument for 4K+ (if you video card can handle the things you want to do with it) because there is no denying the high resolution monitors are gorgeous to look at.

Nov 21, 2023 at 01:09 PM

IndyFab
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · A few questions regarding 4K vs 2K vs 1080

Thank you Mark, your response was very helpful, as this was exactly what I was thinking, thank you for confirming my thoughts.

Now onto the next step, picking out a monitor in the 1080 or 1440 range

I know the usual suspects is going to be BenQ, Dell, LG, Eizo, ProArt.

Most of my editing is for family, internet, and occasionally printing

Any specific 27" models you would like to point me to?

Thanks Indy

Nov 21, 2023 at 03:37 PM

CanadaMark
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · A few questions regarding 4K vs 2K vs 1080

IndyFab wrote:
Thank you Mark, your response was very helpful, as this was exactly what I was thinking, thank you for confirming my thoughts.

Now onto the next step, picking out a monitor in the 1080 or 1440 range

I know the usual suspects is going to be BenQ, Dell, LG, Eizo, ProArt.

Most of my editing is for family, internet, and occasionally printing

Any specific 27" models you would like to point me to?

Thanks Indy

What is your budget? The gold standard is the Eizo CG2700S for around $2,500 USD (without getting into ridiculous territory anyway). That is a 27" 1440P monitor with a true 10bit panel, proper built-in hardware calibration with a 16bit LUT, and dynamic brightness uniformity correction among other things. This is the ideal monitor for hobbyist/professional photo editing and as far as I know it has no competition now that NEC has left that market. The calibration sensor is actually built into the top bezel and automatically drops down to calibrate the monitor - it's very slick.

One step down from that (and half the price) is the Eizo CS2731, also 27" 1440P. It's very similar to the above option but requires you to use your own external calibration device (rather than built into the monitor) but it still has a proper 16bit hardware LUT. It doesn't include a monitor hood, and it doesn't support HDR (total non issue unless you do specific video work). Combined with a colorimeter this could be a nice happy medium for you. It is compatible with virtually every popular colorimeter from X-Rite, Spyder, etc. B&H sells a bundle that includes the colorimeter for an extra $150 or so ($1,375).

There are 4K versions of both above monitors at a significant price premium.

If you were hoping to spend less, any monitor you can find with a 10bit IPS panel and a hardware LUT will be a good choice but pricing probably won't be much different than the cheaper Eizo. You will need a separate colorimeter for calibration as well in most cases.

If you want to spend even less, honestly it starts to not really matter - any monitor with a decent IPS panel will do the job, combined with software calibration (accomplished by using the same colorimeters sold by X-Rite, Spyder, etc.) is going to get you to roughly the same place. These are nowhere near as good as monitors with proper hardware calibration, but reach the "good enough" threshold for a lot of folks and would be fine for web sharing, etc. Nothing wrong with this either as long as you understand the limitations and are OK with them. I would avoid monitors with glossy coatings as well unless you only edit in a completely dark room.

No matter what you choose, calibration needs to be done on a regular basis, and any monitor you see that claims to be calibrated at the factory is only temporary.

Nov 21, 2023 at 04:14 PM

IndyFab
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · A few questions regarding 4K vs 2K vs 1080

Mark I have a question, if I was to buy a 4K monitor, are there capabilities within a specific monitor model that allows you to change to a lower resolution for photo editing. If so, that may be an option.

This way you have best of both worlds, a little 4K video editing when I want, and then switch to 1440 for photo editing.

Another question, if I am using a 1080 screen on my laptop, and use a 1440 external monitor, how will the windows page match up to fill the screen
___________________________________________________________________________

I did do a little looking and Dell just came out with a new 1440 monitor Dell UltraSharp 27 Monitor - U2724D $479 & the U2724DE $649 which includes a internal hub. It looks like its replacing the U2722D & DE

Specs are:
2560 x 1440 at 120 Hz

Color Gamut
100% sRGB
100% BT.709
98% Display P3
98% DCI-P3
Delta E < 2 (average) (sRGB
BT.709
Display P3
DCI-P3)

color support
1.07 billion colors - 10bit >> need to check further if its 8bit FCR to 10bit

Nit 350 > wish it was 500 Nits

Contrast Ratio
2000 to 1 (typical)

Panel Type
IPS Black Technology / Darker Blacks

Viewing Angle
178°vertical / 178°°horizontal

It's not an Eizo, but it doesn't look to bad

I did watch a video on Eizo and was aware of the different between a self calibrating monitor, and one you need to do manually.. The self calibrating is pretty cool stress free alternative, but as you say, at a price.

Nov 21, 2023 at 07:47 PM

CanadaMark
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · A few questions regarding 4K vs 2K vs 1080

IndyFab wrote:
Mark I have a question, if I was to buy a 4K monitor, are there capabilities within a specific monitor model that allows you to change to a lower resolution for photo editing. If so, that may be an option.

This way you have best of both worlds, a little 4K video editing when I want, and then switch to 1440 for photo editing.

Another question, if I am using a 1080 screen on my laptop, and use a 1440 external monitor, how will the windows page match up to fill the screen
___________________________________________________________________________

I did do a little looking and Dell...Show more →

No, there are no photo editing monitors that let you change the native resolution - at least none that I have ever seen and none of the popular models have that ability. Anything like that would involve some kind of scaling if you were going from 4K down to a lower resolution or from a lower resolution up to 4K. Any time there is scaling, you are introducing even more variables. The only display I am aware of at all that has a dual native resolution is on a Razer Blade 16 (a gaming laptop) and I would have to do some more research to understand exactly how they are doing that or if it's more of a marketing trick.

