Best cheap NTSC non-pro monitor for image corrections?

[Mike Rehmus]

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

[Brian Huey]

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

Cheers,
Brian

[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.

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

[Bryan Roberts]

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!

[Mike Rehmus]

<<<-- 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.

[Dave Largent]

Here you go, Roman.

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

[Roman Shafro]

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...

[Bryan Roberts]

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?

[Steve McDonald]

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

[Glenn Chan]

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...odel=CT-2088YB

[Dave Largent]

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.

[Steve McDonald]

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

[Dave Largent]

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?