Monitor solution for P3 grading (with some questions)

Those differences get bigger when we are approaching the outer range of colors. For sure they get stronger when we cover the field of human perception outside of P3, like Rec 2020.

Is it confirmed by research or just a guess?

I knew you'd ask this

It stuck in the back of my head from my lectures in physiology of perception, but that professor has not been among us for a while and I'd need to look up sources.
So, let's write it off until future research and get back to the main subject, where I fully agree with Walter Volpatto. I'd just like to add that even Samsung or LG TVs recently got pretty good with their values for Rec 709, given that you find your way through the menus to deactivate all 'image enhancers'.

Sony is better IMHO because you can calibrate it close enough to 709 and remove all the "enhancements" 500-1000$. Spend 200$ and have it calibrated professionally once every 6 months.

I fully agree with Walter Volpatto. I'd just like to add that even Samsung or LG TVs recently got pretty good with their values for Rec 709, given that you find your way through the menus to deactivate all 'image enhancers'.

Please, don't let me in the doubt: tell me a specific model (or models) you recommend (there are so many Sony's models!)
Thanks a lot.

You may actually get even better results by getting Panasonic, but 1000£($) is rather minimum. 500 range won't calibrate that well and will most likely have uniformity issues, which is one of the biggest problems on consumer TVs compared to pro. New TVs which calibrates crazy well are rather 2K+

Here is Panasonic example for 750£ (may be hard to get as it's older model):
http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/tx55cx80 ... 294129.htm

Sony for 900£
http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/kdl55w80 ... 034145.htm

Here is example of modern OLED Panasonic which calibrates crazy well, but this is 2.5K£
http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/tx55ez95 ... 194485.htm

also, i will skip oled at the moment, most of the devices out there are not, and it is s bit easier of you do something for big screen

Here in Italy I've found the Sony. It's full-hd. Is it able to receive a 2K signal and scale it properly to 1920?

Spend 200$ and have it calibrated professionally once every 6 months.

Sorry for the stupid question... but which keyword should I use in Google to find this kind of service here in Italy?
Thanks (as always).

Here in Italy I've found the Sony. It's full-hd. Is it able to receive a 2K signal and scale it properly to 1920?

Thanks (as always).

Very unlikely- you have to send pre-scaled HD signal to it.

When we tested professional monitors with a Klein K-10 probe (one of the best in the industry) we added a Samsung UE48JU7080 (series 7) out of curiosity.
After switching off all the fancy stuff in the menus, including dynamic brightness (the worst offender) and set it to full scan, it was quite decent. We used the "film" mode with color space on "auto". The gamma was a little bit too high, but delta-E was well under 3 for all values. You can even switch it to video or full range and between 444 or 422. You need to look straight on, though.

Here in Italy I've found the Sony. It's full-hd. Is it able to receive a 2K signal and scale it properly to 1920?

Thanks (as always).

Very unlikely- you have to send pre-scaled HD signal to it.

If I understand correctly, the following setting should automatically scale the 2K project into HD for a second monitor, right?

settings.jpeg (133.85 KiB) Viewed 13837 times

You need to look straight on, though.

You are right! Thanks for the advice.

Hi all!

2 points in the thread make me want further explanations :

I used to edit and grade on an iMac with FCPX (with no added monitor... sorry I know it is a sacrilege!)
I make features for festivals and so far I've never been disappointed by what saw on my iMac preview vs. theater screens.

but I'm now considering building a PC workstation to edit and grade with Resolve Studio...
so what's wrong with the GUI preview?

(in my case I have no room enough no have a big monitor (I edit in a truck!) so even if I do buy a second mon it would be a very little one to maintain the proportionate eye/screen distance)

2nd point :

Dermot Shane wrote :
the aliasing makes Resolve's font tools useless in this world

does it mean there is no way to make the simplyiest title in Resolve?

thks in advance!

Stephanie, something fancy like the ChopinScript may not look perfect but there are scores of simpler fonts that may suit your needs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just wanted to post a follow up since last night I attended a premiere of a feature film I graded here in L.A.

