Recommendations: 40" screen for video editing / on set monitoring

[Will Keir]

I'm looking for recommendations on a 40" screen for video editing and on set monitoring.

Currently I've been using a 4K 40" Samsung JU7100 as a monitor for video editing and first light color work but not for anything on set. The screen is 4K but I use 1080P in OS X because the text size becomes too small. The TV's low input lag make it usable as a computer monitor. At 1080P the screen displays in OS X at 60 Hz, 30 Hz just doesn't work for me.

So I'm okay wit a 1080P display with a larger screen. 40"-42" feels about right. 55" and 48" is a bit large for my setup.

I've looked into on set monitors a bit lately. Was thinking about the Flanders 42" broadcast monitor to do both jobs but I'm not sure if I need all the bells and whistles and to pay the added expense. My main use is for a GUI and image playback with offline cuts of experimental narrative feature content, editing in premiere and FCP X.

I will begin shooting my feature film this year and this is one of the last major pieces of a very long journey acquiring gear to give me creative freedom.

What are the minimums I need for an onset directors monitor?

Slowly, I've narrowed down what I need for a computer GUI display for my offline work. This is a bit of trial and error and I appreciate being steered in the right direction. Thank you for your experience and input.

 

[Marc Wielage]

You need something that can be calibratable and tell you the truth on set. I think 40" will be overkill on a set, particularly if you have a lot of location moves. Generally what I see on sets are maybe 20" or 24" at the most, and usually there's more than one, and they have tents and/or black hoods to eliminate glare and light spill. I think as long as you shoot color charts and do tests prior to production, just use a very simple LUT and know going in you'll be able to handle 90% of any issues in post. My advice: don't let the monitor slow you down, and don't try to do complex color correction on set.

 

[L. Langer]

You'll get some options at CES and probably a few more at IBC too. CES is going to have a huge spread of UHD monitors in the sub-50 sizes from many different players, with HDMI 2.0 and DP 1.2 on many models. 32-inches might fit the bill and that's what some companies will be offering.

 

[Marc Wielage]

The Canon 40" DP-V2410 is one of the few I know of that can be calibrated, but be warned that it's $35,000.

Noted LA colorist Mike Sowa endorsed the THX-approved Panasonic OLED CZ-950, which I'm told is a really good high-end consumer set:

http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/panasonic-4k-uhd-oled-thx-ifa-2015-announced/

No word yet as to what it's going to cost, but I've been told "around $6000" for the 55" version. This one will be calibratable, and I would bet will hold its own against the BT300 and VT60 Plasma HD monitors.

I'm personally not convinced there's a need to monitor on set or editing in 4K. I think HD works fine if you're reasonably close to the monitor -- say, less than 6 feet. If there's a focus problem, you're still going to see it in 1080. 4K won't do anything except cost more and be more complex in terms of monitoring and wiring. And it's also more of a resource hog for computers and cameras in terms of real-time output.

 

[Tom Lowe]

http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/panasonic-4k-uhd-oled-thx-ifa-2015-announced/

Could this be used a computer monitor? Currently I am using 32" UHD monitors, but I really want something bigger.

 

[Marc Wielage]

Could this be used a computer monitor? Currently I am using 32" UHD monitors, but I really want something bigger.

It could be, but do you really want to spend $6000 on a computer display? And if it's not color managed and calibrated, it's not going to give you accurate pictures.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

More curved screens... WTF are they smoking? The curve only works if you sit in a very specific viewing position. And even then, the benefits are very minimal and often more distracting. Other than that, the Panasonic looks like a nice new offering. I'd like a 46~48" one without a curved screen.

 

[Will Keir]

Thanks Marc.

You need something that can be calibratable and tell you the truth on set. I think 40" will be overkill on a set, particularly if you have a lot of location moves. Generally what I see on sets are maybe 20" or 24" at the most, and usually there's more than one, and they have tents and/or black hoods to eliminate glare and light spill. I think as long as you shoot color charts and do tests prior to production, just use a very simple LUT and know going in you'll be able to handle 90% of any issues in post. My advice: don't let the monitor slow you down, and don't try to do complex color correction on set.

 

[Will Keir]

Might be worth "handing" in there with this one. A few more months or more like six months before they are released after the shows?

