Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Why 4K quality ?
Page 1 of 3 next> last>>
Feb 6, 2019 08:43:35   #
MiroFoto
 
I am asking the UHH friends to help me answer one basic question. So far I have spent hours searching for a new lap top and with the help of one member I got the idea - selection done , credit card is shivering.
Those of you who are married know who is asking me this question.

I am not a photographer (all my pictures are lousy) and I do not do any Photoshop edit), but I enjoy looking at UHHs shots.

My camera is Nikon 7100 so its quality deserves good 4K review, BUT all the pictures from e-mail, F-book and even UHH postings are less than 4K quality , right ? Unless I ask that individual shots are sent to me compressed/reduced, I actually will not need 4K, correct?

So would you let me know what else do I get in the 4K? It will help me to justify the extra $$ spent. PS: I do not watch movies nor play the video games. Maybe there is a source of quality photographs to see.

Thank you for your input Miro (Miro's wife)

Reply
Feb 6, 2019 08:46:55   #
fbeaston Loc: Vermont
 
Just ask him ... don't you deserve the very best!!!! ;)

Reply
Feb 6, 2019 08:48:32   #
jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY
 
I have no need for 4K quality, and I suspect very few people do. It's a luxury - a bragging right. Sure, everything will look better on a 4K display, but does it matter? Is there enough of a difference to justify the cost? Certainly not for me. I have a 27" Dell monitor, and that's fine. My TV is a 55" Vizio 1080, and that's fine. Someone who does computer graphics for a living will want the best available, but that's not me.

"You pays your money, and you takes your choice."

Reply
 
 
Feb 6, 2019 08:57:33   #
Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States
 
jerryc41 wrote:
I have no need for 4K quality, and I suspect very few people do. It's a luxury - a bragging right. Sure, everything will look better on a 4K display, but does it matter? Is there enough of a difference to justify the cost? Certainly not for me. I have a 27" Dell monitor, and that's fine. My TV is a 55" Vizio 1080, and that's fine. Someone who does computer graphics for a living will want the best available, but that's not me.

"You pays your money, and you takes your choice."
I have no need for 4K quality, and I suspect very ... (show quote)


I have a six year old laptop, it has a monitor.
I added a second monitor to my desktop, it's wide because that's the only thing they sell now. 4k???
who knows, it's a monitor... Looks great to me.

Reply
Feb 6, 2019 09:25:28   #
repleo Loc: Boston
 
I think 4K really only applies to video. You will only benefit from 4K if you like to sit really close to really big screens. A friend of mine recently got a new 4K laptop. When she opened up Photoshop, the icons and letters were so small she couldn't read them, but I think there is a fix for that.

Reply
Feb 6, 2019 09:50:45   #
olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida
 
This probably doesn't help but I'll do it anyway (my caveat): Perspective and expectation is involved - Some photos look better on 720 than on 1080 and vice versa, some look better on 2160 (4K) than 1080/720 and vice versa...same with viewing screen size, viewing distance and size of picture would make a difference.

A heavy crop spread out on a large screen, or a great shot shown at small size, depends somewhat on what you are viewing, and how you are viewing. That said, with the prices of 4K (2160) TVs becoming quite reasonable (especially prior to Super Bowl or on Black Friday deal, or just older models) I would imagine the same price effect showing up on monitors (if not now, soon, I haven't looked).

How sharp are your eyes, how close are you going to view it, with high MP capability of modern cameras, they can play well together, or not, many factors involved. If money isn't an issue, a newer bigger monitor is always nice, how your pics look on it might surprise or disappoint. Wide screens do make it easy to have two browsers open for multi-tasking or whatever, if your computer can support the activity.

Reply
Feb 6, 2019 09:53:39   #
BebuLamar
 
MiroFoto wrote:
I am asking the UHH friends to help me answer one basic question. So far I have spent hours searching for a new lap top and with the help of one member I got the idea - selection done , credit card is shivering.
Those of you who are married know who is asking me this question.

I am not a photographer (all my pictures are lousy) and I do not do any Photoshop edit), but I enjoy looking at UHHs shots.