The film was graded in rec709 color space (gamma 2.2) and output as ProRes4444 which was then sent over to a local DCP company who generated the DCP files for projection.

What I saw on the screen matched what I saw on my monitor pretty much spot on. The only difference I picked up on was a slightly dimmer image which I partially attribute to the fact that I had to seat all the way to the side since the screening was sold out and that's the only seat I could find.

The point is that whatever the DCP creation process is, it translated to P3 just fine from my rec709 file. As long as your grading monitor is accurate, the image should translate well to the big screen.

2nd point :

Dermot Shane wrote :
the aliasing makes Resolve's font tools useless in this world

does it mean there is no way to make the simplyiest title in Resolve?

thks in advance!

i did qualify "in this world"... even a clean font like Arial is a QC fail for features and delvierables to top tier broadcasters.

for folks who do not need to meet 100% QC, it's workable enought, loads of folks use it for their shows.

but at the end of the day it's not what anyone thinks - other than the QC facility

And they makes the choice for you if you have to deliver with a "pass" on the report

I think I've worked on over a thousand theatrical films in the last 30 years, and I'm not aware of hitting any technological limitations in terms of brightness or color gamut. If anything, often the filmmakers wind up making things a lot more moody and dark and less colorful than my normal tendencies would be (with rare exceptions). In other words, we're not even using the dynamic range and gamut available to us now in Rec 709, let alone P3.

Directors are mostly just a bunch of scared copycats. The end result is stuff that doesn't age well and will look horribly dated to Gen ZZ'ers in 2030. I deal with this now with my own kids who can't stand 80s or 90s movies because they all "look" bad. I don't care if someone has a million theatrical credits to to their name, only a handful of movies from every decade are of any interest to future generations. I could go on, but end of rant.

Last week I attended the premiere of my last film (I'm the DP). It was graded on a calibrated Eizo display in REC709. The DCP was true to the color correction and the film is now playing in 1500 screens.

Keep it simple. Get the decklink, grade on a calibrated REC709 display. 10 bit is not important. (almost always).

Convert to DCI/P3. Be happy.

Kays, you mentioned Rec.709 gamma 2.2. That sounds like sRGB. I thought Rec.709 was gamma 2.4.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Kays, you mentioned Rec.709 gamma 2.2. That sounds like sRGB. I thought Rec.709 was gamma 2.4

The jury isn't completely 100% settled on this, and according to many it's a Pepsi or Coke type of conversation...but various documentation I have read seems to recommend using 2.2 for rec709

http://shootdatapost.com/blog/2013/5/12 ... gamma.html

Thanks, Kays. Here's my understanding which I do follow ( and I'm not disputing your recent post in which your 2.2 gamma material looked very good):

"As of Rec. 1886, the ITU is now recommending a Display Gamma of 2.4 for reference monitors in HDTV Systems.

But what does this mean for acquistion and post production where our work (for now) will almost universally be viewed on 2.2 displays?

The reality is, if you're monitoring and mastering at 2.4, contrast in these images will always seem slightly lifted on 2.2 displays. So for example, if the room we're coloring in has a Sony OLED using a gamma of 2.4, then our deliverables will look quite a bit different when seen on our client's 2.2 gamma iPad or MacBook Air. Rec. 1886 was needed but is far from universal implementation. Ask many a technician in both the field or in post if they had even heard of it and you would likely hear "no" more often than not. My own personal rule of thumb is that in situations where I'm handling the deliverables myself and those deliverables are for 2.2 displays, I set my monitors to 2.2. When I'm working with a facility and a colorist whose monitor is set to 2.4, then my monitors are 2.4. It's very important to be on the same page with whoever gets the stuff next and it will be different from project to project. The Sony OLED's fortunately have several choices for User Display Gamma which have made these monitors indispensable tools in today's digital imaging workflow chaos."

