Hey all: well after having a film of mine displayed on a projector at a local film gathering, I realized that I desperately am in need of an NTSC monitor for color correcting content that is either DVD bound or exhibition bound. Previously, I had discounted this need as I was under the impression that a TV and a computer monitor would look somewhat similar, this is really not the case. Today I color corrected my film on our primary watching TV (27 inch) but the problem is I can't leave this bad boy hooked up in my room so I need to get a dedicated correcting one. I'm running the extra monitor off my ATI Radeon 9600 TX vid card from the provided S-video output (which I have an adapter converting it to a single RCA plug).

Does anyone have any suggestions for a standalone TV for a correction monitor? I'm going for as cheap as I can - maybe $100 - $200 as my content is not demanding of a pro monitor. Any help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated....

maybe a commodore Monitors off eBay, they have S-video input once you get the right adapter. The adapter might actually cost you more than the monitor off eBay. (try cablewholesale, you need S-vid to double RCA male)

Another option is a cheap TV with S-Video input.

Buying old TVs might be bad since the tubes fade out with age.

You want a blue color gel to calibrate your monitor, a lot of color correction books will have one (see the books forum) or you could just buy one.

2- I would be wary about the S-video output on your video card. I'd past through your camcorder instead.

3- I'd be wary of what the external monitor shows. You could try calibrating a CRT computer monitor actually (ATI has overlay and monitor controls).

Is S-Video a huge plus if I'm getting a cheapo consumer TV around 19 inches? The cheapest available TV's I could find that have S-video were from Circuit City and are the following:

Apex 20inch Flat Screen with S-Video $129
http://www.circuitcity.com/detail.jsp?c=1&b=g&qp=0&bookmark=bookmark_20&oid=76405&catoid=-11482

Apex 24inch Non-flat screen with S-Video $139
http://www.circuitcity.com/detail.jsp?c=1&b=g&qp=0&bookmark=bookmark_40&oid=74907&catoid=-11482

Magnavox 20inch Flat Screen with S-Video $159
http://www.circuitcity.com/detail.jsp?c=1&b=g&qp=0&bookmark=bookmark_20&oid=88375&catoid=-11482

Are any of these TV's worth purchasing for a worthy cheapo consumer alternative to pro monitors etc. where I don't need EXACT color correction but a close ballpark?? Or, should I just get the cheapest 13inch TV available? Any help would be MUCH appreciated.

Byran, I think any of those TVs will give you about the same picture quality, but given those choices, I'd go w/the Magnavox over the Apex. I was in your same situation a few months ago, and I went with a 13" Toshiba, also with an S-Video input. My fear on a 20 or 24 inch set is that it might be too big. Mine is about 240-30 inches from my eyes, and is about right. If it were bigger, I'd have to scoot back. I looked at a professional NTSC monitor, but as I recall, a used 9" that came calibrated was in the $800-$900 range, and I just couldn't justify it for what I was doing.

This is a great example of you get what you pay for. In my opinion, what I have is better than nothing, but a far cry from an NTSC monitor.

James - thanks, I just found that TV, it's a 14inch flat screen at best buy for like $160. A great deal indeed. Thanks for the help!

Watch out for the shielding on some inexpensive TVs.

I found a free TV with S-Video, but when I put it next to my computer monitor it made the image shiver/shudder horribly. I tried moving it further away, but didn't have enough desk/room. Rats.

That 14" TV was recommended by a moderator on
another forum as being good for the purpose
being discussed here. This moderator's studio
does mostly corporate work. He said they got it
for their studio to show clients the progress on the projects.
He mentioned that it had quite a good picture.
Based on this I went and had a look myself. Basically, it seemed
to just be a TV, same as any other. Resolution didn't seem very high, which put me off to it. But it may fit your
needs. Just have a look before you buy.

I posted this in another forum, but got no answer. Anyone care to comment?

As a cheap NTSC monitor alternative for video editing, would anyone consider a 17" Video monitor driven by a 'video to VGA' adapter? It looks like an XVGA model (1024X728 at 75Hz) can be had for $60 to $100 on Ebay, and everyone has at least one spare 17" VGA monitor lying around. The picture should be much sharper than that of a regular TV. BTW, it comes out deinterlaced, would that be a feature or a problem? The monitor is shielded, unlike a cheap TV. I think I'd also be able to simulate the blue gun switch in software. Lastly, this would resolve the TV overscan problem.

