4 ms·

As I get older I care about bigger fonts and therefore bigger monitors. Higher resolution does nothing for me really. I need bigger fonts not better anti aliasi

As I get older I care about bigger fonts and therefore bigger monitors. Higher resolution does nothing for me really. I need bigger fonts not better anti aliasing. My main is a 4k43"144hz which is basically the same dpi as a 27" 2560x1440 which I have 4 of in a semi sphere setup. If I ran that 4k at half the resolution to get nice fonts I'd have massive eye strain. Instead I can keep the monitors at a comfortable arms length so I don't squint up close and still get tons of text on screen. I also get a lot better frame rates than pushing 5 4k or 8k screens. I tried out apples absurd 8k display and it's just so small I'm getting half the text on the screen which is basically throwing money at Apple for no reason. The 4k43 is glorious for games and for fusion360. Also as a grow light :)

champdebloom 3y ago
Woah, do you have a picture of this setup you can share? I'm really curious!
- grogenaut 3y ago
  https://imgur.com/a/94yN0Ht https://imgur.com/a/94yN0Ht
esperent 3y ago
I've been rocking 4k48"120hz for a couple of years now (an LG C1 48"). It's game changing, and the OLED shines when I do color sensitive work. It feels like having a huge canvas in front of me. Initially I tried doing fancy window locking arrangements and I still do that occasionally. But over time I moved towards treating it like a big desk that I can resize all my windows on as needed. However, I would probably move down in size a little next time given the choice. 43" sounds sweet. The issue, at least two years ago, was that these smart TVs are massively subsidized. Mine cost about $1000 I think, probably cheaper now. While similar specs on slightly smaller monitor would be considerably more expensive. EDIT: I just checked and the 43" 144hz OLED monitors I can quickly find are $1500+, while the updated version of my screen, the LG C2 48", is on sale in a local shop for $600. This screen is a TV but it's still by far the best monitor I've ever had. The only minor problem is that low brightness and reflectivity of the screen means I had to reposition my desk, and it still becomes an issue for about 30 minutes every day when the sun moves to just the right position to bounce and reflect off the wall behind me on to the screen.
- grogenaut 3y ago
  Would have done what you did but it literally won't fit:( my coworker has that at home it's amaze
drtgh 3y ago
For monitor I just look for screens with 87-94 PPI, for to avoid to scaling. Therefore the size of the monitor for me is determined by the combination of inches and resolution, what gives me centimeters of the screen. 5:4 1280x1024 19" ( 37.68cm × 30.15cm ) 86.27 PPI 16:9 1920x1080 25" ( 55.35cm × 31.13cm ) 88.12 PPI 16:10 1920x1200 24" ( 51.69cm × 32.31cm ) 94.34 PPI 16:9 2560x1440 30" ( 66.41cm × 37.36cm ) 97.91 PPI 16:9 2560x1440 32" ( 70.84cm × 39.85cm ) 91.79 PPI 16:10 2560x1600 30" ( 64.62cm × 40.39cm ) 100.63 PPI 16:9 3840x2160 46" (101.83cm × 57.28cm ) 95.78 PPI People that are used to higher PPI may think those PPI have screen-door (to see the pixel), but for me this only uncomfortable if I see a 81 PPI monitor (16:9 1920x1080 27" [59.77cm × 33.62cm] ) at 45cm of distance. Anyway, I just want the sharpness and uniformity that only comes from not scaling either by the monitor or the operating system. My ideal may be a 16:10, and better a 5:4, with 40cm of height and around 87-89 PPI, nevertheless the monitors with 16:10 aspect ratio use old generations panels what make me to discard them, IPS and VA ghosting. And TN doesn't exist there (at that size the angles limitation of TN would be an issue anyway, nevertheless for 1280x1024 19" is perfect). The modern panels are only under 16:9 aspect ratio. Unfortunately for me I do not like the 16:9 aspect ratio for monitors due if it is small I'm losing visual space top and down like if it were a letter box, and if the monitor is big it forces to move the head much. The matter is, I think the marketing of 2K, 4K, 8K is secondary, without knowing the panel size and the distance from what will be viewed firstly. So I usually recommend to do a table with the PPI predilection and width-height preferences. The one I use for to search monitors have the lines of text that gives the panel height with the font size I use more. > The 4k43 is glorious for games and for fusion360 That gives a reference, 16:9 3840x2160 43" ( 95.19cm × 53.55cm ) 102.46 PPI Maybe you see this from 65-90cm of distance, at least, due the width, case contrary you would have to move the head and even the body, what makes the fonts look tinny. I guess the panel manufacturers introduced 16:9 as monitors -stopped developing panels with aspect ratios for computer monitors better said- for to avoid to have two lines of panels, computer monitors and TVs. Mere guessing. PS: https://www.sven.de/dpi/ https://www.sven.de/dpi/

champdebloom 3y ago

Woah, do you have a picture of this setup you can share? I'm really curious!

