DUNE 3 is not HD

[LivePsy]

Being the superficial and shallow person that I am, the HD feature really got my interest. But Dune 3 is not crisper looking than Dune 2. It is larger than 2 but has just as fuzzy edges. I am running both on Win 10 in 4K and Live 10. Live 10 is wow, drop dead gorgeous and Dune is still fuzzy. I can turn scaling off and get a clean looking plugin that is 3 inches wide but if scaling is on, its a large fuzzy window.

I would really love HD.

[LivePsy]

What do you mean "Read the Manual"? Its OK, I figured it out. Autoscaling off and select the Huge skin.

[Richard]

Yep, the huge skin is Full HD.

Note our internal design resolution is higher than Full HD, so if say 10k monitors become popular at some point, we could easily add a skin size yet much larger than huge if needed

[bones]

HD is a video resolution. In the US it is 1280x720 and in the rest of the world it is 1920x1080. The HUGE skin for D3 is 1920x1296, so it is in fact bigger than HD resolution. The reason it looks less crisp than Ableton is that it uses bitmaps, where Ableton has a vector UI that is drawn by your OS. They are fundamentally different ways of doing things which is why Ableton looks so flat and uninspiring.

What sort of system are you running? Specifically, what size/res is your monitor and what sort of graphics are you running it with?

[MT_]

Yep, the huge skin is Full HD.

What is the huge skin and how to enable it? Can’t see an option to change skin in the Dune 3 Demo.

our internal design resolution is higher than Full HD, so if say 10k monitors become popular at some point, we could easily add a skin size yet much larger than huge if needed

It’s already time to create a scaleable user interface. I am specifically interested in UI for 200% — this zoom level is often used with 24-27" 4K monitors like Dell P2415Q (including me). 4K monitors are already about 5 years on the market and are now quite popular. U-he, Arturia, Reveal Sound already provide user interface scaleable in the 100-200% range in their virtual instruments. Thanks.

[HYPNAGOGIA]

What is the huge skin and how to enable it? Can’t see an option to change skin in the Dune 3 Demo.

It may not be in the Demo version, but it's there


As Bones said, the Huge skin is 1920x1296 in size

It’s already time to create a scaleable user interface.

I'm not sure you can quite do that using bitmaps. I mean, you can give an option of multiple sizes, like DUNE3 does using images of different sizes, but one limitation of doing that using bitmaps is that it most likely won't be a one-size-fits-all kind of a thing.
Alternative to bitmaps in order to achieve a true scalability is to use vector-based graphics, but quite frankly, those generally tend to look like shit.

I am specifically interested in UI for 200% — this zoom level is often used with 24-27" 4K monitors like Dell P2415Q (including me).

Disregarding the apparent gain in screen real-estate, it makes me wonder if it's really worth getting a 4K screen when you have to zoom in to see anything on it. If you really need 200% zoom to see, wouldn't a nice 2K (1440p) monitor be a better option? Especially for that size (24"). Personally, I think that anything below 27" for 4K is a waste - which is why I think you have this problem where you need to zoom stuff to see it. 24" 4K is good for games, in my opinion. Not so much for work.

4K monitors are already about 5 years on the market and are now quite popular.

Yet I don't personally know anyone that has one, even among my tech enthusiasts friends, as they tend to run with the 1080p or even 2K 144Hz screens. Most of them say it's because of the price, but scaling is a factor for all of them. I myself am about to get a new screen because my old 1080p died, and I'll be going with a 27" 2K screen.

[MT_]

What is the huge skin and how to enable it? Can’t see an option to change skin in the Dune 3 Demo.

It may not be in the Demo version, but it's there

Thanks. Quite unusual place to put this setting to. I naturally looked for such setting in the “Settings” tab of Dune 3.

The “Huge” skin (effectively 200% compared with the “Small” one) is quite enough for HiDPI use.

It’s already time to create a scaleable user interface.

I'm not sure you can quite do that using bitmaps. I mean, you can give an option of multiple sizes, like DUNE3 does using images of different sizes, but one limitation of doing that using bitmaps is that it most likely won't be a one-size-fits-all kind of a thing.

Afaik, u-he, Arturia, and Reveal Sound all use bitmaps while still providing ability to gradually change zoom in the 100%-200% range.

Alternative to bitmaps in order to achieve a true scalability is to use vector-based graphics, but quite frankly, those generally tend to look like shit.

FL Studio uses vector graphics, and its UI still looks quite good.

I am specifically interested in UI for 200% — this zoom level is often used with 24-27" 4K monitors like Dell P2415Q (including me).

Disregarding the apparent gain in screen real-estate, it makes me wonder if it's really worth getting a 4K screen when you have to zoom in to see anything on it.

Looks like you confuse higher resolution with higher pixel density. 24″ 4K monitors are about higher pixel density (High-DPI, HiDPI, Retina).

