Monitor for 3D Animation

[Nightfairy151]

I'm in school studying 3d computer animation and use Maya and photoshop a lot. Right now I'm working off a mac book pro, about a year old.

I desperately need a new monitor, my price range is about $1000 and i want something pretty big unless other animators out there think a 30 inch is too big to work on.

any advice?

 

[LeviG]

ok so the gpu is the 8600 iirc.
I wouldn't advise going above 20-22" because with the combination of the increase in pixels and the non cad base for the gpu you will notice a deterioration in the overall performance of maya when you start working with higher polygon models.

In my opinion you need a quadro/firepro to work a higher res screen in 3d programs and due to Apple's wisdom their 'workstation' laptops still use a bloomin gaming gpu which isn't designed for a cad environment.

 

[Cabbit]

ok so the gpu is the 8600 iirc.
I wouldn't advise going above 20-22" because with the combination of the increase in pixels and the non cad base for the gpu you will notice a deterioration in the overall performance of maya when you start working with higher polygon models.

In my opinion you need a quadro/firepro to work a higher res screen in 3d programs and due to Apple's wisdom their 'workstation' laptops still use a bloomin gaming gpu which isn't designed for a cad environment.

Remember Quadro and Firegl cards are the same as the gaming counter parts except for extra frame buffer memory and OpenGL and application specific driver optimizations. Which i have to say is basically what a mac edition of these "gaming" cards are, as Mac drivers are optimized for OpenGL.
Though don't get me wrong there are a few more differences between the PCB's and generally the workstation cards are much more stable than there desktop counterparts but at the core its the same chip.

 

[LeviG]

Though don't get me wrong there are a few more differences between the PCB's and generally the workstation cards are much more stable than there desktop counterparts but at the core its the same chip.

true but there are some differences and its not just down to the drivers. A bottom of the range quadro (based on '9400' gpu) gives smoother frame rates etc in 3ds max (my software of choice) than a top of the range games card (ie the GTX), especially when you are working with high poly counts and multiple work panes being open.
Yes its the same core but its been cut slightly different in that it can handle the way a 3d program works ie, lots of lines, multiple panes etc. Geforce are designed to handle (very basic sense here - its a bit more complicated obviously) single threads of 3d which you get in games, quadro can handle multiple threads of 3d which you get in 3d programs.

 

[Nightfairy151]

honestly I'm pretty new at all this and not so savvy on the technical terms..I just don't know what I should be looking for in selecting a monitor. Are there and specific models and/or brands that are recommended or specifically designed for animators?

 

[LeviG]

I'm of the view that any non tn panel (do a quick google on tft panel types) display is better choice. Also would suggest getting any screen fully calibrated so the colours look right, some of the screens I've had are shocking

 

[stainlessliquid]

because you will need to work with many windows at the same time a bigger monitor is better.

 

[the vj]

because you will need to work with many windows at the same time a bigger monitor is better.

Not really... I have an apple 30" cinema display and I would feel better working with two 20". I have an old 20" apple display (the ones that were available in 2004) and the resolution is 300 times better than the 30" cinema display.

I would go for a 23" or something like that, something that squish the pixels to get better texture.

 

[Cabbit]

snip.

Sorry but it is just down to the drivers. Look for the hacked Geforce to Quadro drivers and you will see the benchmarks are equal between and Geforce that has been modified to a Quadro and a Quadro.

What makes Quadro's more expensive is the amount of extra work that goes into ensuring stable desktop 3D performance. Usually more layers on the PCB , higher quality PCB components and frame buffer memory, and finally the will often have dual link DVI and 3D glassies output that are not so common on gaming cards.

 

[LeviG]

Sorry but it is just down to the drivers. Look for the hacked Geforce to Quadro drivers and you will see the benchmarks are equal between and Geforce that has been modified to a Quadro and a Quadro.

These hacked drivers do not give the same performance as the dedicated cards (trust me I've tried and I do 3D CAD), you still get a performance loss in the programs because there is more to it than just the drivers, benchmarks mean squat in 3D CAD
It might have been a closer call back in the geforce 6 days but the current cards are not so easily hacked, they have some of the paths cut etc so the geforce cards can't be hacked anyways, you can change the 'model name' but it really doesn't make any difference to the performance in the proper programs. If it was all drivers explain to me how the lowly gf8400 based fx570 (which performs like an 8400 in games) can beat the high end geforces in CAD as theres a huge performance defecit which can't be written out with just drivers.

What makes Quadro's more expensive is the amount of extra work that goes into ensuring stable desktop 3D performance. Usually more layers on the PCB , higher quality PCB components and frame buffer memory, and finally the will often have dual link DVI and 3D glassies output that are not so common on gaming cards.

Yes some of the cost is down to the support and components but even the lowest level geforce has dual link DVI these days, 3D stereoscopic support is only on the high end models (and is specialist in its own right). But this still does not explain the above.

If you want to think that a geforce (hacked or not) is good enough for CAD then feel free to feel that way, but having tried to use a geforce gpu (and with the hack applied) for the CAD that I do I can seriously say that they're a load of rubbish as they can't handle the models well enough and slow my workflow down, something even the low end quadro does not.

 

[stainlessliquid]

Not really... I have an apple 30" cinema display and I would feel better working with two 20". I have an old 20" apple display (the ones that were available in 2004) and the resolution is 300 times better than the 30" cinema display.

I would go for a 23" or something like that, something that squish the pixels to get better texture.

2 smaller monitors are fine but he has a laptop and cant do multiple monitors, a single 20" for 3d would suck, I cant even stand working in Flash with a 20" because there are 2 really important windows you want open all the time and at a large size (frames and actions).

 

[lukasdesign]

24" Led Cinema,

with your budget it is a no brainer!
900$, IPS Panel, LED backlight, stylish, mini-display-port, magsafe plug, makes it a kind of docking station for your macbook.
The remaining 100$ you can invest in a full Mac keyboard, and a GOOD mouse (no, no, Mighty Mouse is not a mouse good for Maya! You need three buttons!)

Just make sure you can place it somewhere without having a window or lightsource in your abck! Apple was clever enough to provide it only with glossy panels!

In genral you can spend much less than that, as a good TN panel is fine for animation work. You are not gonna professionally print much stuff!

but once teh budget is allocated )

 

[mBox]

I'm in school studying 3d computer animation and use Maya and photoshop a lot. Right now I'm working off a mac book pro, about a year old.

I desperately need a new monitor, my price range is about $1000 and i want something pretty big unless other animators out there think a 30 inch is too big to work on.

any advice?

FYI, if your using Maya, avoid going higher than 1280x1024. Autodesk dont support anything higher but that doesnt mean you can use it. I have found that using a Dual 24" with an FX5600 there are some weird glitches. Sadly Im using this on a BOXX 8400 3D Workstation set at 1920x1200 each.
As far as Mac side goes, I teach a Maya Basic course on Macs. The res used at the local college is 1280x1024.
Their still running Maya 2008 on PowerMacs.
The display part doesnt hurt you as much its mostly video cards that tends to create havoc with funky screen anomalies created by Dynamics, Shade options etc...