I bought a spyder to calibrate the monitor, but after doing so, the last short film I color graded, still looks different on other people's screens. One one other person's screen, the blacks are too crushed, on another, they are not crushed enough. Could the spyder may not have worked, or will a movie's color not look the best on all screens, even if the grading was done on a calibrated screen?

"the blacks are too crushed, on another, they are not crushed enough"
Would this not mean that the spyder got it right. The spyder being in the middle.
How do the other colours come up?

This is why calibration is necessary it allows you to properly edit on your monitor but it doesn’t change the fact other monitors will display color and tone differently than yours because they haven’t been calibrated. You could include a short video clip of a color chart that would give you a baseline of the monitor tonal range. Could be likely that it might not be able to display shadow details or has been intentional adjusted to have more contrast.

Oh okay, but it's hard to tell from a color chart, because the colors in the color chart are very different than the colors in the project, if that makes sense?

Perhaps the spyder did it's job, but how do you tell if the movie will look good for film festivals though?

I’m talking about a color chart that includes a gray scale.
http://accu-chart.com/treecontent/media/13/01.jpg
https://static.bhphoto.com/images/images1000x1000/1384777447_1014565.jpg

In my experience normal images will display well on most monitors because color and tone are evenly distributed. However heavily graded or images that are pushed too far into a narrow range, don’t look good when displayed on monitors that can’t display that range. For example if an image has a few shadow areas that are getting crushed by a monitor it's not noticeable but if you film a night scene and you grade almost all the image to be really dark that same monitor will crush everything and you’ll lose details every where and it will look terrible.

In addition I found that you can’t do a lot of color grading to 8bit video. It looks bad when pushed too far.

I spent an interesting day at Pinewood Studios in the UK with Sony 4K cameras and while we were getting fabulous images viewed on the Sony monitor that costs nearly the same as my house, none of the domestic monitors could show what was happening in the shadows - so the person grading the output has to 'spoil' the images and move them away from perfect to something the distribution chain can handle satisfactorily - what a silly system.

Oh boy. Here we go.

i suspect Ryan is not using a $3000+ setup in a proper environment that colorists insist is the only way to ensure that what youre doing is accurate. The spyders are seemingly universally deemed useless for calibration and the legit probes are way more expensive. Without doing everything according to these methods there is no reason to think what youre seeing will translate to any other screen, especially with more extreme settings.

I graded a music video earlier this year and only have an imac to work with. I kept the looks more conservative than I wanted to, used the scopes religiously and checked it on 4 or 5 screens/devices I had access to and kept tweaking til it ok on all of them. The colorists will STILL say that this approach is BS but it seemed to work well enough for me (not doing it for pay and not spending that money for a hobby).

Long story short without a proper (expensive) setup you have no real idea how your stuff will look anywhere but your own screen.

Oh okay then, well in order to color grade for theater, do you need a theater screen set up?

That's not what they're saying - they're pointing out that your equipment isn't capable of doing what you expect it too.

Mu UK cameramen colleague are currently discussing 4K TVs, and what people watch at home, compared to what they are seeing in their studio viewfinders and the monitors the racks people are using to set their pictures. They've been sharing a common file and trying it on their home 4K TV's of all kinds and makes and come up with the realisation that none of them had anywhere near an accurately calibrated TV, and some were actually incapable of being tweaked to be remotely accurate. These people use really decent production cameras and the notion their expensive TV at home wasn't doing very well was unpleasant. Even worse the display mode picked in the shops is an artificial expanded one that gives the illusion of high quality, when it's really edge enhancements, enhanced saturation and added ambience, that give the shop material the 'wow' factor. It's a distortion of 4K quality into something fake.

I moved my video edit suite into my audio studio because I'm doing so much that needs audio and video, and I'm amazed at how different things look. My two video monitors look close, but not identical and I can live with that, but the audio monitors when working with a video window are really bland and unexciting - I have to make the video images very different to get the music monitors to look good, and frankly - I don't actually know if it's the audio computer's monitors, or the two I've always trusted on the edit machine. I do know it doesn't seem to matter to the customers. Weird!