My camera is Nikon 7100 so its quality deserves good 4K review, BUT all the pictures from e-mail, F-book and even UHH postings are less than 4K quality , right ? Unless I ask that individual shots are sent to me compressed/reduced, I actually will not need 4K, correct?

So would you let me know what else do I get in the 4K? It will help me to justify the extra $$ spent. PS: I do not watch movies nor play the video games. Maybe there is a source of quality photographs to see.

Thank you for your input Miro (Miro's wife)
I am asking the UHH friends to help me answer one ... (show quote)


It's the question you should ask yourself. For me higher resolution screen allows me to watch 4K video in full resolution. Have more working space on the screen. I can see my images better at 8MP instead of 2MP with the full HD screen.

Reply
 
 
Feb 6, 2019 09:54:36   #
burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC
 
MiroFoto wrote:
I am asking the UHH friends to help me answer one basic question. So far I have spent hours searching for a new lap top and with the help of one member I got the idea - selection done , credit card is shivering.
Those of you who are married know who is asking me this question.

I am not a photographer (all my pictures are lousy) and I do not do any Photoshop edit), but I enjoy looking at UHHs shots.

My camera is Nikon 7100 so its quality deserves good 4K review, BUT all the pictures from e-mail, F-book and even UHH postings are less than 4K quality , right ? Unless I ask that individual shots are sent to me compressed/reduced, I actually will not need 4K, correct?

So would you let me know what else do I get in the 4K? It will help me to justify the extra $$ spent. PS: I do not watch movies nor play the video games. Maybe there is a source of quality photographs to see.

Thank you for your input Miro (Miro's wife)
I am asking the UHH friends to help me answer one ... (show quote)


More important than 4K is the monitor quality. You don't want a gaming monitor or a generic office monitor for photo/video editing.

A good photo/video editing monitor needs to be capable of displaying 98% or more of the Adobe RGB color space. It needs to be controllable and capable of being calibrated.

A 4K monitor displays four times as many pixels as a 1080P monitor. You can get twice as close to it as you can a 1080P monitor, without seeing individual pixels.

On computers, you usually have two (operating system dependent) options. The most common is to use the additional pixels as additional "desktop real estate" or working space. Sometimes, the OS will have options to make all the menu fonts bigger, so you can still see what you're doing. In this case, having a BIG 4K monitor helps a lot. Video editors prefer them, so they can have room for all their tools AND a big view of the video they're editing. Photo editors using Lightroom or Photoshop or something similar like them, too, because they can see more of a whole image at 100%.

There's usually another option to display the image as if it were 1080P. In that instance, interpolation enlarges each pixel by a factor of four.

In my experience, 4K monitors smaller than 32" are not very practical...

For practical photo viewing, you need to see the whole screen at one time. So get back to a distance equal to the diagonal of the monitor, up to 1.5X the diagonal of the monitor. (For example, a 55" TV should be viewed from about 55" to 82.5" (roughly 5 to 7.5 feet) away from the screen, for optimum viewing experience.) A 1080P will be pixelated at closer distances. A 55" 4K screen can be viewed from about 30" to 82.5" with an optimum view. But at 30", you probably don't see the whole image...

Reply
Feb 6, 2019 10:20:50   #
mas24 Loc: Southern CA
 
repleo wrote:
I think 4K really only applies to video. You will only benefit from 4K if you like to sit really close to really big screens. A friend of mine recently got a new 4K laptop. When she opened up Photoshop, the icons and letters were so small she couldn't read them, but I think there is a fix for that.


I agree. One of the selling points of the Nikon D500 is that it had 4K video and a XQD card. I don't shoot video on my Nikon DSLR. And most likely would not do so, owning a D500. For video hobbyists or pros, 4K is great. 4K will eventually be taken over by 8K. None of my laptops are 4K. One is a HP/Presario, that is 10 years old. My newer laptop is a Lenovo. And my current TV is 1080p. When it quits on me, I probably will get a 4K TV. Since I watch it everyday.

