CES 2013: Lenovo releases wacom/touch screen monitor (Cintiq-like)
polycounter lvl 8
I thought this is big enough news to share...since usually Wacom has avoided having their digitizers put in monitors that were not cintiqs.
Basically what's being presented is a LED LCD (possible ISP panel) that has a wacom digitizer build into it. The design of the monitor is not only to rest on ones lap or up right on a desk, but it also has wireless connectivity...so essentially a wireless cintiq like touch screen monitor.
What is also nice about this is the price point, which is estimated to range between $300-400.
If this also catches on, we can expect to see more competition with this form factor and as artist we can gain the most from it.
Here is video: [ame="
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9_EaC7mLOw&feature=player_embedded"]Lenovo ThinkVision LT1423p mobile monitor - YouTube[/ame]
Article: http://blog.laptopmag.com/thinkvision-lt1423-adds-a-wireless-touch-screen-to-your-laptop
Basically what's being presented is a LED LCD (possible ISP panel) that has a wacom digitizer build into it. The design of the monitor is not only to rest on ones lap or up right on a desk, but it also has wireless connectivity...so essentially a wireless cintiq like touch screen monitor.
What is also nice about this is the price point, which is estimated to range between $300-400.
If this also catches on, we can expect to see more competition with this form factor and as artist we can gain the most from it.
Here is video: [ame="
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9_EaC7mLOw&feature=player_embedded"]Lenovo ThinkVision LT1423p mobile monitor - YouTube[/ame]Article: http://blog.laptopmag.com/thinkvision-lt1423-adds-a-wireless-touch-screen-to-your-laptop
Replies
This seems like a progression of the X60, nearly sure that was lenovo too, right?
Most programs don't use more than 512 levels, and when you are actually just using black and white, there's only 256 shades on a normal display.
Unless you work in 16bit mode.
[ame="
Also I believe that the wacom normalizes the pen pressure so no matter what it translates into a 0-1 range. If we as artist cannot notice the difference much less control the levels of pressure, then its certainly worth spending $300 over $2000, especially if the screen is better. Wacom for some reason seems to use mediocre LCDs that use a lot of electricity and generate quite a bit of heat.
Also apparently you can use different wacom pens and get varying results, just as long as they are not part of the intuos or newer cintiq lineup.
Yeah this always confuses me.
256 = accuracy to 0.39
512 = 0.19
1024 = 0.097
So what people are really saying is that they need 512/1024 levels of sensitivity, to set their transparency values to levels of accuracy finer than you can actually manually set them in photoshop? You're going to worry that your pressure can only set the brush to 13.4% opacity instead of 13.1%?
This notion that 256 would be unusable, I don't understand it. You're still getting accuracy down to fractions of a whole number.
I've used non wacom devices with lower sensitivity levels, and the sensitivity level was never the problem, jumping cursors, changing batteries in the pen, etc were always the annoyances.
So this is a problem when you're editing files... that your monitor can't even display the true bit depth/range of? No, I don't see the logic in that.
Before I get my intuose 4 I had bamboo fun and it only had 512 levels of pressure vs the 2056 on the intuose 4 and I was just starting with the art, but I did not find any difference at all between the two tablets pressure sensitivity. I remember being kind of disappointed back then
i did notice refreshrate issues between the wireless and the laptop on mirrored mode. hopefully there wont be any bandwidth issues!
I'll be keeping my eye on this, it looks brilliant.
Your hand can't move accurately enough to make use of 1024 levels
They changed the way pens start to register the pressure, so perhaps thats what you felt. The software has also advanced so, between the two that could explain the feeling of "smoother" and more "accurate" strokes.
I noticed something similar, but I think it had more to do with the way the actual pen felt. I remember those graphire 2 pens feeling terrible.
Think of it this way. You have more control of how much actual sensitivity you want with higher levels of range. Especially for people with light touches.
As for sensitivity, I've noticed the difference between 256, 512, and 1028. Imo I think it's worth to get 1028 minimum for painting work, especially for fine detail.
