32" or 40" Screen Too Much? at DVinfo.net

Jeff Krepner · August 18th, 2009, 11:48 AM

I'm in a situation where I need extra screen real estate for my MBP--but once the basement studio build-out is complete (that is once it gets started..) I'd possibly use it for the Mac Pro tower.

The 24" LED Mac display is perfect of course with the newer MBP (power, display port cable), but a pretty expensive option all things considered for a relatively small screen. The 30" Cinema display is 2560x1600, which I feel makes everything way too tiny to be useful for editors (not to mention it is really expensive). I know some people have posted links to their edit suites where they are running LCD TV's.

Best Buy has a really sweet 40" 1080P LED LCD 120mhz Samsung on sale for $1399 from $2199.
Samsung - 40" Class / 1080p / 120Hz / LCD-LED HDTV - UN40B6000V

That is actually cheaper than the 32"
Samsung - 32" Class / 1080p / 120Hz / LCD-LED HDTV - UN32B6000V

Of course that would look a bit silly sitting on a desk, huh?

Do you feel a 32" or 40" LED LCD would fly for a main display? I think 1920x1080 is a pretty good resolution to work in for obvious reasons.

Thanks in advance.

Boyd Ostroff · August 18th, 2009, 01:37 PM

I think the 40" screen will have the opposite problem as the Mac 30" screen. Menus and text are going to look huge at 1920x1080 on that big a screen... like the "large print edition". Personally, I think a 23" or 24" screen is a pretty optimal size for desktop use at normal viewing distance.

The old Apple 23" screen and some of the older Dell and other brands were offering 1920x1200 resolution which I kind of like for computer work - gives you a few more pixels for programs like Photoshop, CAD, etc. and FCP is "smart" enough to know to letterbox 1920x1080 video.

I wanted to get another screen like this recently and looked at probably a dozen different models from Dell, Samsung, Sharp, etc. at Best Buy. Just about everything is 1920x1080 now. There was only one older model with 1920x1200 resolution and it was quite a bit more expensive than the same size 1920x1080 model.

William Hohauser · August 18th, 2009, 02:10 PM

I have a Samsung 24" as a main display and that's about as large as I would want it.

Jeff Krepner · August 18th, 2009, 02:53 PM

I'm a bit surprised actually to hear you guys can't imagine needing/wanting more than 24" display. My other system is 2 21" CRT displays so I'm used to having lots of space. The problem with 16x9 displays is that a 24" gives you about the same height as a 17" (or maybe 19") 4x3 display. Once you get more than 3 or 4 layers on sequence you have to start scrolling up and down. If you move the Canvas and Viewer to a second monitor to get more vert space for the sequences, then you have to move your head back and forth. I'm editing on a 24" now at a client site and I'm trying to imagine this with a 24" Cinema display in front and my 17" MBP to the side.

My thinking is that on a larger 32" 1920x1080 screen you could drag the sequence portion of your screen up about 2/3 of the way leaving 1/3rd leftover for your Canvas and Viewer (Browser would go to 2nd monitor). Since the screen is so much larger you could keep the layers smaller in the seq and still have enough space to see the Viewer.

I guess one could experiment within the 30 day return period, eh?

Chris Leffler · August 18th, 2009, 04:12 PM

I have a MBP 15" and a newer model Dell 24". I personally find my setup to be just perfect. I switch between the following arangements:

Browser on MBP and Canvas/Viewer/Timeline on 24"

or

Browser/Viewer/Timeline on MBP and Canvas on 24"

Boyd Ostroff · August 18th, 2009, 06:22 PM

Sorry Jeff, you've lost me there. The 40" or 32" screen is still 1920x1080 just like a 24". So all you get is bigger pixels, not more screen real estate. And you said you didn't like the Apple 30" screen which actually does have more pixels. So what exactly are you looking for?

I have a 24" iMac with 23" Apple Cinema Display connected via a Matrox MXO at work and find it a very nice setup for editing personally. At home I connect my 15" MBP to a 23" Apple Cinema Display as well. And I have a Dell PC with a 24" Dell screen at home too.

These all work quite well for me. If I wanted to spend the money, I wouldn't have any problem with the Apple 30" screen. Personally I find one huge screen better than two smaller ones since I do things like CAD, photoshop and 3d modeling.

Jeff Krepner · August 19th, 2009, 08:34 AM

Here we go, I found a couple of posts on this. I knew I couldn't be the only person thinking like this. Look at Glen's setup on this post.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/home-away...ml#post1179997

and some more from Glen Elliot:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/non-linea...-action-2.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glen Elliott

I see what you mean and agree. I originally worked on a 30" display (2560x1900) but the resolution was so high everything in FCP looked TINY! Even down to the little buttons and sliders. Working in the motion tab was tough. This is coming from someone who has no eye problems (well...not yet). :)

I opted for a large screen with lower res. I know it doesn't make sense because in essence I'm actually losing quite a bit of real-estate. However, it hasn't bothered be because FCP is so scalable I can now work with my timeline set to a notch smaller and have the content/text in the bins be small yet very easily readable (due to the display's size). In other words even though the res is much less FCP is set up to display everything smaller so more fits on screen. I never quite got into the dual monitor approach. It bothers me to have two bezels in the center of my vision- though many people swear by it.

I don't do much pixel for pixel viewing of my edit until the final cut is done and I'm going back a second time to work on the color of the imagery. Though I can see the benefit of doing so even apart from color correction.

It remains to be seen whether Color Correction was one of the reasons for opting for a second LED monitor. Andrew?

I hope it was ok to quote Mr. Elliot.

