CRT/LCD Monitor for editing and color corretion?

As I understand it, Sony is no longer making the PVM series monitor mentioned here so what we are seeing is only left-over stock. I had totally spaced on the JVC and now I remember that Mike Curtis had some good things to say about it. For the bucks, the Panasonic LH1700 at a street price of around $2700 with SDI (and another $300 for embedded audio) is the best bargain in the LCD world. The Sony, by the way, is only HD component and SDI bumps up the price.

Ned Soltz
 
Quad Core, Quad FX 4500, 30" Apple Cinema Display. Nothing more to say, everyone can sit down now.
 
JVC discontinued both 19" and 17" models in Japan. I recently got one of the last supplies of 17" - just love it. I compared it with Panasonic BT-LH1700W side by side, and for me CRT was clearly the winner. CRTs make you want to edit, tweak the colour, view nicely shot footage on it but not on LCDs.
 
I don't want to be rude (ok maby a bit) and change the subject but to come back to "Matrox MXO", does anybody know if its only for mac or if its works with pc as welll.
 
Sony 14" - Panasonic 17" - JVC 17" I see this are the most popular ones.

Any one with any of the three above please post your personal feedbacks! I need to get the best one, and a card if needed for the out put of HD 720p 24p Video "You can also recommend the card "Aja, Black, etc. you think is best for the out put, I own a dual 2.3 G5 - 8GB of Ram - Ati 850XT.
I have a few more days to make my decision. Thank you all for your comments this is a very important purchase.

Thank you!
 
Last edited:
I'm new here and noticed this discussion about monitors. I've also been researching this for the past couple of weeks, and have come to a couple of conclusions.

First off, I come from a print background, having done critical color prepress work, Photoshop composites, and color management for years -- ever since desktop color was first introduced. Video color correction and grading is a whole new ballgame but shares a lot of fundamentals with print.

So when I started looking at replacing an aging CRT I immedately ran into the problem everyone here faces: CRT's are being phased out fast.

According to Mike Curtis and Graeme Nattress, CRT's provide the best reference, bar none. It's arguable that LCD's are becoming more prevalent in the marketplace, and it certainly makes sense to color correct on the same technology of the majority of displays. But in a year or so SED's are expected to arrive on the market. And then we're back to "square one" when it comes to doing color correction on CRT's.

While Mike Curtis said the JVC LCD is a great bang for the buck, he was adamant that ultimately CRT's are the only reliable reference for truly critical color.

A solution suggested during some of the post production sessions at this past NAB was to use an LCD for see all the details of the video image, but to use CRT's for color correction. That requires a hefty budget and a good amount of desk space. Both of which are limited for me.

Still, I just put in an order for a 14" Sony PVM CRT display to replace my aging CRT. Graeme Nattress said CRT's are also better at displaying interlaced and SD video, rather than using an LCD intended for HD work. Later I will eventually get a Blackmagic Designs HDLink to drive a high-resolution LCD. If you're going to do 1080i or 1080p work then you'll need a monitor that has a resolution of 1920x1200 to show all the pixels at a 1-to-1 relationship for maximum accuracy of detail.

The monitor I found interesting to possibly use with the HDLink is a Samsung 24" SyncMaster 244T. According to Samsung's specifications, it has a 1000:1 contrast ratio (higher than most), and a 6 ms grey-to-grey response time.

The HDLink is supposed to allow calibration of the monitor -- although I have little idea how that is supposed to be accomplished without a hardware calibrator -- and hopefully this calibration would provide performance that's as close as practical to a CRT.

For print work I use a Monaco Optix monitor calibrator. It would be great if this could be used to do a computer-driven hardware calibration of a monitor driven by an HDLink or similar.
 
DCSensui said:
A solution suggested during some of the post production sessions at this past NAB was to use an LCD for see all the details of the video image, but to use CRT's for color correction. That requires a hefty budget and a good amount of desk space. Both of which are limited for me.
Click to expand...

Actually I think this is a lower cost solution for seeing both accurate color and all the pixels. Compare the cost of the little PVM monitor plus LCD with a Sony BVM monitor with HD resolution. Can't argue about the desk space though.

--Jeremy
 
The most depressing thing about all of this, to me, is how few people have their TVs properly adjusted. Something that looks great on my well-calibrated NTSC often looks flat and washed-out on the average person's television. I had that experience yesterday showing some stuff at my in-laws.

In the end, whatever you cc on is almost irrelevant, if the end product is being shown on a poorly-adjusted TV. This makes me wonder how crucial the choice of a monitor is. I do want my stuff to look good, and I can definitely understand it for film-out, but how many of us are doing work that is so critical? Educate me, please.
 
My experience with the Panasonic 1700 and the Kona LH

My experience with the Panasonic 1700 and the Kona LH

I'm editing and color correcting on a Panasonic BT-LH1700W. I get out of final cut using a KOna LH. I feel quite good about the setup. My experience is that the LCD colors are a bit on the green side. To set it up initially, I put it next to an older Panasonic SD CRT. I calibrated the CRT then got the LCD close to that. I've found that the LCD calibrated properly with the blue gun seems to be a little off. So I've compensated by turning the chroma up a bit.

