Pro Plasma... something or other

[Tim Whitcomb]

so, I have read this entire thread and just wanted to make oone last stab at this. So I was looking at buying a cinetal or ecinema but after reading this quote, it looks like I could save some money. Just wondering how these post houses are calibrating this monitor? Are they using a LUT or are they using a puck from cinetal? I know the trade off is the cinetal has built in lut support and scopes. Thanks ! I live close to cinetal and am planning a visit to them soon. Any ? i should ask besides why I should buy there monitor vs this one?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=cart_accessories&A=details&Q=&sku=613801&is=REG

http://thecoloringroom.com/ lto backup
http://rojolooks.com/ red camera looks exchange .look

While some use Dream color...
Professional grading requires superior calibration

and from what i see here, most (not mmost) seem to lack that.

there is a reason these costed so much... but DONT buy the intregrated scopes on the Cinetal
always best to have them separate (more functionality) and at the end of the pipeline

and the Omnitek XR is the Vectoprscope of choice but another $18K

I dont work for these guys. just facing the same decision and HAD decided on Cinetal ... until I read this... I understood from Quantel that the Cinetal was pretty much the ONLY LCD the big houses used (if not using CRT) and that they all hated Sony.

but most of the big boys I know use a HUGE screen and a 2K Christie projector which is the cost of 4 to 5 Cinetals...

I would love to know what the pro model does as well and I certainly think mmost is one of the most knowledgable post guys on here...

as for us we decided on the Cineo 30 (now called F30 I think) and a screen for projection as the Cineo can take LUTs
and was highly recommened for grading by Steve Shaw of Digital Praxis...

about $18K (or the same as a Cinetal) but in my humble opinion you cant see any problems on a 24" or even 50"
like you can at 12 feet of projected image...

EDIT: Oh and the Cineo 30 is 1080P more than enough for our market as we don't much (if any) film out

 

[N_Villers]

Hello everyone, interesting discussion. I'm as always learning a great deal from your valuable experience that must, if looked at collectively, add up to several centuries!!

If I may intrude with what may be an obviously ignorant question I would nonetheless be grateful for an explanation as to why. I have two Lacie Electron Blue IV CRT monitors kicking around that I had used for print media over several years and they are in still seemingly good shape. Are these in any way suitable for grading broadcast level material? I am thinking for some reason that they might be but am probably wrong.

thnx,

-noel

 

[Chris Parker]

i bet they'd be fine if you calibrated them......

 

[Torrey Loomis]

MM,

In your experience, does the card pass a 4:4:4 signal through and display it as 4:2:2, or does the monitor itself natively display 4:4:4?

The spec page for the TY-FB11DHD says "Compatible with RGB 4:4:4/YPBPR 4:2:2@60p, 50p/2K digital cinema signals in compliance with DCI" but I looked through the latest lit from Panasonic and didn't see if the monitor itself is 4:4:4.

http://is.gd/1sFX5

Torrey Loomis

 

[Tim Whitcomb]

Not "other people." Virtually every major post facility. And this decision was made after extensive testing. Price was not even a consideration. To say it's "not comparable to a high end color grading monitor" is to go against the collective opinions of just about every major chief engineer in Los Angeles. For them, it IS a "high end color grading monitor." The "best" choice for just about everyone was CRT's - and still is, if you can maintain them. But given the current state of technology, the decision to go plasma was not one that was taken lightly. I don't know of any major facility that does HD finishing in L.A. that in a color correction environment uses a CineTal, a TV Logic, or any LCD, period. Including Sony. Broadcast facilities, yes (Fox bought tons of JVC LCD monitors over a year ago). Post facilities doing color correction, no.

What about BIT DEPTH (or lack thereof) and BURN IN issues with Plasma?

Are you saying this is THE choice for color grading monitor or THE choice for client preview?

