4K Monitors - Are they worth looking at?

[hdh]

it does slightly bother me that I have to scroll around my images big time, specially since I use 50Mpix 5dsr.

My current Monitor has 1920x1200, so it is 5 horizonal and 5 vertical scrolls to check the image at 100%, with 20Mpix it was 3x3 scrolls. 

Five versus three does not sound a lot but in total it is nearly three times as many scrolls to cover the complete image (5x5 = 25 vs 3x3=9 ).  

On the other side, I could check three pictures in the same time as one, if I go to the next level in monitors and buy a 3940x2160 Model. 

 

My fear is, that on a new 4K Monitor the pixels are so small, that I may miss out fine details, like a 4-pixel bird or a moderate soft focus. 

 

Has anybody got experience with 4K Monitors, and if so, what is your "mileage" / experience with them? 

 

thanks a lot in advance! 

 

    

[Guest]

Retina screens on an Imac I found far too sharp - not sure how they compare to the 4K coloredges etc but personally i am staying well clear.

 

Another reason I won't be going anywhere near 30mp plus

[Duncan_Andison]

Only if you are using very large monitors, over 30inch. Or, have a standard monitor to QC work. I say this as a Macbook Pro Retina user. This uses high resolution on a smaller screen which results in near zero pixels visible. This is great to look at but causes problems in determining image sharpness. You can review an image on a Retina screen and it will look good but, when viewing it on a standard screen (of normal pixel density) it will look SoLD. And most agencies will not be using Retina type screens.... so you could end up with unwanted declines!

 

I use a couple of 27inch monitors that are 2560x1440 and that seems the right pixel density for that size screen. I process images from Sony's 42mp sensor on them and they seem fine to me.

 

Edit.

Other than QC image sharpness though, I love the retina screen for colour accuracy etc (after calibration) so you coul use a 4k screen for working on and a 2nd for QC.

[MDM]

I agree with Duncan here - I am also working on a MacBook Pro with Retina screen. But I would also add that not only is it too sharp to judge image sharpness correctly but it is also too contrasty - it's calibrated but I can't get the contrast down to anywhere near reality (i.e. my matte 27 inch is calibrated to my printer). Similarly my son has a 5k 27 inch iMac and images look amazing but is not for image editing. A good 27 inch monitor with a matte screen is far better for image editing. I use 36MP Nikon and don't find it a problem having to scroll a bit at 100%.

[Allan Bell]

I thought it would be possible to alter the pixel dimensions of third party monitors to a lower resolution. Not sure about Mac, never tried it.

 

Allan

[Duncan_Andison]

I agree with Duncan here - I am also working on a MacBook Pro with Retina screen. But I would also add that not only is it too sharp to judge image sharpness correctly but it is also too contrasty - it's calibrated but I can't get the contrast down to anywhere near reality (i.e. my matte 27 inch is calibrated to my printer). Similarly my son has a 5k 27 inch iMac and images look amazing but is not for image editing. A good 27 inch monitor with a matte screen is far better for image editing. I use 36MP Nikon and don't find it a problem having to scroll a bit at 100%.

 

I've been using one of BenQ's 27inc 2560x1440 IPS panels with a matte screen and the quality is excellent for the price. The iMac screens (glossy) used to do my head in, which is why I used to use my MacBook Pro connected to a 27 inch screen (Mac Pro now due to 4k video).

[MDM]

Another thing - these high-res monitors don't do my eyesight any good. I get eye-strain when I've been using my 13 inch MacBook Pro for any length of time.

 

The main criterion in buying a monitor for photo editing I think should be colour accuracy (on a matte screen) at a sensible resolution - these wide gamut BenQ monitors are definitely getting a good reputation and a lot cheaper than Eizo or NEC. A few extra scrolls when you are checking image sharpness is neither here nor there in my opinion.     

[hdh]

Thank you all very much for all the helpful answers. 

 

Concluding from all of the above, if 4K, then it has to be a large screen (>30") and matte (which I prefer anyway). 

Definitely keeping my old screen - this is what I always did.

I like dual monitor setups, with the new screen being main and the old screen next to it.

So when I do photo editing, I can keep the menus on the old screen and have the new screen in full for the image. 

Also my emails are always on the second screen. 

 

Not going for Retina -or apple at all- I am one of those rare guys who do neither use Apple nor M$ but am a Linux user.  

I  will need to do some further research now, so far the monitors I was looking at were 28" max.

