Most on-site production monitors are this small. They aren't meant for doing your entire post-production on. They are meant to be something that you can look at the images/video coming off the camera and any other in-line automatic processing devices you have setup so that you can make immediate corrections to the live feed. And if you ARE using this post-production, you're of course putting just the video on this screen with your work-space on other screens.
For the industry they are aiming this at, the size is just fine.
It's only 204ppi. On my desktop monitor (roughly 100ppi), I can see every little fuzzy square around this text, and I'm just done with it. 200 at least isn't that bad from three feet away, but I can still see aliasing and such.
I have a 4k 24" at home, I see 0 aliasing at all from normal desk position. Disabled AA looks perfect for games playing at native 4k resolution, but the framerate may suffer if you choose to enable lots of other options.
This looks like a nice extensiom screen for high-dpi laptops. It would be usable with same scaling factor as the main screen of the laptop and things would not be hugely different in size.
Like 3K/15” and 2560/13” laptops.
I agree, 24” 4K monitor is lovely to use. I wouldn’t take bigger one with 4K as I prefer to have considerably higher dpi than the age old windows standard of 96ppi. And to get good scalings, it is better to go nearer to 200 instead of jumping to 140 or somehing like that.
It's a portable monitor, so the size is limited to airline carry-on size restrictions. If you travel with the screen in checked baggage it will need a much heavier protective case.
And the point of having a display with a .1ms response time running at 60hz would be...? ASUS like Acer is known for it's very poor quality control and support so let's see if they can release this without massive screen quality issues and without severe burn-in, life time and frame rate issues. When they offer something like this without those issues at at least 144hz and 27" then it will be interesting. This may be expensive but as detailed it's worthless to me.
I think the point of .1 ms response is that it's basically native to the technology. OLED has crazy fast response time compared to LCD so it's not like it's some artificial number they were shooting for just for marketing...it's just the way it is.
204dpi is a nice figure to go as a second monitor for high-dpi laptops. One could use the same scaling factor as with the laptop screen and everything would still be nicely usable.
If the minimum brightness is reported as 0.0005 nits(cd/m^2) and the contrast ratio is 1,000,000:1 doesn't that suggest that the brightness is 0.0005 x 1,000,000 = 500 nits? That would be high for an OLED panel, but probably still low for HDR. I suppose even in OLED panels the min nits cannot go down to 0 (and thus provide OLED's theoretical infinite contrast) because there should always be a tiny amount of light bleeding toward blacks - in real content anyway.
The contrast might really be infinite if you divided the screen in 2, 4 or 8 parts and alternated full white and full black squares. Close to the dividing lines (up to a few mm into the white and black frames) the contrast would probably be 1,000,000:1 due to light bleeding, but if you measured a few cm+ beyond the dividing lines the contrast should be infinite. So, when you view or render CGI scenes of a film ora game the 1,000,000:1 number might be minimum guaranteed contrast ratio, rather than the maximum.
ASUS might intend that value to be something totally different, but that 0.0005 cd/m² minimum brightness is just that - minimum brightness, not black. OLEDs are off when fed a pure black signal, so the infinite contrast ratio still stands, but if you feed it any other gray/color signal, there is an absolute minimum brightness each pixel will output. In some cases, this actually becomes a problem if the minimum brightness isn't low enough, as the difference between off and only a little bit on is still infinite. Always calibrate your displays, kids.
For peak brightness, 500 nits falls short of the ~800 nits that LG OLED TVs can currently hit, but it really doesn't matter unless you have a lot of bright windows everywhere. Objective and subjective tests keep putting OLED at the top of the picture quality stack, including HDR performance. Contrast is king.
0.1 pixel response time black (100% off) to white (100% on) is killer even if limited to 60Hz, because it will eliminate LCD-related artifacts (ghosting, etc.). OLED naturally excels at this. What's more important is input lag, the measurement of time it takes for the signal to be processed by the monitor's SOC and displayed by the pixels. Can they get it down to CRT levels (0ms)? Probably not, but we'll see.
My Galaxy Note II would have a barely-perceptible glow when showing black, so its pixels couldn't turn off completely. My more recent BLU Vivo Air LTE was completely invisible (in a perfectly dark room, mind) when I showed a black image.
