Which Card for Color?

Since it doesn't seem possible to view the output of Color on a broadcast monitor via firewire, which card would be best suited to run it out of my 8 core? And what are the major differences between them? Please. I don't need to do masses of high end HD. Yet.

Shane Ross recommends the Matrox MXO connected to the ATI X1900XT (512MB) wth two DVI dual link ports connected to a second 23" Cinema Display. The new version 2.0 of the MXO is capable of setting up color balance.

That seems to be the most cost effective solution for dual monitors with color calibration.

A Panasonic LCD 19" monitor for $3500 is next up and it still needs additional connections.

There is a ton of disagreement on whether you can use an LCD monitor to color correct.

Yeah I'm in the not sure camp about LCDs. Dammit. I've been on this broken record for nearly a year and I can't make a decision about which way to jump off.

Maybe if I wait long enough the technology will push down my door and install itself in the best possible configuration for me. Thats probable, isn't it?

1900 is working good here. Nice card,

Graeme

[www.nattress.com] - Plugins for FCP-X

I've got the ATI 1900 - are you using the Matrox off this, G? Like it? Downsides?

I've actually read that Color does not work with the Matrox set up suggested above. You can go full screen as a desktop monitor, but not as a broadcast monitor.

[forums.creativecow.net]

Is this the end of the Matrox/ACD bundle for cc (supposing, of course, you'll want to use Color instead of FCP for this)?
If so, I wonder what other possible set-ups are there in this price range for SD/HDV/DvcProHD.


Just when I was starting to think life was good...

OK, apparently any Blackmagic or AJA card will work. The decisions about which one are up to you (um, me). And yeah - Matrox out only as a desktop, not a broadcast monitor.

You mean something like this

[www.blackmagic-design.com]

But by now my main doubt is wether Color actually has a 'Cinema Desktop Preview' kind of thing, sending your main image to a second monitor that is set up as a reference monitor.

And since Matrox is out, how would you calibrate an ACD monitor? Would a hardware solution like Spyder make sense?

Using a second monitor - a computer monitor - will not give you accurate gamma or chroma. You need to output to a broadcast monitor. Using Desktop preview only gives you a larger picture, not an accurate one.

Since this is purely for color work, it's important that you can really see what you are doing, not just guess at what you might be doing. It makes your work kind of pointless if you monitor has a nice rich red cast that makes people look great, but when you show this on other monitors it's all washed out because your monitor was lying to you in the first place.

Here's the rub. It's expensive to monitor correctly. There's really no way around that. But if you are using an application as specific and fully featured as Color, you really should be making the investment so you're not just making random adjustments.

If you don't it's a bit like buying a formula one car and then wearing overalls and a pushbike helmet to race in.

Hi Jude

I guess than I?ll have to admit that I don?t understand why the matrox is no longer a good solution. Why can?t you calibrate your ACD with the matrox, as suggested by Shane, and use it with Color as a reference monitor?

As for not being a true reference monitor, I know this is an old debate, and God knows I?ve read many threads discussing this. Should a Color Faq be made, this is a first item. Here are some doubts and thoughts in no particular order:

1. I?ve spoken to a finishing house technician, and after some discussion he admitted that ultimately it doesn?t matter what monitor you use (within reason) as long as you come to know the response it gives; meaning no two monitors are exactly alike, and a colorist would have to know the monitor he works in, its weaknesses and fortes. In theory if you have a monitor that is reddish, and you have a way to find that out, in time you can either calibrate you monitor so the reds are more balanced, or you can adjust your eye. People mixing audio talk about this all the time, ?knowing the response of your equipment and studio?.

2. Sure you should work with proper equipment, but in this brave new world where you have a 4k previously-priced software for free, high def monitors, cards, affordable 1080 cameras, etc, it?s obvious many people will try to finish their material at the lowest cost possible. This is the gist of the vast majority of Color threads I?ve read so far. What is the best low-cost solution for color correcting? What is the point where the cost-benefit scale is best balanced under 5k (cpu and software excluded)?

3. As for lcd vs crt, not only crt?s are heavier (think transportation) and many times more expensive, they are going out of line. The Sony PVM monitors are hard-to-find items, as are many other models said to be great as broadcast monitors. Can you trust technicians will be around for much longer who can fix your monitor - which by the way is no longer covered by any guarantee?