[M.Chapman]

I agree with Duncan here - I am also working on a MacBook Pro with Retina screen. But I would also add that not only is it too sharp to judge image sharpness correctly but it is also too contrasty - it's calibrated but I can't get the contrast down to anywhere near reality (i.e. my matte 27 inch is calibrated to my printer). Similarly my son has a 5k 27 inch iMac and images look amazing but is not for image editing. A good 27 inch monitor with a matte screen is far better for image editing. I use 36MP Nikon and don't find it a problem having to scroll a bit at 100%.

 

Can't you reduce the target contrast in your screen calibration software?

[M.Chapman]

I thought it would be possible to alter the pixel dimensions of third party monitors to a lower resolution. Not sure about Mac, never tried it.

 

Allan

 

On a Mac.. System Preferences>Displays>Display>Scaled allows a lower resolution to be set on a high res screen.

 

Alternatively, if using a retina display, simply inspect images at 200% instead of 100%.

[Allan Bell]

 

I thought it would be possible to alter the pixel dimensions of third party monitors to a lower resolution. Not sure about Mac, never tried it.

 

Allan

 

On a Mac.. System Preferences>Displays>Display>Scaled allows a lower resolution to be set on a high res screen.

 

Alternatively, if using a retina display, simply inspect images at 200% instead of 100%.

 

 

 

Thank you for the information.

 

Allan

[MDM]

 

I agree with Duncan here - I am also working on a MacBook Pro with Retina screen. But I would also add that not only is it too sharp to judge image sharpness correctly but it is also too contrasty - it's calibrated but I can't get the contrast down to anywhere near reality (i.e. my matte 27 inch is calibrated to my printer). Similarly my son has a 5k 27 inch iMac and images look amazing but is not for image editing. A good 27 inch monitor with a matte screen is far better for image editing. I use 36MP Nikon and don't find it a problem having to scroll a bit at 100%.

 

Can't you reduce the target contrast in your screen calibration software?

 

 

 

No. I actually tried it again after reading your comment to see if I'd missed something but there is no option to change contrast within the profiling software (Color Munki) for the MacBook Pro whereas there is when profiling a normal monitor which has a contrast control. It's no big deal to me as I don't use the MacBook Pro with 13 inch screen for image editing in any case except for a quick check that what I am doing is correct. I don't know if the same applies to the iMac Retina screens.

 

Similarly with viewing at 200%. I recall you suggesting this before and it does work to determine sharpness but it would be a very tedious process checking large files on a 13 inch screen.  I would not be happy doing my main image editing on a highly reflective screen.  Given how much time I sit in front of a screen (a lot), it is worth having a decent wide gamut one which can display my pictures reasonably realistically and which I can use for soft-proofing images intended for printing.

 

I should add that images are always going to look snappier and more contrasty on any screen than in print (as in ye olde days with projected transparencies versus prints) and it's really a matter of taking that into account when soft-proofing and printing. My main problem with the Retina screens is the very high resolution and the reflectivity.

[Guest]

Sadly Apple has decided to go with producing screens for gaming, not for their traditional market...... shows in their choice of GPUs as well.

 

As Michael (MDM) said, spend the money on a better wider gamut screen without having to mess around at 200% or mess with contrast settings......Eizo's 4K is about £3000, that goes a long way towards a decent 27" NEC or Coloredge plus a year or twos worth of tea bags.

[MDM]

Sadly Apple has decided to go with producing screens for gaming, not for their traditional market...... shows in their choice of GPUs as well.

 

As Michael (MDM) said, spend the money on a better wider gamut screen without having to mess around at 200% or mess with contrast settings......Eizo's 4K is about £3000, that goes a long way towards a decent 27" NEC or Coloredge plus a year or twos worth of tea bags.

 

 

Yes Apple has tended to neglect its original core high end graphics market in recent years but I can cope as long as I have a reasonably fast computer with lots of RAM and a very decent monitor. I only do stills and 2D at that.

 

I think a lot of photographers are happy to spend small fortunes on cameras (the Canon 50MP for example) , lenses and even computers and neglect the very thing that they need to really see their images - a really good (calibrated) monitor. And yes I was suggesting that hdh stick to 27 inch but a good one. 

[hdh]

 

Sadly Apple has decided to go with producing screens for gaming, not for their traditional market...... shows in their choice of GPUs as well.

