I need a 4K monitor for photo and video editing purposes

[AngeloB]

The monitor is not for me, it's for my mother, that tasked me to find a good 4K monitor for her.

She uses it mainly for photoshop and pinnacle (video editing) and uploads everything on her youtube channel. All for hobby/personal purposes, not professional.

 

When I chose my monitor, I researched for my own purposes (gaming oriented), so I'm not exactly familiar what I should look for for media creation. I think color accuracy is important but that's it.

 

After digging around, I'm thinking about buying the Dell G3223Q 32" 4K UHD. Rtings site gives a good score for media creation and almost every other parameters. The 144Hz and 1ms response time are irrelevant in this case, but color accuracy is good.

Right now, I don't think she works with HDR and good HDR monitors go way beyond the budget anyway (ideally 500€, but if it's clearly better, it can go to the 700-800€ range). A 32" size looks the best for her, to see better (she's over 70 years old)

 

 

Do you think this is a good choice? Do you have other suggestions? It must be a monitor that can be bought in Europe.

 

Thank you for your help.

[Alex Atkin UK]

22 minutes ago, AngeloB said:

The monitor is not for me, it's for my mother, that tasked me to find a good 4K monitor for her.

She uses it mainly for photoshop and pinnacle (video editing) and uploads everything on her youtube channel. All for hobby/personal purposes, not professional.

 

When I chose my monitor, I researched for my own purposes (gaming oriented), so I'm not exactly familiar what I should look for for media creation. I think color accuracy is important but that's it.

 

After digging around, I'm thinking about buying the Dell G3223Q 32" 4K UHD. Rtings site gives a good score for media creation and almost every other parameters. The 144Hz and 1ms response time are irrelevant in this case, but color accuracy is good.

Right now, I don't think she works with HDR and good HDR monitors go way beyond the budget anyway (ideally 500€, but if it's clearly better, it can go to the 700-800€ range). A 32" size looks the best for her, to see better (she's over 70 years old)

 

 

Do you think this is a good choice? Do you have other suggestions? It must be a monitor that can be bought in Europe.

 

Thank you for your help.

Personally I got the Gigabye M28U, its also highly rated, as is the M32U.  They're meant to be pretty accurate out of the box when set to sRGB mode.

[xg32]

11 hours ago, AngeloB said:

.

the dell has 92% argb coverage, which isn't great

 

https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/dell/g3223q

 

the 32m2v is from a less popular brand and has quantum dot+miniled on it, it advertises 99% argb

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0BCK1K44F?smid=A2SHWIYMNRTTNZ&th=1

 

here's a review timestamped from a year ago

 

i also found a couple of argb and even 100% p3 monitors from dell and benq thats at 60hz and calibrated, but they come at 900usd and 1400usd.

 

[Alex Atkin UK]

On 2/5/2024 at 9:00 PM, xg32 said:

the dell has 92% argb coverage, which isn't great

 

https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/dell/g3223q

 

the 32m2v is from a less popular brand and has quantum dot+miniled on it, it advertises 99% argb

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0BCK1K44F?smid=A2SHWIYMNRTTNZ&th=1

 

here's a review timestamped from a year ago

 

i also found a couple of argb and even 100% p3 monitors from dell and benq thats at 60hz and calibrated, but they come at 900usd and 1400usd.

 

I don't understand why so many "professional" monitors are 60Hz.  You actually get a huge bump in precision when editing photos from higher refresh rates.

[xg32]

9 hours ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

I don't understand why so many "professional" monitors are 60Hz.  You actually get a huge bump in precision when editing photos from higher refresh rates.

i dont understand the problem in exact details, but the higher end professional displays usually has 12, 14 or 16bit LUT, so the gradient is more fluid, most gaming displays are 8 or 10 bit. If i had to guess it's alot more info and the processor is either too expensive at the consumer level at 120hz

 

my go to right now for a text/working monitor is the sw240, it's just very comfortable to look at and causes no eye strain for me the panel is piggybacked off an discontinued older model that cost about 700usd

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07CCQGFFG/ref=ox_sc_saved_title_7?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&th=1

 

you can see the 16bit LUT models in the same link, they are "budget" versions of eizo models.

 

afaik the pa32ucg is the only monitor that's 4k 120hz with 12 or 14bit LUT, though i have my doubts since asus doesn't disclose that info.

[Mihle]

On 3/2/2024 at 11:13 AM, Alex Atkin UK said:

I don't understand why so many "professional" monitors are 60Hz.  You actually get a huge bump in precision when editing photos from higher refresh rates.

How does refresh rates affect precision of photo editing?

[Alex Atkin UK]

1 hour ago, Mihle said:

How does refresh rates affect precision of photo editing?

The same as in games, the faster the refresh rate, the quicker you see any slight movement with your mouse or stylus which allows you more precision.

[Mihle]

8 hours ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

The same as in games, the faster the refresh rate, the quicker you see any slight movement with your mouse or stylus which allows you more precision.

Uhm, I am quite sure that's not the limiting factor on how fast you see changes when you photo edit, how fast the software calculates it is.

[Alex Atkin UK]

4 minutes ago, Mihle said:

Uhm, I am quite sure that's not the limiting factor on how fast you see changes when you photo edit, how fast the software calculates it is.

It doesn't matter how fast the software calculates, you can only see it as fast as the screen refreshes.

When you are doing careful per-pixel manual editing with a high resolution mouse, seeing those precise movements reflected on screen faster makes a difference.  It also reduces ghosting of the cursor or anything you are doing on screen.

Another example being when scrolling text documents, directory listings, web pages, etc I can more quickly find what I'm looking for as everything is more legible at a faster scrolling speed.

[Mihle]

16 minutes ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

It doesn't matter how fast the software calculates, you can only see it as fast as the screen refreshes.

When you are doing careful per-pixel manual editing with a high resolution mouse, seeing those precise movements reflected on screen faster makes a difference.  It also reduces ghosting of the cursor or anything you are doing on screen.

Another example being when scrolling text documents, directory listings, web pages, etc I can more quickly find what I'm looking for as everything is more legible at a faster scrolling speed.

Yes it does matter how fast your PC does things.  If PC uses lets say 150ms to do something, 10ms improvement isnt much at all. While if it was less it would matter more.

 

I would argue that the benefit while scrolling the web/word documents etc is plenty larger than while photo editing. Even more so on phones or using touch pads than with a mouse wheel.

 

OLED changes the monitor field, but with other monitor technologies, higher refresh rates have historically ment worse colour and lower resolution. From what I understand that is just how the technologies have been. It seems to be much easier for manufacturers doing both with OLED technologies.