Best quality monitor ~ 27 inches and £400

oxf77 · 13 Sep 2014 at 17:50

Guys, perhaps somebody can correct my misunderstanding here, but all these mentions of resolutions making the picture less-clear:

Surely you are only talking about if the viewer was to maximise the film to fill the whole screen? Only then would this rely on the resolution of the screen?

Right now I am watching a Blu-ray rip of Star Trek in to Darkness. Its 1080p and my monitor is 1920 x 1200- it just means I get some black above and below- which I don't mind.

So, are you guys saying that the image will be a little blurrier IF I want the film to cover the whole screen estate? Because I usually keep the film in its native proportions and then have black space above/below- I really cannot stand out-of-proportion films.

GMac11 · 13 Sep 2014 at 17:57

It depends on the movie. The 'cinematic' ones that are shot in the ultra wide format (like Star Trek) will perfectly fit one of the LG super wides with no black bars. If you were to watch a movie that is in the more standard 16:9 ratio then you will have black bars down the side unless you stretch it which you don't want to do.

Resolution will not affect movie viewing by stretching unless you set the player to stretch to fill the whole screen. Just depends if you want to ultra wide for those cinema type movies or a normal 27 and have the black bars at top and bottom like you do now.

GMac11 · 13 Sep 2014 at 18:06

Maybe these might explain a bit better:

Both movies are in their native 1080p resolution but Predator was shot in normal widescreen (16:9) and Star Trek in 2.35:1

Nexus18 · 13 Sep 2014 at 18:10

Pretty much what gmac said.

A lot of films are shot in the 21.9 aspect ratio and there are a lot which are 16.9 and as said, will not stretch, they will just have black bars at the side so for the 34" LG screen and a 16.9 film, the total area taken up will be the same size as a 27" 16.9 screen.

Personally, I think "zooming" in is fine, quality is still great and you don't lose much of the top or bottom + it isn't out of proportion.

These are how 16.9 films will look on the LG 34" screen before and after "zooming" in.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=26331690&postcount=719

"Stretching" will give you the full film with nothing cut out but have that out of proportion look, which is what you don't want.

The res difference between the UM65 and UM95 won't matter too much for films since you will have to upscale for both anyway.

silent · 13 Sep 2014 at 18:32

nice pictures gmac, looks stunning.

i know my gpu won't puch 4k, but surely crossfired ones in medium/high detail would be awesome in 4k? that said, the real estate is a big pull for me. otherwise, i may go 2 x 27" 1440 p monitors but don;t want the cable mess.

Nexus18 · 13 Sep 2014 at 18:42

I am sure 280's would be enough for medium and some high settings for current games but what about games coming out in the next year? No doubt the detail for textures and general sharpness will be great but at the same time, it is a TN panel so colours, viewing angles and general image quality won't be as good as IPS panels.

oxf77 · 13 Sep 2014 at 18:51

GMac11 said:
Maybe these might explain a bit better:

Both movies are in their native 1080p resolution but Predator was shot in normal widescreen (16:9) and Star Trek in 2.35:1

ha ha! Thank you for the star-trek specific print screen

(Was more of a Star Wars fan but I do like the two newest star trek films!)

oxf77 · 13 Sep 2014 at 18:55

Im thinking Visual Studio will be interesting on this LG monitor, would be able to have every single window (registers, memory, immediate, code definition, disassembly) open at same time haha

GMac11 · 13 Sep 2014 at 19:42

Yeah multitasking is a joy with this much screen. Although it has be said that you could fit even more on the desktop of a 34UM95 as you can squeeze more into it albeit the text would be smaller.

oxf77 · 13 Sep 2014 at 19:45

What kind of graphics card do I need for the LG? Dont laugh but I have a GT220. If this isn't good enough, whats the cheapest one I could get away with?

GMac11 · 13 Sep 2014 at 19:55

oxf77 said:
What kind of graphics card do I need for the LG? Dont laugh but I have a GT220. If this isn't good enough, whats the cheapest one I could get away with?

Well it'll be ok to drive the monitor for general tasks and viewing but gaming would be out of the question. Now if you were thinking of the 34UM95 you could well struggle as there's quite a few extra pixels.

silent · 13 Sep 2014 at 19:58

i think i may get that monitor and stick to 1080p which will suit my needs and eyes, not the best eyesight.

oxf77 · 28 Sep 2014 at 16:37

GMac11 said:
Yeah multitasking is a joy with this much screen. Although it has be said that you could fit even more on the desktop of a 34UM95 as you can squeeze more into it albeit the text would be smaller.

Only problem is messing around arranging the windows- when you have multiple monitors windows snap to each monitor very quickly.....