What Monitor Do YOU Use???

jcg wrote on 10/9/2003, 5:57 PM
I need to buy a used 12", 13" or 14" color monitor and have been surfing eBay for the last week to see what's out there. Sony has many models that may be appropriate, Panasonic has many fewer. I just need something decent to edit with. Should I only get something with resolution of 500 lines or more? I don't need any audio on it.

What do you use and how do you feel about it? Any and all suggestions about what to get or what not to get would be helpful. Many thanks.

JCG

Comments

Spot|DSE wrote on 10/9/2003, 6:58 PM
you'll be happiest with higher lines of resolution, and something between 12-17"
Sony and JVC are always first choices. Be sure it's got SVid in, also labeled as Y/C. RGB in is always good, but since you are probably not using a converter capable of RGB out, it won't matter as much. All converters have Y/C, and most cameras do too.
We use Sony and JVC here at Sundance Media Group.
jcg wrote on 10/9/2003, 7:03 PM
Dear SPOT,

I recognize you (have been your student). Thanks for the response. By "higher lines of resolution", do you mean higher than 500? Any possibility of getting the Sony and JVC model numbers you guys use? That would be especially helpful. Thanks again.

JCG
Spot|DSE wrote on 10/9/2003, 7:17 PM
Anything over 300 lines of resolution is good. 750 lines is heaven.
We use the JVC H1310SU in our small rooms and the Sony14L in our main room. We also have a couple Sony 1350's that we used to use on the VASST tours.
Hope to see you on future VASST tours!
scotty_dvc80 wrote on 10/9/2003, 9:07 PM
SPOT using soemone elses suggestion I just bought a samsung 14" FLat screen TV I was reading in a threads that Tv's today have better electronics and can suffice as a monitor. Being that we will watch the DVD that we burn on a TV in the first place. What is your opinion on this and also the TV I bought has RCA only should have i have looked for Svideo in as well? my panny DVC 80 has RCA jacks.. Did I do wrong or did I make a good purchase..It seems to work ok ... Educate me please.. thanks
BillyBoy wrote on 10/9/2003, 10:08 PM
Let me jump in because I more than anyone promote the 'use a regular TV' as your external monitor method. UNLESS you do work that is going to be directly broadcast over broadcast television... MEANING you're doing commericals, stuff like that... then running out and buying some far more expensive NTSC monitor is gross overkill. Of course its your money.
craftech wrote on 10/9/2003, 10:10 PM
If your end product is VHS you should do some sample renders using a few color corrections and print to VHS. Then you should play the samples on at least three different makes and models of regular TVs. When you find the settings which look good on all of them use those for the final render and create a master.
The reason I am not crazy about using an expensive monitor is that the end product will not be played on an expensive monitor. The default settings on most TVs have the Picture(contrast) and Brightness controls up too high. Many of them have multiple color settings to choose from. You should try them all.
BillyBoy has some excellent tutorials which deal with color correction and monitor setup. He does not use an expensive studio monitor.:

http://www.wideopenwest.com/~wvg/tutorial-menu.htm

John

I see that he was posting as I was writing this.

BillyBoy wrote on 10/9/2003, 10:27 PM
Amazing how often two people are more or less answering the same question the same way at the same time unaware the other or several others are also doing the same thing.

What I've also done for home use is I bought a Radio Shack #15-1172 S-Video distribution amp. Its just a little break out box that accepts either RCA or S-Video input and has 4 output lines. The idea is you can use it to play the same output off your external monitor AND your big screen TV at once. This allows you with a little fiddling to perfectly match the output you're seeing on your external monitor to the output you'll see in your family room or living room, whatever. Its basically a one time deal to adjust the two TV's to each other by playing a Vegas created vid as you adjust the two televisions to each other. I'm very happy that I did this. Before due to variations that can't be helped one TV to another some of the vids I made were off just enough in levels or hue that it bugged me. Now I know whatever I'm adjusting to on my external monitor with be exactly what I see on my big screen TV's.