grogenaut 3y ago
https://imgur.com/a/94yN0Ht https://imgur.com/a/94yN0Ht

esperent 3y ago

I've been rocking 4k48"120hz for a couple of years now (an LG C1 48"). It's game changing, and the OLED shines when I do color sensitive work. It feels like having a huge canvas in front of me. Initially I tried doing fancy window locking arrangements and I still do that occasionally. But over time I moved towards treating it like a big desk that I can resize all my windows on as needed. However, I would probably move down in size a little next time given the choice. 43" sounds sweet. The issue, at least two years ago, was that these smart TVs are massively subsidized. Mine cost about $1000 I think, probably cheaper now. While similar specs on slightly smaller monitor would be considerably more expensive. EDIT: I just checked and the 43" 144hz OLED monitors I can quickly find are $1500+, while the updated version of my screen, the LG C2 48", is on sale in a local shop for $600. This screen is a TV but it's still by far the best monitor I've ever had. The only minor problem is that low brightness and reflectivity of the screen means I had to reposition my desk, and it still becomes an issue for about 30 minutes every day when the sun moves to just the right position to bounce and reflect off the wall behind me on to the screen.

grogenaut 3y ago
Would have done what you did but it literally won't fit:( my coworker has that at home it's amaze

drtgh 3y ago

For monitor I just look for screens with 87-94 PPI, for to avoid to scaling. Therefore the size of the monitor for me is determined by the combination of inches and resolution, what gives me centimeters of the screen. 5:4 1280x1024 19" ( 37.68cm × 30.15cm ) 86.27 PPI 16:9 1920x1080 25" ( 55.35cm × 31.13cm ) 88.12 PPI 16:10 1920x1200 24" ( 51.69cm × 32.31cm ) 94.34 PPI 16:9 2560x1440 30" ( 66.41cm × 37.36cm ) 97.91 PPI 16:9 2560x1440 32" ( 70.84cm × 39.85cm ) 91.79 PPI 16:10 2560x1600 30" ( 64.62cm × 40.39cm ) 100.63 PPI 16:9 3840x2160 46" (101.83cm × 57.28cm ) 95.78 PPI People that are used to higher PPI may think those PPI have screen-door (to see the pixel), but for me this only uncomfortable if I see a 81 PPI monitor (16:9 1920x1080 27" [59.77cm × 33.62cm] ) at 45cm of distance. Anyway, I just want the sharpness and uniformity that only comes from not scaling either by the monitor or the operating system. My ideal may be a 16:10, and better a 5:4, with 40cm of height and around 87-89 PPI, nevertheless the monitors with 16:10 aspect ratio use old generations panels what make me to discard them, IPS and VA ghosting. And TN doesn't exist there (at that size the angles limitation of TN would be an issue anyway, nevertheless for 1280x1024 19" is perfect). The modern panels are only under 16:9 aspect ratio. Unfortunately for me I do not like the 16:9 aspect ratio for monitors due if it is small I'm losing visual space top and down like if it were a letter box, and if the monitor is big it forces to move the head much. The matter is, I think the marketing of 2K, 4K, 8K is secondary, without knowing the panel size and the distance from what will be viewed firstly. So I usually recommend to do a table with the PPI predilection and width-height preferences. The one I use for to search monitors have the lines of text that gives the panel height with the font size I use more. > The 4k43 is glorious for games and for fusion360 That gives a reference, 16:9 3840x2160 43" ( 95.19cm × 53.55cm ) 102.46 PPI Maybe you see this from 65-90cm of distance, at least, due the width, case contrary you would have to move the head and even the body, what makes the fonts look tinny. I guess the panel manufacturers introduced 16:9 as monitors -stopped developing panels with aspect ratios for computer monitors better said- for to avoid to have two lines of panels, computer monitors and TVs. Mere guessing. PS: https://www.sven.de/dpi/ https://www.sven.de/dpi/