 

[Kaku Ito]

Bit depth issue and the burn in issue are there with plasmas.
But the banding can be watched with the waveform monitor and maybe you can combine to watch for banding on SD CRT simultaneously (many hardware video solution provides this).

Burn in can happen very quickly but you can also neutralize it by feeding white for awhile, so regularly maintaining can provide workable solution. Panasonic pro-plasma does provide well balanced performance for the price for sure I think.

I've been testing the NEW TVLogic XVM-245W for a couple of weeks and comparing to my BVM-D24 but I'm pretty much liking it. By this monitor, I have reset the ability limitation of LCD display a bit.

 

[M Most]

What about BIT DEPTH (or lack thereof) and BURN IN issues with Plasma?

Are you saying this is THE choice for color grading monitor or THE choice for client preview?

Grading monitor.

 

[zak forrest]

can i plug into an 11 series or consumer version panasonic plasma with the red rocket card using dvi-hdmi cable? or will there be gamma issues? like when i go dvi-hdmi out of my computer graphics card and the tv gamma does not look the same as when i go out of a blackmagic card for instance...

just trying to figure out if i shoudl return my consumer panasonic plasma and get the 11 series with hdsdi and use hdsdi on the red rocket, or if i can just keep my consumer tv and use dvi output of the rocket card with a dvi-hdmi cable...

also the photo of the rocket card that was posted the other day just has two dvi outputs on the back, i thought it had hdsdi outputs included?? i thought the breakout box was only if you wanted quad stuff, but the basic card had both dvi and hdsdi onboard.. im a bit confused

 

[Torrey Loomis]

also the photo of the rocket card that was posted the other day just has two dvi outputs on the back, i thought it had hdsdi outputs included?? i thought the breakout box was only if you wanted quad stuff, but the basic card had both dvi and hdsdi onboard.. im a bit confused

Zak,

Those aren't regular DVI ports. They are high density ports that go to breakout cables.

Torrey
-----------------------------------------------
Torrey Loomis
President & CEO - Silverado Systems, Inc.
(916) 760-0032 • FAX (916) 404-5258
torrey@silverado.cc
http://www.Silverado.cc

Silverado Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/silveradosys
StudioBuilder blog at http://silveradosys.blogspot.com

 

[Nick Shaw]

also the photo of the rocket card that was posted the other day just has two dvi outputs on the back, i thought it had hdsdi outputs included?? i thought the breakout box was only if you wanted quad stuff, but the basic card had both dvi and hdsdi onboard.. im a bit confused

As far as we know at the moment the card comes with two 'tails' which break out to two DVIs each for quad DL-DVI. Also two BNCs (in a blanking panel) for dual-link HD-SDI. What I'm not sure of is if you can just connect one of the DVIs for 'ordinary' DVI/HDMI, and similarly use one BNC for single link HD-SDI (I hope so as most HD monitors are single link only.)

 

[Steve Shaw]

As I'm sure a lot of you know, I do a great deal of consulting for DI operations around the world, and have never once suggested using a plasma for colour critical applications.

While the viewing angle issues of LCD monitors are well known, it is the only serious issue. I use Cine-tal monitors for grading regularly, and am in the middle of a grade on one right now.

The match to the final film print using LUT on the monitor is just about perfect - LUTs I build with the Light Illusion LUT Builder. Having a lab in the same facility does help!

However, while plasmas have better viewing angles than LCDs they have many other, far worse, issues when it comes to grading, including serious banding (bit depth) problems, poor grey scale calibration, and suffer colour drift.

As has been mentioned elsewhere TI based projectors are a really good way to go, and I've been using the Projectiondesign ones a lot (the Cineo32 is the latest and uses TI's Dark Chip).

Plasmas are used by a number of facilities for one reason only - they are cheap and and can be thrown away when no longer needed.

Buy one by all means, but do not expect it to be colour accurate in the way a good LCD (viewed directly front on!) or Dark Chip projector is.

 

[Kaku Ito]

Steve, thank you very much for your input.

