Are 4K TV's of consequence to a still photographer?

Discussion in 'Digital Darkroom' started by fast_primes, Dec 20, 2014.

  1. I'm in the market for a photography oriented computer monitor (as in decent specs) to also serve as a TV (HDMI input). Should 4K TVs come under consideration? What about such things as IPS, calibration, gamut, etc.? Budget is $400 max.
  2. 4K monitors, not TVs, are still much more than your budget, but the prices are coming down rapidly.
    I was told by a person who is using a 4K TV as a monitor, that's it's not supposed to be as durable, maybe, but he's using it anyhow. I've heard that the TVs are not as responsive?
    I'm still waiting and using a 2560x1440 in the meantime.
  3. The new iMac is available with a 4K monitor. A 4K TV might be good for viewing, but can't be calibrated, nor conform to the usual color space conventions.
    4K is cutting edge when you record video at 60 fps, but as a still, it's only 8 MP.
  4. $400 max, that resolution isn't going to happen, and certainly not for a panel with sufficient quality for photographic work; for that price, look for a 24 inch 16:10 IPS monitor, then you can get something of really decent quality.
  5. Save on and get a 4K monitor when you can. I am quite happy with my Samsung. (currently 410 Euro & more around here)
    Disclaimer: I don't have the toys to attempt calibrating monitors. I am aware that I should probably bite the bullet and get an additional Eizo on sale out for critical color tweaking work. But all that aside: The viewing pleasure on a high res screen is unbeatable. Its nice to be able to see all these megapixels on a screen and considering my job triggered desinterest in printing my own stuff for myself, its all I want to do (on my own).
    I don't watch TV, so I don't know what it takes to display it on a computer screen, but still the 27" 4k monitors appear cheaper than 4K TVs.
    I agree with Edward that all your camera's pixels would be even nicer to have on a monitor but I took what I could get & don't regret yet. - For pixel peeping they might be a bit too cramped (for my eyes at least)
  6. The new iMac is available with a 4K monitor. A 4K TV might be good for viewing, but can't be calibrated, nor conform to the usual color space conventions.​
    There are ways to calibrate an high-def TV (sorta), so I assume it can be done for a 4k TV as well. It's not nearly as precise as what we photographers think of as calibration, but I calibrated my TV and the picture looks better. Basically, you play a DVD and adjust the TV settings. Like I said, not nearly as precise as using a Colormunki or Spyder, but better than nothing.
  7. I calibrate my downstairs computer monitor/TV with my Colorvision Spyder just like I do with my upstairs computer monitor.
    What is it about the 4K monitors/TVs that won't allow them to be calibrated in this manner?
  8. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    I think the new iMac is 5K? This is so one can edit 4K video and still have room on the sides for editing tools
    Everything is too small on a 4K monitor for me. I have a 27" at 2560x1440 and is about as high of a resolution as I would want to go
  9. digitaldog

    digitaldog Andrew Rodney

    What about such things as IPS, calibration, gamut, etc.? Budget is $400 max.​
    IF a wide gamut display with high quality calibration is important, you'll have to up your budget at least 4-5X+ and go for NEC SpectralView or Eizo's solutions. 4K or not, the display's Apple and most other's provide can't hold a candle to these high-end reference displays systems if again, gamut and calibration, control over purity across the display, high bit internal display processing is important.
  10. 4K TV's might be great for playing videos or DVD's, but my guess (and I may be wrong) is that we will not be seeing many 4K TV channels, since the required bandwidth for a single channel will support several HDTV channels (along with the several times more advertisements).
  11. I recently upgrading from an old HP XW6000 workstation with a 21" CRT display to a new to me HP Z600 workstation. I considered the low end 28" 4K displays from Dell, Samsung and Asus. I would have to buy new video card because the video card that came with the workstaion while decent doesn't support 4K. When I checked out the monitors in the store because all these low end units are not IPS and the contrast is severely affected by the viewing angle.
    In the end, I settle for a pair of used NEC LCD2090UXp's for $60 each and while these are not IPS they don't seem to suffer from viewing angle. I like them for the fact that I can calibrate them with NEC spectraview and the software made adjustments to the monitor and not to the ICC profile on the workstation. In the end I am quite happy with the setup.
  12. "5K" is Apple's own term for their monitor, but it is larger than 4K. As Eric said, it specifically can display full size motion video on the "4K" part of the monitor, with enough real estate left over to display the Final Cut menus and such at the same time.
    It's clearly meant for hotshot video makers. They haven't made the screen available without the iMac in it for the Mac Pro yet. I think the idea on the latter is that you are supposed to have two 4K monitors, anyhow. :|
  13. Leaving aside using the unit for photo editing, it seems to me that using a 4K HDTV to show slide shows to guests ought to be pretty nice.
  14. The coming Winter Consumer Electronics Show starts on Jan. 6. Samsung has already announced new UHD sets with IPS display panels, likely 10 bit processing, and decoding to handle 4K streaming. So things are being notched up a bit in terms of display performance, at a price of course. SONY and LG will probably introduce similar offerings.
    If one is willing to work with calibration via a computer video card (assuming it will drive a 4K display), one could hook up a computer to a UHD display and enjoy some level of calibration when using it with a computer--but certainly not to the level of performance of an NEC or other advanced monitor.

Share This Page