Oops... I almost forgot. You'll one time need to lug your little external monitor you use with Vegas and set it along side (not too close to avoid electromaganet interference) your big TV then adjust each TV as you watch the output being feed to both at once. If you don't use a amp the signal strength will be too weak to one or the other TV's.
Spot|DSE wrote on 10/9/2003, 11:08 PM
I'll mention here, that most of our work is either going to broadcast, or will be viewed on a WIDE variety of televisions. So, we do use an expensive monitor, for the same reason I monitor my audio on the best monitors I can afford. Frankly, I could never afford my audio monitors anyway, except that I have a special endorsee purchase deal with Hothouse that saves me 70%. For video, we also use a 99.00 television from Walmart to see the WORST our colors will look. Just like we also check our audio mixes on a Craig boombox from 1985.
I disagree that you can edit video for clients on a television. You can do this for school, personal, corporate use, or other private uses, but if it's going to a client, who MAY check your work on a professional system elsewhere, and believe me, it happens a LOT in the professional side of this biz, then you don't want to be color correcting, blurring, or still image processing on a low resolution monitor, IMO. Subtle differences in codecs for instance, could NEVER be seen accurately/measurably on a low end monitor. Gamma swings are monstrous as well.
Just like you *could* conceivably mix a hit album on a pair of Creative speakers, you *could* conceivably edit a show on a cheap video monitor. But to be in the game for money, you need a good monitor as a safety net.
But like anything else, there are always alternatives. I'd rather play safe. My group's reputation is on the line with everything we put out there.
craftech wrote on 10/10/2003, 12:24 AM
The original post stated:
" I just need something decent to edit with". I made a recommendation based upon that statement.
I am not sure that comparing audio monitors to video monitors is entirely fair. It is much more likely that a customer (at least most of ours here) would have high quality audio equipment as opposed to a TV which is the equal of a monitor with 750 lines of horizontal resolution.
Moreover, there are no automatic tonal adjustments for their audio equipment which have to be defeated as there are automatic picture controls for their TVs which have to be adjusted manually in order to "get them right".
I have seen more incorrectly adjusted commercial VHS tapes of theatrical productions than I have correctly adjusted ones. One can only assume that they were corrected using expensive monitors, but not compensated for the "incorrect" default settings on the average TV. Theatrical productions in my opinion present probably the biggest challenge to an editor especially when having to compensate for "creative" lighting directors who don't know a thing about video reproduction.
As far as the editor viewing subtle nuances between codecs I would agree that a thousand dollar monitor is necessary, but not for the original poster unless I am reading his request incorrectly.
If I were to recommend an expensive monitor it would be a 9" monitor for shooting. That would be worthwhile because without the source material being correct the editing is a nightmare.

John
BillyBoy wrote on 10/10/2003, 12:59 AM
This is one of those topics that comes up a lot. Just for a point of reference I've wrote several posts on this subject if anyone wants more specifics and I have mentioned I did extensive testing with a 'professional' NTSC monitor. For what its worth it was a Panasonic BT M1950 19" High-Grade Color Video Monitor that does have all the bells and whistles and is capable of generating 750 lines of resolution... It "only" costs about $1,900 if you want one. As I said before I saw virtually no difference side to side when comparing several vidoes generated in Vegas when it was compared to that cheap $99 Walmart TV I used to test color/levels. So I sure take exception to SPOT's worst color comment. I'm only commenting further now so nobody gets the impression you need a fancy monitor to test your work or your not doing "professional" work. That's simply overblown and more closely falls under self-gradification I'm more "professional" than you BS. I hate that!

jcg wrote on 10/10/2003, 1:55 AM
This is the original poster. First, despite some of the differences of opinion, this has all been very useful for me. Thank you for your responses. In the end, what I get is that ANY of the Sony, Panasonic or JVC monitors I've been looking at on eBay (more than 500 lines of resolution and Svideo, RGB, NTSC, PAL and more) will be OK. And boy there are a lot of them that are guaranteed and with no screen burn, etc., from excellent sellers that can be had for as little as $80 (most run about $200 to $300). If anyone is interested, search eBay as follows: electronics & computers TO cameras & photo TO professional video equipment TO monitors.

Does anyone else want to share what model monitor they work with? Thanks again.

