Monitor matching TV?

[Stephen Eastwood]

Not sure where this belongs but here it goes.

I have several computers for video editing, most dual quad core setups with dual video cards running two lcd monitors and one 42 1080p lcd tv. When you calibrate the monitors they look great ( and accurate as to print icc profile standards), when you view video on it it looks (in comparison to the 42inch tv and all others I try it on) flat, colorless, contrastless and overall dull, then it goes on the tv and looks amazing! bright, vivid, warm, contrasty, it has a glow (this particular footage is a beach swimsuit scene so its golden sunset hour and a tan glowing model) Really perfect, to simulate that I made a set of adjustments to make the video look the same on a computer monitor, is that what I would need to do? is that the only way? Why? I cannot believe that everyone on a tv will see a great result but everyone viewing on a monitor (same file from dvd, cd web or other) will see flat dull blah video. And to make matters worse if I view the video with effects for the computer screen on a tv it is way blown out, over contrasty, too warm and glowy.

Is'nt there a way to make the video match what a tv screen should be seeing by default? or is this just the way it is? and should I calibrate one of the computer screens to match a tv since I do a lot of the editing looking at the monitor in front of me rather than looking up at the tv, and edit for color on that, or not bother and just adjust for color on the tv and redo an effects package for the computer? Should I put a disclaimer on it saying it looks better and is intended to be viewed on either one or the other so I can make two and not worry that one will look flat and blah or worse yet it will look over blown and way too contrasty?

[Chris Soucy]

OK, look, a computer monitor (bog standard, same as every other Joe Public buys) has to be really good at just a couple of things - reading the mail (basically black & white), surfing the net (B&W), doing the household accounts (er, B&W) etc etc etc.

They are not designed to be calibrated (in most instances) to do full colour calibrated digital video/ photography service, NOR to look like common or garden telly's.

There is the problem in a nut shell. Accept that (unless you have a budget like NASA) and you can't go far wrong.

Use your JP (Joe Public) monitor screen to do all the donkey work, fire it out to a "real" telly to see what it's going to look like on a "real world" telly.

Like it or not, the rest of the world is watching telly on bog standard, over coloured, over everything telly's. If that's where your O/P is going, you need to edit it for same. You could use a "real" telly to do all the work, but if you're doing still stuff, even that won't work.

If you're editing for PC, well, you have to use a computer monitor as that's what people use on PC's.

Bit of "a rock and hard place" I know, but that's just the way it is.


CS

[Glenn Chan]

The easiest route is to get a broadcast monitor if you are outputting for televisions. For SD work, a new (or lightly used) broadcast CRT would be a good choice. (Though the quality of the monitor tends to correlate with price.)

Going with a broadcast monitor solves a bunch of issues:
a- The colors will look right.
b- Consumer TVs will do wacky things to the image. Consumer LCDs and CRTs have their issues. With CRTs, the white point is too blue and they mess with reds to make them look "correct".
c- Computer monitors won't show certain things like interlace flicker well. Their image may also be distorted if you have video overlay settings going on. As well, the NLE may not display an accurate image in the video preview.


2- What you see in the Video Preview in Vegas may not be accurate. This happens if it is displaying images from a codec that decodes to studio RGB (e.g. Vegas DV).

[Stephen Eastwood]

Originally Posted by Chris Soucy

OK, look, a computer monitor (bog standard, same as every other Joe Public buys) has to be really good at just a couple of things - reading the mail (basically black & white), surfing the net (B&W), doing the household accounts (er, B&W) etc etc etc.

They are not designed to be calibrated (in most instances) to do full colour calibrated digital video/ photography service, NOR to look like common or garden telly's.

There is the problem in a nut shell. Accept that (unless you have a budget like NASA) and you can't go far wrong.

Use your JP (Joe Public) monitor screen to do all the donkey work, fire it out to a "real" telly to see what it's going to look like on a "real world" telly.

Like it or not, the rest of the world is watching telly on bog standard, over coloured, over everything telly's. If that's where your O/P is going, you need to edit it for same. You could use a "real" telly to do all the work, but if you're doing still stuff, even that won't work.

If you're editing for PC, well, you have to use a computer monitor as that's what people use on PC's.