 

As Michael (MDM) said, spend the money on a better wider gamut screen without having to mess around at 200% or mess with contrast settings......Eizo's 4K is about £3000, that goes a long way towards a decent 27" NEC or Coloredge plus a year or twos worth of tea bags.

 

 

Yes Apple has tended to neglect its original core high end graphics market in recent years but I can cope as long as I have a reasonably fast computer with lots of RAM and a very decent monitor. I only do stills and 2D at that.

 

I think a lot of photographers are happy to spend small fortunes on cameras (the Canon 50MP for example) , lenses and even computers and neglect the very thing that they need to really see their images - a really good (calibrated) monitor. And yes I was suggesting that hdh stick to 27 inch but a good one. 

 

I have got some more information and definitely I cannot affort a 4K€ color calibrated screen. 

Originally I wanted to stay under 800€, but by the looks of it this will probably have to move up to around a 1K€.

The 3K I save I spend on a Sigma 120-300, 2.8 , if I only could. 

 

From above I believe that 27" may be slightly too small, at the moment I have a 25", increasing the resolution to UHD/4K @ 27" I fear SoLD may become difficult to identify. 

Hence probably go more like 32", which will loose me a shelf above my desk because that is a huge beast of a monitor  . 

 

Also panel technology seems to be key, IPS is the one that does not change colors when looking at it in a different angles. 

At the size of that monitor, one would look at various angles on the screen, unless one moves right and left with the chair to maintain angle;). 

 

Currently looking at a handful of monitors, but have not found out yet if they are matte, glare or not matte but sort of "anti-glare". 

The latter I have no clue how that looks like but read somewhere about that. 

 

Edit: I do not edit a lot, beyond the occasional crop and slight brightness/contrast adjustments. 

[M.Chapman]

 

 

I agree with Duncan here - I am also working on a MacBook Pro with Retina screen. But I would also add that not only is it too sharp to judge image sharpness correctly but it is also too contrasty - it's calibrated but I can't get the contrast down to anywhere near reality (i.e. my matte 27 inch is calibrated to my printer). Similarly my son has a 5k 27 inch iMac and images look amazing but is not for image editing. A good 27 inch monitor with a matte screen is far better for image editing. I use 36MP Nikon and don't find it a problem having to scroll a bit at 100%.

 

Can't you reduce the target contrast in your screen calibration software?

 

 

 

No. I actually tried it again after reading your comment to see if I'd missed something but there is no option to change contrast within the profiling software (Color Munki) for the MacBook Pro whereas there is when profiling a normal monitor which has a contrast control. It's no big deal to me as I don't use the MacBook Pro with 13 inch screen for image editing in any case except for a quick check that what I am doing is correct. I don't know if the same applies to the iMac Retina screens.

 

Does Color Munki software not have an advanced mode? I use X-Rite software with i1 Pro (don't X-Rite also make the Color Munki?). If I swap to advanced mode there are settings to alter contrast and brightness, although I usually leave them set to native. Online help for Color Munki suggests its software may have an advanced mode. This is old info from their website.

 

Easy Mode - Recommended for most users uses a fixed target white point (see below for white point explanation) and the current display settings for brightness and contrast.

Advanced Mode - Allows you to customize more of your display profile settings and will result in a longer profiling workflow. Advanced mode for an LCD or Laptop allows you to enable the following options:

• Optimize the brightness and contrast settings – Enable if want ColorMunki to help you adjust your display’s brightness and contrast settings. This option ensures that your displays brightness and contrast settings are in their optimum positions for profile building.

• Optimize luminance level display based ambient light conditions – Enable if you want ColorMunki to adjust the brightness of your display to best suit your ambient or working environment.

• Target White Point for Display – This option allows you to choose the target white point for your display profile. You should choose the white point setting that most closely matches the lighting under which you will view your prints. D65 is recommended for photography. D50 is recommended for design, printing and proofing. Native will not make any adjustments to the measured white point and is the default settings for projectors.

[MDM]

 

 

 

I agree with Duncan here - I am also working on a MacBook Pro with Retina screen. But I would also add that not only is it too sharp to judge image sharpness correctly but it is also too contrasty - it's calibrated but I can't get the contrast down to anywhere near reality (i.e. my matte 27 inch is calibrated to my printer). Similarly my son has a 5k 27 inch iMac and images look amazing but is not for image editing. A good 27 inch monitor with a matte screen is far better for image editing. I use 36MP Nikon and don't find it a problem having to scroll a bit at 100%.

