OT: monitoring and the end of CRT?

Hi there forum!

So... I was at Best Buy a few weeks ago and I noticed that they don't sell tube-based TV's anymore. All of them were flat-screen (LCD, plasma, whaetver). Same thing at Target. It got me thinking that it will not be long before people just won't have CRT televisions at all anymore, and LCD etc will be the standard in offices and homes.

I wanted to ask some advice. My studio = FCP7, KonaLHe ->component -> Sony PVM-20M2U CRT monitor. I love the Sony monitor -- 16x9 or 4x3, PAL or NTSC, underscan if I want, S-Video and composite available -- things look great on it, and my understanding is that this is more or less the professional way to go. But now I am considering changing the way I'm monitoring, just because the CRT is going away, and things look different on the LCD TV my wife just bought. (Sony doesn't even make this line of broadcast monitors anymore.) Of course I would like to keep using the Kona LHe, which has SDI out (I just haven't been using that). Does anyone have any tips or suggestions on this issue?

I have never liked the idea of working with anything besides a CRT, but maybe I should change. Maybe I should have both (although I wonder if I'll ever finish anything that way). Or should I just keep it the way it is?

I'm really interested to hear what y'all think of this. If this has ben covered in a prior thread, sorry, couldn't find it on my own.

thanks!
karl

Keep your PVM. Standard-definition LCDs are inferior in every way. Even a Cinetal (a twenty-thousand-dollar broadcast monitor) does a poor job with standard definition. When you no longer work with standard definition material, it'll be time to start thinking about a new broadcast monitor. When that time comes, you'll be able to choose from among a number of good-quality monitors in the sub-$10,000 range.

Work on a broadcast CRT if you're going out for SD output. Great fidelity compared to the other options, as Jeff mentioned. If you want to see how your audience will be seeing your work, it won't hurt to hook up an LCD HDTV. The problem with consumer LCD models is the blacks tend to be inconsistent, and the colors will vary.



www.strypesinpost.com

CRT all the way. The alternatives are still awful, unless you want to spend in the 50k range for a proper grading version.

I dunno about 50K- the HP Dreamcolor LCDs are totally usable for color grading and they're more like $2-3K.

Noah

Final Cut Studio Training, featuring the HVX200, EX1, EX3, DVX100, DVDSP and Color at [www.callboxlive.com]!
Author, RED: The Ultimate Guide to Using the Revolutionary Camera available now at: [www.amazon.com].
Editors Store- Gifts and Gear for Editors: [www.editorsstore.com]

What? That's a computer monitor, Noah, not a broadcast monitor. No SDI input, no interlaced playback, it can't even sync to NTSC frame rates and I have a hard time believing it's got proper Rec. 601 or 709 primaries. Never, ever use a computer monitor for color grading broadcast material. They're totally different.

I thought so too but people are supposedly using these things in colour crucial workflows.
Haven't seen one yet but they're out there. Doesn't help that HP is not in that market at all otherwise.

The responder on this thread
[www.reduser.net]
is a colorist at Hi Ground in Culver City.

I would infer from that post that the Dreamcolor can use LUTs and can be fully calibrated with 3rd party software.

Still not convinced as there are field and scan rate issues that can't be covered by a monitor like this.

ak
Sleeplings, AWAKE!

I think you're misreading that Reduser post. I didn't see anything in there that said "I'm using this computer monitor in lieu of an actual picture monitor." I came away with the impression that it was being used as a computer monitor, like on a Scratch system or some such. But who knows. Wonkier things have been known to happen.

I've heard about that monitor too. I'd be very curious to know how it looks. It requires an RGB progressive signal, not PsF, not YUV.



www.strypesinpost.com

From what I've read, the device itself is built around a 10-bit LCD, but that doesn't amount to much since the internal representation on the graphics card is still 8-bit. My understanding is that the purpose of the display is to be quite a good simulation of 10-bit, but that it's still merely a simulation.

To be totally frank, I really got turned off by the whole Dreamcolor hype when I discovered that their much-bragged-about support for the DCI-P3 color space was so much rubbish, as the display is not physically capable of reproducing the whole P3 gamut. Saying the device supports P3 when it literally can't display colors in that color space smacks of marketing taking precedence over honesty, in my book. But that's just my personal judgment.

As computer monitors go, I imagine the Dreamcolor-branded HP displays are probably pretty okay. I wouldn't buy one myself, since I see no value in spending a lot of money and time calibrating up a computer monitor to look almost like a broadcast monitor. If I worked in another field ? animation, for instance, or theatrical compositing ? then I'd be singing a different tune. But for broadcast work? No.

That was just one post from Reduser. Go there and do a search and you'll see tons of DIT's using them on set and in correction suites for displaying corrected shots to DPs and doing all sorts of colour specific work with them.