I do have a cheap tv with the KONA composite signal running to it. It's kinda whack, but gives me the sexy CRT feeling. Usually though when I trust the LCD, it doesn't do me wrong. (clients also love the monitor when we are doing a shoot. We have a road case and it looks very professional. It's also easy to turn upside down when we are shooting with our redrock lens adapter.)

David
 
darwinandpaine said:
In the end, whatever you cc on is almost irrelevant, if the end product is being shown on a poorly-adjusted TV.
Click to expand...


I would guess that back when everyone was watching on CRTs, about half the TVs were on one side of proper calibration (say for brightness) and half would be on the other, so maybe the theory was that a standard monitor represented the average viewing experience across the population?

I was expressing a related thought back in post #18 of this thread. More people are watching on LCDs these days (with a lower contrast ratio than CRTs), so I increasingly we'll see more of the image on our monitors than end viewers will see. (e.g. We'll see details in the shadows while people watching at home will just see black.) Another aspect of the same issue is that you can get footage that really pops on a nice monitor and then it looks unexciting on a computer screen, where, I'm to understand, we'll soon be doing much of our viewing.

Oh well, what can you do? I guess just check the color grading on a variety of screens.

--Jeremy
 
CRT Are good when customer are watching on CRT. Now customers are watching on Plasma and LCDs so LCDS must be good.
I saw the 26'' Panasonic LCD it was uprasing the SD footage internally that looked like HD. I cant wait to buy the 26" because according to Panny it is the master monitor for coloring. Yes CRT were good but they need calibration every month with LCD you are set once then until the light behind goes bad you are set.
WIth new market forget CRT we have to moveon with LCD and Panny has a winner with 17" and now even better with 26".
 
BTW, I'm actually at a point now were I'm feeling really comfortable looking at my scopes for color correcting. Obviously, you need a good monitor too, but I think this is an extremely valuable skill to learn (not that I'm the master colorist -- just learning).
 
darwinandpaine said:
In the end, whatever you cc on is almost irrelevant, if the end product is being shown on a poorly-adjusted TV. This makes me wonder how crucial the choice of a monitor is. I do want my stuff to look good, and I can definitely understand it for film-out, but how many of us are doing work that is so critical? Educate me, please.
Click to expand...

I think what you are saying is a very valid point. And even for a film out, with different length of throw, different sized screens, different strength of projection light etc etc...it is even hard to find a "standard look" for film projection. And like snarton(Jeremy) said, with all the different types of viewing screens and viewing formats, trying to find a one size fits all standard is becoming almost an impossibility.

Having said that, I feel that having a high rez LCD computer monitor and a well - and constantly calibrated CRT monitor, is still the way to go at the moment.

How long that moment lasts is anyone's guess.
 
I have been trying to decide between the JVC DT-V1910CG and BT-LH1700W. I was just wondering if there is a down side buying a CRT when most of the monitors comming out are LCD. I am leaning towards the 19' JVC because of its reported quality for critical colour correction however I have been using LCD's up to now an have never calibrated a CRT just wondering if its difficult. ?
 
These are just my musings so please feel free to disagree :
I have been doing a bit of research and am now seriously looking at the JVC 17' DTV1710 CG as a monitor for cc and field use. I know it has a weight issue but I guess if your using a 17' or larger monitor your not going to be doing run and gun anyway. I have seen a 4 pin XLR to regular household cable at B@H which means you can use any XLR battery pack with the unit.
Here in Ireland I would be paying the same for the BT-LH 1700W and still could not be sure of getting a proper reference colour image when editing. I've managed to locate the JVC with component,composite and SDI for the same price.
I was also thinking; maybe it won't matter if you edit on CRT's and most people view it on LCD.
Won't this just mean that you are getting a more accurate image; and when LCD's /SED eventually catch up and can repoduce more colours with greater accuracy they will more than likley follow the highest CRT standards for referencing. Just wondering what you guys think !!!!



 
Last edited:
I think this whole discussion is analogous to choosing appropriate speaker monitors for mixing audio. You want the flattest most accurate monitors you can get. It doesn't matter if everybody is listening to your songs on crappy ipod headphones - if you want your mixes to translate well, you make the best mix you can. After that, you check on a shitty speaker setup to see if there is anything you overlooked.

Nothing you do can save the guy whose subs are turned up 5x too loud, or the guy whose got crazy bad eq on his stereo (if it's even a stereo). A balanced mix will serve them and those listening to you music off their cell phone speaker the best.

As far as color correcting goes, it sounds like CRT is the most accurate. So color correct on a CRT - make it the best you can. Then check it on your computer LCD/monitor, your crappy CRT in the basement, and whatever other displays you have access too. With the multitude of displays out there, you can't make it look good everywhere - make it look good for the reference which should be a happy middle ground and you should have a viewable product on a display that has been set up incorrectly in either extreme.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top