So they might be saying that the ratio is not infinite, and that a black image in a dark room would still be slightly visible. Most likely, they're doing a whole lot of rounding and you can't get any real number from reversing the math.
OLED can go down to complete black by turning off the pixel, as stated above. The "min brightness" means the minimum brightness of a pixel that's turned on. For OLED, you can have an infinite contrast due to the pixels' abilities to be shut off. For plasma, each pixel needed to retain a charged state since "powering" the pixel took longer than the 0.1ms required for LED. The minimum brightness on OLED refers to the lowest brightness possible for a pixel that isn't turned off -- the lower, the better, as it will allow for less detail loss or "black crush" for shadow detail. The minimum brightness on plasma would be what you all are thinking, while also the same -- it's the lowest "powered" brightness possible, which is ALSO the lowest brightness possible.
For OLED monitors, higher Max brightness threatens faster/worse burn-in. Unlike TVs in typical use, monitors often end up displaying static content. Particularly when it comes to things like task bars or window chrome ...
So in general, it would make sense that OLED monitors should always lag OLED TVs in terms of brightness - all other tech factors being equal.
It's more of a limitation to OLED than trying to prevent burn-in, I believe. I have a Panasonic plasma which also "suffers" from burn-in, however they can get very bright (look at Samsung F9500). In the case of plasmas, there are Energy Star requirements which create an artificial limitation to brightness, and the manufacturers implemented ABL to decrease brightness -- for example a mostly-white screen -- to reduce power-consumption.
In the case of OLED, I think it's less about the potential for burn-in and more about either a hard-limit for OLEDs or a longevity case. As with plasmas, TVs are used primarily for video so the effects of burn-in are almost non-existant outside of using your display for gaming that has HUDs. I game on my last-gen Panasonic plasma for hours, and worst case I'll have some image retention that isn't visible while watching video (except in the rare case there's a solid color for a length of time) which is gone before finishing an episode of your favorite show...
This concern about OLED burn-in is -- in my opinion -- not as big of a concern as people make it out to be. I thought plasma burn-in concerns were inflated for later-gen TVs, and think OLED is even more resistant...
At least, theoretically. It needs to be bright enough, eye adaptation is a bitch for ruining contrast ratios, even a relatively dark office is going to cut into it significantly. It's also kind of small... where's the 24"+ model?
Any word on the 4k/200Hz gaming monitor Asus and Acer have been promising? They have had webpage up for it since June of last year...its been delayed like 2 times already. I heard they was going to announce more info at CES.
I think most people miss the most important part of the announcement, which isn't about ASUS.
JOLED are finally shipping!. It is possibly the only hope the OLED screen will ever come down in price that most consumer can afford them. By afford it doesn't mean cheap, it wont even touch IPS price level in 2022, but at least for a slight premium it should be close within 3 - 4 years.
Finally an RGB-OLED Display! Unlike LG's crappy W-OLED TV's that distort colors to a White Hue. I can't wait until RGB-OLED will reach TV Screens, because CRT's and Plasma's all used RGB Spectrum Light, and that is why the picture quality on those are so superior to LCD and W-OLED. Long live RGB-OLED!!!
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
25 Comments
Back to Article
TheWereCat - Wednesday, January 10, 2018 - link
Too bad it's only 21.6" ... 32"-34" would be awesome but I guess that would drive the price into the sky.vortmax2 - Wednesday, January 10, 2018 - link
...to the moonTheWereCat - Wednesday, January 10, 2018 - link
Well.... yeah.Alistair - Wednesday, January 10, 2018 - link
I'd be fine with a 25". Sad about the size for sure.Freakie - Wednesday, January 10, 2018 - link
Most on-site production monitors are this small. They aren't meant for doing your entire post-production on. They are meant to be something that you can look at the images/video coming off the camera and any other in-line automatic processing devices you have setup so that you can make immediate corrections to the live feed. And if you ARE using this post-production, you're of course putting just the video on this screen with your work-space on other screens.For the industry they are aiming this at, the size is just fine.