Bit of "a rock and hard place" I know, but that's just the way it is.


CS

I think you missed my problem, I am a still photographer, I have over 15 eizo coloredge cg221 and cg241w monitors, in both adobe and srgb for prepress workin my house alone, ad to that now I supplied all dual quad core systems for video editing and included the 1080 tvs and one Sony lmd2450 which is suppose to be pretty good for video.

The problem is getting the video to look the same on both a standard color calibrated and or straight out of the box computer monitor and also a tv, hd or not, most of which are not going to be calibrated as no one but videoholics calibrate their TVs at home, they generally use it as is. So looking good on the basic over contrasty tv is important and the main setup for a dvd, but I know I watch many dvd's any movie really on a computer screen, I almost never watch them on a tv simply because the only time I watch any movies is when I am in a train or plane on my laptop, so for people who do that the beautiful image I put on the dvd will be lost, however if I make it look great on the computer its way overbaked for a TV screen.

Stephen Eastwood
http://www.StephenEastwood.com

[Stephen Eastwood]

Thanks Glenn, I have your dvd's on vegas they are really very helpful in getting started with Vegas, most of the people I hired are using final cut and avid for editing and I definitely prefer the vegas workflow for my own way of thinking. Shame most of the commercials I am doing get done on final cut or avid, I just cannot get my mind around either of those, and I am not much of a fan of premiere although the layout is very familiar since I live in photoshop for years already.

Thanks.

[Glenn Chan]

Something to watch out for is that some consumer DVD software (e.g. powerDVD) have image "enhancement" settings... you can turn that off.

2- Color in consumer sets is pretty bad... they all tend to look different from one another.

There's only so much control you have over your colors.

On the other hand, you don't want to deal with a really wacky monitor (which is what a lot of consumer TVs do).

[Sean Seah]

Sorry to highjack this thread but Glenn, what do u recommend for HDV for Vegas?

[Glenn Chan]

1- Sean, it's better if you just start your own thread.

2- To answer your question...

2a- If you're on a budget, getting a 1920x1200 LCD is ok. Use that in Vegas as a "Windows secondary display". You need to make sure what the right "studio RGB" setting is (under the external preview preferences, under color management).
The major downside is that the LCD's color may be a little wacky, since they inherently have a s-shaped transfer function (like doing a s-shaped curve in Vegas).
But if you're on a budget this is the most reasonable IMO, and you can use the computer monitor for other things too.

2b- Above that, I'd consider a HD broadcast monitor like the ones from eCinemasys, JVC. (They are in the ballpark of 4, 5 grand?)

Don't bother with anything that doesn't have at least 1920x1080/1920x1200 pixels.

You'll need an Aja or Blackmagic card to send a signal to those monitors.

Big disclaimer: I haven't closely looked at the JVC and eCinemasys myself!! Try to get a demo yourself... especially if you can sit them side-by-side with a CRT broadcast monitor.

[Stephen Eastwood]

OK so what do most people do? edit for color on a hdtv color contrast setting or in this cast on a broadcast hd monitor and hdtv and then apply an effects package (in vegas) to the entire video afterwards to the computer version to try to simulate what the tv is showing on a typical computer monitor?

And in vegas, is it better to color correct in the preview window or the third screen which I have playing as a secondary device? (currently I have one screen with the timeline, one with the preview opened to where it wants to be ,usually by double clicking the top of the window it resizes from full to a set size, and than I have a preview going to an HD TV on most systems, and on one it goes to the sony luma.)

[Mike Rehmus]

You still really cannot match the performance of a video monitor with a computer display. CRTs used for video monitors still win the quality contest for dynamic range and other metrics.

I use 3 monitors, 2 computer and a broadcast quality video monitor in my video editing suite. The video monitor is where all picture adjustment decisions should be made if you want the best possible video for all uses.

This doesn't and cannot account for the viewers who use CRT, LCD, DLP, plasma and other viewing technologies. You can only make it 'right' using calibrated equipment. I've never been able to make color bars look right on a computer monitor.

Still, I've always had a heartburn when I've struggled to make certain an ad or other video bit submitted to the local broadcast or cable company is shown on the average uncalibrated, old, dirty and generally disreputable home television set. Same goes for the sound side of the equation too.