 

Can't you reduce the target contrast in your screen calibration software?

 

 

 

No. I actually tried it again after reading your comment to see if I'd missed something but there is no option to change contrast within the profiling software (Color Munki) for the MacBook Pro whereas there is when profiling a normal monitor which has a contrast control. It's no big deal to me as I don't use the MacBook Pro with 13 inch screen for image editing in any case except for a quick check that what I am doing is correct. I don't know if the same applies to the iMac Retina screens.

 

Does Color Munki software not have an advanced mode? I use X-Rite software with i1 Pro (don't X-Rite also make the Color Munki?). If I swap to advanced mode there are settings to alter contrast and brightness, although I usually leave them set to native. Online help for Color Munki suggests its software may have an advanced mode. This is old info from their website.

 

Easy Mode - Recommended for most users uses a fixed target white point (see below for white point explanation) and the current display settings for brightness and contrast.

Advanced Mode - Allows you to customize more of your display profile settings and will result in a longer profiling workflow. Advanced mode for an LCD or Laptop allows you to enable the following options:

• Optimize the brightness and contrast settings – Enable if want ColorMunki to help you adjust your display’s brightness and contrast settings. This option ensures that your displays brightness and contrast settings are in their optimum positions for profile building.

• Optimize luminance level display based ambient light conditions – Enable if you want ColorMunki to adjust the brightness of your display to best suit your ambient or working environment.

• Target White Point for Display – This option allows you to choose the target white point for your display profile. You should choose the white point setting that most closely matches the lighting under which you will view your prints. D65 is recommended for photography. D50 is recommended for design, printing and proofing. Native will not make any adjustments to the measured white point and is the default settings for projectors.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree with Duncan here - I am also working on a MacBook Pro with Retina screen. But I would also add that not only is it too sharp to judge image sharpness correctly but it is also too contrasty - it's calibrated but I can't get the contrast down to anywhere near reality (i.e. my matte 27 inch is calibrated to my printer). Similarly my son has a 5k 27 inch iMac and images look amazing but is not for image editing. A good 27 inch monitor with a matte screen is far better for image editing. I use 36MP Nikon and don't find it a problem having to scroll a bit at 100%.

 

Can't you reduce the target contrast in your screen calibration software?

 

 

 

No. I actually tried it again after reading your comment to see if I'd missed something but there is no option to change contrast within the profiling software (Color Munki) for the MacBook Pro whereas there is when profiling a normal monitor which has a contrast control. It's no big deal to me as I don't use the MacBook Pro with 13 inch screen for image editing in any case except for a quick check that what I am doing is correct. I don't know if the same applies to the iMac Retina screens.

 

Does Color Munki software not have an advanced mode? I use X-Rite software with i1 Pro (don't X-Rite also make the Color Munki?). If I swap to advanced mode there are settings to alter contrast and brightness, although I usually leave them set to native. Online help for Color Munki suggests its software may have an advanced mode. This is old info from their website.

 

Easy Mode - Recommended for most users uses a fixed target white point (see below for white point explanation) and the current display settings for brightness and contrast.

Advanced Mode - Allows you to customize more of your display profile settings and will result in a longer profiling workflow. Advanced mode for an LCD or Laptop allows you to enable the following options:

• Optimize the brightness and contrast settings – Enable if want ColorMunki to help you adjust your display’s brightness and contrast settings. This option ensures that your displays brightness and contrast settings are in their optimum positions for profile building.

• Optimize luminance level display based ambient light conditions – Enable if you want ColorMunki to adjust the brightness of your display to best suit your ambient or working environment.

• Target White Point for Display – This option allows you to choose the target white point for your display profile. You should choose the white point setting that most closely matches the lighting under which you will view your prints. D65 is recommended for photography. D50 is recommended for design, printing and proofing. Native will not make any adjustments to the measured white point and is the default settings for projectors.

 

 

Yes Color Munki has an advanced mode which is what I always use as I want to set the parameters myself rather than allow a bit of hardware/software to tell me what luminance I should be using. it  allows one to set the contrast on other monitors but not on my MacBook Pro with Retina. That is why I tried it again today to see if I had missed something. It spends some seconds checking out the contrast and then passes on to luminance. On other monitors it asks the user to manually change the contrast to some optimum level that it decides on or tick the box that says the monitor does not have a contrast control. On my MacBook Pro Retina it doesn't give that option but it does for luminance. Honest!!! I have been using colour management with hardware calibration for a long time now - not a newbie.

