Eizo EV3285 with MacPro 2019 - recommended settings

[CrystalmakeR]

Currently I have the Eizo EV3285 (with latest firmware) connected to my MacPro 2019.
I use my MP7.1 "only" as a DAW (no video editing, no photography, ...).

I can run 3840x2160 resolution (scaled), but at this resolution the letters are small, and are not so crisp for my eyes (55+eyes).
Currently I am running 3360x1890 resolution (scaled), quite OK-ish, but I am not sure that this is really the best setting. Maybe looking at this 32" monitor from 60-70 cm needs another resolution?

Also, I would highly appreciate if you can help me to set the Eizo monitor, so that I could have a crispy image on the Eizo (like my iMac 2020)...or that is simply not possible.

Any advice is very much welcome.

 

[Amethyst1]

I can run 3840x2160 resolution (scaled), but at this resolution the letters are small, and are not so crisp for my eyes (55+eyes).
Currently I am running 3360x1890 resolution (scaled), quite OK-ish, but I am not sure that this is really the best setting. Maybe looking at this 32" monitor from 60-70 cm needs another resolution?

The only way to have very crisp (sharp) letters on that monitor is to run it at the pixel-perfect "looks like 1920×1080" setting. Any other setting apart from the native 3840×2160, no matter if it's (looks like) 2560×1440, 3008×1692 or 3360×1890, causes downscaling of a larger framebuffer to the monitor's native resolution, which introduces blurriness. There's no way around that.

Also, I would highly appreciate if you can help me to set the Eizo monitor, so that I could have a crispy image on the Eizo (like my iMac 2020)...or that is simply not possible.

Even at "looks like 1920×1080", the Eizo won't be as crisp as the iMac's 5K screen because of the Eizo's significantly lower pixel density (136 PPI vs. 218 PPI). If you want a 32" monitor that is every bit as crisp as the iMac, you need a monitor with the same pixel density as the iMac's LCD: the Pro Display XDR.

 

[CrystalmakeR]

Thanks!

Indeed @ "looks like 1920 x 1080" I have very sharp letters.
The native 3840x2160 looks sharp-ish, too.
In the "System/Accessibility/Disply preference pane" the small text can be made more readable by using the "Increase Contrast" and Reduce Transparency" checkboxes. Quite OK, but the letters are still small, although in my DAW (DP) I cam increase the size of the letters.

Maybe it was not so good idea to go for this Eizo monitor...

May Ask you, what would you recommend as a "sharp" 32" monitor? I do not know much about this topic, but I think 3840x2160 resolution is not the best for 32" as the letters will be too small.

Could you please comment and advice?

 

[Amethyst1]

May Ask you, what would you recommend as a "sharp" 32" monitor?

One thing to keep in mind if you go for, say, a 32" 1920×1080 or 2560×1440 monitor in order to have bigger text, you won't get the HiDPI modes with their improved text rendering (macOS only enables them on a "4K" or higher-resolution external monitor).
Some people, myself included, find macOS' text rendering unsatisfactory (as in: blurry/fuzzy/not crisp) in non-HiDPI modes (i.e. on lower-than-"4K" resolution monitors), which is why I have a bit of a problem actually recommending a lower-than-"4K" resolution monitor for use with macOS.

So my first idea would be to stick with the "4K" monitor for some more time and try all the scaled resolutions to see if you can find one that makes text both large enough and crisp/sharp enough; you can enable additional scaled resolutions by holding [Alt] while clicking "Scaled" in the Displays preference pane. If you cannot find a setting you like...

...the question is: Do you find the way text is rendered at the native 3840×2160 resolution acceptable (as in: crisp/sharp enough)? If you do, non-HiDPI text rendering may not be an issue for you, so you might be happy with a 32" 2560×1440 monitor, for instance.

 

[CrystalmakeR]

Thanks!

So, following your advice, I have spent - and still spending time with the 3840x2160 native and scaled resolutions of my Eizo monitor. I am using my Eizo monitor only as a graphic display so to speak - in my DAW/softsynhts/etc. not so much is happening => I have a +-static image, although when I score for a movie, I have a movie clip running.

Until now I could not find any settings what would come to close to my 5k iMac. However, in the past my DAW monitor was another IPS monitor with glass and that was very sharp (2560x1440), but the real estate was "small"-ish. The Eizo is as good as it is, somehow I prefer the glassy IPS monitor.

