2nd (and 3rd) monitor recommendatons - 5k 27" iMac sizing/scaling questions

[voicycle]

Specific product recommendations welcome but really this is about resolution sizing and scaling across different types of displays.

These threads were helpful but I'm still struggling to distil the information and relate it to my needs: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...n-sonoma.2418120/?post=32909212#post-32909212

4K Monitor Advice Needed

With the super high resolution of the 5K displays, text and icons can be larger but drawn with more pixels for super sharp and detailed text and icons. Photographs will generally be displayed at the monitor's native resolution (though dependent on the app). Text drawn with equal number of...

forums.macrumors.com

--

My 2020 5k 27" iMac is more display than I need for pretty much everything, but I like the default resolution and am happy with it as my primary workspace. It sits next to a cheap 32" Samsung smart TV with 1920x1080 resolution which was there first. The TV is primarily a TV (connected to ATV) but is on a VESA arm mount so it can be easily repositioned and used as a second monitor when required.

When I need the second monitor I don't mind the low resolution - it's about having extra space rather than detail. But because the resolution is SO much lower I have to scale windows to less than 1/4 of the iMac desktop size before dragging them across or they spill over the edges of the second desktop so much that they become unusable. It's a pain, but not enough of an issue to be worth the cost of replacing it with ASD or similar in order to get matched resolutions.

However, it recently occurred to me that I could probably replace it with something at 32" and 4k and scaling would be much much closer to the 27" 5k, and I could probably do it for less than a quarter of the cost of ASD. I wouldn't even need any features out of it because it's connected to ATV and I pretty much only use it with bluetooth headphones in TV mode. But I don't really understand how close those resolutions would be, how the scaling would compare, etc. Can someone enlighten me?

--

Part 2 - separate but related:
I have a voiceover recording booth right next to all of this and I'd love to be able to control my DAW from within the booth instead of having to go back and forth. The control app for iPad is helpful but limited, and ideally I'd also be able to bring up video calls and other stuff from in there too. I've got a second magic keyboard and mouse for that purpose but no monitor. For this location the smaller the monitor the better, really, but at the same time this display needs to be a mirror of one of the other two (since I can't see all three at once).

So this is my second resolution/scaling consideration. At one point I was even looking at tablet-style travel monitors for this purpose so that I could in theory also take it on the road with a laptop if I wanted, but I have a feeling that's just going to exacerbate the scaling/resolution mismatch issues I've already got.

--

Only other thing worth taking into consideration is the age of the iMac. I'm in no hurry to replace it now, but I expect any new monitor(s) I buy will outlive it. Unsure at this point if I would replace it with a Studio/Mini or a MBP and dock, but either way that probably involves a new 'main' display in place of the current one so I don't think that should affect my 2nd/3rd display choices much.

Can anyone help explain this to me in a way that will help me know what to shop for? Or even make specific product recommendations?

Thanks!

 

[xraydoc]

However, it recently occurred to me that I could probably replace it with something at 32" and 4k and scaling would be much much closer to the 27" 5k, and I could probably do it for less than a quarter of the cost of ASD. I wouldn't even need any features out of it because it's connected to ATV and I pretty much only use it with bluetooth headphones in TV mode. But I don't really understand how close those resolutions would be, how the scaling would compare, etc. Can someone enlighten me?

Basically, a 27" 5K Studio Display and a 27" 4K display, when both set to 'looks like' 2560x1440, will have essentially the exact same amount of desktop space, and text & icons will be drawn to virtually the same size on-screen (if you were to measure the icons and text with a ruler, give or take a millimeter).

The 5K ASD, however, would have much sharper text and icons as they're being drawn with more available pixels. Things would look a bit blurrier on the 27" 4K because they're being drawn with fewer available pixels as compared with the ASD (so some dithering will have to occur in comparison). But windows and everything would remain "scaled" to the same size on both. Your Mac will still render a 2560x1440-equivalent screen image at 27" on each display (using as many pixels as are available on that display).