People don't calibrate their displays/TV correctly, so they will vary all over the place, different makes will have different characteristics and most monitors are 8 bit display, rather than 10bit or 12 bit. There are expensive monitors for grading films, although in your case it may come down to buying the best that you can afford

Many high end DPs tend to turn off all the fancy setting that you find on TVs these days on their domestic televisions..

I bought a spyder to calibrate the monitor, . . . . even if the grading was done on a calibrated screen?

You cannot grade video adequately on a computer monitor. Period. Video grading needs to be done on a video monitor via HDMI or SDI output that has been setup to color bars. It doesn't even have to be a super expensive professional monitor. Many of today's consumer monitors are good enough for basic grading if you turn off all the automatic settings and set them up to color bars. A Spyder or other calibration tool is unnecessary. They key is that you need to view your video as a true video signal and not in a computer environment. If you can put your mouse's cursor over the top of the video -- you are still in a computer environment and you are doomed to failure.

This Blackmagic device is all you need to transform the program output from Resolve, Premiere, etc. into a true video signal.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/892451-REG/Blackmagic_Design_bdlkulsdzminmon_Ultrastudio_Mini_Monitor.html?sts=pi&pim=Y

I really need to install a "best reply" identifier in order to earmark exceptionally useful responses in discussion threads, such as Doug's post above (plus others).

I have to say, not to start a whole thing here, but I guess I'd be curious as to what type/price range of monitors you mean. Some folks say certain plasmas are ok for this purpose but still advocate calibrating some fancy sophisticated way (i.e. not just bars), others talk about certain Eizo monitors and others. None of these are especially cheap solutions (to me), still looking at around $1000 at least for the monitor (not to mention the cost of the Blackmagic box). I would love to be wrong but all my research has told me it is not so.

Besides which, you also need (again from what I understand) completely neutral grey/black/white walls in the area surrounding your grading monitor, as a slight tint to the wall color can desensitize you to certain colors, and make you overcompensate when grading. Likewise lighting is supposed to be a certain ambience level and color temp for the same reason.

Some might say that's just colorists protecting their jobs by spreading misinformation, but surely some of these other message board posts (spreading the above info) have to be from folks (like me) who've never tried to get paid as colorists and only want their own material to look good for their own satisfaction. Many blogs and articles etc. on the subject basically say the same thing in my first two paragraphs up there, as well.

This is not as difficult as everyone is making it seem. The definitions for various types of broadcasts, media use etc. are defined very specifically by governing bodies. In the old days (read analog) we had NTSC in the US. This standard was defined by the NAB, SMPTE and FCC was the standard for broadcast. Today we have various methods of distribution, but still defining bodies and guidelines at the very least.

You can use various types of monitors, displays etc. This issue will always be that you can't calibrate every monitor, computer screen and projection system in the world. But if you calibrate your own system, you have a better chance of getting it right on the majority of systems. The OP mentioned that he was worried about a contest etc. then one has to assume that they will be using calibrated systems for judging and presentation. Smaller film festivals etc. may be clueless, but certainly larger organizations will be doing it right.

I did a quick Google search and found this page that describes some simple/basic terms,

https://www.richardlackey.com/choosing-video-color-space/

Please read the article and if you want a more in-depth article, please read this white paper on the subject,

https://github.com/jeremyselan/cinematiccolor/raw/master/ves/Cinematic_Color_VES.pdf

The above link will download a PDF.

If the material is using terms you don't understand, or concepts that are hard to wrap you head around, please post questions below. I'll be happy to answer any questions related to monitors, calibration and calibrators etc. Please read at least the website link above and ask away.

Who am I and how do I know this stuff?

Chris Hurd will vouch for my understanding of things related to video and photography. I used to be very active on DVInfo, but life and jobs etc. forced me to move on. I'm truly sorry I can't spend more time here, but I do subscribe to various Forums here and read an email this afternoon and thought I should chime in.

