Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Colorgrading - Monitor Recommendation

I also own the Dell 27" UltraSharp U2711
It´s a very solid monitor but very saturated on it´s defaults.
On several blogs i could find: 8bit + FRC.
Is it better to connect this monitor via a decklink card - or can i connect it directly over "display-port"?

Has anybody a "how to calibrate" for this model?
 
Mike Halper said:
What about the Panasonic production broadcast monitors?
Click to expand...
The BT-300 series are widely used at post houses all over LA for color-timing network and cable shows. They have their issues, but I think when properly calibrated, they'll get you more than 90% of the way there. I've seen them in at least a dozen rooms in the last couple of years, and they've kind of become a defacto standard, replacing the old Sony BVM tube-based HD monitors. No question, the higher-end LCD monitors like the Dolby PRM-4200 are better (and it should be, at $40,000), but I think the Panasonic's are more than 90% as good for 10% of the price. It does help if you have the Cine-tal Davio calibration box, which adds another $8K or so.
 
I currently use a calibrated 60" Kuro as my larger monitor, but am looking for something smaller to use in the studio and on set as part of my DIT cart setup. The 17" Panasonics are used so much on sets I'm wondering how accurate the larger 21.5" 1080p Panasonics are for color correction when setup and calibrated properly. Any thoughts on that?
 
mikeburton said:
In our office we use a Dreamcolor as a GUI, Cine-Tal as our 10bit reference, Panasonic VT25 plasma and a JVC RS60u projector with a 147" Stewart Screen. I really love the Cine-Tal as a reference monitor. Even though they are hard to get a hold of now because Ikan owns them and discontinued them they hold calibration longer than any other monitor in its class and are beautiful. We also own a new Sony 25" OLED and that monitor is also beautiful with extraordinary blacks. We just recently purchased another non-working Cine-Tal that we just got serviced at IKAN which is being used on one of our cart systems. Any/all of these monitors are fantastic for set and color suites.
At my house I use a Dell 27" U2711 and a JVC HD950 projector with a DC1 panamorph anamorphic lens on a 103" curved 2.39 DaLite screen running Resolve and have them all calibrated to Rec709 gamma 2.2.
Click to expand...



+1 on the Cine-tal. I own two and they have been, by far, the best reference monitors I've ever used. They have their quirks and are "old" by today's standards but as far as calibration goes they've never let me down. I had one of mine recently rebuilt and calibrated at iKan and the service was great. I think I will get the panel replaced in my 2nd as well.

I can't say anything about the Dell Ultrasharp but the NEC's calibration has held up for me better than expected.

As far as the Panasonics go I like the larger (42"+) plasmas with proper calibration (Davio Box) but really don't think any of the current 17"+ production LCD models are worth considering for proper color calibration.
 
Adrian Jebef said:
As far as the Panasonics go I like the larger (42"+) plasmas with proper calibration (Davio Box) but really don't think any of the current 17"+ production LCD models are worth considering for proper color calibration.
Click to expand...
I actually see the 50" Panasonic being used most often, set back about 3 feet from the colorist's viewing position, and the clients on a slightly raised platform about 8 feet behind, looking over the colorist's head. I think you can actually get more than 90% of the way there without the Davio box, but I agree, it's better to use it than not.
 
sander kamp said:
After the probe broke I bought a i1 display pro probe and it works with the Dreamcolor's software, that means it is recognized and the software performs a calibration
Click to expand...

I have not had such luck. I have the Dreamcolor and i1Display Pro, and it does not work with the Dreamcolor calibration software. Additionally, I sent an email to X-Rite regarding this, and their response was:
"As for that particular HP monitor, if you are currently using the HP software for profiling it,
that software does not currently support using an i1DisplayPRO device."

So I'm very curious, how were you able to get a standard i1Display Pro colorimeter to mate with the HP calibration software? I'd really like to get that setup working on mine so I can do a proper hardware calibration. I should add that the i1Profiler software does, of course, work with the Dreamcolor/i1DPro, but only for display profiling.

Thanks - John
 
Filip Vandoorne said:
also have a look at the Eizo CG245 and the newer CG246 monitors. They are 10bit panels with 3D lut's for Rec709 and EBU or user defined profiles. they also support DCI, but then you need to give them a xyz signal. For real 10bit connection, you will need a hd-sdi adapter, for example a hdlink pro with displayport interface, which is 10bit on the hdlink pro. price including the hdlink pro would be around 3000$.
Click to expand...


This is a great recommendation. Eizo monitors are outstanding and have a lot of useful features. The newer CG series have built-in calibration. They can even be correlated with an external probe (for example if you have a reference probe for your facility) and then the auto-calibration will match. I know many have never heard of Eizo, but they are some of the best out there.
 
Yep, they are doing it wrong, and many are looking for alternatives as they have now realised the serious problems ABL generates...

We get a lot of calls from customers trying to use plasmas for grading, asking how they can calibrate to overcome the problems - you can't... just not possible.

To see the problems in action is very easy.

Put an average image on screen - something with a decent dynamic range. Then drag a full white rectangle slowly across the screen. The underlying image will change as the white rectangle increases in size!

This make plasmas totally unsuitable for grading.