mkozakewich - Wednesday, January 10, 2018 - link
It's only 204ppi. On my desktop monitor (roughly 100ppi), I can see every little fuzzy square around this text, and I'm just done with it. 200 at least isn't that bad from three feet away, but I can still see aliasing and such.JoeyJoJo123 - Thursday, January 11, 2018 - link
I have a 4k 24" at home, I see 0 aliasing at all from normal desk position. Disabled AA looks perfect for games playing at native 4k resolution, but the framerate may suffer if you choose to enable lots of other options.4K at 21.5" is just fine with me.
zepi - Saturday, January 13, 2018 - link
This looks like a nice extensiom screen for high-dpi laptops. It would be usable with same scaling factor as the main screen of the laptop and things would not be hugely different in size.Like 3K/15” and 2560/13” laptops.
I agree, 24” 4K monitor is lovely to use. I wouldn’t take bigger one with 4K as I prefer to have considerably higher dpi than the age old windows standard of 96ppi. And to get good scalings, it is better to go nearer to 200 instead of jumping to 140 or somehing like that.
Gc - Friday, January 12, 2018 - link
It's a portable monitor, so the size is limited to airline carry-on size restrictions. If you travel with the screen in checked baggage it will need a much heavier protective case.Magichands8 - Wednesday, January 10, 2018 - link
And the point of having a display with a .1ms response time running at 60hz would be...? ASUS like Acer is known for it's very poor quality control and support so let's see if they can release this without massive screen quality issues and without severe burn-in, life time and frame rate issues. When they offer something like this without those issues at at least 144hz and 27" then it will be interesting. This may be expensive but as detailed it's worthless to me.masouth - Thursday, January 11, 2018 - link
I think the point of .1 ms response is that it's basically native to the technology. OLED has crazy fast response time compared to LCD so it's not like it's some artificial number they were shooting for just for marketing...it's just the way it is.zepi - Wednesday, January 10, 2018 - link
204dpi is a nice figure to go as a second monitor for high-dpi laptops. One could use the same scaling factor as with the laptop screen and everything would still be nicely usable.Santoval - Wednesday, January 10, 2018 - link
If the minimum brightness is reported as 0.0005 nits(cd/m^2) and the contrast ratio is 1,000,000:1 doesn't that suggest that the brightness is 0.0005 x 1,000,000 = 500 nits? That would be high for an OLED panel, but probably still low for HDR. I suppose even in OLED panels the min nits cannot go down to 0 (and thus provide OLED's theoretical infinite contrast) because there should always be a tiny amount of light bleeding toward blacks - in real content anyway.The contrast might really be infinite if you divided the screen in 2, 4 or 8 parts and alternated full white and full black squares. Close to the dividing lines (up to a few mm into the white and black frames) the contrast would probably be 1,000,000:1 due to light bleeding, but if you measured a few cm+ beyond the dividing lines the contrast should be infinite. So, when you view or render CGI scenes of a film ora game the 1,000,000:1 number might be minimum guaranteed contrast ratio, rather than the maximum.
nathanddrews - Wednesday, January 10, 2018 - link
ASUS might intend that value to be something totally different, but that 0.0005 cd/m² minimum brightness is just that - minimum brightness, not black. OLEDs are off when fed a pure black signal, so the infinite contrast ratio still stands, but if you feed it any other gray/color signal, there is an absolute minimum brightness each pixel will output. In some cases, this actually becomes a problem if the minimum brightness isn't low enough, as the difference between off and only a little bit on is still infinite. Always calibrate your displays, kids.For peak brightness, 500 nits falls short of the ~800 nits that LG OLED TVs can currently hit, but it really doesn't matter unless you have a lot of bright windows everywhere. Objective and subjective tests keep putting OLED at the top of the picture quality stack, including HDR performance. Contrast is king.
0.1 pixel response time black (100% off) to white (100% on) is killer even if limited to 60Hz, because it will eliminate LCD-related artifacts (ghosting, etc.). OLED naturally excels at this. What's more important is input lag, the measurement of time it takes for the signal to be processed by the monitor's SOC and displayed by the pixels. Can they get it down to CRT levels (0ms)? Probably not, but we'll see.
mkozakewich - Wednesday, January 10, 2018 - link
My Galaxy Note II would have a barely-perceptible glow when showing black, so its pixels couldn't turn off completely.My more recent BLU Vivo Air LTE was completely invisible (in a perfectly dark room, mind) when I showed a black image.