When I know my material is going to be viewed on a television, I use gamma 2.4; when it's going to be viewed on a monitor typically via a computer including browsing the Internet, I grade with my monitor set to gamma 2.2. That 0.2 difference is quite significant when viewing shadows. My 2.4 videos lose some of their punch if viewed at 2.2; if I play a 2.2 video on a monitor set at 2.4, it's too dark as the article illustrates. I've settled on using ACEScct for colour managing everything as of this year.

Maybe this never ending story will come to an end when Rec.2020 is the norm on UHD televisions and monitors. I look forward to the day when I can afford a Dolby Vision monitor with accurate Rec.2020 using ACES.

I'm not a professional, but I try to follow the 'recommended standards' nevertheless. You are a professional and I appreciate your contributions here very much.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Hmmm....I have to wonder if all those guys complaining that their Quicktime exports look so different from Resolve to YouTube etc. might be because of going from 2.4 to 2.2? Just a thought.

Yes, very likely. I'm seeing that often.

Although I shoot mostly 2K/HD and mostly for the Internet, people using devices like the AppleTV make it complicated as well as they take Internet material and display it on UHD/HDTV as well as their computer monitors. I normally put videos on Vimeo or Facebook (mostly private client work) and I really don't know what they do with my gamma. And when I create DVDs for clients, I also don't know what happens to gamma and some people will display the same DVD on a television or on a computer monitor. So it's a mess. That's why I think when Dolby Vision Rec.2020 becomes the norm, we can rejoice. Rumour is that the Second Coming has a greater chance of occurring first though so I understand it's a long wait.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

But that kind of mess is rather coming from incorrect communication between computer and monitor.

If I connect them by HMDI, the computer should assume a video range signal and send it that way, since the TV will assume it's in video range (you can change that on a few TVs, though).

If I connect them via DVI to HDMI cable, the computer will assume a computer monitor is connected and sends full range signals. On a TV your signal will have blown-out highlights and crushed blacks if you can't switch it to full range. I see that all the time when clients play a movie graded for Rec 709 from a computer to a TV.

That whole video range concept is crap left over from the last millennium, just to protect analog circuits. Digital has no spikes over 255 or under 0 (or the related values for 10 bit) and you could always introduce protection when converting from digital to analog. But until then, we'll have to educate clients about this mess or, even better, set the equipment up for them. The issue of 2.2 vs 2.4 gamma is quite a bit more subtle compared to that problem!

My experiences with 2.2/2.4 gamma:

- 2.4 is what in the 90s was called "mac gamma" and was why stuff always looked different on a PC
- 2.4 is still default on macOS unless you explicitly assign sRGB to your monitor in display settings
- I've had issues matching the colours between Resolve's Decklink output and the GUI preview / DNx exports (viewed in a media player or imported back into Premiere), which I falsely attributed to a TV/PC levels issue until I figured out I needed to set the display gamma to "Mac" in my Dell's OSD menu which fixed all my problems

So it's definitely not clear cut.

Sorry, but the classic "Apple Gamma" used to be 1.8. It was aimed at print, since the first big market for Apple was DTP, due to their laser printers and software for that field.

At the time, PCs already used a gamma of 2.2, since many users who couldn't afford a computer monitor used TVs for display and 2.2 was considered Tv gamma by manufacturers and Microsoft.

But that's all history from the stone age

Sorry, but the classic "Apple Gamma" used to be 1.8. It was aimed at print, since the first big market for Apple was DTP, due to their laser printers and software for that field.

Right, I must've misremembered. But that makes the rest (like having to set "Mac" gamma on a Dell monitor for Decklink output) even more confusing.

The last 4 replies by Uli Plank and Micha Clazing are very interesting to me (as a newbie).
I have a pair of questions about (I know that, for your professional level, my questions are silly, but think that your kind replies can help not only me, but all the newbies at my level that are reading this useful topic!)