Have you tried the new TVLogic XVM-245W? The viewing angle towards the dark area contrast has been really improved. The best LCD I've ever seen. I compared it to Tamuz, it's way better in that extent. Also comparing it to BVM-D24 daily, it's very close.
I'm thinking of applying your software/service to XVM-245W based grading package.

 

[M Most]

Plasmas are used by a number of facilities for one reason only - they are cheap and and can be thrown away when no longer needed.

Buy one by all means, but do not expect it to be colour accurate in the way a good LCD (viewed directly front on!) or Dark Chip projector is.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. But what Steve just said is not an opinion and is not true. The facilities in Los Angeles that have switched to plasmas in color correction rooms did not do so because of price. In fact, the low price was almost a deterrent in the sense that few felt that such low priced devices could be used in color critical environments. But the fact is that they can and are. I'm not suggesting that just anyone can properly calibrate these devices in the way that the engineering staffs at the large facilities can. But the reason they were chosen is because they came closer than anything - including all LCD's that were tested - to being able to achieve an accurate image based on what we have been seeing on CRT's for many years, especially in terms of the blacks, and especially in the ability of the monitor to be properly seen by more than one person in the room. I have also never suggested that they are used in DI situations, but rather, for color work on television material. Projectors can be very nice, but they are inappropriate in an environment that is designed for grading and finishing material for television, both in terms of accuracy for the colorist and meaningful viewing conditions for the clients. While projectors are very appropriate for DI work, they are not appropriate for television, in part because very few producers, cameramen, or even normal viewers see their television programs in projection rooms.

Steve, I have no problem with you not using these devices in your own facility. But please don't suggest that the motivations of other facilities are any less technically motivated than your own. Especially when you're wrong.

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

Mike, how long of an accurate life would you say the 11's have in them with proper maintenance if at all necessary.

However, while plasmas have better viewing angles than LCDs they have many other, far worse, issues when it comes to grading, including serious banding (bit depth) problems, poor grey scale calibration, and suffer colour drift.

Steve, I would love to hear more specifics regarding your opinion on this particular monitor. What did you think of the way it looks when fed HD-SDI?

 

[Steve Shaw]

Ah, Mike - "not used in DI situations..."

That's the phrase that clinches it.

I thought the chaps here using Red cameras were looking for DI workflows with the intent to grade for theatrical projection, with LUT based calibration.

If it's for tv work plasmas are fine.

For DI, which as you know, and as I stated, is my market, they just don't cut it.

And everything I say is my opinion based on my real world experience.

Steve

 

[M Most]

I thought the chaps here using Red cameras were looking for DI workflows with the intent to grade for theatrical projection, with LUT based calibration.

There's often a disconnect - especially here - between what people say and what they really need and mean. Very, very ,very few projects discussed here are distributed on film. They are primarily finished for HD and SD video deliverable formats, be that DVD, BluRay (rarely), Internet viewing, or one-off projection in a rented screening room. Even those that purport to go to festivals are usually delivered as HD screeners. The need for film output by the vast majority of posters here is rare and usually unaffordable. There are a lot of posts here about "working in log," but I have found that what they often mean is "transcoding to Redlog" because they're been told that format is the best way of retaining the most information. So when I talk here about monitoring solutions, I try to keep in mind that video format viewing is really what's being called for, even if it's sometimes described as something else.

Now, that's not to say that there aren't any projects discussed here that get recorded and distributed on film. There are. But very few.

 

[Tim Whitcomb]

Thanks Steve for the clarification, especially when we are talking about MAJOR POST HOUSES have adopted this as CRT replacement.

So NONE of them are using these monitors for film out? Regardless of affordability, that was an important context that was left out. i.e SD, HD, and TV ONLY.

Yes, I agree, few projects will see their day in film... but what I think needs more clarification is this post...