If you really need 200% zoom to see, wouldn't a nice 2K (1440p) monitor be a better option?

Regular FHD and QHD displays do not provide such clarity as 4K monitors. Especially when working with text, including programming and web development and even just web surfing, and elements of user interface of applications.

Other advantages of high-DPI are invisible interpixel grid and much less noticeable crystal-inversion “fussing around” flickering thanks to smaller pixel and resulting partial compensation of flickering of nearby pixels.

Moreover, even if there were no 4K monitors on the market, but there were FHD monitors where each logical pixel was actually 2×2 physical pixels, I would buy such FHD monitor just to overcome interpixel-grid visibility and crystal-inversion flickering. But fortunately, I’m able to use the Dell P2415Q monitor for almost 4 years already.

24" 4K is good for games, in my opinion. Not so much for work.

Totally the contrary. The smaller atomic screen element is, the more pixel density is needed.

With games or videos, the entire screen is a monolithic thing, so the only thing that higher pixel density brings is a more realistic image.

With text, atomic element is much smaller — characters and lines their glyphs consist of. With regular low-DPI displays, the line a character glyph consists of is typically 1-pixel wide, and this is incredibly not enough for quality rendering given that those lines are not even always snapped to physical pixels, besides that there are also curves in characters that cannot be snapped to pixels and are therefore always antialiased and look more blurry on monitors with lower pixel density.

4K monitors are already about 5 years on the market and are now quite popular.

Yet I don't personally know anyone that has one, even among my tech enthusiasts friends, as they tend to run with the 1080p or even 2K 144Hz screens. Most of them say it's because of the price, but scaling is a factor for all of them. I myself am about to get a new screen because my old 1080p died, and I'll be going with a 27" 2K screen.

4K monitors are now quite affordable. For example, LG 24UD58 costs just about 300 $. Though it’s possible that affordability may depend on average wage in each specific country.

[Touch The Universe]

Seeing that you are quite knowledgeable, what TV would you recommend to use as a monitor. I want a higher screen size 40-60 so I can have it farther back than where I sit.

[bones]

This guy knows bugger-all. He has read a review of a monitor on the personal web page of some other know-nothing idiot, who is probably trying to justify his own dumb purchase, and he thinks he understands what he is talking about. If you want to get the best TV, go into a store where you can see dozens of screens side-by-side and use your eyes to pick one for yourself. Your choice will almost certainly come down to price.

FL Studio uses vector graphics, and its UI still looks quite good.

Unless something has changed in the last few years, FL Studio uses a lot of bitmaps.

Looks like you confuse higher resolution with higher pixel density. 24″ 4K monitors are about higher pixel density (High-DPI, HiDPI, Retina).

Looks like you don't know what you are talking about. Resolution and pixel density are two sides of the same coin. i.e. High resolution and high pixel density mean exactly the same thing.

If you really need 200% zoom to see, wouldn't a nice 2K (1440p) monitor be a better option?

Regular FHD and QHD displays do not provide such clarity as 4K monitors. Especially when working with text, including programming and web development and even just web surfing, and elements of user interface of applications.[/quote]
Rubbish, absolute rubbish. The reason 4k panels tend to look better is that they are generally expensive and use the latest technology, whereas lower res screens can use much older, less impressive technology. We use a mix of 4k and 2k 27" monitors where I work and because the 4k screens are the cheapest ones they could find, they don't look as good as the 2k Apple monitors that cost several times more.

If your text doesn't look perfect, run the ClearType utility and optimise it for your system and your eyes.

Other advantages of high-DPI are invisible interpixel grid and much less noticeable crystal-inversion “fussing around” flickering thanks to smaller pixel and resulting partial compensation of flickering of nearby pixels.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing and you clearly don't understand any of what you've read. e.g. If you bothered to follow the link concerning crystal inversion, you would have read the part about it being imperceptible to the viewer. As for the pixel grid, I can see it on a 26" CRT running at NTSC resolution but in 20-dd years of computer use I have NEVER been able to perceive the pixel grid on any monitor I have ever used. Seriously, try and find any review that pre-dates Apple Marketing's invention of the term "Retina display" that complains about being able to see pixels. You won't find any because it wasn't a problem until Apple needed it to be.

Moreover, even if there were no 4K monitors on the market, but there were FHD monitors where each logical pixel was actually 2×2 physical pixels, I would buy such FHD monitor just to overcome interpixel-grid visibility and crystal-inversion flickering.

No, if you did that it would be because you are a fool, no other reason. Seriously, do a search for "crystal inversion" and it won't show anything related to what you're talking about on the first page of results. That should tell you everything you need to know about how easily you have been fooled by some idiot's personal web page.