Does anyone have any experience with those adapters?

I had one of those VGA adapters (name escapes me
but I could look it up if it's important) but the image
quality was not very good. I got it for just the purpose
you are describing.

A few comments.

Television sets are designed to make bad video look good. Pro and Industrial monitors are designed to make video look like it IS. So a TV set isn't going to be of much help.

Furthermore, the video out of a display adapter is not the same video as you get out of a NLE either as a direct analog output or as transcoded from digital to analog by a camera or standalone converter.

JVC and Pannasonic both make industrial monitors in 13" size that will give you a 'real' video picture. They sell for a few hundred dollars. An example is the JVC model TM-A13SU. About $200 or so. This isn't a $1500 broadcast monitor but they are used for a lot of editing work.

A LCD projector is going to look different than video on a CRT. You have to make adjustments to make it look as good as possible. Very hard to make it look as good as a CRT display. Better to tweak the video for the LCD projector on a LCD display if you cannot use the projector itself.

I picked up the Toshiba today, and I really like it. It gave my film a very close awful picture that was displayed on a projector a few nights ago. I was able to correct the short and now it displays very well on a projector not to mention I can use the TV as a TV to watch shows and movies on without missing color correction stuff etc. It was $159 at best buy so I'm happy with this ok alternative......

<<<-- Originally posted by Dave Largent : I had one of those VGA adapters (name escapes me
but I could look it up if it's important) but the image
quality was not very good. I got it for just the purpose
you are describing. -->>>

Dave, if you could look it up, I'd really appreciate it. I'm thinking about the newer adapters, with 1024X768 resolution at 75HZ. I'm thinking about Viewsonic's Nextvision 4 or Grandtec's Grand Video Console.

<<<-- Furthermore, the video out of a display adapter is not the same video as you get out of a NLE either as a direct analog output or as transcoded from digital to analog by a camera or standalone converter. -->>>

Mike, could you please elaborate on this one? I was thinking about this connection:

NLE (Vegas) -> camcorder (through firewire) -> video to vga adapter (through s-video) -> XVGA monitor.

I was hoping to get the camera-transcoded analog video (interlaced) converted to VGA (progressive). I thought I'd get better resolution, no overscan, and the ability to fake a blue gun switch in Vegas. Am I missing something? I'd really hate to spend $100 on a useless adapter. TIA.

Roman, I'll see what I can find.
I got mine about a year ago and the price
was ~ $100. The image it gave was totally useless
for color correction.

Roman, I've never tried it as my NLE has an S-Video out that I plug right into my NTSC Broadcast Monitor. But those who have reported on this practice have said that the color-space used by the adapters is that for regular computer displays, not that used by NTSC video.

Many of the Radeon Pro adapters have a second output that can drive an S-Video monitor. I think the new Matrox cards can too but those did have a problem (drivers) with some NLEs so you want to check before leaping there. The old Matrox 450 display card with a double head would also output S-VIDEO IIRC. I have one and I use the double-head on my business computer but not for video monitoring.

Hey Mike,
I use Matrox G400. Don't know if you are aware, but
there is a Matrox users board. Used to follow it,
but not anymore.

Good cards but no acceleration for After Effects so I put a Radeon 9600 Pro in my editing computer. Major improvement in AE.

Just looked at BHPhotoVideo.com and they have 3 demo units of the JVC Model TM-A13CV monitor (looks real similar to thel TM-A13SU Mike mentioned but they don't have a speaker). They're going for $169 + Shipping, regularly $210. Link (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=162477&is=REG)

Cheers,
Brian

Mike,
I have After Effects but have never used it. What would
you say that it has to offer that you can't do
with an NLE? What areas of AE does a faster card help?
I use Vegas and my understanding is that graphics
card speed has no effect on operation of an NLE
because that is all done by CPU.

I am curious about running my footage through a tv monitor like discussed above.
I would rather not buy a new video card to support dual monitors or S-Video out so I was happy to hear someone suggest running it through my camcorder...