Plasmas were originally used as they did promise a good image for not a lot, but the manufacturers were not overly truthful about the effects of ABL.

Now the real problems are well understood few would chose them.
 
Steve, I read that thread and think you may also have said here previously that you didn't recommend the Eizo displays for video color grading. Is that still the case with the new CG246? That is the one I was planning to get if nothing else as an alternative is announced at NAB. I'd love to of the FSI route but with 4K hitting the market I can't justify buying a $5k monitor that's only HD. All the reviews I've read about the CG246 have been highly positive about the performance and accuracy of the display and the self calibration. Though I'd still probably prefer to run a software calibration myself and write that to the monitor. There was discussion about that in that thread. Is that something your software is able to do yet?
 
I just got off the phone with Eizo. I confirmed with them that using their Color Navigator software with the built-in self calibration sensor and an external supported sensor will write the calibration to the monitor. So in that case, if I use an external sensor such as my X-rite i1Display Pro, wouldn't I get an accurate image?

Also, I found out that the CG246 has a correlation function. You calibrate with an external sensor and then correlate the built-in sensor based on the corrections of the external sensor. Then the built-in sensor will have been calibrated to compensate for the difference between the sensors and the for the center of the screen vs. the lower part of the screen where the built-in sensor is. Although it would be better to calibrate from the center of the screen, if you needed to do a quick calibration or if the external sensor wasn't available it is an option. In fact, what I've read is that you don't want to use the self-calibration exclusively by itself. It's better to use the Color Navigator software with the built-in sensor and then use the built-in sensor for regular self-calibration, but going back to the Color Navigator software periodically for a more complete calibration.

In my discussion with Eizo, I also found out the CX240 is the same monitor as the CG246 minus the built-in sensor, hood, and some preset profiles (Rec709, DCI, etc.), but those profiles wouldn't get used anyway if you use calibration. So some money could be saved going the CX240 route and using only an external sensor to calibrate. That said, Eizo was pretty adamant that the built-in sensor is very accurate and could be more accurate than the external sensor I have (i1Display Pro). Pages 15 and 16 of this in-depth review and test (http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/review/2012/review-eizo-cg246-part15.html) seems to jive with what Eizo is saying. They say "the results were convincing" and "the built-in colorimeter works fine" and in the conclusion on page 18 "Thanks to a well-matched built-in colorimeter, there is no need for external measurement devices."

And in this article (http://nativedigital.co.uk/site/2012/11/eizo-coloredge-cx240-vs-cg246/) comparing the CG246 and the CX240, they tested the self-calibration sensor vs an i1Display Pro and "there were small differences between the monitors but never more than 0.3 delta E and pretty much within the margin of error of the colorimeters."

So I guess my question is, what makes the Eizos not suitable for color grading? And are you basing that on older models and haven't specifically evaluated the CG246 or CX240?
 
Unfortunately the present Eizo calibration is ICC profile based, and suffers with inaccuracy compared to our industry's usual LUT based approach.

Also, their in-built probe is very inaccurate compared to external probes, and even match calibration will not generate the same accuracy.

The CX240 option, with external calibration does sound like a better bet - if the external calibration can be made to work.

TVlogic have just released a 'beta' version of external LUT calibration capability that is LightSpace compatible - that could be worth looking at...

Steve
 
Steve Shaw said:
Unfortunately the present Eizo calibration is ICC profile based, and suffers with inaccuracy compared to our industry's usual LUT based approach.

Also, their in-built probe is very inaccurate compared to external probes, and even match calibration will not generate the same accuracy.

The CX240 option, with external calibration does sound like a better bet - if the external calibration can be made to work.

TVlogic have just released a 'beta' version of external LUT calibration capability that is LightSpace compatible - that could be worth looking at...

Steve
Click to expand...
As you mention "LUT based approach", what's you opinion of the Dell U2713H that uses an i1 Display Pro to auto-calibrate the internal 14-bit LUT? Apparently their first with this capability?

I have some concerns that X-Rite (who wrote Dell's calibration software) is not quite up to speed yet on GB-LED's.

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2713h.htm
 
Steve Shaw said:
Unfortunately the present Eizo calibration is ICC profile based, and suffers with inaccuracy compared to our industry's usual LUT based approach.
Click to expand...


Actually, according to their website it does incorporate 3D LUTs. From their website on the CG246 page http://www.eizo.com/global/products/coloredge/cg246/index.html


[TABLE="width: 720"]
[TR]
[TD]3D LUT for Accurate Color Display

A 3D LUT is included which adjusts colors individually on an RGB cubic table. With the bundled ColorNavigator software’s emulation function, the 3D LUT applies a film look to the image so creators can check how it will be seen by their audience. The 3D LUT also improves the monitor's additive color mixture (combination of RGB), which is a key factor in its ability to display neutral gray tones.[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


Is this being confused with something else?

If it's really not LUT-based, and if you want to write the calibration to the monitor, you do have to use Eizo's Color Navigator software, right? So then calibrating with some other software that is LUT-based wouldn't do any good since there's no way to load that LUT into the monitor?

So would there be some way of calibrating with LUTs by loading a LUT into a BMD HDLink Pro DisplayPort? If so, what would be the proper way of doing that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top