Let me say to you that I'm going to follow your advices and buy a decklink + second monitor for 709 grading. Said that, right at the moment I'm still with a single Dell (I need some time to make the money for the upgrade). The shots in my timeline are RAW dngs from a Magic Lantern 5D3 set in AdobeRGB color space, so here one first quesion:

1st Question: for 709 grading purpose, shooting in RAW, is it better to set the camera on AdobeRGB or sRGB? (Since that my final target is a theatrical projection, and that someone said that P3 is more-or-less AdobeRGB, I'd tend to think that AdobeRGB on camera is better then sRGB, right?)

Now, let's say I want to grade for theatrical projection. You said that the easiest way to grade (for my current-&-near-future gear) is doing that in 709, then converting it into P3, then converting it into DCP. The first step (if I understand correctly) is to set my whole system into the right color space and gamma. 709 is the color space, but the gamma (2.2, 2.4, 2.6, ect.) seems to depend on the final target (TV, computer monitor, etc.) Now, even if I'll grade in 709, you know that my final target is a theatrical projector, so here the second question:

2nd Question: which is the better gamma when you are grading in 709 but your target is a theatrical projector? Perhaps 2.2?

Now, on my Dell I can set Color Space and Gamma. Gamma is PC vs MAC, that is (if I understand correctly) the same as 2.2 vs 1.8. So I set PC if I want gamma 2.2. Here the third question:

3rd Question: if my monitor's gamma is set on 2.2, should I absolutely set my Resolve's Color Management > Timeline Color Space on Gamma 2.2? Or is it indipendent?

Backing back to the monitor: about the Color Space, I can choose between AdobeRGB, sRGB, Custom, etc. (where Custom - I suppose - means calibrating by an external devices like i1Display-Pro). Now I'm confused (by my ignorance):

4th Question: AdobeRGB should be a bigger c.space then sRGB, so what happens if I choose sRGB? That all the non-sRGB colors aren't used on the monitor?

Anyway...

5th Question: following my grading needs (i.e. 709 grading, but theatrical projector as target, and AdobeRGB source shots) which is the most coherent setting for my monitor? AdobeRGB or sRGB or Custom (with X-Rite calibrator)?

And now let me ask about Resolve's Camera RAW: as I said, the RAW shots in my timeline come from a ML-5D3. So, in Camera RAW window I have to choose - again - Color Space and Gamma. I've noticed that - even if the source camera is not a BMCC - setting Blackmagic Design for both (Space and Gamma) gives a sort of log appearance that seems useful for grading. So I'd tend to set this way to let me more "room" for grading. But I have a doubt:

6th Question: should I set Camera RAW's Color Space as 709 to be coherent with the Color Management setting? Or is it indipendent? And when you said to me to grade in 709, do you refer to Camera RAW setting, or to Color Management setting, or both?

I's a bunch of questions, I know, and I'm sorry, but your replies will be very useful for me and all "low knoledge self-taught" community

Thank you so much as always.

Thanks a lot for your answers
very enriching topic...

anything about the non-accuracy of the GUI preview?

I mean if I only work on a calibrated LG 31MU97C-B, what i see in the UI preview won't be accurate ?

It could be accurate if you test/tweak/verify it, but in case of Resolve 150$ BM card will make it accurate without worrying about it at all or investigating and validating. When you buy 3K$ or more new machine this 150$ is worth it.
You also (I assume) still can't have full screen 2nd monitor GUI preview, which is a problem (at least for me as I like video to be full screen).

The last 4 replies by Uli Plank and Micha Clazing are very interesting to me (as a newbie).
I have a pair of questions about (I know that, for your professional level, my questions are silly, but think that your kind replies can help not only me, but all the newbies at my level that are reading this useful topic!)
....

You are over-thinking and complicating it.
Shot in best possible quality. It can be Adobe RGB or sRGB- doesn't really matter that much if you going to grade it. Set Resolve to Rec.709 2.4 gamma (or sRGB for youtube etc) and grade over BM card on calibrated monitor.
When you go to P3 DCI you simply tell software what gamma you used- 2.2 or 2.4, so conversion is done accordingly. In both case it will be fine as long as you set software to correct value.