I've been using a Toshiba Tecra M4 TabletPC for a few years now for creating press-quality comics. I currently have a new 200 page GN at the printing plant which was created entirely using old Toshiba hardware.
I found the pressure sensitivity level to be completely fine, and when thinking over why this was so, I came to a few realizations...
I do all my 'pencil' work using an air brush set to a medium opacity black, which puts down a nice gray line very similar to what a pencil offers. I most often use a brush size set to 13 pixels.
That means there are only possible 13 states that brush tip can have, thus only 13 levels of pressure are needed to completely describe everything that brush can do. When 'inking', I'll use up to a 30 pixel brush. Also, well within the scope of fine control via the Wacom hardware.
In keeping with this logic, only brush sizes of 257 pixels or greater would overwhelm the stylus/digitizer's ability to accurately describe the range of possible brush states. Unless I'm doing really broad stroke generalized fills with huge brushes, I simply do not drift into that lower accuracy zone, and when I do, it's not the kind of work which would create any noticeable difference wrt pressure.
Further, the art software has a FAR greater impact on line quality than the digitizer hardware. Paint Tool Sai, Manga Studio 5 (Clip Studio Paint for the Japanese illustrators), and Mangalabo, for instance all use brush stabilizer algorithms which put Photoshop to shame; they extrapolate the direct information received from the pen tip and create smooth transitions from one pressure state to the next, resulting in beautiful, smooth line work. (This is a Japanese innovation in each case, leading from, I suspect, a cultural impetus related to an alphabet based originally on ink-brushed characters.)
Anyway, even Intuos and Cintiq power-users immediately notice a difference in line quality between Photoshop and Sai using this feature, where the actual hardware pressure sensitivity level results in only subtle, and I would think, imagined differences. The range of possible brush states many artists use are simply too small in most cases to be negatively affected by hardware pressure limits.
Tablet PCs, with their 256 pressure levels, make excellent, low-cost, portable tools.
Just my two cents!
I've been using a Toshiba Tecra M4 TabletPC for a few years now for creating press-quality comics. I currently have a new 200 page GN at the printing plant which was created entirely using old Toshiba hardware.
I found the pressure sensitivity level to be completely fine, and when thinking over why this was so, I came to a few realizations...
I do all my 'pencil' work using an air brush set to a medium opacity black, which puts down a nice gray line very similar to what a pencil offers. I most often use a brush size set to 13 pixels.
That means there are only possible 13 states that brush tip can have, thus only 13 levels of pressure are needed to completely describe everything that brush can do. When 'inking', I'll use up to a 30 pixel brush. Also, well within the scope of fine control via the Wacom hardware.
In keeping with this logic, only brush sizes of 257 pixels or greater would overwhelm the stylus/digitizer's ability to accurately describe the range of possible brush states. Unless I'm doing really broad stroke generalized fills with huge brushes, I simply do not drift into that lower accuracy zone, and when I do, it's not the kind of work which would create any noticeable difference wrt pressure.
Further, the art software has a FAR greater impact on line quality than the digitizer hardware. Paint Tool Sai, Manga Studio 5 (Clip Studio Paint for the Japanese illustrators), and Mangalabo, for instance all use brush stabilizer algorithms which put Photoshop to shame; they extrapolate the direct information received from the pen tip and create smooth transitions from one pressure state to the next, resulting in beautiful, smooth line work. (This is a Japanese innovation in each case, leading from, I suspect, a cultural impetus related to an alphabet based originally on ink-brushed characters.)
Anyway, even Intuos and Cintiq power-users immediately notice a difference in line quality between Photoshop and Sai using this feature, where the actual hardware pressure sensitivity level results in only subtle, and I would think, imagined differences. The range of possible brush states many artists use are simply too small in most cases to be negatively affected by hardware pressure limits.
Tablet PCs, with their 256 pressure levels, make excellent, low-cost, portable tools.
Just my two cents!