4. If you?re color correcting SD, then fine, a broadcast monitor is ideal. But 1080 lines material on a 800 line monitor? I?ve read that to be a truly HD reference, a monitor cannot be smaller than 42 inches (something about pixels and lines, I?ll try to find the link later). In fact many new top-of-the-line LCD monitor, costing 30-50k, that are said to be true HD reference monitors are 30+ inches. What would a 14-21 inches monitor show you? And with 800 lines of resolution? Plus, if the material you are color correcting is going to be digitally projected, then a monitor, no matter what monitor, would still be less than ideal.

5. A hypothetical question: is it best to have a colorist with 20ys of experience color correct on a laptop (and having later reference) using Color, or a 6months trainee on a DaVinci 2k? I don?t mean to be flippant. If many people would choose the experienced colorist, than that says something about what do they really value. If nothing else, the question gives you a different perspective when thinking of equipment. Since color correcting is something of an artistic skill, than having equipment is great, but what is really needed beyond a certain minimum-configuration point is a skilled artisan.

Sorry for the long post...

>>ultimately it doesn?t matter what monitor you use (within reason) as long as you come to know the response it gives; <<

That is true, but for stuff like gamma it's very hard to remember how much more is going to look washed out or crushed on a broadcast monitor. You could export a test clip at the beginning of the session and try to figure out the offset, then apply this to each clip, but the reality is that you're guessing. I mean, you could even do it without any external monitoring and use the scopes to make sure you stayed inside broadcast legal, but you wouldn't have any idea of what you were really doing until you saw it after export. For some people this might not even matter, but if you want to use the equipment properly, it does matter.

As an example, there's a couple of screenshots in a tutorial I did here : Colour My World

Have a look at picture 11 and 12 of the blue car - one of them has a green tick at the top of the screen. The first picture is correct on a broadcast monitor, the second one which looks correct on a computer screen is extremely washed out in FCP. Could you figure out this offset and apply it to a completely different clip?

As for the best solution under 5K - it's variable. I can't tell you what you need - geez - I can barely make a decision myself about what's best for me. Are you going out SDI? What kind of monitor are you going to attach? SD or HD? Do you need a card that can import as well as display? Like I said, check out the gear at Blackmagic and AJA and first decide which card is best for your situation. Then go on from there.

CRTs are going out of line. Yes. But the thing that really sucks is that they are still the best quality solution. LCDs are not a better technology. The reason the CRTs are being dumped is to do with lead levels and changes in environmental laws. I would not recommend that someone buys equipment that is going EOL, but personally, for me, it's what I probably will be doing, at least for another year or so until the tech improves. This is my opinion only, so don't take this as a buying guide.

HD is different to SD. You'll have to get a HD monitoring solution if you're going to do HD.

Agree that the experienced colourist is a better deal, of course, but you're really knobbling the colourist by not giving them the equipment they need to work. I can make a weekly TV show on FCP 2, in fact I do, but if I was given FCP 6 I could do a lot more a lot quicker, which would improve the quality of the show and save the producers money. It's a false economy to stay with the old technology, especially at these prices. It's not millions of dollars like it was less than 10 years ago.

Thanks for the reply, Jude.

I agree with you that if you don't have a more precise reference than a computer monitor, than is guess work. But I don't see how having a 800 lines crt monitor which is sold as "hd ready" is that accurate as well. To be true hd reference, pixel for pixel, you'd have to be talking of 1080 lines of resolution, right? That leaves out any crt I've heard of, certainly any crt under 10k. I've seen some interesting lcd "true hd" reference monitors for under 5k, but I admit I still have to do a whole lot more researching. Bottom line is, hd reference monitors on most color correction suites will be lcd from now on. Not computer monitors, but lcd nonetheless.

I'm going to be working on a lot of material shot by a HVX200 camera, probably 1080something, and since I'm getting Color in the upgrade, I'll be doing color correcting as well. Funny thing is, a couple of months ago I was ready to purchase Final Touch. Who said procrastination wasn't a good thing, right?

Yeah I think that most suites that are being set up now - HD or not - will be having LCD reference monitors. I just don't like them.

And I was also looking to buy Final Touch - we got the bargain of the century there, don't you reckon?

I'm using a X1900 here too, no complaints at all.

No monitor setup yet - I'd love a CRT but I'm thinking an LCD is going to fit into my budget at the moment.

Yeah, Jude. Bargain of the century for sure. I was going to buy FT too but I'm glad I waited.

Great forums here. I've been lurking for a while but since I'm getting more into Color I'll post some of my thoughts and experiences.

cheers,
Robb