I have 2 questions about this:

1. What specifically do i do to accomplish this?
2. Would this put any extra wear on my already sensitive gl2's heads - would i get the same image quality if i did it w/ my one chip instead?

thanks guys

Jerry - firewire is firewire - what is being sent is simply a signal - nothing is being done with your heads, it's only using the electronics so in that department, don't worry about wear and tear on heads. As for quality: it will be the same whether you use a $500 camera or a $3500 one, it's simply a signal being sent, it's why you can in theory rip part of a DVD onto a DV tape then play it back on a cheap camcorder and have it be a level of quality that your camcorder couldn't reach - it's simply a signal and it's stored on DV tapes that are capable of storing a finished film in terms of quality. Your connection may yield different levels of quality in terms of if your camcorder has S-video or component outputs but I assume you'll be using the RCA which is fine for the route your taking.....

thanks bryan that was a very helpful response!

<<<-- Originally posted by Dave Largent : Mike,
I have After Effects but have never used it. What would
you say that it has to offer that you can't do
with an NLE? What areas of AE does a faster card help?
I use Vegas and my understanding is that graphics
card speed has no effect on operation of an NLE
because that is all done by CPU. -->>>

After Effects is a very comprehensive Compositing program that allows you to control the way video is presented and how it interracts with other still and moving elements, both imported and internally generated, within the program material. It is quite different from most NLEs in how you manipulate the elements and what you can do to them. A lot of what you see on television and Hollywood movies are finished in a compositing program.

For example, in a typical Lord of the Rings scene, there may be images of actors, 3D scenes, 3D characters, and other elements that all have to be combined (composited) to create the final scene. That is difficult-to-impossible to accomplish that in a NLE.

The further up the food chain you get, the more indistiguishable the NLE and Compositing systems become. FCP, Premiere, and others all have some compositing capabilities. And I could edit a movie in After Effects but that would be slower than in Edius.

Since a compositing program manipulates the visual image in a wider manner than a NLE and a lot of it is done in vector, not raster form, the accelerating capabilities of a display card, just like for games with their vector images, really effects the way AE responds.

Here you go, Roman.

http://www.avtoolbox.com/avt3340.shtml

Thanks, Dave! I'll remember to avoid this one :)

Another question: does anyone experience problems with RF interference when the TV is located too close to the PC monitor? I seem to geat a lot of it (faint lines slowly moving upwards on the TV screen). Any ideas how to fix this? Moving the TV away from the monitor is not an option...

Roman - I second that. Ironically I was just thinking how annoying my little scanning lines were on the screen when I scrolled down to your post. Anyone help here?

As Bryan reported, the Toshiba medium-size monitors give knockout quality for the price. I'm using a new 24AF44 and it has such a rich and sharp image, I can view it from 5 ft. away, just in back of my editing desk and it loses no clarity. I paid $290. for it and got a 3-year GE warranty for only $35.

Everyone I know who has Toshiba TVs has had excellent luck with them. One friend has used his Toshiba 32-inch IDTV set (does a progressive display from an interlaced input) for 15 years, with no problems. Others have had several for 10 years or more with glitch-free dependability. The 32-inch standard set of another friend finally went kaput after 14 years of about 6 hours daily use.

Toshiba also makes a 14AF44 for about $150. and a 20AF44 for about $220, that seem to deliver the same quality as my 24AF44. I imagine for most editing monitor use, the 20-inch model would be preferred. They all have component inputs for DVD viewing.

I also bought a Toshiba 32-inch set for general program viewing, but the 24-incher looked so much better, even when viewed close-up, that I returned the larger one. I may pick up a 14AF44 Toshiba to use as a 2nd editing monitor, if I get tired of the little 4-inch screen on my GV-D1000, that I now use for watching the player picture and timecode.

So, there's my answer to your request for an inexpensive, but high-quality monitor.
It's good enough for me and I'm very fussy about such things. Make sure you get one that has an "AF" in its model number. Those with just an "A" are from an older generation and don't have the improved fine-pitch picture tubes and other advanced image-control systems.

Steve McDonald

Steve- have you tried putting that Toshiba against another good monitor (i.e. another Toshiba or a NTSC monitor) and tried to get the colors to match?

Some engineers joke that NTSC stands for 'never the same color' (or never twice the same color). I doubt a $200 TV will be able to give accurate colors. If it can then that'll be very interesting.

