The Ilo 26 inch HDTV/monitor for $696.

D

David_M_Payne

Well-known member
The Ilo 26 inch HDTV/LCD monitor for $696.

I picked one up from Walmart for $696-$762.66 with tax and shipping, no coupon needed. (I had to order it from their web site, they can't keep it in stock here in Reno.) I'm looking at it now and it has a great picture and a lot of inputs and outputs. The resolution is 1280 X RGB X 768 (WXGA). (You can find out more by going to their web site and looking it up.) So if you can stand dealing with Walmart it is a very good deal. This is the big brother to the monitors I bought for my DVX's and it is the same price as those 17 inch models. (Though they do have a built in DVD player, which is handy.)

David
 
Screw Walmart.
Why spend 5K on a camera, and then 2 bucks on the monitor to view it? The monitor is JUST as important as the camera in the edit.
 
esperman said:
Screw Walmart.
Why spend 5K on a camera, and then 2 bucks on the monitor to view it? The monitor is JUST as important as the camera in the edit.
Click to expand...

Albeit, the monitor is important, I don't think the monitor is JUST as important. I feel that the cost of the monitor should be relative to what you value that performance to be. To me, that performance value does NOT equal 3-4k. Not by a long shot. For 6-700 dollars you can get decent results with a Walmart monitor. Is this monitor going to be as good as the 3-4k variety. Nope. But, does the 3k-4k monitor offer you an image that is so stunning, so mind blowingly necessary that it justifies a 2-3 THOUSAND dollar hike in the pricetag? No Way.

Before modern times, films have been edited on non 3k monitors for the most of the ENTIRE 20th century. I think that a $3,000.00 dollar monitor is nice but is mostly a luxury that many cannot afford.
 
accuracy

accuracy

It's not the fact that a pricey monitor is "mind blowing." A decent broadcast monitor is ACCURATE. When you are editing or CGing or color correcting, you need accuracy that you simply will not get from a consumer model. And for most of the 20th century, people were cutting film an the big film desks... Not using monitors.

We just got the Panasonic BT-1700W and it was a cost compromise (3k instead of $5) but it looks good and I can rely on it's accuracy. The absolute least you could get away with is a Cinema display or a Dell 2405 witha a decklink, but even then you're pushing it. It's not reliable for color like a CRT or high end LCD is.

Oh... and check out the great new indie film.."Walmart, the high cost of low price." and you'll understand why every american should say "screw Walmart."
 
Yes, I understand the importance of color accuracy. But it's just not necessary to spend 3 thousand dollars for an accurate flat panel monitor. Sure, you are paying for performance but you are also paying for the luxury and slick looks that comes with having a flat panel monitor. To me, it's just not worth it. I can get just as accurate color reproductions with a calibrated NTSC monitor for the FRACTION of the price.

I just think 3k is only justifiable if you have gear lust and the pocketbook to pay for it.
 
I agree rlm...don't spend the 3k. for the monitor. Rent it in production to insure you have good color/proper exposure etc etc. But I wouldn't rely on a NTSC monitor at all, different color space and you won't get a real idea of focus.
 
esperman-

thats probably a real good tip. I am always so focused on looking at the purchasing pricetag of things and always seem to disregard the option to rent. fortunately, i am not pressed at this time for supreme color accuracy. but, when that day comes, renting might be the way to go.

Rick
 
esperman said:
I agree rlm...don't spend the 3k. for the monitor. Rent it in production to insure you have good color/proper exposure etc etc. But I wouldn't rely on a NTSC monitor at all, different color space and you won't get a real idea of focus.
Click to expand...


I don't care for renting. Good monitors rent for between 100 to 300 a day. So if your shoot is a week long you may as well have bought a good monitor. Assuming you will be shooting a lot, if not, you then you're not a real shooter and shouldn't care.
 
Well, some people can afford all the latest lights, jibs and HD monitors...but renting has it's place....and since most houses give us a 3 day week rental...let the client pay for the rental, since every shoot has different requirements and needs.
 
Ok, so... What IS the best way to monitor HD accurately? On a 17" $3000 pro LCD? On a 42" HD Plasma? On A CRT HD monitor that costs $20,000? On a Dell 24" LCD for $900?

Before, I could shoot on a DVX hooked up to a SONY 14" NTSC pro calibrated CRT monitor, and be very confident in WYSIWYG.

How can I do that with HD? With 1080/24p HD?

Please list the options, and the prices next to them. I've been looking for a while, and haven't found a definitive answer.
 
