|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
November 22nd, 2006, 09:30 PM | #1 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Atlanta/USA
Posts: 2,515
|
Computer monitor advice: 4x3 or 16x9?
I am trying to make up my mind and I can find as many pros as cons for a new 16x9 aspect ratio LCD monitor.
Can anyone turn on the light for me please? What would be the real advantage of a 16x9? I am editing/authoring with Adobe on PC, mainly SD at the moment but got my feet wet and kind of like it in HD waters too. Thanks, |
November 23rd, 2006, 02:00 AM | #2 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: switzerland
Posts: 2,133
|
it depends where the signal come from and what the monitor is able to do.
if your 4/3 monitor is able to letterbox a 16/9 signal by adding black bars, i see no problem using a 4/3 monitor. if you 16/9 monitor is able to play 4/3 format by adding black bars on the side, there is no problem to go with this format. after this is made clear, the size and price of the monitor and other features will make the choice. |
November 23rd, 2006, 04:38 AM | #3 |
New Boot
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ballarat, Australia
Posts: 11
|
G'day Ervin,
Personally, I'd go with the widescreen if there isn't a huge price differential. Everything just feels more roomy. When it comes to media editing, all the apps seem to benefit more from extra horizontal space than verticle. In the end however, it comes down to personal preference and cost. If you can't justify the extra cost for yourself then it is not worth it. All that said, the primary feature to look for is resolution. There is no point getting a widescreen that can only do 1280x800 if you can get a 4:3 that can do 1600x1200 for roughtly the same price. The later will give you more space in both dimensions. Good luck! |
November 23rd, 2006, 06:35 AM | #4 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chandler, AZ
Posts: 86
|
Ervin,
I went through exactly what you're goin' through buddy! After weighing all the options I went with the 16:9 LCD. Reasons? I prefer all my real estate in one place. Some programs, like early versions of Avid, had issues stretching across two screens. (Now that could have just been my card bein' dumb, but it was still an issue I didn't want to face.) Another big reason for me was all the post production work I do in Combustion. I really wanted one big screen to see my composites. I currently work on a 24" Dell, with a res of 1920x1200, and I'm lovin' every pixel of it!! Now.. down the line a bit I’m probably going to end up getting, say, a 17” LCD just to have a little more land to play on, but all my editing and compositing will still be done off the primary 16:9. Take if for what it’s worth… (not much) ;-) Peace, |
November 23rd, 2006, 06:46 AM | #5 |
RED Code Chef
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Holland
Posts: 12,514
|
Giroud: I don't think he's looking for an external "broadcast" monitor
I love the 24" DELL screen too. Have 2 of them at home here. That would be my advice, get 2 of those together with a broadcast monitor for accurate color work (or get one of those devices to calibrate your TFT screen). I tend to like more than 1 monitor, but if you can only get 1 I would go with a widescreen (especially if you can afford a 24" one like that DELL). Gives you more space for the timeline (assuming the horizontal resolution is larger than the 4:3 monitor you would buy). A 30" at 2560 x 1600 is just a bit too large for my day to day work. But if you do a lot of editing / audio work I can imagine that is a nice screen to have. I would probably go for two 24" screens though to have more resolution and more flexibility for less money.
__________________
Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge | Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers | Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors |
November 23rd, 2006, 12:38 PM | #6 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: switzerland
Posts: 2,133
|
yes , if you are speaking about PC monitor, i am very happy with my dual 24" Dell.
before i got a 3 x 17" setup , but a 2x24" is definitely better. |
November 23rd, 2006, 12:51 PM | #7 |
Wrangler
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Mays Landing, NJ
Posts: 11,800
|
I'm on a Mac, but I agree with the others. I have the Apple 24" LCD which is 1920x1200, like the Dell. It's great for all kinds of work. I'm not a fan of dual monitors but that's just my personal preference; I have a couple other widescreen LCD's that I can plug in if I need them.
Minor point: most of these widescreen monitors are actually 16:10 and not 16:9. If you want to view HD on them, look for one with a mode that letterboxes 1920x1080 on the 1920x1200 screen. |
November 23rd, 2006, 01:01 PM | #8 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Atlanta/USA
Posts: 2,515
|
Sorry, I forgot to mention, what I am looking for is a PC monitor, not a video monitor.
Anyone bought this one? Sceptre X20WG-Naga 20" 16:10 Wide LCD: 20.1" WSXGA+ Digital Video TFT LCD HD Ready Ultra High 1680 x 1050 resolution Ultra High contrast 1000:1 Ultra Wide Screen Dual Page display* DVI, VGA and Speaker Ultra Wide Viewing Angle 160/160 (Full specs on the manufacturer's website: http://www.sceptre.com/Products/LCD/...20wg_Naga.htm). It's on sale at Costco for $199 after rebate... |
November 23rd, 2006, 01:50 PM | #9 |
Trustee
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Rotterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 1,832
|
This might be alternative and the price is around € 1.250, contrary to what the article says:
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=5016 |
| ||||||
|
|