Matrox MXO: WTF is its purpose and why do I need it for HD editing?

Zillax0rz

Member
Seriously, I do not understand why I keep hearing that I should get an MXO if I'm getting into HD editing. Because it shows final output on my Apple Cinema Display as opposed to an expensive HD monitor?

I don't get it; what do I actually physically do with the advice?

Please help me from going back to cutting my skin.

P.S. Blackmagic HDLink is a better alternative, yes, no, irrelevant?
 
You cannot accurately monitor color through your computer display. The color space is different and the computer display is progressive and not interlaced. The Matrox MXO will take the DVI output of your notebook computer or the second DVI from your desktop and provide a signal in YUV color space which also allows viewing of interlaced footage should you be shooting in any interlaced format (e.g. 1080i). It also gives the ability to downrez through SDI, composite or component outputs. Likewise, with those components, you could simultaneously output out SDI to a deck, as one example.

Just viewing your footage on the ACD does not give you accurate color.

You can also calibrate the monitor to some degree with the MXO's proc amp, blue only mode and bars.

HD Link is not really a better alternative. It requires that you have an SDI capture card already in your system. It also does not provide the calibration capabilities that the MXO provides.

MXO is useful for those who are acquiring P2 footage or HDV via firewire footage. It does not have capture capabilities but in these cases it is not needed.

So yes, if you are getting into HD editing you need to be able to monitor just like if you were in SD editing. Your options for HD monitoring are:

Capture card to SDI monitor like the Panasonic LH1700
Capture Card via SDI to Blackmagic or AJA SDI->DVI converter to ACD
Blackmagic Intensity ($249) via HDMI to HDMI HD consumer TV (least expensive option but not as accurate as MXO since you can't calibrate anything)
MXO to Apple Cinema Display (or any other 23-24" comparable display-- I use a Dell 2405).

You might not need the MXO but you need something other than just a computer display. Nothing has changed.

Ned Soltz
 
ive been considering the MXO but dont like the fact that it takes over my second monitor... i hear thats maybe changed in the newest rev?

the other option is the BM intensity, but im told that its not blessed to work on a G5. only intel macs...

i can still monitor parked frames of a dvcprohd timeline out via firewire to my advc110 out to my sony broadcast monitor. like i say, parked frame only but good enough for CC and detail review.
 
Intensity only works on Intel Macs.

MXO only takes over your second monitor when you want it to do so.

For example, you could have FCP stretched over 2 monitors. When you want to preview in accurate color, then just hit Apple-F12 and it will toggle the MXO output on the second display.

I think it is very logical, for example, just to edit using the Canvas window. Then go back to fine tune edits and color correct with the more accurate MXO display.

Your only other options, then, for the G5 are going the capture card route with either the SDI->DVI converter or with a dedicated SDI monitor. I think that Panny LH1700 packs lots of punch for under $3K.

Ned
 
If all I care about is calibrating an apple cinema display or dell LCD is my only option an expensive hardware piece. I've heard the new photoshop has some sort of calibration utility and some talk about "the spider". Color also some some LUT stuff but I guess you need to already have a calibrated monitor to use those.
 
Calibration is only part of the question. It is the issue of color space and interlacing. You cannot monitor video on a computer screen and expect accurate results. The MXO gives you the option of being able to use a computer monitor for that purpose.

The MXO is the second least-expensive option. The Intensity is the least expensive option but the quality is not nearly as good.

Ned
 
Back
Top