I understand your comment about not recommending any special monitor, but I still ask, do you know a + 4K monitor with glassy screen? I know one: Pro Display XDR, but I think it is a bit overkill for my needs.

Your comments are highly appreciated here.

 

[Amethyst1]

do you know a + 4K monitor with glassy screen?

All 27” 5K (5120×2880) monitors out there are glossy at least, some more so than others.

The LG UltraFine 5K is the only one still available to buy AFAIK, other decent but discontinued options are the Dell UP2715K (I own one, and it has glass in front of the LCD) and the HP Z27q (this one is also available with “4K”, so make sure to get the correct one!).

The Iiyama XB2779QQS and Planar IX2790 use rejected iMac 5K panels, so they do have glass in front of the LCD, but can have many stuck pixels (the Iiyama I briefly played with did) so…

 

[CrystalmakeR]

Thank you! I am still thinking what to do...

My video card is the basic Radeon Pro 580X (it has only 2 HDMI 2.0 ports). My Eizo monitor is connected to it via one of them. Does it matter which one (of these 2) I use? Or shall I use one of the Thunderbolt 3 ports of my MP7.1?
I guess it does not matter, but I am checking as I really want to close out a bad cable or "wrong" connection.

 

[Amethyst1]

My video card is the basic Radeon Pro 580X (it has only 2 HDMI 2.0 ports). My Eizo monitor is connected to it via one of them. Does it matter which one (of these 2) I use? Or shall I use one of the Thunderbolt 3 ports of my MP7.1?

DisplayPort (which is what the Thunderbolt 3 ports carry) is known to be less problematic than HDMI on macOS so it's worth a shot I guess.

 

[CrystalmakeR]

Well, I did try the Displayport option => the result is the same :-(.

Reading your answers here in this thread and in other threads, my conclusion is that there is no "good" 32" display with 3840x2160 resolution :-( for my MP7.1. Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Amethyst1]

Reading your answers here in this thread and in other threads, my conclusion is that there is no "good" 32" display with 3840x2160 resolution :-( for my MP7.1.

In terms of pixel density at least...

 

[CrystalmakeR]

...ahhhh...just received a price offer for the Pro Display XDR...but why I just cannot buy a monitor what my 2020 Retina 5K iMac has? I think, many here asks the same...I am using the iMac 2020 in 2560x1440 = very nice, at 3200x1800 still very nice! This is a difficult situation. Getting my MP7.1 ±2 years back instead of using 3-4 Macs (and zillion of cables) was quite an "easy" decision. ...but this monitor story is just slowing down my musical creativity! I like to see the notes very sharp, but after 40+years of music writing my eyes are as they are...I am thinking, I will go back to the old days = I will write the whole orchestral score on a paper...

Amethyst1, reading your advices, the only remaining possible display is the LG UltraFine 5K.
Is that really really crispy at 3840 x 2160 resolution? Or @ 3200 x 1800 (if it does it)?

...or the new Dells...U2723QE, U3223QE...

 

[Amethyst1]

Amethyst1, reading your advices, the only remaining possible display is the LG UltraFine 5K.
Is that really really crispy at 3840 x 2160 resolution? Or @ 3200 x 1800 (if it does it)?

The LG is every bit as crisp as the iMac at 3200×1800 or 3840×2160. If you want to try setting your iMac to 3840×2160, you can use e.g. RDM. Select the 3840×2160 mode that has a lightning bolt (⚡️) next to it for HiDPI.

 

[CrystalmakeR]

Thank you Amethyst1!

My 32" Eizo EV3285 has 140 PPI / 55 PPCM. I am going to test these days a 27" LG with 163 PPI / 64 PPCM.
Sure, not a fair comparison, but this is what I can do now, and I will see: get the 27" LG or keep my Eizo.
At this moment I am using my Eizo with 2560x1440 resolution - this is quite OK (-ish). I have also moved my Eizo a bit further from me (+5-10 cm); this helps a bit too. Indeed, with this resolution I have less real estate, but OK.

 

[CrystalmakeR]

So, I did test the 27" LG with 163 PPI; it is not like my iMac 5K, but it gives me better feeling.

