Keep my CRT for grading?

[Richard_D]

I have a Sony pvm 20L5 with a 16x9 hard mask I have been planning on replacing with a modern panel, but then I saw a video from about 2 years ago with a major colorist saying he would keep his CRT as long as possible.

So my question is if I get a 4k client Monitor (in another post I mentioned that the Sony consumer monitors looked very c lose to broadcast Sony at Nab) does my old hd CRT still have a place in a modern davinci grading suite?

 

[jake blackstone]

I'm still using my Sony BVM-D24E1WU 24" and I couldn't be happier. It is still better, than almost any LCD monitor out there ,costing much more, except 24" pro OLED or Dolby. When I finally decide to move up to 4k monitor, probably something, that uses quantum dot technology or OLED, I will not be sad to throw away my 15 years old CRT. But right now I'm still happy with it and it is perfectly calibrate-able as a SMTE-C monitor. On the other hand, 20" monitor is too small for critical color work.

 

[Marc Wielage]

I have a Sony pvm 20L5 with a 16x9 hard mask I have been planning on replacing with a modern panel, but then I saw a video from about 2 years ago with a major colorist saying he would keep his CRT as long as possible. So my question is if I get a 4k client Monitor (in another post I mentioned that the Sony consumer monitors looked very c lose to broadcast Sony at Nab) does my old hd CRT still have a place in a modern davinci grading suite?

Not a PVM, no. The BVM Jake has above is a world of difference from the cheap PVM monitors Sony sold over the years. A BVM-32E would still work today, provided the tube held up and you could still calibrate it. The biggest problems I see are: 1) it weighs 400 pounds, and 2) a new tube was about $17,000 six or seven years ago and is probably no longer available, period. Those are big problems.

I think the world has moved on from CRT, and even if you convince yourself that the picture is "right" on the CRT, the rest of the world is watching some kind of flat screen at this point. But in truth, plasmas won't match LCDs, LCDs won't match OLED's, OLED's won't match projectors... there's a hurricane of different standards out there.

 

[jake blackstone]

I think the world has moved on from CRT, and even if you convince yourself that the picture is "right" on the CRT, the rest of the world is watching some kind of flat screen at this point.

I'm not "convincing" myself, that my monitor is "right". It is right! And it is right, because I use proper software (Calman) and hardware (i1Display3 Pro) to calibrate and profile my CRT display in order to display proper images. I would put up my 15 year old CRT monitor agains any LCD monitor on the market today, including FSI LCD. The black levels, contact and uniformity is much better, than LCD. On the other hand, even the best and most expensive monitors on the market today are completely useless, if they're not calibrated correctly. So, as usual, it's not so much how old are the tools, but it is more the user, who needs to know what to do to get the best out of those tools.

 

[Richard_D]

Thanks for the input. I also have a dlp projector on a 15' screen so my goal is have a few different display technologies.

 

[Marc Wielage]

I'm not "convincing" myself, that my monitor is "right". It is right! And it is right, because I use proper software (Calman) and hardware (i1Display3 Pro) to calibrate and profile my CRT display in order to display proper images.

I don't doubt that your display is correct, Jake. I'm concerned that the RP-166 1995 SMPTE monitor standards are kind of stuck in the past. I'm waiting to see if they'll finally get a new Recommended Practice out of committee to govern LCD and other flat panel displays, and cover Rec709, Rec2020, and other future standards in a way that actually relates to the monitors that the real world actually uses in 2015.

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

Not a PVM, no. The BVM Jake has above is a world of difference from the cheap PVM monitors Sony sold over the years. A BVM-32E would still work today, provided the tube held up and you could still calibrate it. The biggest problems I see are: 1) it weighs 400 pounds, and 2) a new tube was about $17,000 six or seven years ago and is probably no longer available, period. Those are big problems.

I think the world has moved on from CRT, and even if you convince yourself that the picture is "right" on the CRT, the rest of the world is watching some kind of flat screen at this point. But in truth, plasmas won't match LCDs, LCDs won't match OLED's, OLED's won't match projectors... there's a hurricane of different standards out there.

They may feel different but if well calibrated via LUT box (I recommend Lightspace as a far more technically advanced than Calman, in my opinion, and I have a Hubble, itself recalibrated annually) plasma LCD, CRT and projection can all look the same in terms of which grading decisions you make with them. We also have a few "s---tboxes" here - crappy LCDS set to Vivid Sports mode - because we do feel it's of value to also see what viewers with terrible set ups will be looking at - for example to make sure important information is not lost within crushed shadows, or that banding is not too much of a crazy issue even on a crappy TV.

 

[Marc Wielage]

We also have a few "s---tboxes" here - crappy LCDS set to Vivid Sports mode - because we do feel it's of value to also see what viewers with terrible set ups will be looking at - for example to make sure important information is not lost within crushed shadows, or that banding is not too much of a crazy issue even on a crappy TV.

That's a very slippery slope. The reality is that if you buy six different-model TV brands, you'll see six different versions of wrong in terms of colorimetry, detail, and balance. I know of a major LA post house working on a $200 million film where the director demanded to see "what will my film look like on 'average' consumer TV sets," so they went out and bought 20 different monitors, but then calibrated them as best they could to Rec709 before they let him see them. Otherwise, you're chasing your tail forever in coming up in greens, down in blacks, up in saturation, down in contrast, shifting hues, all depending on which monitor is screwing up the signal at the moment. The facility called the monitor room "Best Buy," and the only reason why they didn't try to reason with the technically-ignorant director is that he was an Oscar winner with a billion-dollar film. It was easier to placate him than it was to tell him the truth. The facility wound up making only very minor changes with the final delivered film, so it ended well.

This is as nutty as trying to worry about how a mix is going to sound on different kinds of speakers. There are about 1900 different loudspeakers out there. Earbuds are going to sound different from headphones, those are going to sound different from TV speakers, TV speakers will sound different than desktop speakers, those will sound different than full-range speakers, and those will sound different than the theatrical mixing stage in which the film was mixed. Only the latter is correct. Everything else... all you can do is cross your fingers and hope things will translate in a linear, predictable way.

This situation is far worse today than it's ever been, since you have people looking at iPhones, tablets, laptops, computer displays, plasmas, LCD monitors, OLED monitors, and projectors. Every one of them is different. With many of them, if you move your head one foot to the left or right, the monitor itself changes its look due to viewing angle. This is a very, very difficult part of the post business today. Adding multiple bad monitors to the equation does not make life easier, nor does it really provide a solution; it just obfuscates the real issues and leads you into confusing directions.

 

[Richard_D]

Great story.... Best buy... Lol