JCG
scotty_dvc80 wrote on 10/10/2003, 8:14 AM
Billyboy.. I bought the TV 149.95 at BestBuy Samsung. i did this on your recommendation through a thread you posted a few months back. After reading all these replys I came away with a few things. First SPOT I dont believe was trying to be condenscending by over riding your recommendation with his.

I came away with hey: If i want to make videos professionally for movie studios or the like that I might consider investing in a true monitor. If i want to make videos locally for corporate or weddings and various personal projects then your recomendation is the way to go...

In summation folks if your a pro doing hollywood type projects then SPOT is right. If your a prosumer doing your small local projects for your average customer then a TV will do just fine. My 2c
John_Cline wrote on 10/10/2003, 8:56 AM
I have mentioned I did extensive testing with a 'professional' NTSC monitor... As I said before I saw virtually no difference side to side when comparing several vidoes generated in Vegas when it was compared to that cheap $99 Walmart TV I used to test color/levels.

Well, then there must have been something seriously wrong with the professional monitor. You and I have already gotten into this in a couple of other threads and we are on completely opposite sides of this discussion. For one thing, a $99 Walmart TV simply doesn't have a very well regulated power supply and it's black level will "float" depending on how bright the scene is, also, its color response will not be linear and the whites will bloom, also depending on how bright the scene is overall. I could go on. It just IS NOT a reference monitor and should NOT be used as one.

The bottom line is that based on over thirty years of experience in the video production business, I absolutely can't agree with you. Why would you spend at least two or three thousand dollars on a camera and then cheap out on a video monitor? I'm sorry, but it just doesn't make any sense. Just because you can't see any difference between a pro monitor and a Walmart TV, doesn't mean there isn't any difference.

I'm sure you're going to give me the same treatment that you gave to Spot when he disagreed with you. You "hate it" when someone even implies that they may be "more professional than you." Sorry about that...

John
retrofilms wrote on 10/10/2003, 9:03 AM
I use an old Commodore 1702 monitor, which offers a great picture and can be had on ebay pretty cheap:

http://www.myoldcomputers.com/museum/perif/1702.htm

Notice the separate Chroma and Luma imputs on the back--yep, S-video! You probably also noticed that you can't use a standard S-video cable, so you'll have to make one (which only requires simple soldering).

Here is the cable (called "split chroma/luma cable"):

http://www.oldsoftware.com/cables.html

Just cut off the non-RCA end and attach an S-video connector:

http://www.radioshack.com/product.asp?catalog%5Fname=CTLG&category%5Fname=CTLG%5F011%5F003%5F011%5F000&product%5Fid=278%2D451

Here is the pinout that you can coordinate with the RCA ends of the Commodore cable:

http://www.sun.com/products-n-solutions/hardware/docs/html/817-2400-10/appF.IOpinout-specs.html#78237

And there you have it, a quality external monitor for around $50!



SonyEPM wrote on 10/10/2003, 9:04 AM
PVM146NU
John_Cline wrote on 10/10/2003, 9:14 AM
At the time, a Commodore 1702 was actually a rebadged low-end JVC professional monitor. It really is a very good monitor and vastly better than any $99 Walmart TV. Thanks for bring it up. I have a couple of them and use them daily.

John
craftech wrote on 10/10/2003, 9:18 AM
jcg,

" In the end, what I get is that ANY of the Sony, Panasonic or JVC monitors I've been looking at on eBay (more than 500 lines of resolution and Svideo, RGB, NTSC, PAL and more) will be OK. And boy there are a lot of them that are guaranteed and with no screen burn, etc., from excellent sellers that can be had for as little as $80 (most run about $200 to $300). "
=====================
In the end, what you may get is someone elses headache. There are differences in terms of quality control for the brands you mentioned and I would be suspect in terms of getting a bargain on eBay. What good does calibrating video to a screwed up monitor do for you anyway? All three manufacturers have had their share of lemons and quality control issues with JVC leading the pack.
When I read your original post I assumed you didn't want to spend a lot of money. I based my recommendation in part upon that assumption. Do yourself a favor and buy a NEW TV or monitor , the TV being within your budget. If the TV isn't designed to be carried to a video shoot get one with a larger screen. Simply put, you'll see more when you edit.

