December 23, 2013

LG is Launching a 'Real 4K' Monitor With a Resolution of 4096 x 2160 Just for Filmmakers

LG 4k monitor4K computer monitors aren't new. In fact, several models are currently available right now from makers such as Asus, Sharp, and Dell. However, LG recently announced their first 4K monitor, which seems to be targeted at filmmakers. How? Well, typically 4K monitors offer a 16:9 aspect ratio, but this 31" monitor, called 31MU95, not only offers 4K resolution, but also a 19:10 IPS panel (a DCI compliant 1.9 aspect ratio), which LG has dubbed "Real 4K." Continue on for more.

According to RedShark News, it seems as though they've upped the ante this time around with the 31MU95 by offering "DCI-compliant 4K at 4096 x 2160," as well as a Thunderbolt 2 port, which LG thinks is, "an excellent choice for those working in design, film and other creative industries," -- especially for filmmakers wanting to transfer and display 4K video files.

Engadget elaborates on this monitor, as well as the new 4K "Ultra-Wides" they will be releasing (This isn't the first ultra-wide monitor made by LG -- they came out with a 29" 21:9 display over a year ago, only with a resolution of 2,560 x 1,080):

Interestingly, the new offering conforms to the 4K format recorded by RED's EPIC and SCARLET cameras and also packs a Thunderbolt 2 port with 20Gbps throughput. LG claims that'll let you monitor 4K footage and archive it up at the same time -- ideal for on-set movie playback or post-production, for instance.

LG will also offer 34-inch and 29-inch UM95 models with 3,440 x 1,440 resolution at 21:9, which will display 99-percent of the sRGB gamut and come with LG's True Color calibration software.

No price or specifications have been made available for the DCI 4K or the ultra-wide monitors yet, however its competitors are listed somewhere the vicinity of $3,000. With a CES demo of these babies still a couple of weeks away, this gives us a little bit of time to consider another big question: What does this mean, if anything, for 4K adoption?

Opinions and predictions vary on when wide 4K adoption will occur -- something that we at NFS have talked about quite a bit. But if recent developments like this are any indication (the standardization of UHDTV, 4K offerings from VOD platforms like Amazon and Netflix, even the arrival of 4K porn), then this ultra-wide 4K monitor might be another piece to add to the puzzle.

What do you think? How important is having a 4K/ultra-wide monitor to you? Do you think LG's new monitor indicates anything about 4K adoption? Let us know in the comments below.

Links:

Your Comment

21 Comments

Great specs, but I'd much rather have a 16:9 monitor, as it can display 4:3, 1.85, and 2.39 with minimal pillar and letter boxing. This monitor is only really useful for 2.39 content.

December 23, 2013

-1
Reply
ok

That seems like a really strange reason honestly...the point is that 4096x2160 allows you to display 1:1 resolutions instead of doing a slight sub-pixel upscale or downscale which can create visual artifacts on the stuff you're actually looking at...compared with the slight amount of pillar boxing on 16:9 content which is barely noticeable on the sides.

December 23, 2013

1
Reply
Gabe

+1

December 23, 2013

0
Reply
Kuk

Take a look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF-kqIZGRLk

Definition isn't the biggest improvement over HD, it's the new UHD colorspace that is a big deal and those screens only cover 99% of sRGB... Pointless!

I would rather buy one of Dell's which are wide gamut and allow for DCI simulation.

Anyway, no screen covers the UHD space and it will take some time before anything comes even close so for the time being "the wider the better".

December 23, 2013

0
Reply
Nej

It's true that one thing that makes 4K so attractive is the richer colors.

December 24, 2013

1
Reply
Gene

Hey Nej, to be clear, LG hasn't said yet what the colorspace is on the Real 4k monitor yet. The 99 percent colorspace spec is for the other monitors -- those with 3,440 x 1440 resolution. Hopefully the 4K model will be a 10-bit monitor. We'll find out soon enough.

December 24, 2013

0
Reply

December 23, 2013

1
Reply
Nej

It's a great idea and a nice monitor, if a little expensive.

I'm sitting here, in front of two 23" Apple cinema displays and it occurs to me this 31" 19:10 would be pretty close to what I see here, but on one monitor. Perfect. Why are we still running two monitor setups? For real estate...well, now you have it. You can still playback 16:9 footage full screen, you just would have bars on the sides, which I think is preferable anyway since the screen is so wide.

