[Brad]

I need more pixels (or at least I want more pixels) to display/manipulate my photos.

I'm currently using a 27" IPS 2560x1440 monitor.
Would like to go to something around 40" at 4K resolution.

There are apparently some issues with the DisplayPort and HDMI specs as far as supporting computers at full color depth (or at least in the manufacturer's implementations)

Just wanted to see if anyone had gotten into this and what their experiences were.

The Vizio M43-C1 is one I'm considering ($599)

[Brad]

Meant to throw in the other options would be higher end IPS monitors like the:

BenQ  BL3201PH
LG    31MU97-B
Asus   PB279Q

[macrojack]

If it's resolution and detail you seek, why not the new 5K retina iMac?

[Brad]

If it's resolution and detail you seek, why not the new 5K retina iMac?

Good question.  I already have a pretty stout PC workstation built for my photo processing.   
So I'd rather spend ~$600-1000 on the monitor, vs. $2500+ on the 5k iMac.

[viggen]

your goal is bigger monitor w/o losing much resolution or denser resolution?  just curious

[Brad]

Gaining resolution AND some size.   What I have is 3k, want to go to 4k, debating between fancy computer monitor or consumer 4k tv

[srb]

The idea of using a 4K TV is interesting from a size and price aspect.  But I wonder what resolution they might actually accept from a PC output into their HDMI inputs?

Many PC video cards will only output 3840 x 2160 through their Display Port outputs, but I have seen some cards (some ATI/AMD models come to mind) that do say they can output that resolution from their DVI or HDMI outputs.

Steve

[viggen]

i am going to guess there's not a whole lot of TVs that's going to give you a clean picture as most of these "monitors" are designed for sports and movies even after calibration.. i could be wrong.

[macrojack]

Go to Best Buy and check out the Retina iMac. Then go to the TV department and price whatever comes closest --- because nothing will match it. You have to ask yourself which is more important to your goal - quantity or quality?

I haven't your good reason to buy the Retina but I'm struggling every day against the impulse to bring one home. It is incredible.

[Brad]

The other point in the favor of the 5K iMac is that you can do 4k work with all of the toolbars, etc, still visible on the screen.

Reviews on a couple of the $1k+ monitors compare them favorably to the screen in the 5K iMac.

Thanks all for your input so far

[Brad]

D*mn you, Macrojack.     I've also been looking for a laptop upgrade so I can do photo editing while traveling, and I found BestBuy had the 2015 MacBook Pro 13" for $200 off today.    2560x1600 resolution, good battery life, great IPS screen.

So before they realized their pricing error, I placed the order.
I'll review the 4k screen market again towards the end of the year.

[macrojack]

D*mn you, Macrojack.     I've also been looking for a laptop upgrade so I can do photo editing while traveling, and I found BestBuy had the 2015 MacBook Pro 13" for $200 off today.    2560x1600 resolution, good battery life, great IPS screen.

So before they realized their pricing error, I placed the order.
I'll review the 4k screen market again towards the end of the year.

Just trying to help my brother's Apple stock.

Seriously though-both my son and his girlfriend/partner bought Retina MacBooks recently and they are delighted. Both replaced older MacBooks. Meanwhile I'm trying like hell to find some justification for buying me a Retina iMac. It's really overkill for email and browsing, although I can use it for texting as well. I also stream movies but I'll be quite old when Netflix delivers that kinda rez.

[Brad]

Amazon and Netflix both have some 4k content now.
I've been planning a weekend binge to catch up on House of Cards for a while now.

We are WAY off topic now 

[macrojack]

Amazon and Netflix both have some 4k content now.
I've been planning a weekend binge to catch up on House of Cards for a while now.

We are WAY off topic now 

Doesn't matter now. The original poster (you) has resolved his issue and is now free to be silly.

[viggen]

early adoption isn't always rational haha

[kingdeezie]

The problem with inexpensive 4k TVs, or 5K IMAC screens, is that they are horrendously inadequate when it comes to the most important facet of picture quality; contrast.

I read a review on the the IMAC screen once, and the calibrated contrast ratio was around 1000:1. That is awful, and other than still images, I can't imagine the PQ is any good. Of course, the color accuracy is great, and the resolution is highly impressive, but contrast makes PQ.

I would rather have a 1080P OLED TV with something like a 20K:1 calibrated contrast ration, than a 16K IMAC screen with a 1000:1 contrast ratio.

I am sure the added resolution matters when your working with photos, but I have to also imagine you would want as stark of a contrast as possible as well.

[Brad]

I think what I'll do is wait a bit for the prices of the 30-32" 4k monitors to come down a bit.
And just be happy with the 27" 3K IPS monitor for photo processing.

I may still check into a larger 4k tv for the living room. 

Thanks all for your input.

[Brad]

Just to follow up on this.  I decided to add a 2nd 27" WQHD IPS monitor that I will orient in the portrait direction.
Then I can have more real estate to process no matter which way I took the picture.

Next year, I'll add a good 4k tv to display them....