Boyd Ostroff · August 19th, 2009, 10:58 AM

That's all fine as far as I'm concerned. Everyone should use whatever works best for them. But you asked for our opinions and you got 'em. I have a 46" Sony Bravia in the living room and it's spectacular with bluray disks. NO WAY that I would want it "in my face" the way Glen has his.

To each his own....

Jeff Krepner · August 19th, 2009, 12:31 PM

Boyd, you are correct I did ask for opinions and I guess I didn't listen all that well. Thank you for your feedback. I'm still searching but leaning towards a 24" for now. As with all of this stuff, prices are dropping so maybe the wise thing to do is get something that does what I need now and not make too much of it.

Jeff

August 18th, 2009, 11:48 AM	#1
Jeff Krepner Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Timonium, MD Posts: 142	32" or 40" Screen Too Much? I'm in a situation where I need extra screen real estate for my MBP--but once the basement studio build-out is complete (that is once it gets started..) I'd possibly use it for the Mac Pro tower. The 24" LED Mac display is perfect of course with the newer MBP (power, display port cable), but a pretty expensive option all things considered for a relatively small screen. The 30" Cinema display is 2560x1600, which I feel makes everything way too tiny to be useful for editors (not to mention it is really expensive). I know some people have posted links to their edit suites where they are running LCD TV's. Best Buy has a really sweet 40" 1080P LED LCD 120mhz Samsung on sale for $1399 from $2199. Samsung - 40" Class / 1080p / 120Hz / LCD-LED HDTV - UN40B6000V That is actually cheaper than the 32" Samsung - 32" Class / 1080p / 120Hz / LCD-LED HDTV - UN32B6000V Of course that would look a bit silly sitting on a desk, huh? Do you feel a 32" or 40" LED LCD would fly for a main display? I think 1920x1080 is a pretty good resolution to work in for obvious reasons. Thanks in advance.

August 18th, 2009, 02:10 PM	#3
William Hohauser Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: New York City Posts: 2,650	I have a Samsung 24" as a main display and that's about as large as I would want it. __________________ William Hohauser - New York City Producer/Edit/Camera/Animation

August 18th, 2009, 01:37 PM	#2
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,800	I think the 40" screen will have the opposite problem as the Mac 30" screen. Menus and text are going to look huge at 1920x1080 on that big a screen... like the "large print edition". Personally, I think a 23" or 24" screen is a pretty optimal size for desktop use at normal viewing distance. The old Apple 23" screen and some of the older Dell and other brands were offering 1920x1200 resolution which I kind of like for computer work - gives you a few more pixels for programs like Photoshop, CAD, etc. and FCP is "smart" enough to know to letterbox 1920x1080 video. I wanted to get another screen like this recently and looked at probably a dozen different models from Dell, Samsung, Sharp, etc. at Best Buy. Just about everything is 1920x1080 now. There was only one older model with 1920x1200 resolution and it was quite a bit more expensive than the same size 1920x1080 model.

August 18th, 2009, 02:53 PM	#4
Jeff Krepner Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Timonium, MD Posts: 142	I'm a bit surprised actually to hear you guys can't imagine needing/wanting more than 24" display. My other system is 2 21" CRT displays so I'm used to having lots of space. The problem with 16x9 displays is that a 24" gives you about the same height as a 17" (or maybe 19") 4x3 display. Once you get more than 3 or 4 layers on sequence you have to start scrolling up and down. If you move the Canvas and Viewer to a second monitor to get more vert space for the sequences, then you have to move your head back and forth. I'm editing on a 24" now at a client site and I'm trying to imagine this with a 24" Cinema display in front and my 17" MBP to the side. My thinking is that on a larger 32" 1920x1080 screen you could drag the sequence portion of your screen up about 2/3 of the way leaving 1/3rd leftover for your Canvas and Viewer (Browser would go to 2nd monitor). Since the screen is so much larger you could keep the layers smaller in the seq and still have enough space to see the Viewer. I guess one could experiment within the 30 day return period, eh?

August 18th, 2009, 04:12 PM	#5
Chris Leffler Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Wescosville, PA Posts: 90	I have a MBP 15" and a newer model Dell 24". I personally find my setup to be just perfect. I switch between the following arangements: Browser on MBP and Canvas/Viewer/Timeline on 24" or Browser/Viewer/Timeline on MBP and Canvas on 24"

August 18th, 2009, 06:22 PM	#6
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,800	Sorry Jeff, you've lost me there. The 40" or 32" screen is still 1920x1080 just like a 24". So all you get is bigger pixels, not more screen real estate. And you said you didn't like the Apple 30" screen which actually does have more pixels. So what exactly are you looking for? I have a 24" iMac with 23" Apple Cinema Display connected via a Matrox MXO at work and find it a very nice setup for editing personally. At home I connect my 15" MBP to a 23" Apple Cinema Display as well. And I have a Dell PC with a 24" Dell screen at home too. These all work quite well for me. If I wanted to spend the money, I wouldn't have any problem with the Apple 30" screen. Personally I find one huge screen better than two smaller ones since I do things like CAD, photoshop and 3d modeling.

August 19th, 2009, 10:58 AM	#8
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,800	That's all fine as far as I'm concerned. Everyone should use whatever works best for them. But you asked for our opinions and you got 'em. I have a 46" Sony Bravia in the living room and it's spectacular with bluray disks. NO WAY that I would want it "in my face" the way Glen has his. To each his own....

August 19th, 2009, 12:31 PM	#9
Jeff Krepner Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Timonium, MD Posts: 142	Boyd, you are correct I did ask for opinions and I guess I didn't listen all that well. Thank you for your feedback. I'm still searching but leaning towards a 24" for now. As with all of this stuff, prices are dropping so maybe the wise thing to do is get something that does what I need now and not make too much of it. Jeff