Meanwhile I have found:

DPI scaling settings on macOS / OS X (HiDPI display) | EIZO

EIZO is a visual technology company that manufactures high-end monitors and display solutions for business, graphics, home entertainment, healthcare, maritime, security/surveillance, ATC and defense/aerospace.

www.eizoglobal.com

I think (I can be wrong, as I am not an expert in this field), "note 2" on the above link answers my question about the somewhat "blurry" screen if I use this monitor at looks like 3360 x 1890, looks like 3008 x 1692 or looks like 2560 x 1440 resolutions.

At 1920 x 1080 resolution, the scaling is 200%, the image is just perfect, but that is way too low resolution.
At 3840 x 2160 resolution, the scaling is 100%, the image is just perfect, but the letters are way too small.

So, all together, if I keep this monitor I will use it one of the above scalings.

Note: I wish I knew all this before buying the monitor (I would not buy it, btw).
I can imagine that it is working perfectly with Windows.
But as I do not have any windows machine, I cannot test it.

 

[CrystalmakeR]

Little update:
I had a possibility to quickly check this Eizo EV3285 monitor with a Windows machine (USB-C connection).
At resolution 3840x2160, 125% scaling, or 150% scaling, the image is just perfect! If my MP7.1 (Big Sur) could do that I would be very happy!

Note: I had no possibility to check it with HDMI on the PC.

So, my conclusion is that, indeed as I indicated above:
"The screen of the Eizo EV3285 @ looks like 2560 x 1440, @ looks like 3008 x 1692, and @ looks like 3360 x 1890, looks somewhat blurry because of the OS scaling".

There is still one more thing to check, namely font smoothing:

How to Adjust or Disable Font Smoothing in macOS Big Sur

If you recently installed macOS Big Sur and you're wondering why the text looks blurry on your display, it could be because font smoothing is...

www.macrumors.com

But I am not so so sure that it will help. Any comment is very much welcome concerning font smoothing. Will it help?

 

[Amethyst1]

At resolution 3840x2160, 125% scaling, or 150% scaling, the image is just perfect!

This is because Windows handles fractional scaling differently: Windows' UI elements can be scaled to arbitrary sizes, macOS only offers 100% and 200%.

 

[CrystalmakeR]

This is because Windows handles fractional scaling differently: Windows' UI elements can be scaled to arbitrary sizes, macOS only offers 100% and 200%.

I see. So whatever I do, until scaling to arbitrary sizes are included in the OS, I will have somewhat blurry letters if I do not use 100% or 200% scaling :-(.

I have here now an LG, 27”, 163 PPI. This is also not perfect but gives sharper letters.
However, the size of the monitor is a bit small for my setup.

This brings me closer and closer to the Pro Display XDR.

 

[Amethyst1]

So whatever I do, until scaling to arbitrary sizes are included in the OS,

Back in the days of Mac OS X 10.4, 10.5 and 10.6, arbitrary scaling (50%...300%) was actually possible, but it was very glitchy and unfinished.

 

[HenryAZ]

I've been using an Eizo EV3237 since November 2015, with similar specs to yours (PPI, etc). I've run it on two different Minis, and the Trashcan Mac Pro. Always at the native resolution of 3840 x 2160 @ 60Hz, and I sit about 70cm away. As you've noticed, this resolution gives the crispest display.

Two things make this doable for me. My eyes are aging (I'm 75), but I have always had special computer glasses made that place the main focus at 70cm. I use these also for pistol shooting, as that is also the distance to my front sight. I order them online and adjust my prescription to change the main focus distance.

Second, I have found that, with the exception of some native Apple text, like the menu bar, I can modify all my programs to enlarge the text to a more comfortable size. My browser, for example, runs at 185% zoom, and sits in the middle of one desktop with room on one side for a Terminal window and Messages (both with comfortable text size). Thunderbird email is just below the browser and paritially covered by it, and only PCalc on the other side of the browser. There is certainly plenty of real estate at that resolution to handle this. The browser easily displays 1024 pixel wide images with no sideways scrolling.

I use 5 desktops, each dedicated to a different function (set of programs). This keeps each one uncluttered.

I've always felt that the native resolution provides the best experience, and I run my 13" MBP at its maximum, with a similar strategy with regard to sizing programs.

 

[CrystalmakeR]

Back in the days of Mac OS X 10.4, 10.5 and 10.6, arbitrary scaling (50%...300%) was actually possible, but it was very glitchy and unfinished.

OK, clear!