With text, atomic element is much smaller — characters and lines their glyphs consist of. With regular low-DPI displays, the line a character glyph consists of is typically 1-pixel wide, and this is incredibly not enough for quality rendering given that those lines are not even always snapped to physical pixels, besides that there are also curves in characters that cannot be snapped to pixels and are therefore always antialiased and look more blurry on monitors with lower pixel density.

You really are a fool. Have you ever seen a light-matrix road sign? What's the pixel density there? I reckon it's probably around 15 pixels per metre, yet everybody can read and understand text just fine.

4K monitors are now quite affordable. For example, LG 24UD58 costs just about 300 $. Though it’s possible that affordability may depend on average wage in each specific country.

I'm sure an HD monitor at the same price would look at least as good, possibly better.

[Christophe]

@Bones, it's Christmas time, a bit less offensive will be kind

[MT_]

He has read a review of a monitor on the personal web page of some other know-nothing idiot

This tone is unnecessary and actually makes your text less convincing.

I am the author of the Dell P2415Q review I referred to.

Crystal inversion is not something I simply read about somewhere and just because of that concluded it is bad. I myself was suffering for about 8 years from a flickering of unknown nature — not entire screen was flickering like CRT, but it looked like the screen consisted of multiple points flickering independently. This made it hard to look at screen and to focus on small elements like characters text consists of. I naturally believe to my eyes and feelings more than to eyes of other people, some of which publish some reviews in internet and possibly don’t suffer from such flickering like not everyone suffer from PWM.

I gradually investigated the issue and eventually concluded that crystal inversion (also referred to as VCOM flickering at least in russian forums) is the reason of that flickering.

The flickering was an objective feeling and a real nightmare for me until I bought a 4K monitor.

Techmind’s article about crystal inversion says that it should be imperceptible for most "natural" images. And while videos and 3D games are quite natural, text and large single-color areas are not.

My previous monitor was NEC 20WGX2 (1680×1050, 20″, IPS), and it had visible interpixel grid and horrible flickering of the type I described.

Note that interpixel grid and pixel grid are totally different things. Interpixel grid consists of dark lines (horizontal and vertical) between pixels.

Another low-resolution monitor I see such flickering on is Dell S2240L (1920×1080, 22″, IPS). It has smaller pixel than NEC 20WGX2 and therefore fortunately interpixel grid almost invisible at a typical viewing distance, but flickering is still quite noticeable and uncomfortable for me.

Crystal inversion is one of the reasons why I’m interested in OLED displays: if there are no crystals, there is no their inversion, and there should be no corresponding flickering.

It is expected that FHD monitors having the same price of 4K monitors of the same size should have some benefits over 4K monitors. The main benefit is obviously better color reproduction, but while this is critical for tasks like graphics design, it is surely not critical for creating music or development (programming). That said, my P2415Q has quite good color reproduction and smooth gradients in particular.

[MT_]

Seeing that you are quite knowledgeable, what TV would you recommend to use as a monitor. I want a higher screen size 40-60 so I can have it farther back than where I sit.

Can’t recommend a specific model, but here are some thoughts that may help.

As a TV, I plan to eventually buy an OLED one somewhen. The only producer of OLED panels is currently LG (strictly speaking, LG Display). It (strictly speaking, LG Electronics) produces its own OLED TVs, but also sells OLED panels to other TV producers — e.g. chinese (such as Hisense) and japanese (Sony, Panasonic). OLED TVs of japanese producers are typically 3+ times more expensive than LG’s own TVs. As for chinese OLED TVs, I don’t see reasons to buy them given that they are at least not cheaper than korean LG TVs.

In terms of color reproduction, constrast and potential crystal-inversion freedom, an OLED TV could be an option for using as a computer monitor.

But OLED displays suffer from so called burn-in which is not a big issue for constantly moving content like videos or games, but is an issue when using as a computer monitor since user interfaces of applications and OS itself typically have many static parts (Start menu, taskbar, etc.).

So for use as a computer monitor, an LCD TV is currently the only option. At least until the MicroLED technology is mature and corresponding TVs are on the market.

As for 4K LCD TVs, note that some of TVs advertised as 4K are not actually true 4K due to using RGBW pixel pattern with white subpixel shared between adjacent pixels. So before purchasing one, it makes sense to go to a shop, see the TV yourself, and preferably try to ask for displaying some test images on it.

Also, it makes sense to choose a model that does not use pulse-width modulation (PWM) to control brightness because PWM may cause side effects including headaches and eye strain, and possibly eyesight may be harmed in long term.

[MT_]

FL Studio uses vector graphics, and its UI still looks quite good.

Unless something has changed in the last few years, FL Studio uses a lot of bitmaps.

User interface of FL Studio 12+ (2015-04-21) is based on vector graphics.

Vectorial UI — FL Studio is now 100% vectorial allowing it to be used on 4, 5 or even 8K monitors with pin-sharp fidelity.