[Guest]

https://www.xrite.com/i1display-pro/support/kb5839

 

Personal experience is that mac screens calibrate poorly, regardless of retina or old vanilla type - not surprising since they weren't designed to be colour critical. The newer pucks/software have the new automatic calibration with iMacs so results are better.....but only relatively.

[M.Chapman]

Yes Color Munki has an advanced mode which is what I always use as I want to set the parameters myself rather than allow a bit of hardware/software to tell me what luminance I should be using. it  allows one to set the contrast on other monitors but not on my MacBook Pro with Retina. That is why I tried it again today to see if I had missed something. It spends some seconds checking out the contrast and then passes on to luminance. On other monitors it asks the user to manually change the contrast to some optimum level that it decides on or tick the box that says the monitor does not have a contrast control. On my MacBook Pro Retina it doesn't give that option but it does for luminance. Honest!!! I have been using colour management with hardware calibration for a long time now - not a newbie

 

 

Must be something to do with the retina display. I'm using i1Pro software on a Macbook pro (non retina). In Advanced mode, on the first (Display settings) screen I can change the target luminance, contrast and gamma away from the default or native settings to any custom value I want. On the  4th screen (Measurements) I leave the ADC and manual adjustment check boxes empty. I then profile the display and the profile generated then has my new luminance, contrast, gamma incorporated. I just tried it to massively reduce the contrast. NB. I can only use this method to turn down the luminance and contrast from the native setting. To make this work I believe it's important to leave the manual adjustment box unticked.

 

Please accept my apologies if these settings don't appear on your MacBook with retina, I'm just trying to be helpful and to be sure we haven't missed anything.

 

If that doesn't work you could try DispCalGui / Argyll software. See here for example. You can do pretty much anything with that, but it is more complex. I used it to sort out a problem with a monitor that had a barely noticeable blue tinge in the shadows. i1Pro fixed this by adding red and green giving grey shadows i.e. significantly reduced the contrast. I used DispCalGui to achieve a better compromise.

 

Mark

[MDM]

 

Yes Color Munki has an advanced mode which is what I always use as I want to set the parameters myself rather than allow a bit of hardware/software to tell me what luminance I should be using. it  allows one to set the contrast on other monitors but not on my MacBook Pro with Retina. That is why I tried it again today to see if I had missed something. It spends some seconds checking out the contrast and then passes on to luminance. On other monitors it asks the user to manually change the contrast to some optimum level that it decides on or tick the box that says the monitor does not have a contrast control. On my MacBook Pro Retina it doesn't give that option but it does for luminance. Honest!!! I have been using colour management with hardware calibration for a long time now - not a newbie

 

 

Must be something to do with the retina display. I'm using i1Pro software on a Macbook pro (non retina). In Advanced mode, on the first (Display settings) screen I can change the target luminance, contrast and gamma away from the default or native settings to any custom value I want. On the  4th screen (Measurements) I leave the ADC and manual adjustment check boxes empty. I then profile the display and the profile generated then has my new luminance, contrast, gamma incorporated. I just tried it to massively reduce the contrast. NB. I can only use this method to turn down the luminance and contrast from the native setting. To make this work I believe it's important to leave the manual adjustment box unticked.

 

Please accept my apologies if these settings don't appear on your MacBook with retina, I'm just trying to be helpful and to be sure we haven't missed anything.

 

If that doesn't work you could try DispCalGui / Argyll software. See here for example. You can do pretty much anything with that, but it is more complex. I used it to sort out a problem with a monitor that had a barely noticeable blue tinge in the shadows. i1Pro fixed this by adding red and green giving grey shadows i.e. significantly reduced the contrast. I used DispCalGui to achieve a better compromise.

 

Mark

 

 

No worries Mark and thanks. Sorry if I came over a bit tetchy there  . I was getting the feeling that you weren't believing me. We are definitely looking at different things. 

 

The ColorMunki differs from the X-Rite monitor profiling devices in that it is a spectrophotometer and can be used for making printer profiles in addition to monitor profiles. The software is similar to but obviously differs from the i1Pro as there is definitely no option to change contrast or gamma - just white point and luminance. The option to adjust contrast appears at the first stage when profiling but not for the MacBook Pro Retina - it just skips on to the next stage after doing some contrast measurements. 

