Larger LCD Monitors

[LunarMist]

I can't seem to find a monitor larger than 21" (1200x1600) that is of normal height proportions, not the wide-screen crap. Am I missing something? Thanks.

 

[ddrueding]

That is the biggest I found as well. An advertised 22.3" ViewSonic. Tannin should be along to rant on the subject of "shallow-screens" soon.

 

[Tannin]

<rant>
etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., shallow bloody screens etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., moronic bloody manufacturers etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., fools that wouldn't know a useful application if it bit them on the bum etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., throwing away a huge potential market etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., but you've heard me on this topic before etc., etc., etc.
</rant>

 

[sechs]

After upgrading a laptop from Vista to XP that the client purchased without consulting me:

Client: [Noticing desktop] Stonehenge. Why did you pick that?
Me: It's the only desktop that comes with Windows that looks *reasonable* when stretched on your screen.
Client: [Quizzical look]
Me: Remember those black bars that you used to have on the sides of your screen?
Client: Oh....

 

[udaman]

I can't seem to find a monitor larger than 21" (1200x1600) that is of normal height proportions, not the wide-screen crap. Am I missing something? Thanks.

By whose standards is 'normal'? What do you need a larger than 21" monitor for, state the purpose...wide-screen rules!

http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/04/gateway-intros-30-inch-xhd3000-hd-lcd/

If you need a 4:3 ratio monitor of 21in size (anything larger is silly, just use a wide-screen, put up two windows side by side) of greater resolution than 1600x1200...you have that monitor of yours in landscape mode ? ), there are some @2048x1536 in 21in size, special purpose higher color accuracy, mucho dinnero...want a link?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SXGA+

 

[Tannin]

I find that the default blue "windows classic" background colour stretches to fit most screens quite well.

 

[mubs]

I've found widescreens useful for two things (ducks).

Viewing pics in landscape mode; most pictures I take are of this type (default handling of the P&S digicam) and they almost fill the screen. I use Irfanview, and have it set to "fit only big images to window"

#2 If you're a business type, it helps when you're viewing two Excel spreadsheets side-by-side (vertically).

 

[Fushigi]

No need to duck, mubs. With a rotating display - at work I have this 24" @ 1920x1200 actually at 1200x1920 - viewing web pages, documents, PDFs, etc. lets you get a lot more text on-screen. Or have shell/command windows/terminal emulators stacked. Or a good sized document/spreadsheet at the top with 3 or so IM windows sibe by side across the bottom. I think they're very flexible for presenting documents.

The unfortunate thing from my perspective is Microsoft Office's tendency for horizontal tool bars and with Office 2007 a fairly large ribbon bar. Those eat up way too much screen space on a widescreen display leaving less space for actual data. But turning off the unnecessary bars helps and/or rotating the display helps even more.

Widescreens also excel at video presentation; pan and scan and scaled video truly sucks. P&S sucked before HiDef video and it sucks even more that HiDef is readily available.

Widescreens are also good for image editing as you can still have a 1600x1200 image window with another 720x1200 pixels worth of space for tools (something Office should do a better job of).

 

[Tannin]

I agree, gentlemen: shallow screens do have their advantages for certain tasks. These tasks are, however, few and far between.

Above all else, shallow screen lacks flexibility: there are a whole stack of things you can't do with it that you can do with a standard screen. Image editing is the stand-out example. Although shallow screen is minimally competent at displaying landscape-format pictures, it is significantly less compent than an equal-area standard screen. Cameras produce images in 3 x 2 format (Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Sony, and most other SLRs, 35mm film, various others) or 4 x 3 format (Olympus SLRs, nearly all P&S cameras). Some weirdo gimick-ridden cameras artifically crop out a large portion of the image circle to do 16 x 9 or 16 x 10 - but this isn't a native resolution, like the shallow screen concept itself, it simply robs you of useful image resolution.

Mubs: you can view landscape format pictures reasonably well on shallow screen, but you get lower resolution than with an equal area standard screen. Pictures are 4 x 3 or 3 x 2. Screens should be too. Figure this for yourself. Do the maths.

But now we turn to portrait format pictures - and although amateurs tend not to use portrait much, that just shows that they are indeed amateurs. Pick up a magazine, pretty much any magazine. Look at the pictures in it and note their orientation. Not just editorial content, look at the advertisments too. What do you notice? Most of the pictures are in portrait orientation. In other words, for the professional, portrait is where the market is, and it's where the money is. And shallow screens are hopeless at displaying portrait-oriented images. Case closed.

(What's that, Tea? Rotate the monitor? Well, of course you can. But lok at that magazine again: although most images are portrait, there are lots of landscape images as well. You need to be able to to see both, and shallow screen monitors don't have the flexibility to be able to do that unless you are going to rotate the damn monitor every 5 seconds. Hopeless.

 

[udaman]

http://www.electronista.com/articles/08/06/10/hp.dreamcolor.lcd/

$3,499...ouch.