Set Resolve to Rec.709 2.4 gamma (or sRGB for youtube etc)

Do you mean Color Management setting? Or Camera RAW setting? Or both?
Thanks

Project settings.
Video can be set to many things- you can keep it log and grade from this or add LUT to make things easier.

As long as your timeline space is as large or larger than your output space, it doesn't matter which either is, the timeline space should be what feels natural to you when grading and the output space should be what you intend to deliver and are capable of monitoring. Gamma is just a curve between 0.0 and 1.0 and so it can be arbitrarily mapped between source/timeline and destination/output.

Thanks!

Very interesting discussion for me.
Right now, I'm looking for an inexpensive solution for 4K external grading monitor, via DeckLink.
rec.709 is more than enough, and I can perform regular calibration with X-RITE, so it is not a problem at all, thank to DisplayCal

The problem is the proper choice.
I don't ask about a specific model but more about the proper display TYPE.

Firstly, what do you think, will I have some real differences between 4K TV and PC display?
Secondary, we have too many options here: from ISP matrix to OLED, with different backlight options (full array, side backlight, LED backlight), with many "intellectual" things like local dimming (which, as far I understand, should be turned off anyway), etc.

What kind of display is preferred, in your opinion, for this purpose?

Basic question- your budget?

lower is better

This is not an answear.

Eizo CG318-4K or new model which is coming soon (with HDR support).

http://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?su ... 1494331977

Way cheaper option:

LG 31MU97

Other option- good TV. e.g.:

http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/tx55ez95 ... 194485.htm

Why not Eizo CG2730? (It's 2K.)
It seems pretty good under 2000€.

Or Eizo CG277-BK or CG248-4K (it's 4K) for 2300€ ca.

Not 4K.

4K in 24inch is about pointless, specially for keying, masking. You can't see edges at all

Way cheaper option:

LG 31MU97

Two questions:
1. 10bits declared are true or FRC?
2. Is it possible to calibrate it with the X-Rite i1Display Pro?

Thanks

Andrew, I'm sorry, but with all my respect, this as the answer to a question I did not ask
I especially mentioned that I'm looking an advice not regarding specific models but regardind screen technologies. I understand what I want for photo, but video is a little bit specific beast. And different technologies have some advantages and disadvantages regardind calibration and profiling for video which I don't understand truly. The simple choice of IPS matrix is not so obvious here

With some guide around this matter, I believe I will be able so make some (educated) decision based on my past experience and common sense. And yes, I'm oretty dure that ENZO would be unbeatable regardless technology they used

I think technology should be your almost last worry
Each technology has it own problems and different manufactures deal with them in different ways.
Local dimming is one of the very advanced methods to deliver better black/contrast for LCD screens.
I like OLED look with its real black and most important very fast response time. Never liked LCD due to their "lagginess". Worked a lot on Pioneer Kuro plasma and it was really nice, but this is past.
Up to today best monitor I've see is Sony BVM 4K, specially in HDR mode, but even this has its problems (fairly poor viewing angles).
Don't focus on technology to much, its not the key driver in choosing monitor.

Way cheaper option:

LG 31MU97

Two questions:
1. 10bits declared are true or FRC?
2. Is it possible to calibrate it with the X-Rite i1Display Pro?

Thanks

1. Native 10bit.
2. Don't know- LG has own software. You calibrate to Rec.709, hook over BM and all should be good. If this is not accurate then it means Resolve preview engine is not good (or monitor messes with e.g. YUV signal).

Just for fun.
Just fund out that Eizo Prominence may cost huge money- we are talking 20K$+
It's based on soma fancy new Panasonic panel which itself costs a fortune.
New FSI 4K HDR monitor is apparently based on the same panel and has list price of 45K$.

Way cheaper option:

LG 31MU97

Two questions:
1. 10bits declared are true or FRC?
2. Is it possible to calibrate it with the X-Rite i1Display Pro?