---> What it's doing at this step internally is rendering the display in memory at 2x the "looks-like" resolution, so 5120x2880 for a 'looks-like 2560x1440' resolution. Then the computer will take that rendered screen frame and compress it down to fit the available actual resolution of your monitor. On a 5K display, this exactly fits the 5K pixel matrix of 5120x2880, so everything remains pixel-perfect sharp. On a 4K display, which is 3840x2160 (and obviously fewer pixels than 5120x2880), it'll have to compress things, just like a high-res photograph would be when displayed on a screen with a lower resolution than the original 48MP image. So the 4K will look less sharp in comparison to the 5K. But items on screen, if both monitors are the same physical aspect ratio and 27" diagonal in size, will be essentially all the same physical size to your eyes, albeit with the 4K having less fine detail than the 5K.

If you do the same comparison, but with a 32" 4K monitor instead, text and icons on the 32" 4K at 'looks-like' 2560x1440 will be physically larger as compared to the 27" 5K, since the pixels are physically bigger on a 32" 4K display as compared to a 27" 4K display (and on, say, a 75" 4K display/TV, the pixels are bigger still). The computer doesn't know if the 4K display is 12", 20", 27", 32", 55" or 95" in size. It just knows it has 3840x2160 pixels to use.

Now, on a 32" 4K display, you might be able to get away with scaling to a 'looks-like' resolution of, say, 2880x1620 -- the print might be too small at this render level on a 27" display but would be larger enough to read comfortably on a 32" display, but understand that now you're rendering smaller text with even fewer pixels, so you'll lose an additional step in sharpness. Some people are very sensitive to the edge blurring and find it too out of focus for their taste. Others don't appear to mind it so much and they can happily use larger 4K displays that way.

If you want everything to be the same size on-screen when moving between the two displays and keep things within a budget, then get a 4K display as your second monitor that is the same size as your primary 5K display (e.g., 27"). If you want both displays to be of same size and sharpness, then you'll need another 5K display as a second screen. If neither of these situations make a difference to you, then go for 4K at 32" or larger.

This is why I personally opted for matching displays.

 

[meson]

To replace the TV, a 32” 4k monitor will be a great option. When connecting to it using DisplayPort via thunderbolt/usbc, you can set it to a scaled resolution of 3008x1692. Things rendered at that resolution will be the same size as they are on your iMac. I use a low end LG 32 UL500 and am quite satisfied with it. If you are fine with the 1080p TV, I’m sure you would be more than satisfied with this or something that was released a little more recently.

For the studio, for simplicity a 27” 4k screen scaled to 2560x1440 and mirroring the iMac makes a lot of sense. A portable screen sounds good, but if you want mirroring, it will be a problem with scaling.

That said, a free app that you might find useful is Rectangle.app. It allows you to drag windows to certain areas of the screen and snap them into place at prescribed sizes. It’s really useful when laying out windows for reference or moving them between screens with different sizes/resolutions. You can assign key combinations to add a few other location/sizing options as well. It has been critical to my workflow over the years.

 

[voicycle]

Thank you, this is so so helpful!

Especially this:

The computer doesn't know if the 4K display is 12", 20", 27", 32", 55" or 95" in size. It just knows it has 3840x2160 pixels to use.

So for demonstration's sake, if I use airplay to mirror my iMac desktop onto my 55" 4k TV (in a different room) at 'looks like' 2560x1440 then I'll see exactly how sharp or fuzzy everything would render onto a 4k display of a different size? And if I stand at a proportionally equivalent viewing distance it should give me a good sense of what the viewing experience would be?

I'm aware that airplay is bad in terms of latency, but I assume I'd at least get the same level of definition as I could expect with a cabled connection?

Seems like that could be a good way to know what to expect before committing to replacing the 32" TV.

 

[voicycle]

To replace the TV, a 32” 4k monitor will be a great option. When connecting to it using DisplayPort via thunderbolt/usbc, you can set it to a scaled resolution of 3008x1692. Things rendered at that resolution will be the same size as they are on your iMac. I use a low end LG 32 UL500 and am quite satisfied with it. If you are fine with the 1080p TV, I’m sure you would be more than satisfied with this or something that was released a little more recently.

Thanks - is it going to matter what kind of input it has? Any benefit to spending extra for one with USB-C or Thunderbolt over HDMI/displayport?

For the studio, for simplicity a 27” 4k screen scaled to 2560x1440 and mirroring the iMac makes a lot of sense. A portable screen sounds good, but if you want mirroring, it will be a problem with scaling.

Just meaning that everything will be far too small crammed onto a 15-17" screen? Or is there another issue as well?

I'll have a look at Rectangle. Thanks!

 

[xraydoc]

Thank you, this is so so helpful!