The DreamColor is designed with help from DreamWorks Animation SKG and uses a rare 24-inch LCD panel that produces 30-bit color, generating more than one billion colors; the color range is 64 times that of even better everyday LCDs and also results in blacks four times deeper than normal LCDs. An LED backlight both contributes to a better contrast ratio (1,000:1) and also ensures that colors are uniform across the entire screen.

http://www.electronista.com/articles/08/06/18/nec.ea261wm.display/
not so good, only 92% NTSC, but only $680 and it pivots!

http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Product/?product=b2824707-0c2c-4c7a-83e7-c4dfb2e4b742

 

[Mercutio]

I got in a long argument a few weeks ago with another "techie" who swore up and down that widescreen represented an IMPROVEMENT, based on the argument that the 16:9 screen would have more pixels than "one size down" in 4:3.

Apparently that's the monitor manufacturers' claim. They show pictures of a 15" 4:3 flat panel and a 17" widescreen that has roughly the same vertical height, and magically the 17" screen is 30% larger!

The people that came up with that math need to be beaten to death with a dildo that's been dipped in a raw colony of HIV.

On the other hand, at 1920x1200, I don't really find I'm missing anything; the vertical resolution is certainly great enough.

 

[LunarMist]

I'd rather have 1440 vertical pixels (4:3 ratio) by 1920. Now I will probably buy a 2560x1600 monitor when I'd prefer narrower.

 

[ddrueding]

Actually, working on all these panoramas, the wide screen is beneficial for once...

 

[mubs]

...need to be beaten to death with a dildo that's been dipped in a raw colony of HIV.

Aaaaah! Merc is getting back in form, slowly but surely!

 

[udaman]

I'd rather have 1440 vertical pixels (4:3 ratio) by 1920. Now I will probably buy a 2560x1600 monitor when I'd prefer narrower.

Well the HP is designed for professional movie/video makers/editors, not what LM or Tannin do.

We will need 4k res monitors in the near future I'm sure, what with a 3k res palmcorder coming out next year from Red One for an estimated $3k (called the Scarlet...get the pun), less than a D700 . Can you say Blu-ray 3k HD pr0n Merc? I knew you could, even if Merc has to grind his teeth every time he thinks of Sony, lol. Uh oh, I don't think soccer moms, making amateur 3k res pr0n is a good idea...scary!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RED_Digital_Camera_Company

Filmography

Director Steven Soderbergh has shot his two features recently screened at the Cannes Film Festival: Guerrilla and The Argentine entirely with the Red One camera. Soderbergh is very enthusiastic about the camera, saying that "this is the camera I've been waiting for my whole career: jaw-dropping imagery recorded onboard a camera light enough to hold with one hand. I don't know how Jim and the Red team did it—and they won't tell me—but I know this: Red is going to change everything."[8]
Red One digital camera was tested shooting the film Wanted. The movie was shot entirely on 35 mm film, but some scenes were shot twice, once using the Red One, once using 35 mm film to compare the results for the future use of the Red One camera. The film is directed by Timur Bekmambetov and stars James McAvoy, Morgan Freeman, and Angelina Jolie. Production began in April 2007. Wanted has a target release date of June 27, 2008.[9]
The upcoming motion picture Game is also to be shot on the Red One.[4]
The feature Sensored, starring Robert Picardo, currently in post-production, was shot using the Red One camera.[5][6]
"The Last Dragon", an official Australian Chinese Co-production, will also be shot entirely on RED by director Mario Andreacchio in October 2008 in China.

[edit] September 2006 theft

On September 24, 2006, the Red offices in Lake Forest, California were broken into. No sensors or sensor information were stolen.[10] Some of the stolen items, including a prototype camera shell, have since been recovered, and some items such as computers containing in-detail information on the Red One have not been recovered. Red has not revealed the circumstances of the recovery, due to the existence of an ongoing investigation.[11] Red has offered a $100,000 reward for any information leading to the apprehension of those responsible.[12]



[edit] Epic

A 5K camera called "Epic" has been announced. It will have a S35 mm Mysterium X sensor and Red has announced that customers who bought the Red One and wish to upgrade may trade their existing cameras in for full credit towards the purchase of the Epic. The Epic is expected to sell for around $30,000.

[edit] Scarlet

Red also announced the arrival of a "pocket professional" camcorder along with its 5K "Epic" camera. This camera is known as the Red "Scarlet", to be released in early 2009. Currently, not much information has been released, but word has it that the Scarlet will record 3K footage to its dual CF card slots. It has a built-in 8x zoom lens and has full auto and manual shooting modes. Supposedly, the Scarlet will be compatible with the same accessories as the other Red cameras such as the handle bars and LCD screen, and is expected to sell for under $3,000. After much sucess from the revolutionary Red One camera, the lower-end Red Scarlet is targeted at a much larger consumer base, from "soccer moms to independent filmmakers". The prototype of the Red Scarlet was unveiled at NAB 2008. However, the specs are "subject to change, count on it".