Always love it when you chime in, Jeff -- many thanks!

It was brought to my attention by Seth Bloombaum that the link I had in my first post above was for the wrong Blackmagic Device. Thanks Seth.

I have edtied my post. Here is the correct device:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/892451-REG/Blackmagic_Design_bdlkulsdzminmon_Ultrastudio_Mini_Monitor.html/BI/2855/KBID/3801

The device is not really necessary. A modern computer screen can accurately display the same color set as a monitor. It’s important to have the computer screen profiled and calibrated properly. Digital is digital, it’s just 1’s and 0’s. But if they are not converted properly by the software and monitor is not calibrated, then you’ll be upside down.

This is not as difficult as everyone is making it seem. .

I agree with Jeff, it is all very simple. It is not even necessary to read the links that he has posted or that you understand color spaces, etc. in order to calibrate a monitor for grading. This is all you need to do . . .

Step 1: Connect a Blackmagic Mini Monitoring device between your computer and a television monitor via HDMI or SDI.

Step 2: Turn off all the monitor's automatic functions and set it up to color bars.

Step 3: Start grading.* No additional calibration or knowledge of color spaces is needed.

* assuming you know how to grade and how to read scopes.

The device is not really necessary. A modern computer screen can accurately display the same color set as a monitor. It’s important to have the computer screen profiled and calibrated properly. Digital is digital, it’s just 1’s and 0’s. But if they are not converted properly by the software and monitor is not calibrated, then you’ll be upside down.

We will have to agree to disagree on that one because I strongly disagree with your statement. I don't know any professional colorists who would not grade via SDI or HDMI output to a video monitor. Plus, it eliminates all the variables of computer screen calibration which is the reason for the OP's post. My recommendation is so much simpler.

The device is not really necessary. A modern computer screen can accurately display the same color set as a monitor. It’s important to have the computer screen profiled and calibrated properly. Digital is digital, it’s just 1’s and 0’s. But if they are not converted properly by the software and monitor is not calibrated, then you’ll be upside down.

Jeff, without a Blackmagic UltraStudio Mini device (or similar model) what is your suggestion for getting full-screen video to a monitor while grading? Resolve is absolutely setup to be used in a three monitor configuration:

Monitor 1) Computer with Resolve GUI
Monitor 2) 2nd computer monitor just for scopes.
Monitor 3) TV/video monitor being fed program output via HDMI or SDI.

How do you do it?

SDI (Serial Digital Interface) is used in broadcast facilities for transmission of standardized video formats of uncompressed and unencrypted signals over long distance runs. SDI and HD-SDI are used because of licensing agreements that restrict the use of unencrypted interfaces.

This has nothing to do with color accuracy or calibration of monitors.

SDI (Serial Digital Interface) is used in broadcast facilities for transmission of standardized video formats of uncompressed and unencrypted signals over long distance runs. SDI and HD-SDI are used because of licensing agreements that restrict the use of unencrypted interfaces. This has nothing to do with color accuracy or calibration of monitors.

Oh come on. Really?? That is your answer? I never said it had anything directly to do with calibration. Clearly SDI is just a pipeline to get video output from a camera, computer, and other video devices to a monitor or other devices. If you don't use SDI, what method do you use to move video signals from device to device? Every professional camera, recorder, and monitor I own uses SDI. What would you suggest as an alternative?

And I'll ask again, what is YOUR setup for monitoring professional color grading with Resolve?

Just because you use SDI, what makes you think that the colors on the monitor are accurate? Yes, you can buy monitors with built in calibrators, but I doubt the average user on DVI is using that grade of monitor. How does your solution provide accurate color?

Because it allows the operator to set up the video monitor using SMPTE color bars so that a video signal can be accurately monitored and evaluated in a video environment. Period.

The key word here is VIDEO. I'm not talking about Photoshop, or Lightroom, or any other software or workflows that may also depend on calibration. I am talking about professional video. Color Bars is all that is needed. One does not need calibration tools, special software, or in-depth knowledge of color spaces. This is video production 101. Very simple.

