Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

Suggest Monitors for Grading...

Steve Shaw said:
Hi Dave,

The broadcast defaults for those displays are not accurate (when we've tested them), but as said above can be made accurate ;o)
Click to expand...

Steve, you must see a lot of setups. I'm interested to know what your choice would be for a grading monitor at the low end of the cost scale - for an individual, not a facility.
 
Steve Shaw said:
Hi Dave,

The broadcast defaults for those displays are not accurate (when we've tested them), but as said above can be made accurate ;o)
Click to expand...

I agree. A HD link and proper line up and LUT is still needed but they are another step forward for this range of displays.
 
Steve, you must see a lot of setups. I'm interested to know what your choice would be for a grading monitor at the low end of the cost scale - for an individual, not a facility.
Click to expand...

Yup, we see loads of different displays...

What I really don't like are any of the lower-end LCDs that are sold as being 'broadcast' or similar - I've not found one that is any good, and that includes the likes of FSI, and especially the old Dreamcolor, which was appalling for accurate colour work!

I am working with Penta on improving their range of displays, and they are now looking rather good - but then I would say that...

Penta aside, and understanding the power saving issues, I have to say Plasmas are probably the best low-end displays, so long as they are accurately calibrated with external 3D LUTs.

I'd ignore the so-called 'broadcast' plasmas, and get the cheaper range that use the same panels and spend the savings on external calibration kit.

Oh, and don't believe the 10bit claims - no plasma screen can get that many bits to the display, and the difference between those expensive displays and the cheaper ranges is not (IMHO) worth the money.

Accurate calibration is.
 
So you recon the Pana 30 series is prefered over the 300 series both with external LUT applied ?
 
Steve Shaw said:
Not preferred, but not worth the extra for the 300 as you are basically negating the inbuilt calibration.

With both externally calibrated and sat side-by-side the difference is bugger all...
Click to expand...

Steve,

What is the Power Management issue you talk about in some of your posts?

As in, what issue does it cause with Panasonic Plasmas etc.?
 
All plasmas have a power reduction process included as standard - it's a legal requirement of some sort?

It reduces the power to the screen as the overall screen brightness increases...

So, as the overall image brightness increases the power to the screen reduces, making the image less bright.

This can be a problem for accurate image display as well as being a key understanding for calibration.
 
Steve Shaw said:
Sorry, they are just not a good display...
Click to expand...

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. But I would point out that in all fairness, many, many people disagree with that assessment. And most of those people are using it for "real" work and getting excellent results. So while I'm sure Steve has his reasons for saying that, it's only an opinion, and one that is not widely shared.
 
Steve Shaw said:
Sorry, they are just not a good display...
Click to expand...

what is not a good display? some plasmas you were referring to or the FSI? can you elaborate?

Edit: i've gone from my 50" Panasonic 25 series via Matrox I/O on FCP and to the FSI and my "in the dirt" opinion out of the gate is i get far better results that match best for broadcast via my FSI monitor.
 
I have attempted to calibrate a number of FSI displays - none calibrate well, and are very poor out of the box, and being poor out of the box makes them difficult to calibrate after the event...

But, the power management of plasmas can be a problem too. The choice is yours...

However, an externally calibrated plasma (power management aside, as this is not a problem in most normal use situations) is often better than most LCD displays, especially the FSI display I have had the misfortune to come up against.

But. as Mike says, this is my view!
 
Steve, your posts in this thread have been very helpful. Thank you for sharing your expertise. I have an LG60 PS8000 THX plasma I'd love to use for grading with Resolve. How well do you think it would work with an HDlink Pro, i1 Display Pro and LightSpace CMS?
 
Im having problems finding an Display port to HDMI 1.4 adaptor for the HD link. I can find Display port (full size) to mini display port adapter (which i think passes 1.4 compliant data) thena mini display port to HDMI 1.4 adaptor. Its only needed for dual stream 3D. Any ideas where to find one with out the back to back adaptor solution above.
 
To be fair, all plasmas are just about the same - if you run them in un-calibrated mode (wide gamut) they are all basically the same (very wide brush used for that statement, but I have yet to see a viable variation). So. can be calibrated to a known standard externally.

The THX bit is a waste of money - I have yet to see a THX certified display that actually meets standards.
(Sorry, I don;t mean to be negative about THX, but they do seem to allow their name to be associated with some very poor displays - I guess money rules?)

I recently tried to calibtare a THX certified JVC DLA projector - impossible as it was so far off of acceptable standard as to be uncalibratable... (that's probably not a real word!).

So, to answer you question directly, is should be fine!
 
Thanks for the quick reply. I really appreciate it!
 
Saw panasonic's displays at NAB last year, wasn't too impressed. I'm a much bigger fan of Sony and Dolby's
 
So on the subject of calibration? There seems to be a lot of products out there covering a wide price range, is there a specific product that wins for computer monitor calibration?
I have experience in the photography world with Spyder products which worked great. I have heard that the HP Dreamcolor tool is tricky to get working with monitors other than the Dreamcolor specifically... and the Spyder4Elite system is cheaper than the HP Dreamcolor calibration tool.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top