 

[CrystalmakeR]

I've been using an Eizo EV3237 since November 2015, with similar specs to yours (PPI, etc). I've run it on two different Minis, and the Trashcan Mac Pro. Always at the native resolution of 3840 x 2160 @ 60Hz, and I sit about 70cm away. As you've noticed, this resolution gives the crispest display.

Two things make this doable for me. My eyes are aging (I'm 75), but I have always had special computer glasses made that place the main focus at 70cm. I use these also for pistol shooting, as that is also the distance to my front sight. I order them online and adjust my prescription to change the main focus distance.

Second, I have found that, with the exception of some native Apple text, like the menu bar, I can modify all my programs to enlarge the text to a more comfortable size. My browser, for example, runs at 185% zoom, and sits in the middle of one desktop with room on one side for a Terminal window and Messages (both with comfortable text size). Thunderbird email is just below the browser and paritially covered by it, and only PCalc on the other side of the browser. There is certainly plenty of real estate at that resolution to handle this. The browser easily displays 1024 pixel wide images with no sideways scrolling.

I use 5 desktops, each dedicated to a different function (set of programs). This keeps each one uncluttered.

I've always felt that the native resolution provides the best experience, and I run my 13" MBP at its maximum, with a similar strategy with regard to sizing programs.

Good words! Many thanks!

Although the 27" LG is crispier, it is a no go for me, as the real estate is small and I had to pace the 27" LG closer to me. That is also a no go for my audio studio. Note: It is not so good to have anything "blocking" the sounds from the speakers.

So, since a recent OS update point (please read below further) I have put back my Eizo EV3285 (not only that I need more real estate, I also I need a clear sonic place between my speakers and ears) and moved it even further from me - now it is 80-90 cm from me. I am using it in it's native resolution. Now, I am not using so many apps (my powerful MP7.1 is "only" for music); my DAW (Digital performer) has a zoom in function. I am using it at 150%-160% - it looks OK. My other important app is the VEPRO. This does not have a zoom in function, but if I need to really go into it (what I do not do so often), I just switch the monitor resolution to looks like 2560×1440, or looks like 3008×1692.

BUT something very strange has happened! I really cannot explain. I have just updated (yesterday) my OS from 11.6.2 to 11.6.4, and the Eizo is just better. Now I am really clueless...Can someone explain this to me?

I did not change the HDMI cable, I have just removed the monitor from the desk and put it back. I do not think there is any "bad" electrical connection (in the monitor/cable/or in whatever), what would become OK after moving this "heavy" monitor. In my opinion the only change is the OS upgrade. I really did not have this "sharp" image before this upgrade. I say, it is still not like my iMac 5k Retina, but it is surely better as it was before.

 

[chekie]

The only way to have very crisp (sharp) letters on that monitor is to run it at the pixel-perfect "looks like 1920×1080" setting. Any other setting apart from the native 3840×2160, no matter if it's (looks like) 2560×1440, 3008×1692 or 3360×1890, causes downscaling of a larger framebuffer to the monitor's native resolution, which introduces blurriness. There's no way around that.


Even at "looks like 1920×1080", the Eizo won't be as crisp as the iMac's 5K screen because of the Eizo's significantly lower pixel density (136 PPI vs. 218 PPI). If you want a 32" monitor that is every bit as crisp as the iMac, you need a monitor with the same pixel density as the iMac's LCD: the Pro Display XDR.

I don't agree with this.

The way mac scales HiDPI screen, whether texts are blurry depends ONLY on PPI. Scaling a 4k screen to 1080p only makes text bigger than scaling to 1440p, not more crisp.

You can try this with two 4k screens of the the same size: one scale 200% to 1080p and other scale 150% to 1440p. Open the same webpage, zoom in the webpage on 1440p by x1.25 (this makes texts roughly the same size on the two screens). You'll see texts look exactly the same on two screens.

 

[Amethyst1]

The way mac scales HiDPI screen, whether texts are blurry depends ONLY on PPI. Scaling a 4k screen to 1080p only makes text bigger than scaling to 1440p, not more crisp.

I disagree.

Case in point: I have several screens with the ideal PPI range for macOS, i.e. 219-227 ppi. Even on those, non-integer scaling causes blurriness I can see immediately. Example: I have a 27" 5120×2880 monitor. At pixel-perfect 2560×1440 HiDPI, everything is perfectly crisp. At 3008×1692 or 3200×1800 HiDPI, there's blurriness. I can see this immediately.