Now in terms of the reference to the cheap $99 Walmart TV I have seen mentioned in this thread. Walmart has been one of the largest distributors of Sanyo TVs. If Sanyo is the brand being referenced, here's a bit of information for you. Check Consumer Reports. Sanyo overall has the fewest repairs of any major brand of TV. You can buy a 32" Sanyo TV from Walmart with S-Video input and AV I/O for $350. In addition to that you have 90 days!!!! to return it with no questions asked. Try that on eBay or from the sleazoid vendors who are located in and around NYC.

John
craftech wrote on 10/10/2003, 9:26 AM
The Commodore 1702 would be a good choice for him if he can find one which is reasonably priced and which can be returned. I have seen them on eBay for $40 in the past, but I would be suspect. In contrast I have recently seen it for $225 with a return policy.....hardly a bargain.

John
John_Cline wrote on 10/10/2003, 10:23 AM
John,

While reliability is certainly one factor in buying a piece of equipment, my main concern is image quality. Consumer televisions are generally not accurate enough to make critical judgements concerning the application of color correction filters. Some consumer televisions can be adjusted to come fairly close for less critical work. But if your work is more than editing home movies for friends and family, I still believe a good monitor with high quality "calibrated" phosphors, high video bandwidth (i.e. high resolution) and a stable, well regulated power supply is absolutely essential. A professional, reference video monitor is supposed to reveal any problems in your video, like compression artifacts, focus and color issues. A consumer TV just isn't good enough to show what is potentially wrong with your video.

I would take an accurate monitor with a smaller screen over a less accurate monitor with a larger screen any day.

The earlier suggestion of a Commodore 1702 is a good one. It has relatively high resolution (although the dot pitch is a bit coarse if you're sitting close to it) and a fairly well regulated supply. The particular Hitachi picture tube it used had pretty decent phosphors and the color reproduction was relatively neutral as opposed to consumer TV's which tend to boost certain colors that consumers find "pleasing." This is usually accomplished by the choice of phosphors used in the picture tube and can't be adjusted out by tweaking the set.

The 1702 originally sold for $199, but essentially the same monitor with the JVC label on it sold for over $400. $225 is a bit high, but not outrageous considering what it is. The only downside is that any 1702 was probably used with a Commodore C64 computer and could have latent images of the C64's boot up screen burned into the tube. If you can find a pristine 1702, it might be worth $225.

John
BillyBoy wrote on 10/10/2003, 11:18 AM
John, have you even bothered to try what I did? I'm guessing you haven't yet you go on and on knocking what I proved to myself in a side to side test. You keep bringing up a NONE ISSUE; image quality. Of course an expensive NTSC monitor will have a better quality image, meaning cripser resolution. It ought to, because it costs maybe 20 times more!

It sounds like you fell for marketing hype with buzz words like calibrated phosphors, well regulated power supplies, etc.. The fact you can't run away from is a PROPERLY calibrated TV regardless what is costs CAN have proper black and while points and show proper hue meaning yes, even a Walmart purchased $99 consumer TV can serve as an external monitor.

I also see you're starting to back away from your orignal position. Now you say Consumer televisions are GENERALLY not accurate enough. Well, maybe if you knew how to calibrate one you could use it like I do and use all that saved money for something else. LOL!
PAW wrote on 10/10/2003, 12:32 PM

SonyEPM - first time I have typed that, wierd

the PVM146NU does not show up on google is that correct?

PAW
PAW wrote on 10/10/2003, 12:41 PM

Tried loads of permutations on the acronym and still can't find it.

SonyEPM, I guess this must be a specialist monitor from a small company without a web site ;-)
SonyEPM wrote on 10/10/2003, 1:12 PM
Yeah, well, this is a $50,000 monitor I had custom built for me at the top secret Sony skunkworks plant in...

oh, wait, just read the number off the back. PVM-14N6U. $690 at B&H.
Starwipe wrote on 10/10/2003, 2:09 PM
Another good choice may be the JVC TM-H1375SU . 750 lines and only $429
at B&H.