Reply
Feb 6, 2019 10:26:54   #
MiroFoto
 
burkphoto You always do a decent review of the question. I guess, you gave me a cold shower & my wife will love you for it....my credit card too.

Thank you all for the inputs. It was very helpful. Miro

Reply
Feb 6, 2019 10:53:37   #
blue-ultra Loc: New Hampshire
 
OK one thing that is missing here in this discussion. Burk makes very good points and is correct. However one thing you need to consider is that you are buying a new system intended for many years of use ( 5 to 10 yrs) during that time frame there will be many new innovations and technology changes. You need to ask yourself if your new system will be up to date or will it be outdated and require you to purchase new equipment sooner??? I always use this approach when making a major purchase soo I can get the most out of my equipment... Just a humble opinion...

Bob

Reply
 
 
Feb 6, 2019 11:28:42   #
rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA
 
jerryc41 wrote:
I have no need for 4K quality, and I suspect very few people do. It's a luxury - a bragging right. Sure, everything will look better on a 4K display, but does it matter? Is there enough of a difference to justify the cost? Certainly not for me. I have a 27" Dell monitor, and that's fine. My TV is a 55" Vizio 1080, and that's fine. Someone who does computer graphics for a living will want the best available, but that's not me.


Nowadays, many videographers use DSLR and other still photography cameras for video recording, and a camera with 4K capability is important to a good number of them. Camera manufacturers know this, and compete for that rapidly growing market segment by including more and better video features into the cameras. I don't know what bragging rights have to do with it. Did you buy your last camera because you wanted to use it for bragging, or because you believed it can help you obtain the images you wish?

Reply
Feb 6, 2019 14:55:25   #
Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA
 
The best you can view a picture is at 100% resolution. You can do that by zooming in with free software like Hornil photo viewer, or any generic photo viewer zoomed in until you start to notice pixilation in the image. A 2K monitor displays about 1/4th the resolution of a 4K. A 4K monitor will give a better image on youtube or Vimeo videos provided they are 4K. But a 4K video looks better than a 2K video on a 2K monitor as well. It would look it's best on a 4K monitor but you would only know that if you compared the two. I may be wrong, but if you are viewing a picture zoomed in to 100% resolution, or a 2K video, it seems the 4K monitor shouldn't improve the image.

Reply
Feb 6, 2019 15:28:31   #
therwol Loc: USA
 
repleo wrote:
I think 4K really only applies to video. You will only benefit from 4K if you like to sit really close to really big screens. A friend of mine recently got a new 4K laptop. When she opened up Photoshop, the icons and letters were so small she couldn't read them, but I think there is a fix for that.


In Windows 10, you can scale everything "down" in the display settings. I have a 4K display on this computer. My wife likes 200%. (Giving you the equivalent of HD.) So be it.

The screenshot is readable if you download it.


(Download)

Reply
Feb 7, 2019 08:41:53   #
lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA
 
MiroFoto wrote:
I am asking the UHH friends to help me answer one basic question. So far I have spent hours searching for a new lap top and with the help of one member I got the idea - selection done , credit card is shivering.
Those of you who are married know who is asking me this question.

I am not a photographer (all my pictures are lousy) and I do not do any Photoshop edit), but I enjoy looking at UHHs shots.

My camera is Nikon 7100 so its quality deserves good 4K review, BUT all the pictures from e-mail, F-book and even UHH postings are less than 4K quality , right ? Unless I ask that individual shots are sent to me compressed/reduced, I actually will not need 4K, correct?

So would you let me know what else do I get in the 4K? It will help me to justify the extra $$ spent. PS: I do not watch movies nor play the video games. Maybe there is a source of quality photographs to see.

Thank you for your input Miro (Miro's wife)
I am asking the UHH friends to help me answer one ... (show quote)


4K not needed, that is for watching movies and sports on TV. In fact for most of us if you use your computer for things other than imagery, say like word processing or spread sheets, etc. The fonts with 4K are too small to read for most people. Even with a system set to font size 125%. You'd be better served buy saving your money, getting a better computer, getting it with more RAM. Or buying something else, or just invest the money.

Reply
Page 1 of 3 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.