I don't buy it myself and colour fidelity is only part of the equation when it comes to broadcast QC. Field order and scan issues are something that I wouldn't trust to an emulation when it comes to QC. That and I want to be able to see that the HD-SDI out of the record deck looks like what I thought it would look like on the monitor I graded on.

ak
Sleeplings, AWAKE!

>but that doesn't amount to much since the internal representation on the graphics card is still 8-
>bit.

Yes, and no. The point is not to go out through the graphics card, but through the capture card, via 3G/Dual Link/HD SDI, and send it through a converter.

Eg.
[www.aja.com]

And ideally you work from a progressive source, or you need to find a way to get a good quality deinterlacer. Lots of hoops if you want to use the Dreamcolor properly.

Then there's the FSI monitors, and they have a 10 bit LCD:

[www.flandersscientific.com]



www.strypesinpost.com

Quote

The point is not to go out through the graphics card, but through the capture card, via 3G/Dual Link/HD SDI, and send it through a converter.

Never. Like you pointed out before, the Dreamcolor monitor is RGB only, which means you have to change color spaces. That's on top of a signal conversion, on top of a timing conversion, on top of the fact that the monitor can't display an interlaced signal. The Dreamcolor monitor is absolutely unsuitable for displaying video, period, end of story, and can only be used as a computer monitor.

That's totally just my inexpert opinion. I'd expect as much to be obvious, but it never hurts to reiterate it I guess.

You can go component into the Dreamcolor from a Kona card and it rocks. These are in lots of color grading suites. Believe me I used to be a CRT purist as well but if you've actually seen one of these working with Scratch or a Color suite you'll realize they are a great option. And I say that without any reason to other than personal opinion because I'm not an HP dealer.

Now I'm not saying a nice used high-end HD broadcast CRT or say a Sony Trimaster wouldn't give you more accurate color, but good luck securing that for $2,500. LCD is the way it's going.

Noah

Final Cut Studio Training, featuring the HVX200, EX1, EX3, DVX100, DVDSP and Color at [www.callboxlive.com]!
Author, RED: The Ultimate Guide to Using the Revolutionary Camera available now at: [www.amazon.com].
Editors Store- Gifts and Gear for Editors: [www.editorsstore.com]

>You can go component into the Dreamcolor from a Kona card and it rocks.

With all due respect, if you do component inputs, the Dreamcolor engine no longer works and you will not be able to toggle between the different LUTs (eg. the all important Rec 709), and the thing becomes totally just your average computer monitor in terms of any form of broadcast color accuracy, just a little expensive. The thing needs a proper HD-SDI to HDMI scaler.


[www.fxguide.com]



www.strypesinpost.com

Do you have any actual actual experience using a Dreamcolor in a color grading suite as I do or are you just saying that based on your looking over the specs and staring in disbelief? I'm not asking you to agree with me opinion here but at least give me the respect of having hands-on experience with this particular piece of gear.

Noah

Final Cut Studio Training, featuring the HVX200, EX1, EX3, DVX100, DVDSP and Color at [www.callboxlive.com]!
Author, RED: The Ultimate Guide to Using the Revolutionary Camera available now at: [www.amazon.com].
Editors Store- Gifts and Gear for Editors: [www.editorsstore.com]

Okay, things are getting a bit tense in here. Let's remember that nobody's impugning anybody else's skills or experience.

At the same time, it's important to keep in mind that different people have different priorities, and it's not necessary that everyone agree on what's appropriate post-production gear and what isn't.

What I mean, is that it's not a bad piece of gear for its price, just that it seems very particular on the input signal. And personally, I won't run a YUV signal into it and expect it to behave like a CRT. But like Jeff, I haven't used it for grading yet, so I don't really have a foot in this one.



www.strypesinpost.com

Allan Tépper, over at ProVideocoalition.com has 3 or 4 good articles talking about the DreamColor including how to maintain the proper signal path so that you don't disable the DreamColor Engine (which I guess is the magic behind the whole thing).

Below is from one of this articles:
"As stated in my DreamColor monitor review, the DreamColor Engine is very demanding: it absolutely requires a true progressive digital RGB signal over HDMI or DisplayPort. Although the monitor will accept them, interlaced video and/or digital YUV over HDMI are not welcome for the DreamColor Engine. If you supply either or both of those, the DreamColor Engine will shut off, the settings for color space settings will become inactive, and the monitor will display full gamut, which is much more saturated than ITU Rec.601 or ITU Rec.709. These are some of the DreamColor monitor?s most important features. Make sure you take advantage of them by making your system deliver a compliant signal."


-Andrew

OMG -- I apparently started a flame war! Golly!