"I'm not suggesting that just anyone can properly calibrate these devices in the way that the engineering staffs at the large facilities can"

OK, so why then is this a good monitor for us smaller guys, especially if we cant calibrate it properly? Wont this lead to problems in delivery? In even in the "lesser" formats? (Scopes excluded)

And why does Theatrical DIstribution mean film out? What about 2K or even 4K digital projection? i.e the forthcoming RED RAY (Which I saw at Reduser party)

will this provide the grading precision necessary for those formats? Or is it too soon to tell? Im not a colorist, but there are just so many choices and I have been led to believe that those monitors (LCD) were expensive for a reason.

Finally, whats the point of spending the $ on the Dual link card to get 4:4:4 in,to the monitor when the monitor only displays 4:2:2 and isnt TV out 4:2:2?

Thanks in advance. This is a great thread you started Roberto, I cant believe more people are chiming in here.

 

[M Most]

T
OK, so why then is this a good monitor for us smaller guys, especially if we cant calibrate it properly? Wont this lead to problems in delivery? In even in the "lesser" formats? (Scopes excluded)

Because even with "simple" calibration - i.e., setting it up using something like the Digital Video Essentials BluRay disk - you'll still get a more representative image than almost any LCD, especially if you're looking at it even slightly off axis.

And why does Theatrical Distribution mean film out? What about 2K or even 4K digital projection? i.e the forthcoming RED RAY (Which I saw at Reduser party)

The current population of digital cinema equipped theaters, while growing, is very small compared to the population of film equipped screens. And in the current economic climate, the growth of digital cinema is much slower than anyone could have predicted two years ago. The bottom line is that essentially every theatrical release involves film. Restricting a release to digital cinema means a very, very limited distribution path.

will this provide the grading precision necessary for those formats?

For most people doing do-it-yourself work? Yes. For anyone creating digital only deliverables? Yes. For professional facilities that are expected to turn out very accurate film product? Possibly not.

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

EDITED:

OK, thanks for pointing that out Steve. And of course thanks to Mike for adding even more.

As I said I am not intending to grade for DI myself. But I see a huge benefit in gearing up for Blu-Ray DVD and TV grading. It seems that with a RRocket and a PPP11 you are working with 75% of the tools necessary for a solid deliverable. TV/Blu/DVD are a must unless you are going to the web, so having a "best" set up for that side of the fence gives me exactly what we need to create. And it is a major benefit to be actually working towards a finish. So if you can find a pro grader that works with the grading tools you are using, then he could possibly come over with his scopes and jump in with only tweaking necessary depending on what you have going in there. That may save some cash ...unless you f'ed everything up royally and he needs to start from scratch on every shot.

If you see color as important then you'll definitely get better, so even if you do make a few messes now, or several, you'll definitely get better if you can work properly. Unless you guys think you need scopes or don't even bother too much? Cause I think that if you can see what is attainable, even if not 100% perfect, it allows you to create in a conducive environment and prepare solid decisions which at least will lead to making the most of your timming sessions with the pro grader.

Also, if the budget is much lower, then you can at least do your best thanks to the fact that you can actually see. And for large chunks of the audience many people's best can be more than enough.

How long will a Plasma last? They can't die out in a couple of years...? Wasn't that the first generations of plasma?

 

[Tim Whitcomb]

Because even with "simple" calibration - i.e., setting it up using something like the Digital Video Essentials BluRay disk - you'll still get a more representative image than almost any LCD, especially if you're looking at it even slightly off axis.



The current population of digital cinema equipped theaters, while growing, is very small compared to the population of film equipped screens. And in the current economic climate, the growth of digital cinema is much slower than anyone could have predicted two years ago. The bottom line is that essentially every theatrical release involves film. Restricting a release to digital cinema means a very, very limited distribution path.



For most people doing do-it-yourself work? Yes. For anyone creating digital only deliverables? Yes. For professional facilities that are expected to turn out very accurate film product? Possibly not.

Thanks for the clarification, much appreciated.