1. Pansonics BT-LH1700W 17" lcd - $3400.00
2. Sony BVMD14H5U 14" CRT - $5925.00
3. Sony LMD152S 14" lcd - $3025.00
4. Panasonic BT-H1700B 14" crt - not sure $$$$

these are all very good monitors. As you can see, shooting in HD in general is expensive.
although HD is better looking than SD, it will show all errors becuase of the higher rez. It doesn't make sense to shoot in a higher format, and then use a cheap computer lcd screen to view what you may or may not have in the footage.
 
Thanks, esperman. I'm assuming that one of the CRTs would provide a better image than an LCD, right? For doing accurate color correction and grading and checking dynamic range, CRTs are generally considered better than LCDs, at least in the SD world. Does the same apply to HD?

The Panasonic 17" LCD listed above is for 720p HD, so 1080p HD would be downconverted. Are there any Pro LCDs capable of showing the full 1080 HD image with completely accurate colors? Would those CRTs listed above show the full 1080 HD detail?

Thanks for all the info.
 
I think the crt's are better for accurate color and sharpness....or at least hey have long been. I have viewed full 1920 X1080...but only on very expensive CRT's. I'll do some research..but any one of these would be good to use.
 
rlm7189 said:
Albeit, the monitor is important, I don't think the monitor is JUST as important. I feel that the cost of the monitor should be relative to what you value that performance to be. To me, that performance value does NOT equal 3-4k. Not by a long shot. For 6-700 dollars you can get decent results with a Walmart monitor. Is this monitor going to be as good as the 3-4k variety. Nope. But, does the 3k-4k monitor offer you an image that is so stunning, so mind blowingly necessary that it justifies a 2-3 THOUSAND dollar hike in the pricetag? No Way.

Before modern times, films have been edited on non 3k monitors for the most of the ENTIRE 20th century. I think that a $3,000.00 dollar monitor is nice but is mostly a luxury that many cannot afford.
Click to expand...

I'm not as knowledgeable as most of you guys here are, but I've learned a little over the years about shooting a film as opposed to doing weddings, documentaries etc. If I remember correctly Barry said on another thread that HD is a different animal than SD and it isn't as susceptible to the problems that one can run into as far as color correction etc in SD analog. I used the 17" HD little brothers to this monitor to shoot with using the 16X9 lens adaptor on my DVX's and got very good results. Focus was fast, easy and very sharp compared to using the eyecup or the LCD flip out screen on the camera, a big plus for shooting an indie flick. In fact I'll use these 17 inch HD monitors for the HVX also as I have them and they worked very well in the past. I wish I had as much money as I could use to film my movie, but I don't, so I have to cut corners where I can and a HD monitor is still an HD monitor, even if it doesn’t have all the pixels and bells and whistles of the high priced spread. So if my choice is one HVX and a really great monitor for the same price, or two HVX's and an OK monitor that will do the job, I'm getting the two cameras and the OK monitor. Shooting a movie scene with two or more characters using two cameras is more efficient and a lot easier than trying to use one and having to move it back and forth when shooting.

David
 
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...238&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

The Sony PVM-14L5 seems like a nice fellow to have in the editing bay. A professional calibrated CRT dusplay with 800 lines of resolution cabable of displaying HD signals.

Goes for 1500. It's not portable, but that seems like a reasonable workflow:

Let's say we all learn how to check focus on the HVX and that focus magnifier does work as good as people are saying. Let's assume we can calibrate our LCDs to a useable extent, like we do with the DVX. Say, we shoot in location, without a field monitor (maybe with a cheap LCD or cheaper NTSC CRT - Focus or Color, whatever seems more important), and do all our final adjustments in the editing bay, on a calibrated HD monitor. Looks like a winner to me!
 
taubkin said:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...238&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

The Sony PVM-14L5 seems like a nice fellow to have in the editing bay. A professional calibrated CRT dusplay with 800 lines of resolution cabable of displaying HD signals.

Goes for 1500. It's not portable, but that seems like a reasonable workflow:

Let's say we all learn how to check focus on the HVX and that focus magnifier does work as good as people are saying. Let's assume we can calibrate our LCDs to a useable extent, like we do with the DVX. Say, we shoot in location, without a field monitor (maybe with a cheap LCD or cheaper NTSC CRT - Focus or Color, whatever seems more important), and do all our final adjustments in the editing bay, on a calibrated HD monitor. Looks like a winner to me!
Click to expand...

A reasoned reply.

David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top