You'll get some options at CES and probably a few more at IBC too. CES is going to have a huge spread of UHD monitors in the sub-50 sizes from many different players, with HDMI 2.0 and DP 1.2 on many models. 32-inches might fit the bill and that's what some companies will be offering.

 

[Will Keir]

I'm actually with you there. I find that 1080p is enough for me. The Epic feed is only 1080p onset and my final delivery will be 1080p. Bridging the desire for more computer desktop space, 4k, with the ability to monitor on set, 1080p accurately, is where my sight is directed.

I'm personally not convinced there's a need to monitor on set or editing in 4K. I think HD works fine if you're reasonably close to the monitor -- say, less than 6 feet. If there's a focus problem, you're still going to see it in 1080. 4K won't do anything except cost more and be more complex in terms of monitoring and wiring. And it's also more of a resource hog for computers and cameras in terms of real-time output.

 

[Will Keir]

Tom,

There is a good site for researching if a TV can be used as a TV monitor. http://www.rtings.com/ Cederic is available via e-mail for questions as well. Very helpful what he has done there and there's even color calibrations settings he shares for each display that get you in the ballpark.

The most import factor I found when researching and testing 4K TVs for computer monitors is INPUT LAG and REFRESH RATE. Input lag can be measured and below 35ms you won't notice much mouse delay. Then having 60 Hz is the next piece. 30 Hz, you will notice lag in your movements, at 60 Hz, it smooths out. Still, even with both of these, there is a touch of responsiveness missing compared to a computer display. I'm currently editing on a Samsung JU7100 4K TV.

Editing on a curved screen distorts the image, I went back to flat screens after my demos.

Hope that helps in your adventures.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/panasonic-4k-uhd-oled-thx-ifa-2015-announced/

Could this be used a computer monitor? Currently I am using 32" UHD monitors, but I really want something bigger.

 

[Will Keir]

Jeff,

What are you using for onset monitoring? What computer screens are you using? Curious what your setup looks like.

More curved screens... WTF are they smoking? The curve only works if you sit in a very specific viewing position. And even then, the benefits are very minimal and often more distracting. Other than that, the Panasonic looks like a nice new offering. I'd like a 46~48" one without a curved screen.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

All my computer displays at the moment are Dell and LG UHD displays in the 24" to 32" size. And a few old 27" and 30" 2.5K displays that I haven't retired yet.

For on-set use, I'm all 1080p except I occasionally bring a 24" Dell IPS 4K monitor to connect to a workstation, depending on what I need to do. This is almost always more for client or producer benefit than for myself. I often edit on the fly while shooting and work off native R3D clips. It's not like the workstations, especially the ones I can cart around with me, can handle processing and displaying 6K or even 4K at full quality. I trust the cameras to capture the image they're supposed to, and they do. I approach my workflows still very much as if I were shooting film. I don't pull focus from a monitor except for odd situations where that actually makes sense during setting up a shot. I'll sometimes create looks to load to the camera to help smooth over the look of things. Once again, for client/ producer benefit. We're shooting RAW, I can make the image do whatever I want later in post.

I don't have a studio crew or enough resources to deal with color grading on-set. This is becoming a thing lately and it usually is a mistake in most situations.

For proper color work, I still have a 1080p Panasonic plasma, a 4K Samsung 55" and a 4K Sony Projector with a 12-foot wide screen in my coloring/screening setup. I can do 100X better work in that environment than trying to hack it out on location.

 

[Will Keir]

Thanks for the feedback. I'm looking forward to a nice UHD screen with HDMI 2 and DP support that will last me several years and we are only a couple months away from the unveiling of options!

 

[PC Greene]

Couldn't agree more Jeff...really one needs to be at the apex of the curve to make sense and that means sitting a few feet from these 50" inches out there

More curved screens... WTF are they smoking? The curve only works if you sit in a very specific viewing position. And even then, the benefits are very minimal and often more distracting. Other than that, the Panasonic looks like a nice new offering. I'd like a 46~48" one without a curved screen.

 

[Will Keir]

Curved screens for evaluating a Boxed framed image is a little backwards too.

It's an environment for immersion in games.

Couldn't agree more Jeff...really one needs to be at the apex of the curve to make sense and that means sitting a few feet from these 50" inches out there