And I'll ask again, what is YOUR setup for monitoring professional color grading with Resolve?

So, color bars are a standard reference signal, with standard reference colors. Monitors and computer screens use various methods of displaying the signal received via SDI, HDMI and other transmission standards. Here is a good article from Eizo that explains some of the fundamental issues that the monitor must resolve, such as how many bits of information is being received and how many bits of information can the monitor display. Again, in a perfect world everyone here is using $5000 USD monitors, but the reality is they are using much less expensive display hardware and if they want accurate color, SDI is not a solution.

I see this is becoming "a thing". Again, I have done much research on this, every time I do a personal project (that I can't possibly justify the cost of a real grading setup for) and want to know what I'm seeing is accurate.

No colorist I have seen the opinion of thinks "any computer monitor" will do. They all recommend specialized monitors like the Flanders.

There are page and pages and pages of probably hundreds of threads about the fine points of color space conversion and which settings need to be where so I refuse to believe it's as simple as "turn auto settings off and calibrate to bars". There's supposed to be some sophisticated procedure involving a "probe" that measure each individual screen, color luminance etc across the entire surface and creates a profile that corrects for unevenness in those parameters. As (I think) a human, I would say we don't overcomplicate stuff for fun, and if it was really that simple, I think the colorists would know it. Same reason sound guys and camera guys buy all the fancy crap they do. Sure, there are gearheads, but I believe most of us would like the simplest, quickest, cheapest, least physically demanding way to get the results we want; surely colorists are no different (gearheads aside).

And you need a monitor capable of displaying full gamut blah blah blah and on on and on. The conclusion is that, for instance, my Imac monitor simply cannot be calibrated or used for accurate grading.

Now, perhaps all these neurotic colorists here are talking about the high standards of features, high end music vids, commercials, narrative TV, netflix, etc.--pro content with distribution in place for a wide audience, basically the top of the production food chain, and folks here are talking about something that gets you 75%-90% there. I'm just telling you what I've read.

The HDMI/SDI out from the computer is supposed to get you the compliant, true signal to your external monitor and bypass all the computer profiles etc. that cause a bias.

Hi Josh, it’s good to see you still on DVI and continuing to pursue your dreams.

So, let me get this straight. The preferred monitors are Flanders. Here is a link to one of their monitors.

FSI | AM420 (http://flandersscientific.com/AM420/)

Funny how when I go to the page the first two things mentioned (one would think that you might highlight the most important features the first) are Color Management and Calibration. Flanders Scientific even points out that you can return your monitor for free calibration, if you feel it needs it.

Why would Flanders Scientific do this, if all they needed was a Convertor from Black Magic?

Color Management and color calibration is critical in ANY workflow that requires accurate color.

With all due respect, I don't have time to keep saying the same things over and over again or trying to educate someone who is clearly out of their element and doesn't want to learn. Especially when that someone won't even answer very simple questions about their monitoring setup. We are talking about VIDEO PRODUCTION and this is quite different than photos or graphics or other kinds of calibration. I'm out of this conversation. Make of that whatever you will, but I am not going to waste further time on this thread.

Hi Doug,

I’m sure your reference of being out his element was directed towards me. I was president of Impact Video Productions from 1988 to 1996. Our clients included Proctor & Gamble, Krogers, Ford Motor Co., Johnson and Johnson, University of Cincinnati, UC Medical College, and hundreds of other corporations.

I’m a certified AVID editor, I’ve taught Final Cut Pro since 2000 and I’m a certified instructor in Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Lightroom. I’ve taught Photoshop since 1994. I taught video production at St. Pete College from 2002 until 2006. I worked for Apple Computer from 2006 through 2008. I still consult for Apple with regard to UI, OS, iOS and cameras. I do beta testing for Apple, Adobe and Western Digital.

Lastly, I’ve been calibrating monitors since 1985. I think I have a pretty good understanding of the issues at hand.

