|
|
Posted by David McCall on 10/05/27 11:37
<mrwizzer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1137431625.397373.136440@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Up to now I've been using a portable TV for referencing my video apart
> from my computer monitor. I figure it's long past due I got a
> respectable broadcast reference monitor.
>
> Can anyone give an affordable suggestion for such?
>
> Thanks,
>
I guess it depends on your definition of affordable.
There are 2 features that you expect on a monitor used for
judging video.
One is an under-scan function that allows you to see all of
the way to the edge of the frame (most monitors and TVs
overscan, which hides the edges). The other is called
blue check and is used to help you calibrate your monitor
to the color bars so you know what you are looking at.
Most NLEs let you see the edges, so that is less of an issue
when editing than it once was. Blue check can be accomplished
by looking through a blue filter, although it is not the best way.
There may be inexpensive monitors or TVs that are useable,
but I don't have any information on that. People used to claim
that the monitor used with the Amigas was good for this. I'm
not sure I agree.
I personally like, and trust, Ikegami monitors. They don't hold up
in bright light though, so they aren't great in the field.
Sony makes nice monitors, but be careful. Most Sony monitors
are designed to "look good". You can miss important errors if
the monitor covers them up. Sony does make production monitors,
but they are more expensive.
JVC makes usable production monitors. They used to look a little
green to my eye, but that may have changed.
Panasonic makes monitors too, but I've never trusted them much.
Another consideration is tubes VS LCDs. If you want to know what
your picture really looks like, you need to use a tube. LCDs look too
different when view from various angles, so they can not be trusted.
There are professional LCDs that claim to be usable, but they are
very expensive.
David
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|