If your laptop is 1080P and your external monitor is 1440P, that is no problem, Windows can easily display different native resolutions on both and even different refresh rates on both if applicable. At work (not my photo editing setup), I have 3 monitors, with two monitors running at 1920X1080 and a laptop running 2880X1920 - so, different aspect ratios and resolutions. One additional benefit of getting a monitor with hardware-based calibration is that since the calibration is in the monitor itself, no matter what computer you connect it to, it will always be perfectly accurate. This is useful for people who might have a desktop and a laptop, but wish to use the monitor with both. It is also useful for people with multiple identical monitors, since there is always sample variation, hardware calibration allows you to have multiple monitors that all look truly identical (I know that probably doesn't apply to your situation). The same is not true with a software-calibrated monitor as it is reliant on an ICC Profile instructing a particular computer's GPU to alter/approximate colors in a certain way.

That Dell monitor looks OK and would fit into the third category in my previous post. It's a decent IPS panel with no hardware calibration LUT and you would be software calibrating it with the colorimeter of your choice. True 10bit panels are pretty rare, so at that price point I would venture a guess that it is 8bit + dithering/FRC, but that isn't the end of the world if it's done well. Even Apple's egregiously overpriced Studio display uses an 8bit panel with dithering so that they can claim 10bit/1.07B colors in their marketing materials. I took a quick look and I can't find anything that confirms if that Dell monitor has a true 10bit panel or not (no professional reviews out yet that I can see). Even for reviewers, generally they can only confirm what bit depth the monitor supports, rather than the true native bit depth of the display, so often that information has to come from the manufacturer themselves.

So that Dell monitor (or anything of similar quality/spec), when calibrated, would probably be fine for your usage assuming that is online sharing and the occasional print. At the end of the day, it's up to you how much you care about working with objectively perfect color, or if "good enough" will suffice - there's nothing wrong with either choice. I am a strong advocate of always buying based on your needs, and maybe a bit of your anticipated future needs. If you were doing lots of printing or any professional work (or plan to in the future), I would be more inclined to steer you towards one of the Eizo displays. If 90% of your use is online sharing where the overwhelming majority of people viewing your photos aren't using calibrated displays, the difference between "good enough" and "perfect" is far less important.

Nov 22, 2023 at 12:32 PM

IndyFab
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · A few questions regarding 4K vs 2K vs 1080

CanadaMark wrote:
No, there are no photo editing monitors that let you change the native resolution - at least none that I have ever seen and none of the popular models have that ability. Anything like that would involve some kind of scaling if you were going from 4K down to a lower resolution or from a lower resolution up to 4K. Any time there is scaling, you are introducing even more variables. The only display I am aware of at all that has a dual native resolution is on a Razer Blade 16 (a gaming laptop) and I would have to do some more research to understand exactly how they are doing that or if it's more of a marketing trick.

If your laptop is 1080P and your external monitor is 1440P, that is no problem, Windows can easily display different native resolutions on both and even different refresh rates on both if applicable. At work (not my photo editing setup), I have 3 monitors, with two monitors running at 1920X1080 and a laptop running 2880X1920 - so, different aspect ratios and resolutions. One additional benefit of getting a monitor with hardware-based calibration is that since the calibration is in the monitor itself, no matter what computer you connect it to, it will always be perfectly accurate. This is useful for people who might have a desktop and a laptop, but wish to use the monitor with both. It is also useful for people with multiple identical monitors, since there is always sample variation, hardware calibration allows you to have multiple monitors that all look truly identical (I know that probably doesn't apply to your situation). The same is not true with a software-calibrated monitor as it is reliant on an ICC Profile instructing a particular computer's GPU to alter/approximate colors in a certain way.

That Dell monitor looks OK and would fit into the third category in my previous post. It's a decent IPS panel with no hardware calibration LUT and you would be software calibrating it with the colorimeter of your choice. True 10bit panels are pretty rare, so at that price point I would venture a guess that it is 8bit + dithering/FRC, but that isn't the end of the world if it's done well. Even Apple's egregiously overpriced Studio display uses an 8bit panel with dithering so that they can claim 10bit/1.07B colors in their marketing materials. I took a quick look and I can't find anything that confirms if that Dell monitor has a true 10bit panel or not (no professional reviews out yet that I can see). Even for reviewers, generally they can only confirm what bit depth the monitor supports, rather than the true native bit depth of the display, so often that information has to come from the manufacturer themselves.

So that Dell monitor (or anything of similar quality/spec), when calibrated, would probably be fine for your usage assuming that is online sharing and the occasional print. At the end of the day, it's up to you how much you care about working with objectively perfect color, or if "good enough" will suffice - there's nothing wrong with either choice. I am a strong advocate of always buying based on your needs, and maybe a bit of your anticipated future needs. If you were doing lots of printing or any professional work (or plan to in the future), I would be more inclined to steer you towards one of the Eizo displays. If 90% of your use is online sharing where the overwhelming majority of people viewing your photos aren't using calibrated displays, the difference between "good enough" and "perfect" is far less important....Show more →

Thanks again for your reply Mark, I think you summed it up very nicely in your last paragraph. There's no doubt if I was doing loads of printing, and pursuing a professional carrier in photography, the Eizo would definitely be in my sight, especially the self calibrating mode.

Thanks again for all your help !!

Nov 22, 2023 at 08:27 PM

CanadaMark
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · A few questions regarding 4K vs 2K vs 1080

IndyFab wrote:
Thanks again for your reply Mark, I think you summed it up very nicely in your last paragraph. There's no doubt if I was doing loads of printing, and pursuing a professional carrier in photography, the Eizo would definitely be in my sight, especially the self calibrating mode.

Thanks again for all your help !!

Happy to help - good luck with your decision!

Nov 23, 2023 at 11:02 AM


FM Forums \| Post-processing & Printing \| Join Upload & Sell

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.