So they might be saying that the ratio is not infinite, and that a black image in a dark room would still be slightly visible. Most likely, they're doing a whole lot of rounding and you can't get any real number from reversing the math.
Jorsher - Friday, January 12, 2018 - link
No. People are not understanding.OLED can go down to complete black by turning off the pixel, as stated above. The "min brightness" means the minimum brightness of a pixel that's turned on. For OLED, you can have an infinite contrast due to the pixels' abilities to be shut off. For plasma, each pixel needed to retain a charged state since "powering" the pixel took longer than the 0.1ms required for LED. The minimum brightness on OLED refers to the lowest brightness possible for a pixel that isn't turned off -- the lower, the better, as it will allow for less detail loss or "black crush" for shadow detail. The minimum brightness on plasma would be what you all are thinking, while also the same -- it's the lowest "powered" brightness possible, which is ALSO the lowest brightness possible.
boeush - Thursday, January 11, 2018 - link
For OLED monitors, higher Max brightness threatens faster/worse burn-in. Unlike TVs in typical use, monitors often end up displaying static content. Particularly when it comes to things like task bars or window chrome ...So in general, it would make sense that OLED monitors should always lag OLED TVs in terms of brightness - all other tech factors being equal.
Jorsher - Friday, January 12, 2018 - link
It's more of a limitation to OLED than trying to prevent burn-in, I believe. I have a Panasonic plasma which also "suffers" from burn-in, however they can get very bright (look at Samsung F9500). In the case of plasmas, there are Energy Star requirements which create an artificial limitation to brightness, and the manufacturers implemented ABL to decrease brightness -- for example a mostly-white screen -- to reduce power-consumption.In the case of OLED, I think it's less about the potential for burn-in and more about either a hard-limit for OLEDs or a longevity case. As with plasmas, TVs are used primarily for video so the effects of burn-in are almost non-existant outside of using your display for gaming that has HUDs. I game on my last-gen Panasonic plasma for hours, and worst case I'll have some image retention that isn't visible while watching video (except in the rare case there's a solid color for a length of time) which is gone before finishing an episode of your favorite show...
This concern about OLED burn-in is -- in my opinion -- not as big of a concern as people make it out to be. I thought plasma burn-in concerns were inflated for later-gen TVs, and think OLED is even more resistant...
Frenetic Pony - Wednesday, January 10, 2018 - link
Want. Want want want want want want waaaaant.At least, theoretically. It needs to be bright enough, eye adaptation is a bitch for ruining contrast ratios, even a relatively dark office is going to cut into it significantly. It's also kind of small... where's the 24"+ model?
imaheadcase - Thursday, January 11, 2018 - link
Any word on the 4k/200Hz gaming monitor Asus and Acer have been promising? They have had webpage up for it since June of last year...its been delayed like 2 times already. I heard they was going to announce more info at CES.Alistair - Thursday, January 11, 2018 - link
not until Q3 now apparantly, those are not coming out anytime sooniwod - Thursday, January 11, 2018 - link
I think most people miss the most important part of the announcement, which isn't about ASUS.JOLED are finally shipping!. It is possibly the only hope the OLED screen will ever come down in price that most consumer can afford them. By afford it doesn't mean cheap, it wont even touch IPS price level in 2022, but at least for a slight premium it should be close within 3 - 4 years.
LuneTech - Tuesday, February 13, 2018 - link
I want to get this, but I'm gonna have to put the strictest screensaver on to prevent burn in.davidwinst - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link
Finally an RGB-OLED Display! Unlike LG's crappy W-OLED TV's that distort colors to a White Hue. I can't wait until RGB-OLED will reach TV Screens, because CRT's and Plasma's all used RGB Spectrum Light, and that is why the picture quality on those are so superior to LCD and W-OLED. Long live RGB-OLED!!!lilkwarrior - Saturday, December 29, 2018 - link
Uh… what is currently touching W-OLED TVs that are the top picture quality TVs in the world w/ LG & Sony leading the way?RGB-OLED is an improvement, but don't act like LG's screens are "crappy" they'e unanimously among the best displays in the world!