 

In any case, it is fairly academic for me as I only use the MacBook Pro screen when I'm on the road without access to a proper monitor and I don't do any serious editing on it. But it is always interesting to know about this stuff. 

[MDM]

https://www.xrite.com/i1display-pro/support/kb5839

 

Personal experience is that mac screens calibrate poorly, regardless of retina or old vanilla type - not surprising since they weren't designed to be colour critical. The newer pucks/software have the new automatic calibration with iMacs so results are better.....but only relatively.

Interesting link - thanks Geoff.

[MDM]

 

 

Edit: I do not edit a lot, beyond the occasional crop and slight brightness/contrast adjustments. 

 

 

Regardless of whether you edit a little or a lot, you still need to be able to judge white balance (presumably you are shooting raw) which you can only really do with a properly calibrated monitor.  The camera just has a guess at white balance and is often wildly wrong. Believe me, you are better to go for a smaller monitor designed for photography than a big general purpose one. If it doesn't have an in-built calibrating device, then factor in the smallish amount of money for such a device (100-200 euro max). It's well worth it. 

[hdh]

 

 

 

Edit: I do not edit a lot, beyond the occasional crop and slight brightness/contrast adjustments. 

 

 

Regardless of whether you edit a little or a lot, you still need to be able to judge white balance (presumably you are shooting raw) which you can only really do with a properly calibrated monitor.  The camera just has a guess at white balance and is often wildly wrong. Believe me, you are better to go for a smaller monitor designed for photography than a big general purpose one. If it doesn't have an in-built calibrating device, then factor in the smallish amount of money for such a device (100-200 euro max). It's well worth it. 

 

thanks for this hint, MDM, 100-200€ sounds much better than 2,000 or 3,000 more for a professional calibrated monitor. 

Only have the challenge that not all calibration devices are supported with Linux and neither Apple nor Microsoft will ever be able to enter my house . 

Datacolor Spider seems to be supported by the linux calibration software, but will take me some more time to finally verify if that holds for the current Version 5.  

 

Googled a bit further and found a device that is natively developed for linux.

I probably go for that after a few nights of sleep -

Cannot do any harm with my current setup until I have decided the new monitor. 

http://www.hughski.com/index.html

 

The Monitor question I will leave open for a while, as the last posts have really been very much relating to apple retina displays. 

Hope to get some more experiences from others, not using Apple. 

[KateR]

 

I've been using one of BenQ's 27inc 2560x1440 IPS panels with a matte screen and the quality is excellent for the price. The iMac screens (glossy) used to do my head in, which is why I used to use my MacBook Pro connected to a 27 inch screen (Mac Pro now due to 4k video).

 

*SIGH* I have that same, apparently superb, BenQ panel....sitting in a box in my spare room for the last 2 months. Be super careful that your PC will be able to drive the full resolution of anything you buy. I thought I'd checked all the boxes - graphics card capability etc - before buying, but it turns out that despite the thing having HDMI connectors, only a Display port will actually give the full 2560. Which my laptop doesn't have, so I'm now into a complete system upgrade

[Duncan_Andison]

 

 

 

I've been using one of BenQ's 27inc 2560x1440 IPS panels with a matte screen and the quality is excellent for the price. The iMac screens (glossy) used to do my head in, which is why I used to use my MacBook Pro connected to a 27 inch screen (Mac Pro now due to 4k video).

 

*SIGH* I have that same, apparently superb, BenQ panel....sitting in a box in my spare room for the last 2 months. Be super careful that your PC will be able to drive the full resolution of anything you buy. I thought I'd checked all the boxes - graphics card capability etc - before buying, but it turns out that despite the thing having HDMI connectors, only a Display port will actually give the full 2560. Which my laptop doesn't have, so I'm now into a complete system upgrade

 

Err.... nope :-) I'm running mine at 2560x1440 via HDMI at the moment. Model number GL2760-t

 

It maybe something to do with the computer settings. I know when I first set mine up it was via a thunderbolt connector but I damaged the cable so I put the HDMI one back on and it worked just fine. Make sure everything is setup ok. I've just copied the settings from mine to see if it will help.

 

Picture mode -

 

          Overscan = Off

          Display Mode = Full

 

System -

          HDMI Auto Switch = On

          System Information = 2560x1440@60fps

 

Both my Macbook Pro and my Mac Pro both work fine with these settings.

 

Hope this helps

 

Edit. Also make sure HDMI is selected in "Input Mode" I'm sure it will be but just in case.