Thanks

1. Native 10bit.
2. Don't know- LG has own software. You calibrate to Rec.709, hook over BM and all should be good. If this is not accurate then it means Resolve preview engine is not good (or monitor messes with e.g. YUV signal).

This thread is all about this monitor:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread ... 4K-Monitor

I think technology should be your almost last worry
Each technology has it own problems and different manufactures deal with them in different ways.

Thank you. I understand your point, probably you are right.

What do you think about followed models:

LG 43UJ6300
BENQ BL2711U
ACER ET430K
HP Envy 27

?

We are back at question no. 1- what is your budget?

I don't know every monitor/TV out there- read reviews online. I would probably not pick any of them for video work.
For me UHD needs at least 30inch- even this is to small in my opinion.
If you have low budget stick to one of the Dells- this is fairly safe buy.
If you have 1000$ get LG LG 31MU97, which does offer quite a lot for the price.
If you do a lot of TV work and interlaced maybe buy TV instead.

If you do a lot of TV work and interlaced maybe buy TV instead.

With some reasons, I would rather prefer smallest sizes even I understand all disadvantages of this solution.

And this is interesting point. I really know nothing about this. Af far as I understand from your response, probably, any TV will works only in interlaced mode, unlike pc displays, is it right?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

And this is interesting point. I really know nothing about this. Af far as I understand from your response, probably, any TV will works only in interlaced mode, unlike pc displays, is it right?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Nope- TVs these days have mainly LCD, OLED panels which are "the same way progressive by nature as PC monitors".
You can have 1080 60p going to your TV- well new ones even do 100/120p.
In the same way nothing stops PC monitor to accept and display like TV interlaced signal- it just has to be part of monitor features (and it's in case of higher-end models). Key elements are very similar in todays TVs and monitors.
If you want smaller one than 27 inch 2.5K resolution or 24inch HD is good option.

P3 is basically Adobe RGB. Try to find a monitor which covers as high a percentage as possible of Adobe RGB and you'll be in the general ballpark.

Adobe RGB and P3 are not same. The only thing Adobe RGB, P3 and sRGB/Rec.709 share is a common blue x-coordinate in the Yxy space. Adobe can represent purer 'wider' greens, while P3 purer reds.

Can anyone chime in on using an Eizo CG277 vs CG247X?
Basically is the CG277 overkill as a ref monitor.
Cost is a bit more and pixel res is 2K but is there an advantage?
I read somewhere that that CG277 is softer when used as ref in HD.
I work mostly in 4K but use HD for ref display.

I hope this topic is not too old for a pair of clarifications:

1. From your answers I understood that the most effective way to grade for theatre in a non-ideal situation (my room, my monitor) is doing it in Rec.709 (not in P3) with a good monitor through Decklink Mini Monitor, then converting it into P3 DCP. Well, I don't understand why I should convert into P3: I mean, in DCP-O-Matic I can import the Rec.709 graded file specifying its color space, and DCP-O-Matic converts it into a DCP perfectly usable in a theatrical projector. I tried: grading in Rec.709, outputting a Prores444, converting it via DCP-O-Matic, and viewing in a theatre where the colors seems identical (or at least very-very close) to my home monitor colors. So here my question: does it mean that DCP-O-Matic converts under-the-hood my Rec.709 footage into P3, or that DCP-O-Matic outputs a Rec.709-DCP that the theatrical projector can handle anyway?

2. I even understood that is preferable to grade not with the GUI monitor, but using a good preview-monitor via Decklink Mini Monitor. Now, both Eizo or the cheaper LG are monitors with various color space presets (AdobeRGB 99%, Rec.709 100%, DCI-P3 98%, Custom, etc.) but Decklink-specs say that only Rec.709 is handled. So, if I connect a Eizo with a Decklink card, what do I do with all the different monitor presets? How can I take advantage of them? (Perhaps using a Quadro card for the preview-monitor and my old TitanX for the GUI?)

Thanks a lot.