Got a 4K screen, end of pixel peeping?

Chris2500dk

Top Veteran
So I finally got around to replacing my 25" 2560x1440 Dell monitor with a LG 27UD58 27" 4K one. I find that the prices are reasonable now, and spending a lot of time looking at photos and working with photos I felt I could justify the expense. Fortulately my wife agreed :D

At first I was surprised at how much bigger a 27" screen is compared to a 25", it's very noticable and very nice. And of course the resolution is wonderful for pictures and with a bit of adjusting the UI scaling it works great for "regular windows stuff".

What really surprised me is how it changed the way I look at pictures, with the old monitor I found myself constantly zooming to 100% pixel resolution to "check the details", especially with my Sigma DP Merrill images as they have a very unique look at pixel level resolution.
Or so I thought, on the old screen they looked very special indeed, but on the new screen not so much. The difference between full screen view and "100%" is much smaller now and maybe that's why, I'm not sure I can explain it correctly but I think the aliasing and "full color readout per pixel" of the Foveon sensor combined with the large pixels of the old screen ended up giving that look.
It still looks great on the new monitor, looks even better than before, but now the other cameras look great too :)

I now find myself looking more at "the whole picture" than peeping at the details, probably because I can see the details much better while looking at the whole thing.

Sadly this also means that cropping 2560x1440 images from a single Merrill file no longer works as well, as it's not filling the screen so I no longer have the illusion of "lossless digital zoom".

Did any of you experience something similar going to a 4K display?
 

mike3996

Hall of Famer
Location
Finland
I'm now waking up to the idea that maybe I should treat myself to a decent monitor, for the amount I spend on editing and PP it makes sense to splurge a little bit.

I'm currently sporting a 24" Asus 1920x1080 and now I'm entertaining a 32" Philips 4K.

And was just thinking about the same things as you have mused here. With hi-DPI monitors (the Philips I'm considering is in-between, which is fine for me) it is true that you start to lose pixel-peepability.

The insights you shared with us appear remarkable indeed. Who knows if this is the way I could shed my own pixel peeping tendencies. This could be an affordable way to kick my Leica habit! :D Wish this subforum was more active, would love to hear more about 4K in PP.
 
I've been using an iMac with a 27" Retina 4K screen since 2016 and I remember I had to get used it: pixel-peeping just wasn't the same anymore. If I want to see details on a pixel level I zoom in to 200 %. Due to the display's resolution and dimensions I often view pictures in full-screen mode because that resembles a nice print size of 35 x 53 cm (3:2 aspect ratio) and if that looks good, I'm happy. I often can see all kinds of aberrations zoomed in to 200 %, but that in itself doesn't bother me. At one point in time I set out to put the Zeiss Loxia 2/35's aberrartions at max. aperture to good use, but that failed: when looking at the full-screen picture, they were all but unnoticeable and the image looked almost flawless. Same for subtle bokeh effects and apparent depth-of-field.
 
Last edited:

rayvonn

Hall of Famer
A while ago I treated myself on a 27"Philips UHD (3840x2160) monitor. It was quite cheap (€ 249.00 VAT included). I really love it. It gives the pics from the good old X-Pro1 the display they deserve.
René.
That’s useful, it would be interesting to hear any other recommendations too in terms of value.
 
Last edited:

mike3996

Hall of Famer
Location
Finland
Now I'm looking into 4K TVs as computer displays. 😅 :eek:

43-49-inch 4K UHD IPS tv's cost basically the same as one 28-32-inch dedicated PC monitor in 4K resolution. Only you can't actually get IPS panels in PC monitors that affordably.

The pixels are large but not at all humongous -- in 48" TV panel the pixel density comes down to same as my current 24" FullHD one. This pretty much means I could be getting quadruple the screen estate, as if I had four of my current monitors glued in a 2x2 matrix.

Huge implications for my purposes as I also try to occasionally write code and in this affair there's never too much screen estate.

The big questions are about viewing angles, the poorer-quality panels they usually use and all that jazz.
 

mike3996

Hall of Famer
Location
Finland
Not bad René :)

For some reason it doesn't seem to be the case in Finland. The usual stores are big on gaming/movie displays with VA panels mainly.

I would love a medium/hiDPI monitor (such as a 27" 4K one) for raw development. Gorgeous crispness and stuff. But there are physical constraints and issues with this approach. Need more screen estate for other work that I do. 4K monitor at 150% scaling means an effective screen estate of 2560x1440 (~3.6 MP) which is not enough alone. I currently have about that amount of estate between two displays, it's not enough for enjoyable coding.

So what then? A second monitor? It will be difficult to fit a second one so that there's at least one in a direct line in front of me. 🤔 Compromises all around. At least with a TV I get way more bigger pic previews, and the pixels will be somewhat smaller as I can lean back on my chair and still get this huge image...
 

mike3996

Hall of Famer
Location
Finland
What really surprised me is how it changed the way I look at pictures, with the old monitor I found myself constantly zooming to 100% pixel resolution to "check the details", especially with my Sigma DP Merrill images as they have a very unique look at pixel level resolution.
Or so I thought, on the old screen they looked very special indeed, but on the new screen not so much.

So I went for it and bought myself a very cheap 4K UHD IPS panel by LG. I tried to weigh my needs across the different things that I do so a cheap TV has some merits.

Absolutely not an ideal tool for developing photos, this thing.

But let me say, even if I run this thing at its 89 DPI, the sheer resolution and size alone makes everything look bigger than life. Suddenly every picture appears as 16x24" or 30x20" with raw developer tools visible on the side.

Above all, some Fuji shots benefit from this look tremendously, and that leveling that was mentioned is happening. This can help a lot with the pixel peeping.
 

Latest threads

Top Bottom