Wake me up when they're under $2K.

December 23, 2013

-1
Reply
sean

How is it a little expensive when they haven't even announced a price yet?

December 23, 2013

0
Reply
Lip

Because it's obviously going to cost more than 2 apple displays, even after factoring in that apple displays are already artificially inflated, and factoring in for the upped resolution and the value of having the inconvenient edges of the apple screen that meet in the middle of the dual setup.

December 23, 2013

-1
Reply
Pianohero

Is it just me or does this seem a bit weird? I'm using a Dell 1920 x 1200 (16:10) monitor as a program monitor for 1920 x 1080 footage (16:9). This works out nicely as the extra bit of vertical height is taken up by menu bars and tools at the top and bottom. Won't a "Real 4k" monitor just mean that this lost height eats into the res of your footage? I'd much rather the screen was a little taller than my footage to allow for this.

December 23, 2013

0
Reply

+1 I own a set of 2 Dell 1920*1200 monitors for the exact same reason you said. Surprised how the market is flooded with 16:9 but hardly any 16:10 monitors.

December 23, 2013

0
Reply
Archie

You should be using the screen as a display monitor so that your NLE displays the image in full screen while you work on a different screen. Using a 4k monitor allows you to work in a native 4k timeline.

December 23, 2013

0
Reply
Gabe

Some folks are using the cheaper Chinese Heiki TV's as monitors. $500 on sale but only HDMI 1.4. If they upgrade the ports in 2014, they'll become the best buy among the 4K TV/monitors.
.
As to where or when, Netflix says they want to stream the "House of Cards" in 4K this spring. However, if they don't upgrade their codec by then, a customer will need a lot of bandwidth. On the other hand, the affordable range bandwidth speeds are going up.
.
http://news.yahoo.com/4k-netflix-streaming-launching-next-month-08482823...

December 23, 2013

0
Reply
DLD

Speaking of faster internet, I live near silicon valley. It's densely populated for miles here. It seems that if anywhere gigabit internet would catch on immediately and be provided with lots of customers to make it profitable it's this area. But Google, nor anyone else, has started running fiber optic lines in this area that would be $70.00 a month having 734 MB download and 730 MB upload. Head scratcher......

December 24, 2013

0
Reply
Gene

There hasn't really been any demand for super fast speeds. HD plays fine at 3.5 Mbps, as is the case with YouTube or NBC (who streams the Premier League matches at 3.5 on a good day, 2.2 on a busy one). You figure 1440 is streamed at around 6 Mbps and the US average is around 8.5. The 4K will buffer with VP8/H264 but most people haven't awaken to its presence yet anyway and the most recent upgrades probably have people scratching their heads, "Why do I need 30-75 Meg anyway?". And, if they don't download large files on a frequent basis, they actually do not. Regardless, the technology is there - up to 10 Gbps via cable (DOCSIS 3.1) and up to 500 Mbps via DSL but it could be an overkill for your average household.

December 24, 2013

0
Reply
DLD

By the way, check with your local ISP. Mine is now offering 30 Meg for $40, its second cheapest package. Considering that MPEG-4 type speed can deliver 4K at around 14 Meg with the HEVC/VP9 aiming to cut the bandwidth requirements down in half , for most people, 30 Meg should more than suffice.

December 23, 2013

-1
Reply
DLD

It's not "made for filmmakers". It probably doesn't have built in calibration, LUT support, full 10 bit panel, and frame guides. Please know what you are writing about before you write it. The ONLY thing it has that is filmmaking related is the panel res which happens to match the 4k acquisition res of red MX sensor

December 23, 2013

0
Reply
john jeffries

You definitively state it's not for filmmakers and follow that with "probably doesn't". At the very least, you're guilty of the very thing you accuse the author of. You may be right but no one knows the full specs yet and the specs we do know (DCI compliant, 4096x2160) seem to show promise for the features you mention.

December 25, 2013

-2
Reply
Brian

The only reason I would want a 4K monitor is for color grading. I'll never edit an online 4K timeline.

December 24, 2013

0
Reply
Caleb

Oh, I'm sure you will at some point.

December 25, 2013

-1
Reply
Brian