That sounds like a good option for me, Lee. They are only a few hundred dollars, but they are 10-bit and do a good job. #Colormunki display greyscale tv#If your Samsung TV isn't 10-bit, consider replacing it with a VIZIO 10-bit LCD or a used Panasonic plasma. Premiere and After Effecs will send a preview out to your calibrated display, just like Resolve will. The nice thing about the MiniMonitor is that many apps can use it. #Colormunki display greyscale mac#It only shows the video preview being fed to it by the Mini Monitor.įor compatibility, you should wait for one of the Windows Wizards to weigh in - I'm a Mac guy. There's no GUI, and you can't use it as desktop space. You end up with an additional display that is for video preview only. It will output SDI and HDMI, and you can calibrate the display. It's like the Mini Monitor box, but it's a card. Lee Gauthier wrote:I think you should look at the DeckLink MiniMonitor. If it's to run an "external monitor" I would assume it doesn't effect other parts of the system? am I right to assume that? How does a BMD card and/or external monitor fit into the system? Would it let me use a third monitor, and that third monitor being fed by the BMD card? If I add a BMD card, can I still use the GTX 670 the same way as I've always used it? #Colormunki display greyscale full#The full Adobe CC suite (mostly Premiere, Photoshop, After Effects, and Illustrator). I'd be surprised if it is.ĭaVinci Resolve Lite. #Colormunki display greyscale Pc#There's also a good Samsung LCD TV next to those, but it's currently not hooked up to the PC in any way, and I don't know if it's 10bit. Input terminals: DVI-D, VGA, and Display port. Ĭurrent monitors- x2 Dell "Ultrasharp" monitors, with the display set to "duplicate these displays". Here's some of the specs (the one's I'm assuming are relevant in this case). What model/s would suit my PC and not mess with the other applications I use on the same PC? I'm still trying to get my head around all this, and figure out what is an affordable and realistic option for me.Ī few have suggested I should use a "BMD card". When I was showing to a new colorist how the scopes worked, I actually blanked the whole projector an color a trailer using only the scopes. Otherwise, it's a slippery slope if you've timed everything on a monitor that covers up serious problems, and yet over-emphasizes very minor issues, both with color and density. You have to have some reference standard by which compare your work for a "real" job where everything had to match. I asked the client the next day how the films looked, and they said, "everything looked great - terrific job."īut I wouldn't want to do this as a general rule. I had to color-correct some really grisly medical procedure films back in the 1980s, and I opted to turn the main monitor to B&W and just color-corrected completely from scopes, particularly after lunch. Maybe the answer is to not use a monitor at all, and grade through text-to-speech on calibrated speakers? "If you have graded on a poorly calibrated display their relative judgement on their still un-calibrated display will define your images being yet more inferior."Īs once again, it ignores the relative judgement of the user on the uncalibrated grading system.ĬhrisWilliamson wrote:That made me chuckle too, how on earth would you grade color on a black and white monitor? And would you use a calibrated black and white monitor, because everybodys luma will be different. There are definite advantages to working from a calibrated delivery point, but they are not this: To say that a viewer with the same setup will have a compounded error based off the relative difference when comparing it to correctly graded material is incorrect, as it ignores the fact that that same relativity applies to the user of the uncalibrated grading system. The real problem here being when it is different, it will be likely _more_ different than if you did it from a calibrated system. I have to play devils advocate and say, statistically speaking, if you work on a run of the mill uncalibrated system you have just as much chance of the intended audience seeing it as you intended as you do it looking different from how you intended. For the majority of my career I've delivered commericals from an online suite with correctly calibrated equipment, but always did it from the point of view that 'at least I know its correct' fully knowing that the vast majority of the target audience will be watching it incorrect one way or another (using the 'showroom' setting on a commercial television). Marc Wielage wrote:Steve Shaw of Light Illusion has a good explanation on why and how calibration has to be done:Īlthough I agree with the sentiment, the logic of this argument doesn't seem to be correct.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |