I am currently in the process of selling my video production studio of 25 years and opening a new one 300 miles away. All of my equipment-(3)edit bays, sound stage, duperoom, disc room, etc., etc., stays, according to the contract. I am being very careful reinvesting in equipment. In my new market area, there may be some true HD work, but plans are for DVCPro HD/50/25 (HVX 200's) and HDV. I need 1 or 2 monitors for a final project for the rest of this year. Anything I purchase needs to handle my move to HD. The HD footage I've seen on the somewhat affordable JVC CRT's looked almost as good as the very expensive Sony's. But like many of you who frequent this forum, I would prefer to go LCD and/or Plasma. I have read most of the posts on many of the Cow's forums on this very subject. But it still seems to me that CRT is the only real way to go re. 1920 x 1080, especially for color grading, etc. I would love to find a reasonably priced LCD of around 20" to 26" that does a good job displaying both 1080 and 720 and give reasonably accurate color. Apple Cinema, HP and Dell seem to be mentioned the most. Another feature desirable for the current upcoming job is ability to show 2 separate displays, split screen, side-by-side, on the same monitor. I actually need to aquire this unit within the next 7 days. Any suggestions anyone?
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by Graeme Nattress on Nov 1, 2005 at 12:26:14 pm
I have the 17" JVC monitor in for testing. At 720p you don't see all the detail that I can see on my 23" cinema display+hdlink+decklink HD Pro combo. At 1080 it's noticibly deficient in resolution. Colour seems fine, but then again, I have no complaints about the colour on the LCD. The only issue with the LCD is interlace doesn't display quite right.
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by John Frey on Nov 2, 2005 at 4:03:43 pm
I am hoping to find an LCD, if it is indeed less than 1920 x 1080(such as either 1280 x 720 or 1388 x 720) that displays 1080i well. Seems to be the biggest complaint, unless of course you go the full 1080 to begin with. Then there is the problem of displaying 720 on a 1080 unit. Anyone found a display that handles these scenarios?
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by Harry on Nov 2, 2005 at 5:11:55 pm
I was under the impression that the Dell that everyone is raving about could display full rez 1080 and 720 - both at full screen size (with the 720 filling the screen and not a reduced image sitting in the middle).
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by Graeme Nattress on Nov 2, 2005 at 5:15:28 pm
I think it can. But if you get the image sitting in the midle, you're sure you're seeing what the 720p pixels look like, not, perhaps, any scaling artifacts taking it up to 1080p. Personally, I'd like the choice of both.
Graeme
- www.nattress.com - Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by Ron Shook on Nov 2, 2005 at 5:35:59 pm
Graeme,
[Graeme Nattress]"Personally, I'd like the choice of both."
I don't know about the Dell, but the HP 23" does both and although it's a little more pricy than the Dell 24" it does one thing much better than the Dell which may be critical to some folks. Both scale 720p to full screen very well, but the Dell scaling of SD resolution is gastly and extremely noisy, whereas the HP does an excellent job with SD.
BTW, Graeme, thanks for being around the COW. I have learned so much from your posts here and on the HDV Forum.
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by toke lahti on Nov 2, 2005 at 10:16:43 pm
[Ron Shook]"...whereas the HP does an excellent job with SD."
I also onw L2335 and I really don't like the quality it gives to PAL-dv exported through fw from computer and imported to display through s-video.
Getting a high quality monitor for hd is quite a problem at this time.
If you want highest quality now, you still need a crt hd video monitor, preferrably with 10bit colors hd-sdi card and 5 figures in price tag.
Lcd's are getting better really fast and the newest ones are beginning to be very close to crt's.
Some do present 601/709 color space quite perfectly, but are limited to 8bit colors.
Just last gen displays couldn't disply even 8bit colors accurately, but now that they are beginning to be able to do that, there is a possibility to do that with dvi connector: with dual link and reduced blanking it is possible to display 16bit colors with 1920x1080/1200 resolution by using the first link of dual link to msb of color data and second link to lsb of color data. There just isn't any graphics card or display available that does that.
And my guess is that there will never be these since VESA is bringing out a new standard for linking displays called DisplayLink. So maybe those high color accuracy flat screens with displaylink are coming to stores sometime in next year.
But right now options would be very expensive crt or cheaper lesser quality lcd's for short time use, until better ones arrive. Choise also depends on how sensitive one's eyes are for watching flickering crt for hours a day.
Dell's 24" was the first hd-resolution lcd that has over 1000:1 contrast ratio in real life.
Way better than now a bit outdated Apple's cinema displays or even HP's L2335.
New Eizo 24" might also be worth for a test drive with professional calibrator and I've heard rumors that brand new Acer 24" might be pretty good also.
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by donatello on Nov 3, 2005 at 7:23:30 am
i see LCD's & Plasma at many post houses for clients to view project etc and those LARGE screens do look impressive in all the rooms ( even waiting room ) ..
however when it comes time to color grading i have NEVER anybody use a LCD or plasma screen ...
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by toke lahti on Nov 3, 2005 at 10:22:52 am
Expensive high end post houses can use those expensive crt's.
On the other hand most of press/printing/still photography color grading is already done with lcd's.
One reason for this is that you can't get high quality crt's to computers any more.
My guess is that hd crt's start disappearing next year. Lsd's are better enough then and there are new techs coming like SED and OLED.
Led-LCD's might becaome also very nice. Like the BrightSide is already.
http://www.brightsidetech.com/
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by toke lahti on Nov 3, 2005 at 4:44:23 pm
[Graeme Nattress]"...they don't cost that much"
They do add one zero to price, but still use the same display panels as everyone else.
"Real fps" is a nice feature, but does it really count?
Any hands-on experience?
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by Graeme Nattress on Nov 3, 2005 at 4:50:38 pm
Saw them running at NAB, and they looked really nice. But then again, so does my Cinema Display + HDLink. The only let down with the HDlink is I still can't get the interlace mode working properly, but other than that, it's superb.
Graeme
- www.nattress.com - Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by Graeme Nattress on Nov 3, 2005 at 6:21:06 pm
But size does alter our perception of the effect of colour. Grading a movie on a 12" display will give you a result that will not have the same effect emotionally etc. as it would on the cinema screen.
Graeme
- www.nattress.com - Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by Bob Zelin on Nov 4, 2005 at 12:18:47 pm
what an interesting thread. Many choices are made due to seeing these displays at manufacturers booths at trade shows, or recommendations directly from the manufacturers. I am sure that countless displays work, but everyone discusses the same products, because that's all they ever hear about.
The original was the Apple Cinema display 23", becuase Blackmagic came out with the HD Link.
AJA soon followed with the HDP (HD-SDI to DVI converter), and not only recommended the Apple Cinema display, but the Sony SDM-P234b, which could display at 24p (48 Hz) image, and would not scale it like the Cinema display. I used this monitor extensively, but it's the same crap as the Cinema display.
AVID (becuase of the AVID DS and their deal with HP) pushed the HP 2335. The HP had Y Pb Pr inputs on the side of the monitor as well, so you didn't need the HD Link or AJA HDP. AVID HD users were pushed towards the HP 2335.
Then DELL came out with the 2405FPW, which was reviewed on Barefeats. It was the same crap, but it was CHEAP. Cheap is important to professional users, so there was a flurry of Dell purchases. Big guns like AJA and Blackmagic "approved" this monitor, so it was accepted.
At NAB2005, almost every booth showing HD except for Sony used the Panasonic
TH50PHD7UK (now called the 8UK). This became the # 1 plasma monitor of choice - becuase everyone saw it everywhere at NAB2005, and it did 1366x768.
Since it dropped in price to $3000, everyone wanted it (and it looks better than any LCD screen I mentioned above).
Of course, everyone is "talking" about the eCinema display - this is a 23" display that is "critical", but costs about $14,000. It's tough to buy a $14,000 monitor when you can get the Dell 2405FPW for under $1000 with the right discount code at the DELL website.
NOW, I saw the Samsung 46" 460P at the NSCA tradeshow in March 2005. NO PROFESSIONAL MANUFACTURER has "approved" this monitor, but I can assure you, it's the largest and brightest LCD screen I EVER SAW - much brighter and sharper than the Cinema, Dell, HP, or Sony. Will it work properly with our professional equipment ???? I have no idea - and at $4800 street price (PC Connection has it in stock) - I am not going to be the guinea pig that finds out.
Bottom line - LCD monitors all look about the same (even the small, horrible Astro systems field monitor). Some people just love to buy Apple, but you will get the same value with the Dell. Please remember that I have NOT seen the eCinema in person, but I doubt my clients will ever spend $14,000 on a 23" screen.
Bob Zelin
ps - people who own the "old" Sony PVM-20L5/1 CRT monitor are kissing the ground.
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by Bob Zelin on Nov 5, 2005 at 12:02:41 am
I Love the Dell because it's so cheap (and it's very good), but it does not
have a dramatically better contrast ratio with 720p or 1080i images than the Apple Cinema display. I don't care what the spec says.
So the black levels are getting lower, but we are still far away from hq, witch would be <.1.
That last NEC lumiled had a perfect color representation. And what will be the price for lumiled-hd? Near ecinemasys?
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by Graeme Nattress on Nov 5, 2005 at 12:38:40 pm
I can't quite visualise how non-linear gamma relates to contrast ratios though..... Video is non-linear (about 0.4) for two reasons, to distribute more bits to the darker values so as to reduce banding, and hence not need 12bits just so that we don't see artifacts, and to counter the 2.5 gamma of a CRT. But in any gamma 0=0 and 1=1 - those values don't change, just how the values inbetween get distributed. Thoughts?
Graeme
- www.nattress.com - Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by toke lahti on Nov 6, 2005 at 12:43:30 pm
I see no problem using monitor with 1000:1 contrast ratio with 8bit colors.
Let's assume that black level (0,0,0) is 0.1 cd/m^2 and white level (255,255,255)then 100 cd/m^2.
With linear gamma rgb values would give intensity:
(1,1,1) 4.0 cd/m^2
(2,2,2) 7.9 cd/m^2
(3,3,3) 11.8 cd/m^2
etc.
With gamma of 0.4:
(1,1,1) 1,8 cd/m^2
(2,2,2) 2,4 cd/m^2
(3,3,3) 2,8 cd/m^2
etc.
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by Graeme Nattress on Nov 6, 2005 at 6:25:07 pm
Toke, I hope you don't mind me sharing some thoughts here to try and get to the bottom of this, as it all leaves me confused some what.
In light terms, contrast ratio is white / black, which in your 100 / 0.1 case gives a 1000:1 contrast ratio. This makes sense so far.
But in digital terms, you'd get white / black, which is 255 / 0 = infinte. So something's not quite right there.
In audio, dynamic range is peak signal / noise (or distortion) floor in db, which for an 8bit system is what, about 48db? (16 bit being about 96db, give or take)? But if I play a 8bit recording on a 16bit CD player, I'll only hear 8bits worth of dynamic range, even though the player is capable of more (although I'd have to be in a dead silent room playing the music really loud to hear 96db dynamic range).
Is not the light situation similarly limited by the noise floor of the signal feeding the monitor?
Graeme
- www.nattress.com - Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by toke lahti on Nov 7, 2005 at 12:52:55 pm
I don't mind at all, thinking of these makes me to refresh my memory and logics also.
Amount of color bits restricts the number of tones you can have, but not how big contrast ratio you can have between the ends.
Only if you use linear gamma and want to reproduce a shot excactly how it was in real life, then (4,4,4) has to be twice as bright as (2,2,2,) etc.
You can adjust your display to show 10 f-stops with 8bits, there just is less tones per f-stop.
And usually in moving images, you want pictures look good rather than naturally realistic.
More you boost your contrast ratio, easier tone banding appears.
Gamma helps in this, because you can put more of tones in critical area and less elsewhere.
To show 2.2-gamma 8bit tones you need 12bits in linear gamma.
As to analogy with audio, with 8bit audio you can't reproduce a sound that is weaker than -48dB but you can adjust the 0dB point.
With 8bit color you can't reproduce a tone that has half the brightness of (1,1,1), but you can adjust the brightness of (1,1,1).
And to get back to real life, lcds have had an annoyingly high black level, but very high white level. So talking about contrast ratios doesn't really tell if the picture will look good. Contrast can be high, but that doesn't help if black level is also high. At least if you are planning to watch the display in traditionally dim lit room.
I'm not sure if there is any kind of standardization to contrast ratio in any color spaces, I've understood that they only specify the relation of tones to each other, not the overall output.
Maybe Apple has some ideas about everybody looking the same picture, because their displays don't have adjustable contrast. Most of the rest of the world does have...
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by Graeme Nattress on Nov 7, 2005 at 1:09:11 pm
"Contrast" on a CRT is white level, and "brightness" on a CRT is black level?? The brightness control on an Apple monitor adjusts the white level does it not?? Given that the black level is fixed by nature of the LCD, I don't think you could adjust that.
So, contrast range in a monitor is much more like max volume level in audio, because the black level is fixed, but you can scale the white point to anywhere you want given the bounds of seeing banding, and how much light you want to put out. Given that LCDs are bright enough, we have to tackle black level. Personally, in a lighted room, I have no issues with LCD black level - it's only in darkness do I have a problem, and then, in real world images, it's minor.
Graeme
- www.nattress.com - Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by toke lahti on Nov 7, 2005 at 11:12:57 pm
Sadly brightness adjustments also affects the black level in lcds.
Maybe that's because backlight brightness is also used to handle overall brightness?
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by Graeme Nattress on Nov 7, 2005 at 11:57:32 pm
In an LCD, black level and white level are tied by the backlight and the LCD itself. As you make the screen brighter (white level) you're also going to allow through more black level too.
Graeme
- www.nattress.com - Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
Re: HD Monitoring Again! by David Battistella on Nov 8, 2005 at 3:20:21 am
This sharp monitor is the largest true 1920x1080 monitor on the market, but it doesn't do 23.98 frame rates. you need a 1500$ miranda converter to do the pulldown on the fly, but it looks unbelievable.
