PC Monitor for decent video resolution - HDMI?

[Mike Stranks]

What Ho!

I have an Asus 27" monitor on my desktop PC (Scan) which only has VGA and DVI inputs. I'm using DVI.

Now that I'm getting into semi-serious video work I'm discovering the inadequacies of my monitor. I've tried 'tweaking', but both colour rendition and screen resolution are pretty poor when compared to our modest TV. (Video I shoot is full HD (no plans for 4K) at 50fps.)

I'm considering changing to an HDMI monitor. Nothing too fancy - 27" in the £100-£150 (ish) price-point. NB it has to be 27" as it has to fit into a limited space - no room for expansion! The Scan PC has an HDMI output so no worries there.

Am I going to see a significant improvement in colour rendition and resolution if I switch to an HDMI monitor? Any recommendations at that size and price-point?

I thenk yew!

[CS70]

Bit depends on what shortcomings you experience. Resolution, refresh rate, or both?

DVI and HDMI can both support high resolution - 1920x1200 at 60Hz.
But if you want higher refresh rate, HDMI 2.0 supports 1440p at 144Hz , which DMI doesn't (you've gotta use a hi-speed cable). Make sure your output is HDMI 2.0 before buying.

As of colors, it's really about the panel, not the digital connection, and it's a bit like audio monitors: in the price range you indicate things will be pretty much as you have now, I guess. However, most monitors can be calibrated relatively ok.

Remember that like in audio, people will look and print with all sorts of devices so you need a to be able to make relative decisions, not absolute.

If you want better, you can measure the output in controlled conditions using an external hardware tool and use the results to make calibration moves (either on the screen itself or some software) - a bit like you would with a measurement mic.

I have an old Spyder 4 that I got cheap second hand and it's served me well but havent used it for a while now.

[Agharta]

1080P/50 is entry level so that is straightforward.
I suggest looking at your overall workflow and setting goals.
As well as resolution, look at bit depth, colour space, file format and target formats.
Your cameras will define the maximum native specs you can work with.
Then your software needs to accommodate those.
Then you decide what formats you deliver in.

The cheapest and easiest way to get a decent quality monitor for video work is probably to get one that is pre-calibrated and covers the colour spaces that you require.
27” will give you 1080P, 1440P or 4K.
The downside of 1440p is that it is not a whole number ratio of 1080P, so in full screen mode the video is interpolated.
Whereas with 4K it is exactly 4 times 1080P, at least with monitors.
For video do look at the differences between the terms 4K and UHD. Confusing.

Also consider the viewability of text at the native resolution of the screen and whether you like to use scaling.
If some of your software doesn’t scale well it might become unusable.
I’d be tempted to suggest a 4K screen and scale it with a 4 to 1 ratio. Not sure if that means 200%.
For 4K at standard refresh rates you will need HDMI 2.x.
Check which version you have as 1.x tops out at 4K/30.
If you have DisplayPort then that might work with an adapter, but only if you have a suitable version.

Note added.
HDMI 1.x is basically DVI with audio added which means you can use passive adapters or cables costing a few pounds with no loss in signal quality as there is no conversion.

[jaminem]

Hi Mike for 4K If your HDMI out on the PC isn't HDMI 2, you wont be able to get 60Hz refresh rate, and as a result the video will look slightly jerky...

As others have said, you need either Display port or HDMI 2 , via an expansion card if your graphics card doesn't have either of those. I would have a look tho as I suspect your graphics will have display port - at which point check if it does 4K and then buy a monitor with a display port socket (which is pretty much every 4K monitor.

Incidentally since I'm just down the road in Calne and have an Asus 4K monitor PB287Q 28" (but small bezel) in excellent condition with the box and stand etc, that I am looking to sell, you could give me a shout, we could work something out in your price range im sure...

If you pick it up, I can show you it working so you can be sure its right for you, no worries if its not for you, but at least you could make a decision based on what you actually see..

PM if interested...

[CS70]

Hi Mike for 4K

Think Mike mentioned he didn't need 4K?

[jaminem]

Hi Mike for 4K

Think Mike mentioned he didn't need 4K?

...that'll learn me to read the post properly...

doh!

...and then there's lockdown...

I was trying to be nice, ignore me

[Agharta]

Hi Mike for 4K

Think Mike mentioned he didn't need 4K?

If we wants to use the monitor for other things then being able to run 4k/60 may be relevant.
As I said earlier, a 4k monitor allows you to run 1080p without interpolation, so a 4k monitor might still be a good option. 1080p on a 27" screen and the pixels are fairly large.

[CS70]

Hi Mike for 4K

Think Mike mentioned he didn't need 4K?

If we wants to use the monitor for other things then being able to run 4k/60 may be relevant.
As I said earlier, a 4k monitor allows you to run 1080p without interpolation, so a 4k monitor might still be a good option. 1080p on a 27" screen and the pixels are fairly large.

He also mentioned £100-150

But no big deal, he'll make his mind himself.

[Agharta]

Hi Mike for 4K

Think Mike mentioned he didn't need 4K?

If we wants to use the monitor for other things then being able to run 4k/60 may be relevant.
As I said earlier, a 4k monitor allows you to run 1080p without interpolation, so a 4k monitor might still be a good option. 1080p on a 27" screen and the pixels are fairly large.

He also mentioned £100-150

But no big deal, he'll make his mind himself.