Sorry to bore everyone here with facts.

Flanders one of the models that comes frequently recommended on those forums, yes, not the only one.

What they are really saying is you need a monitor capable of being professionally calibrated and displaying the correct color space and gamut.

There are maybe some plasmas or other consumer sets that can do this, depending on what you can and can't turn off.

There are articles out there about affordable grading monitors and what to look for.

I have been wrong about the bars, thought it was way more complicated than that.

The reliance on bars is just a very simple example of the issues of color management. SMPTE colors bars show the 3 primary colors (Red, Green, Blue) and 3 secondary colors (cyan, magenta and yellow). This is dependent on what your doing is additive color or subtractive color.

Eight bit color can display about 16.7 million colors, (2 to the 8th power x 3) and 10 bit color displays over 1 billion colors (2 to the 10th power x 3). Colors in most color spaces are not linear. A curve is applied and the colors are not given equal importance for various reasons. Thinking that if just 6 points are accurate, 1 billion points will be accurate is quite a stretch. This is getting more complicated than it needs to be.

The point is, if you want more accurate color, calibrate your screen.

How to test this.

Buy a calibrator and the Black Magic Box from B&H, I’m sure Chris has links from B&H so he gets a little credit for the purchases. Calibrate the monitor using a calibrator from x-rite or DataColor (X-Rites are better but more costly). Look at the before and after image provide by both X-rite and DataColor and look at the differences in the monitor between uncalibrated and calibrated. Pay particular attention to skin tones. they are very difficult to reproduce accurately.

Then go back to the default calibration and plug in the Black Magic box and compare before and after. If calibrated accurately, the calibrated colors will be more accurate, but not necessarily more pleasing. Color is subjective and monitors in an uncalibrated state may appear more pleasing with regard to a limited color set. But overall, the color of the image will suffer.

Then return the product you don’t want. B&H offers a 30 day return on most products (always check return policy before you buy).

Thanks. This all comes back to....what is the most affordable, DECENT setup we could recommend to Mr. Ryan Elder? Monitor, box, anything else he might need.

That’s like asking what is the best camera, best car, best truck etc. Opinions and colors are VERY subjective.

It will really depend on your budget and your understanding of color management. I would recommend the purchase of a mid-range color calibrator from X-Rite or DataColor. If you’re growing, have higher aspirations or a bigger budget get the X-Rite. The X-Rite calibrators are spectrophotometers, not colorimeters (like the Spyders from DataColor). Not a huge difference on the lower level, but when greater accuracy is required the X-Rite is the better choice. It also help future proof you a little buying the better calibrator. Follow the included software and ask for help from their support people. That is what they are there for.

If your budget goes up look at monitors that are in the $1000 to $3000 USD range. Many (most/all?) will come with built in calibrators thus avoiding the need for a separate calibrator. You will also find many that come calibrated at the factory and should stay in calibration most of their useful life or offer a recalibration service for a small amount.

Lastly, you have the Flanders and other higher end monitors that are in the $5000+ USD range (depending on size etc). Great monitors, but beyond the reach of most production studios and independent producers etc.

I hope this helps. Questions are always helpful.

The device is not really necessary. A modern computer screen can accurately display the same color set as a monitor. It’s important to have the computer screen profiled and calibrated properly. Digital is digital, it’s just 1’s and 0’s. But if they are not converted properly by the software and monitor is not calibrated, then you’ll be upside down.

Oh okay thanks. But since people online suggest to use external software to calibrate a monitor, if it's not necessary, how do you properly calibrate a monitor, within the monitors own color settings?

My research tells me you really can't unless it's one of the specialized monitors (Eizo, BenQ) that allegedly display the full gamut/proper video colorspaces. Maybe not even then. I use a lot of "maybes" and "allegedlies" 'cause this stuff, again, gets real complex and even the pro colorists get into fights about all this stuff.

Just find the grading forums (LiftGammaGain, etc.) and search for threads along these lines.