Do I need a higher resolution Monitor?

My path.

Up to 2013, I used a 27" 1440 monitor from 0,6-0,8mt.
I cannot see clearly enough on short distances. It's now 50 years I've been wearing double and then multifocal
<I can still read a newspaper standing on it without spectacles>

I passed to a 32" Samsung Monitor/Tv from 1mt-80cm

Then I decided to save some money and got an old Samsung TV 44" FHD using it from 1,20-1,60mt,. That lasted 1 year or a little less

In 2018 I invested some money in a cheap Samsung TV 55" and started to use it a 1,60-1,80mt . The Same distance that I still use now.
At that time I thought it was not bad at all, but that 55" got too many issues and after 18 months I ended up relegating it to the kitchen.

Bought a Samsung TV 65" 4k normal LED.
Things had a small improvement but brightness was an issue, I cannot have a Day/Sun/Night separated setting easy to use.

This year I changed it to an LG Qled 4K 65" - WOW -
With this kind of LED, there is a huge change in crispness and definition.

And more .. the software is simpler and gives you great customization opportunities, and you can save everything in 7 different "modes"
really better than any of the previous ones I had used!!

For photos, I use the 300% 😔

What I've found is that all the LEDs are not the same.

Better technology, better seeing experience.

The jump in the last 4 years makes it worth changing anything older than 5 years and doing it now.

Mostly stuck in bed, I'm in front of my screen and my PC runs 12 to 20 hours per day

( In the last 10 years that's an average of 10 hours each day)

[deleted]

OK

I have always found that unless my monitor is set very dim, the shadow regions of my prints are too dark. I have the brightness and contrast settings of my new monitor set at 20%. I've made no attempt to calibrate/profile it yet, but subjectively it feels about what I'm used to. My monitor is placed in front of a south facing window with the venetian blinds shut. Walls are painted white.

I'm not fond of the brightness of LCD monitors even for general use. Particularly the highlight areas. There is a lot of glare to my eyesight. Even though this 4k monitor is noticeably crisper, and even though I have everything lowered, I still find the "gentleness" of a reflected light print more pleasant.

It's been a while since I dug out the Spyder and I've forgotten how to do profiling under Linux. Thinking about it, I may have the profiled the last monitor under windows and imported the profile. Can't remember. Need to start reading up again.

I don't know the first thing about 8k monitors but that resolution would allow you to use a very large monitor which might be useful. You'd have to scale it massively though as text would be minuscule.

I have now calibrated/profiled my new monitor. Of course the spyder went and insisted I set brightness to 120cd :-(

The trouble I find with calibration and colour management in general, is that there is no feedback. I believe I have successfully calibrated my monitor but how do I know for sure? I have to take it on trust that it has worked. What the device should be able to do is compare before and after readings and confirm that the monitor is now calibrated and correct.

No, you don't need that. Windows takes care of that.
And if it's not enough with "Right-click on Desktop" >Display< you can modify the dimensions of the text and %
No issues at all

( I use a 65" 4k ( I use a 65" 4k @1,70mt right now that I'm writing )

Nice for those working on Windows 😄

One advantage to higher-res displays is that they take upscaling more gracefully. Let's say you have a device that outputs 1280720, or have some reason to drive the display at that resolution. If you have a 2K "FHD" monitor, the monitor MUST perform an awkward resampling ratio to fill the monitor; 1.5:1. You have unavoidable micro-distortion, and no capability, whatsoever, to see actual pixels or 100% pixel views unless you "zoom in" further. If the monitor were 4K, however, the ratio would be 3:1, which means that all source pixels are presented on the display, at the same size. So, even with the same video coming out of a graphics card at 1280720, the 4K monitor will be clearer (less distorted) than the 2K monitor, and text should be more legible at the same small size.

In Linux Mint Cinnamon you can scale text without scaling pictures. I have 1.5x text in my 27" 2560x1440 monitor.😃

Yes, that's why one should pixel-peep over 100% in Nearest Neighbor at X2, X3, X4, etc. ad naus.

That's a work-around, but it forces more magnification than you may have wanted.

I missed that response sorry.

I didn't understand "forces more magnification than you may have wanted". Is that some sort of rebuttal?

I'm saying that "magnifying" pixels to say 4X their size without changing their values is a deliberate act with completely foreseen results.

Yes, but it could be 4x for a mismatch between the monitor and graphics card, and 3x for a match, to see all the original pixels. 4x may be overkill for other aspects of viewing. IOW, you may need extra magnification when there is a mismatch, just to clarify the original pixels.

Of course, just using Nearest Neighbor for upsampling preserves original pixel values, but will cause periodic spatial bunching with many small ratios.

Driving a 2K and 4K monitor with the same 1280*720 video, the pixels are cleanly and evenly distributed already at 3x on the monitor (which is 1x in the video signal). With a 2K monitor, you would get tremendous periodic distortion with 1x in the video signal, since each video signal pixel becomes 1.5 monitor pixels in each dimension. IOW, you need more video signal pixel magnification to have more evenly-magnified/evenly-distributed reproduction of original pixels, when the video signal does not result in exact-integer magnification on the monitor.

You're mostly clear of the issues in this situation at "4x" magnification coming from the video chip, which will be 6x on the monitor pixels, but if your need for magnification is less than that, then the 4K monitor will give clearer resampling.

So, the 2K forces higher magnification, if we want to avoid microdistortion.

I fold. I know nothing of graphics cards mismatching, spatial bunching, 1280*720 video, periodic distortion, magnification.

I am beginning to wonder if your responses are deliberately abstruse.

Again, I fold.