I think what Chirstopher is trying to say is to use the equipment designed for the end result. There are some of us Pro's whom don't provide tapes for broadcast. It all depends on your audience and what they are viewing the end result on.

For example, if your stuff is intended for playback on the very equipment that you are editing on (i.e. web, cd, presentation on labtops or booth display, etc.) Then standard PC monitors should suffice. What you see is what you get. However, providing that you know your equipment is calibrated to whatever extent possible.

Still, nothing beats a CRT in terms of contrast and color. Even with a 22" gateway and a 40" Bravia, I'm still keeping a 21" viewsonic CRT for photo and print work. I would assume that visiting any production studio and you'll still find CRT's in use.

Monitor Calibration
 

For color and contrast correction---

1. Do any of the CRT/LCD computer monitor calibrators work for calibrating an HDTV monitor used in editing from a computer?

2. I keep seeing the suggestion to use an SD CRT monitor for HD color & contrast adjustment. How can that work? Aren't the SD and HD two different color spaces? Are color bars enough to "calibrate" a SD monitor to the HD color space? If so why not a random LCD HDTV with a DVI input from the computer?

Still confused.
Rick

The JVC I mentioned above, although a 4:3 screen, produces a real HDTV color space from what I read in the specs and hear from others.

-Christopher

Most programs don't support it. After Effects does I think.

You may be better off buying a broadcast-grade monitor. I haven't compared to the print/digital photography calibration probes, although the broadcast-grade monitor will likely do a better job (except maybe some of the broadcast LCDs on the market).

The coding for Rec. 601 SD and Rec. 709 HD signals are different since Rec. 601 and Rec. 709 use different luma co-efficients. This is not an issue if the numbers are converted from one to the other.
*Some/most consumer equipment don't do this. Your NLE will likely do this.
**Not all HD formats follow ITU-R Recommendation BT. 709- SMPTE 274M doesn't, but you probably won't be using that format.

HD and SD also differ in the primary chromaticities- the exact colors of red, green, and blue. For SD, the standard is SMPTE C for the NTSC world and EBU for the PAL world (and Japan). For HD, the standard is the Rec. 709 chromaticities.

However, most HD work done for the NTSC world is graded on monitors following the SMPTE C colors. So, a SD monitor will be ok in that aspect.

A third last difference between Rec. 601 SD and Rec. 709 HD is that the transfer functions are different. However, a lot of work is graded with the same transfer function anyways so that's not a big deal. You probably aren't going to be able to spot a meaningful difference.

Um... yes and no? Color bars simply calibrate the levels- between the recorded (or generated) levels, and how the monitor interprets those levels. They show you if the levels are being interpreted differently (which is usually wrong).

They can't be used to account for differences in primary chromaticities or transfer functions.

An ideal broadcast monitor won't have image cheats, will be calibrated, will have standard primary chromaticities (or close enough), will have a good de-interlacer (if it's a progressive display), will show full HD resolution, and can show a HD signal output from your editing system (or recording VTR)- whatever the image is displayed in your NLE on your computer display is rarely accurate.

That being said, not all HD broadcast monitors meet those criteria.

Monitors and calibration
 

Glenn-
Thanks for a great answer. That really clears up a lot of the confusion for me.

Thanks
Rick

So till now, has anyone actually used this monitor?

I'm considering between this and the Dell 2407 for use with my XH A1 through component input for focusing.

The folks over at hardware forum are complaining about the deinterlacing which kind of confuses me. I thought all pc lcd monitors are progressive? And then why would they deinterlace?

I have the monitor for viewing the footage from my V1 & Z1, so far only over Component (haven't got a HDMI cable yet).

It looks beatuiful, but let me tell you something in advance, the 1:1 pixel mapping issue is not fully resolved - so as yet, you will not get 1920x1080 footage through anything other than a PC input carrying a graphics signal.

Video signals, whether analogue or digital are cropped about 5% on both sides - don't ask me why.

BenQ have a firmware upgrade that allows you to at least get a pixel for pixel representation of 95% of your footage, but you do lose the sides.

Benq Australia assures me that a second Firmware update will eventually be available to give us the 5% on the sides back.

That said, when you're watching footage on your computer it's beautiful and untainted. But it is so good it lets you see where you went wrong. Watching it on a smaller monitor hid all the imperfections. So that's a positive in helping you get the best result.

If you want it for focusing alone you'll be very satisfied. I've had it attached to my camera with the camera at the end of a crane and it's beautifully crisp. No more focusing errors for me. However, I did pan a little too far in one shot and ended up seeing some of our equipment in the shot and because the sides are cropped, I didn't notice until I got the footage onto my computer. That said, the image displayed on the monitor (when cropped) is almost exactly the same as on the Z1's LCD Display, so it's probably not a disadvantage at all.