Well, this thread has been very useful to me, but let me throw something else in here.

My issue all about plain old SD monitoring. It's not really about color timing (or "grading" as it's now called), but more about interlacing issues, how things might really look for the enduser, that sort of thing.

Let me tell you what happened the other day as an example.

I have a client who shot a micro-budget movie on camcorders. It's a great little movie, as long as it doesn't look like it was shot on camcorders. I applied Nattress' Film Effects filter to give it that "film look." The client loved it and I loved it -- based on the PVM (component / Kona-LHe). However, when I put it on DVD, I looked at it on the cheapo LCD in the living room (component), mostly it was fine, but I just wasn't sure with some high-action handheld shots. So, I made a second version of the film using Magic Bullet Frames. Five days later (no joke), I didn't like the look of it on the PVM or the cheapo LCD, I missed the softness of Nattress, it was too sharp, and I really started getting confused because everyone claims MB Frames came from god or whatever.

We decided that we would take the two versions to a local screening room (I/O Film). What resulted was incredible -- the Nattress version had interlacing issues all over every single shot, everywhere. Totally unusable. The MB Frames version was... well, from god. Just gorgeous. No disrespect to Graeme at all, I love Nattress, I know Film Effects deinterlaces and everything, but truth be told, that's what happened.

So. What does this mean?

To me, it means that now that everyone has different kinds of TV's, there's no way to be certain about what I'm giving a client... which is the whole reason I have the PVM in the first place! I guess I am confused because in the old days, the CRT monitor was true, and now, I just don't think it is.

Based on all of this... and I guess back to my original issue... does anyone have any thoughts on how I can retro-fit my cutting station so I know what I'm giving people? Do I have to have the PVM and an LCD? Or are we currently in a weird technological period where there's just no way to be sure?

thanks!
k

>the Nattress version had interlacing issues all over every single shot, everywhere.

what sort of interlacing issues? You should be able to tell most interlacing issues on the PVM.


>Do I have to have the PVM and an LCD?

I would suggest having both, and make sure the color looks good on the PVM and acceptable on the LCD. There is a very distinct difference between LCDs and CRTs, consumer and professional gear, especially in the blacks as well as how saturation affects the overall image. And you need to make sure that everything would would look okay.



www.strypesinpost.com

Well, that's the strange thing. The PVM was rock solid re Nattress (as rock-solid as can be anyway). When projected... for example, think of a side-light on the side of a person's nose. Severe horizontal lines there, super-evident, unacceptable. That artifact was not present in my suite.

Your suggestion poses the question. Say I have both monitors. Say an image is good on one, but not good on the other. Then, after adjustment, it's good on the second and not good on the first. How many more hours will be spent in making the image resolve in both monitors? And, considering interlaced SD, is doing so even possible?

>Severe horizontal lines there

Okay. There's a lot of factors here, so I don't want to speculate on what may have happened. Firstly, what's your source signal, and if you deinterlaced the footage, is it then playing back at 30p or 24p? Off a 29.97 fps timeline or a 24p timeline? If you are playing back a 24p timeline, what is adding pulldown onto the monitor?

Then, the LCD off the DVD player would be a relatively simple connection from a set top box- composite, component, s-video or HDMI. The main issues which could arise will be whether the fields got messed up in the encoding.

Then the screening room. What are you using for the projector, and what kind of signal is coming out? 60P? 24p? or 29.97 with both fields played out at the same time?


> Say an image is good on one, but not good on the other. Then, after adjustment, it's good on
>the second and not good on the first. How many more hours will be spent in making the image
>resolve in both monitors? And, considering interlaced SD, is doing so even possible?

First things first, I always assume my audience has their system hooked up properly, to a certain extent- just that they will not be using a Cinetal off an HD-SDI feed. If I'm working on an interlaced show, I will deliver interlaced, and i know that it will field comb on the wrong monitor/connection, but every show that they watch off that channel will also field comb, unless they fix their TV. That part's none of my business.

Let's say i have a broadcast CRT and an ACD (computer screen) or a consumer HDTV hooked up through a YPbPr HDMI signal. When it comes to gauging the color response and overall video quality, I'll trust the broadcast CRT, as the other monitoring options are likely to add artifacts due to bad scaling algorithms, low quality color space conversion, or because the signal is heavily compressed.

However, in terms of color fidelity, because all the three different monitoring options that I mentioned earlier will provide drastically different looks, it's essential that if you're color correcting, for example an exterior night scene, you'll balance the shots so that it looks good on the CRT, but you also do not want folks at home or people watching the show on a computer screen to be staring at saturated shadows with a slight reddish tinge. So if I can't make out my subject on any of the 3 monitors, or it looks extremely unnatural, I will rework the grade.



www.strypesinpost.com