Especially this:


So for demonstration's sake, if I use airplay to mirror my iMac desktop onto my 55" 4k TV (in a different room) at 'looks like' 2560x1440 then I'll see exactly how sharp or fuzzy everything would render onto a 4k display of a different size? And if I stand at a proportionally equivalent viewing distance it should give me a good sense of what the viewing experience would be?

I'm aware that airplay is bad in terms of latency, but I assume I'd at least get the same level of definition as I could expect with a cabled connection?

Seems like that could be a good way to know what to expect before committing to replacing the 32" TV.

I'm not sure how much AirPlay compresses things, so it may or may not look the same as a direct connection. Does AirPlay stream 4K in full fidelity? I'm sure someone knows, but I don't.

 

[meson]

Yes, if you mirror a 2560x1440 display on a 15”-17” screen, things will be way too small. The resolution of Apple’s 13” retina screen is 2560x1600 and the 15” was 2880x1800, so you would be mirroring at nearly the native resolution for a retina laptop screen.

AirPlay is limited to 1080p, I believe.

There is no need to shell out more for the usbc/Thunderbolt unless you want to use the monitor as a port hub. As long as it has DisplayPort and hdmi, it will do everything you need.

 

[voicycle]

All really helpful, thanks. And whether Airplay is full fidelity or not I was at least able to get a better sense for things just by playing around with it.

Having had a bit more of a dig around I'm starting to think the following:

32" 4k next to the iMac and only ever operating as an extended display, so I can probably just let it run in whatever Apple says its 'native' resolution is. Or it should look alright in 2560x1440 if I end up preferring that. Either way it should become a lot more seamless to drag windows back and forth between the iMac and that screen than it is with my current 1080p setup.

24" 1440p in the VO booth. It's a really small space and not only do I think 27" is going to feel too big, I'm also concerned about the effect on audio quality from putting a big flat hard surface in there. There's very little (if anything) available to actually purchase in 24" 4k so it's not easy to find great deals.
That means I'll use it to mirror the iMac instead of the 32", and at 2560x1440 it should scale perfectly. The space forces me a good deal closer to the screen in the booth than at my desk, so I don't think shrinking overall size is going to be an issue. I'll be at half the resolution, but I think that should be ok in terms of the minimal text required to navigate the UI of a DAW or video call. I can see it being an issue if I try to read from a script for long periods on that screen, but then I assume I can just scale up the text using the zoom settings for the document viewer app itself (preview/acrobat/word/etc.) and if I understand correctly, that's also the use-case where the non-integer scaling of a 4k display is most likely to cause viewing fatigue.

Have I got all of that straight? Anything I'm missing?

--

In terms of specific models here's what I'm thinking:

For the 32" 4k there are some Samsung options on sale at around £250-270 new, but I just found this slightly higher end BenQ one on eBay for £160, 1 year old, in perfect condition, collection only and in my city: https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/benq/ew3270u
No benefit to the hub functionality at present but it gives me flexibility if I ever wanted to make it a main display for a MB in the future.

For the 24" 1440p there's a refurbished one of these available at £150: https://www.samsung.com/uk/monitors...a-24-24-inch-ips-uhd-4k-ls24a600ucuxxu/#specs
Reviews are ruthless in terms of its USB-C dock capabilities, but it seems to work alright as a display-only item.

No warranty support on either but at this point neither is mission-critical for any of my workflow. Existing TV will move to the guest bedroom so will also still be available as a backup unit. And at those prices it's not a huge loss if one of them quits after a year (or turns out not to suit my needs). In the case of the 24" especially, I suspect if I ended up wanting more out of it and conceded the size increase to 27" then I'd be really tempted to jump straight to ASD as a futureproofing move.

 

[meson]

Sounds like you have a great plan and found some nice prices on a pair of screens that will serve you well.

 

[xraydoc]

so I can probably just let it run in whatever Apple says its 'native' resolution is.

macOS will default to 'looks-like' 1920x1080 for 4K displays. This will produce huge lettering and icons at 32", but things will be perfectly smooth (like it would be on a 5K display at 'looks-like' 2560x1440). The reason is that in Apple-world, to get high PPI like Apple expects for their own displays, it is expecting a 4K display to be about 21" in size (i.e., the size of the display on the old smaller 4K iMacs). However, you can easily override that in the macOS Display settings to something more appropriate like 2560x1440 or higher.