[Archie Cruz]

I just had to comment on this:
“Re: Monitoring Question
by Mike James on Nov 28, 2008 at 8:46:28 pm

I’ve been scouring the Cow trying to find someone who knows about this pretend computer-land video to real broadcast video video business. Please don’t send me away when I finally found experts who know the Answer!
PS. No I don’t use Premiere Pro… :)”

I’m about to give up celebrating New Years Eve 2008 to write a short paper on this, so I thought I’d get some feedback from Pros & Rookies alike. I’ll keep it brief:
– The fundamental facts are known to the ‘Pros’. Only the highest caliber of calibrated broadcast monitors can be reliably used as reference so as to match delivery footage to an ideal that will display with no color, contrast, brightness or gamma anomalies whatsoever.
– The use of any monitors less than the top tier will not guarantee that output footage will be free of anomalies.
– The above statements assume that the ‘client’ is therefore responsible for also calibrating their monitors to take advantage of cleanly broadcast material.
These fundamental facts have been so since the beginning of calibration capable authoring and viewing monitors.
These assumptions were pretty easy to cope with up until the floodgates of content media distribution burst open with many new client-side viewing platforms.
If one considers that one cleanly calibrated program may now (Assuming Digital TV) be distributed in one or more of 7 key media formats (Broadcast Digital Cable TV,Narrowcast Video, print to Film, Web,DVD,Blu-Ray & Handheld… AND this content flows to a plethora of client screens of all stripe…
The classic assumptions have therefore changed by force.
What I’m saying is that unless there’s a reliable auto-calibrate button on every client platform that magically aligns client monitors to the SAME standard as that used by authors, the difference in probable quality between content that’s been color graded on top tier monitors and content that’s been graded on lesser screens will statistically be narrower than in the past when the viewing options were FAR fewer than today.
Eventually the Top tier CRT Color grading monitors will loose relevance as CRT’s vanish. Eventually, we’ll just be discussing HD over LCD or LED or O-LED displays ( of all sizes) – period!
With some effort, client side displays will be manufactured to closer tolerances- all but eliminating the need for user-calibration completely. THEN we’ll have a much easier time grading as the likely range of client side variances will have diminished.
The utopic vision is one of monitors metaphorically like Triconderoga #2 pencils- always delivering the same dark gray line, no matter which Triconderoga #2 pencil you use! https://www.prang.com/
I fear that day is a long way off.

[Archie Cruz]

Bob. Don’t kill me- I tried but failed to upload or link to a diagram that I wished to share with you (hence the …looks to your eye reference) . Please MOD. remove my posts immediately prior to Bob’s. Can someone help me upload/link images in this UI? Thanks

[Archie Cruz]

I do follow your logic but what Bob is basically saying is [if broadcast quality is what you’re after, you need to retool your camera and capture components because that’s where quality is most affected]. there are so many degradation issues with lower end HD cameras (not to mention DOF constraints etc) that to imagine that color grading can correct for them is foolish. A need for a reference monitor also assumes that you’re an expert colorist.Many aspects of reference color correction are not visual. I really see the wisdom of his bare logic. Match the gear to your intended delivery platform+ skill level + budget. All links in the chain have to make sense in relation to each other and yes- that includes skill level(total production value).
FYI-My strategy therefore, is to take his advice and buy the plasma display [Oh and yes- it can be used for watching broadcast content;) for better-than-computer-monitor approximation of broadcast/narrow-cast gamma, color & contrast until my skill level, funding and rest of the HW chain are in sync with the next level up in gear. I know I will not be needing the top tier of monitors because I have no intention or aspiration of being that level of colorist (though I’ll gladly hire the talent).
In the scheme of things, this strategy allows me to focus on what matters most- Delivering Compelling Content. The highest level of color grading will not inversely translate into that anyway.

[Archie Cruz]

[Archie Cruz]

So interesting that these issues keep cropping up. I’m trying hard to demystify this diagrammatically. Just ignore my ‘placeholder’ camera, a consumer job with HDMI out. How does the rest of the set-up look to your eye?

[Archie Cruz]

“Don’t be in such a rush to spend your hard earned money.”
It takes courage to provide that kind of mentorship. I’m in a similar quandary as many that are trying to assemble an HD turnkey edit system but hit a roadblock when it comes to quality Color grading. I sense that you’re trying to say that absolutely perfect color grading demands the top tier of monitors so as to correct to a benchmark standard.
Simply put, that standard is ‘Broadcast’. Is it then true to say that if using a camera or capture card (or both) that are not broadcast caliber, that the monitor really doesn’t matter since the quality will be sub-par?
Surely there are various levels of color grading that depend on the viewing delivery ‘platform’. So if the person is keen on achieving a benchmark that will satisfy customers playing back from Blu-ray players on Plasma displays that indeed, a good plasma display of the appropriate resolution, features and inputs should be sufficient?
An Indie Film maker shooting a self-funded feature for submission to Discovery Communications would be foolish to skimp on any link in the Broadcast HD chain of components.
Mabe Color grading ought to be graded on a scale.
B= Broadcast
C= Consumer HD for Blu=Ray
D= Consumer SD for DVD
etc ?