Exactly, give the info and let him decide.
That budget might well not be realistic for someone "getting into semi-serious video work", so I wouldn't let that stop me giving options outside that price range.

[Mike Stranks]

Thanks all!

Just a word on the 'semi-serious video work'. Sloppy phrasing on my part probably. I meant that I'm doing lots of video-editing, but strictly not-for-profit stuff. All destined for YouTube...

My query was occasioned because I took out my new-to-me Sony camera yesterday and shot about 45 minutes of 'video wallpaper' Got back and was very disappointed with what I was seeing. I was about to delete virtually all of it, but decided to put it on a USB stick and try it on the TV. A revelation. Much better colour rendition and sharper definition.

I could go to £200 at a push, but will probably need to do more research and analysis.

Thanks again!

[Agharta]

My query was occasioned because I took out my new-to-me Sony camera yesterday and shot about 45 minutes of 'video wallpaper' Got back and was very disappointed with what I was seeing. I was about to delete virtually all of it, but decided to put it on a USB stick and try it on the TV. A revelation. Much better colour rendition and sharper definition.

A cheap TN panel monitor can look terrible for various reasons.
One being that they have very narrow viewing angles, so if you are viewing outside of that the picture will look much worse.
If you list your current monitor we can see if it's a dog.
Hopefully it is as that way you won't need to pay so much to get a very noticeable improvement.

[Hugh Robjohns]

My query was occasioned because I took out my new-to-me Sony camera yesterday and shot about 45 minutes of 'video wallpaper' Got back and was very disappointed with what I was seeing. I was about to delete virtually all of it, but decided to put it on a USB stick and try it on the TV. A revelation. Much better colour rendition and sharper definition

Most monitors can be tweaked to improve colour rendition -- colour temperature, saturation and so forth -- and there are online test and alignment aids.

As for the definition, I wonder if that's an issue with the scalar processing in your graphics card, converting the HD picture from your camera to whatever larger pixel count is in your monitor. The TV would be showing it pixel for pixel -- no scaling necessary.

[James Perrett]

It may also be worth saying that the average modern TV processes the picture to make it look sharper (or at least the Samsung TV's we have here do). If you try to display a computer image on it you will find little borders around the letters as the sharpening algorithm does its stuff unless you disable it. So you may not be comparing like with like.

[CS70]

My query was occasioned because I took out my new-to-me Sony camera yesterday and shot about 45 minutes of 'video wallpaper' Got back and was very disappointed with what I was seeing. I was about to delete virtually all of it, but decided to put it on a USB stick and try it on the TV. A revelation. Much better colour rendition and sharper definition.

Worth also checking if there is a specific Windows driver/software for your monitor - often the driver allows you to tweak the sharpness and it makes a lot of difference (besides allowing you to change the parameters from software, which is far easier than by using the fashionable "touch" buttons which so many monitors have).

[Mike Stranks]

Further update....

I've spent some time this afternoon playing video and doing further tweaking of the various monitor controls, of which there are many!

I've now got video 'resolution' - using the word in an imprecise and non-technical way - to be much much better.... my search for a 'better' monitor is now in abeyance.

[CS70]

Further update....

I've spent some time this afternoon playing video and doing further tweaking of the various monitor controls, of which there are many!

I've now got video 'resolution' - using the word in an imprecise and non-technical way - to be much much better.... my search for a 'better' monitor is now in abeyance.

Cool to hear!

Remember also the monitors tend to "drift", so every few months it's worth doing another little tweak round to see if there's something that can be improved again.

[Hugh Robjohns]

[Tim Gillett]

Further update....

I've spent some time this afternoon playing video and doing further tweaking of the various monitor controls, of which there are many!

I've now got video 'resolution' - using the word in an imprecise and non-technical way - to be much much better.... my search for a 'better' monitor is now in abeyance.

Cool to hear!

Remember also the monitors tend to "drift", so every few months it's worth doing another little tweak round to see if there's something that can be improved again.

Drift? In what parameter(s) and to what degree? What would cause that?

[CS70]

Drift? In what parameter(s) and to what degree? What would cause that?

A good question - to which I cannot really answer with much authority, as I am no expert.

I would guess it's like with any machinery: it depends on both the specific technology used, the characteristics of the components used, the operating environment and its changes (termal effects, for example) and how much the technology and design can/has accounted for all these factors in the cost range. An example is the backlighting tech or the time and thermal stability of the dye used for LCD displays. Or clocks. All clocks drift, some more than others.

So there are displays that are extremely stable and don't change or change minimally over time, and some that change relatively quickly. On a single display, it may be hard to spot because of the lack of references, but if you have two or three near each other (like I've had for basically the last two decades), it can be pretty evident. One of the reasons I recently went to the 49" ultra-wide

In general, color is hard if one wants precision - one of the reasons for which reference monitors are insanely expensive, I guess.

You find a bunch of stuff if you google something like "display calibration drifting" or similar.

[Mike Stranks]

Agharta raised some good points that got me thinking somewhat broader...

The reality is that what I'm producing each week all ends up on YouTube and is viewed mainly on phones and tablets. Thus, while I want to ensure a level of quality control and don't want to churn out technically sub-standard dross, I need to be realistic.

They key thing is that I know both of my cameras are producing good stuff so for the level of edit viewing I need, my existing monitor is sufficient.

Any moans I receive are about content not quality.