2- Some people recommend using an industrial quality monitor when you don't quite have the budget for a NTSC monitor. Example: http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelDetail?displayTab=O&storeId=11201&catalogId=13051&itemId=68391&catGroupId=14626&modelNo=CT-2088YB&surfModel=CT-2088YB

About a year back I looked at the 14" Toshiba
and didn't see much about it that stood out from
any TV. Perhaps it was the "A" model. When did the
"AF" models come out.

I had the opportunity to check my new Toshiba 24AF44 against several other good sets. One was my 35-inch Mitsubishi CRT, which was next to it in my home. The Mitsubishi has always given me what I consider the best and most accurate color and has a wide range of adjustability. I also had a new Toshiba 32AFX54. After tweaking them all to color-match as closely as possible, the 24AF44 beat them all, and in every aspect of picture quality.

Also, in the dealer's showroom, I compared it to several other NTSC sets that were being fed the same sources, such as DVD playback, and broadcast channels, off antennas. The transmitters were on a hill about 5 miles from the store. Of course, I could see the colors from tape playback on the VX2100's two viewscreens and on the 4-inch screen of my GV-D1000, a DV mini-VTR. Whatever anyone thinks of the color accuracy of those small, LCD screens, they did offer another point of comparison.

Rather than altering the picture for the best display to please a consumer, I regard the 24AF44 as being a set that reduces variations and inaccuracies from the original picture source. In most cases, my comparisons at home were from my VX2100's recordings, but also included DVD playback over component inputs to the 24 and 32-inch Toshibas. As I said in my previous meaasage, the new 32-inch Toshiba didn't meet my expectations and unfavorably compared to the 24-inch set, so I returned it to the dealer.

The new "AF" models were just recently introduced by Toshiba. My 24AF44 is labeled as being manufactured in March, 2004. The 32AFX54 that I returned was marked as manufactured in May, 2004. The 32-inch "AFX" set is actually in Toshiba's "Cinema-series", which is promoted as being of a higher quality and is more expensive than the group that includes my 24-inch model.

The MSRP of the 24AF44 is $350. and that of the 32AFX54 is $700.

Note that the request of the original poster was for a "cheap, consumer NTSC monitor", that would be an acceptable substitute for a more expensive professional monitor, for color-correction purposes. The poster made it clear that the performance needed was only medium level.

After having looked at dozens of different consumer sets and making side-by-side comparisons with half a dozen of them, the 24AF44 was the clear winner in my eyes and that's why I chose it. It's also why I no longer have either a 32 or 35-inch monitor in my house, as this 24-incher, even when placed up close, outdoes them both. The 35-inch Mitsubishi, which I enjoyed and admired previously, is now my workshop TV.

Another point that I'll make, is that just like various models of cameras and monitors, each one of us has different eyes and visual processors in our brains. The same images may strike our eyes, but we each perceive something that is unique. If any of us is fortunate to have two good eyes, in most cases, at least slightly different images are perceived by each of them. One of my eyes produces a brighter and warmer image than the other, but together, they blend nicely. If you've never done a side-by-side comparison of your eyes' separate outputs, you might be surprised by the differences.

A video image that looks flawless to one person, may not be as pleasing to another.

Steve McDonald

How would you compare the 20" AF to the 24" AF?
Any idea of the lines of resolution on these and on the
14" AF?

Mine's the 14AF43 and I've been quite happy with it so far using it for music videos and short films I've done with my upstart production company. It sits only a couple of feet away from my eyes, so I opted for the 14 inch over a larger model. Anyways, this is some great extra info you provided, thanks for updating an old post.

http://www.DefiningFilms.com

Dave, from what I saw, the Toshiba 20AF44 and the 24AF44 are close to identical, except for size. I saw a more extensive set of specs for them on a dealer's website than anywhere else, that stated they had a horizontal resolution potential of 750 lines. The most I've seen on mine would be the 600 lines from a direct feed off my 2-CCD Sony camera. It seemed to deliver the full amount. Oddly, the Toshiba website lists the 20-incher as a 20AF43, but our local dealer stocks a 20AF44.

Bryan, what does the sticker say on the back of your 14AF43, for the manufacturing date? I don't know if there's any difference as far as features or date of manufacture, but the dealer here has a 14AF44 in stock, although I didn't check its birthday. Often, the manufacturers' websites don't list the latest models, even though they may be at dealers for sale. Perhaps they want to wait until the older models are sold out, before they list the new ones??

Steve McDonald