Dell or BenQ with HDMI
 

The 24" models of Dell and Benq seem fairly similar -- except that the Benq has HDMI inputs. I'm getting an Intensity card for my Mac Pro, so I'll have HDMI output, plus I'll be working with camcorders that have HDMI as well.

with the Dell, I would just go DVI to it, I suppose. What is the real advantage of having the HDMI connection as well?

2) Any other opinions about the two monitors? Which would you choose?

Price point is important for me here in the UK since monitors are one of those items that seem over-priced here, and with the BenQ you seem to get a lot of bang for your buck (or £). Also, Dell support here is reportedly horrible.

Finally, I tend to agree with the montior reviews at TrustedReviews.com, and they are gushing about about the BenQ FP241W:

http://www.trustedreviews.com/displa...een-Monitor/p1

But I still don't get the 1080p thing. Aren't all lcds progressive?

Or what they meant was you could get 1080p from HDMI as opposed to 1080i from component?

Maybe I better go for the Dell. For some reason, the shops I know are kind of reluctant to bring the Benq in. There MAY be a reason behind that. As for the Dell I heard the colours are way too saturated though component, wonder how the BenQ fares.

Ok, this is getting confusing;

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/dell_2xx7wfp.htm

Scroll to the bottom. No 1080i support over dvi?

Ok, just bought the Benq FP241 WZ yesterday. I have some problems with it mostly in pc.

Through DVI-D connection, the display is really bright. From the factory setting of 90 (out of 100) I had to reduce it to 20. I find this really odd.

Also, my graphics card (non hdcp) is outputting 1920 x 1200, but the BenQ puts black bars at the top and bottom. However, when I point my mouse up or down, it scrolls up or down to show the rest of the screen so the black bars are definitely on BenQ's end.

Colours and exposure look really wash out on DVI-D. It had a noisy grain to it that tame down a bit when i reduce the brightness. My previous Acer 2423 never had any of the above problems.

Connecting the component input to my XHA1, focusing was acceptable but somehow does not seem as sharp as my Sony Wega. The colour on the other hand was veering towards technicolour :(

The 1:1 pixel thingie works. There is still overscan.

My biggest gripe now is black bar through the DVI-D. I never seen this problem before. Whether HDCP or not, it shouldn't matter right?

the question is that knowing for sure that nobody will play you HD footage on something else than a LCD or Plasma flat screen, what is the value to use a calibration screen that will not reflect the final result users can see ?
Is it not better to ajust the signal to avoid artifact created by the display technology than making a perfect signal that will render badly on regular users screen.

I'm having some problems with this monitor, as I mention here.

My V1 is not sending a 1080 line signal to it via HDMI, but a 720 line signal. Has anyone else had this problem?

Also, I'm having a lot of signal loss problems, where it just drops out at random for a few seconds. Does anyone else have this?

i have the fp241wz and don't seem to have any overscan problems. I'm running it of a macbook pro not a pc and it works great with the components from my canon a1. As far as having a problem focusing off it I can't possibly see how. Looking at the full 1080 signal coming through the components on this baby looks face-meltingly awsome an incredibly sharp. It comes pretty bright from the factory and i had to lower it down to around 20 but i don't think thats something worth complaining about. Yeah any lcd can't come near to true black but the benq has pretty much no backlight spill which makes the whole grey for black lcd thing much more tolerable. The picture looks amazing on it and the design i think looks super sleek. Couldn't be happier with this puppy, i highly recomend it!

Ok,the information on my lcd is showing the output as 1080i. This is not right of course, since its coming from my Nvidia 7800GTX at 1920 x 1200.

I unplugged it and connect the BenQ using VGA. Now the OSD information shows 1920 x 1200 and it displays correctly.

In a last minute attempt before I start my bitching at Hardforum, I unplugged both connections from my card and exchange them. My Acer (dvi to vga) was occupying dvi out no. 1 and the BenQ ( dvi-d) the other.

Guess what. It works now. BenQ information OSD displays the incoming signal as proper 1920 x 1200 and it displays correctly now :) Perhaps my graphics card (or the BenQ) was confused when i plugged the BenQ in the first time or something but anyone who gets this problem should try to unplugged and plugged the connector back in. Might work, who knows?

The brightness of the monitor is still crazy. I reduce it to 10 (out of 100) and I think this is fine. Certains colour tones seems desaturated (quite obvious mind you).

As for component, perhaps I'm asking too much. I was comparing my Wega to a 24 inch and my Wega is more then twice the size. Perhaps it looks more detailed in that manner (because of the size). I tried the component output of a lot of 32 inch lcds (Sony Bravia S, Samsung, LG, Sharp, Panasonic Viesta) and was not impressed at all.