[Michael Hadley]

Well, indeed. Broadcast is a whole ‘nuther mutha. Tape is also the cheapest (best?) long term storage medium (for now).

But I think it can be safely said that if tape is not dead, it is being politely shown the door. No one will be using tape in 10 years.

I know of two small post houses who moved into new locations. In each instance, they decided to sell off some of their decks. Devices that cost $35-45K were sold for peanuts. It was painful.

[Michael Hadley]

Yes. Tape is dead.

I’ve been working the higher-end corporate vein for nearly 20 years. In fact, as an intern, I can recall portable 3/4″ and 1″ record decks. Beta, BetaSP, DigiBeta–great tools for many years.

Have not shot (or cut with) tape for at least two years.

In my neck of the woods (NY metro), tape is pretty much dead.

(Although a great shooter I work with does work with the BBC and they apparently still like tape).

[Michael Hadley]

Well, in truth, in the past have used and ACD (which is indeed 1920×1080) and a nice Samsung which is full 1920×1080. So, no downscaling when monitoring. Used the Matrox with FCP7. But the original string was about the need for the Matrox when using X and a true 1920 monitor, based on the NEW WAY that X supposedly handles color space data.

Agree that laptop monitor is NG for critical evaluation (although, anecdotally, it is hard to distinguish between the full res HD ACD.)

Again, everything is QC’d via scopes.

And again, anecdotally, I have to say what X gives back out of the box on the HD ACD looks DAMN CLOSE if not the same as what we see when we are shooting and monitoring out an SDI signal into a panasonic 17″ field monitor that’s been calibrated properly. In fact, it looks better/closer than what we see when we go through the Matrox chain and calibration.

It’s a head spinner.

[Michael Hadley]

Right. Broadcast is not the issue since that is not our deliverable.

And we’re lucky because our clients don’t visit our editing suite–we do production as well so we just post cuts on on a client web page we create.

I guess we are indeed down the rabbit hole in terms of standards. I guess my point is it helpful to start with monitoring in broadcast workflow set up (via MXO or Blakcmagic, etc) or is that really beside the point.

Bear in mind that of course we use (software) scopes to check black levels, white levels, vectorscope for skins tones, etc. Then do our style grade as we’d like to.

But bloody hell, finding the best way to reference is like quicksand.

I will say this:

We shoot a lot these days with the Sony F3 and Canon c300 (both great). When I monitor live on set via an SDI in on a 17″ Panasonic monitor it does indeed look like just what I get out on the back end looking at the image on a ACD pumped right of FCPX.

Of course, I’ve not done a real side-by-side comparison so it’s a bit from memory.

[Michael Hadley]

Thanks everyone for the input. Now here’s a question:

Most of our deliverable are non-broadcast. Either for web usage or Pro Res projection. In which case, is broadcast monitoring still the best standard for critical grading—or do we just tumble down the rabbit hole?

[Michael Hadley]

Well, that’s what I thought. Until I read Hodgetts article–which is admittedly insanely technical. But X really does handle color space different.

As well, I have read a number of post by editors who have run side by side comparisons with blackmagic and mxo rigs vs output to ACD or on iMac and to their surprise they did not notice a difference.

Sounds to good to be true but wondering if others have any actual experience with this…

Thanks!

[Michael Hadley]

Well, that works for my tower-based system. But a second system is being driven by a laptop. An Acer monitor for workspace, and the MPB monitor being used to show viewer.
Based on Hodgetts’ comments, it would seem that the laptop screen is indeed OK for critical viewing but wanted to get some other expert opinion. And if there was a agreement, what is the best way to set up the Apple screen/monitor for viewing.

Not a problem to get a second MXO. Matrox is a good company with good support. That said, every couple of weeks the calibration jumps the shark for some reason and necessitates a call to support. At least that’s what would happen regularly with FCP 7.

[Michael Hadley]

With the “Used Media” option, do you happen to know if it puts handles on the clips or is it strictly just the used media–and nothing else.

Thanks as always.

[Michael Hadley]

Would appreciate the update on FCPX and the MBPr when you get a chance. And yes, this computer looks pretty monstrous indeed.

[Michael Hadley]

I was completely offended by the lack of offense that was taken slightly.

On a more serious note: I want to see/read about real world results with FCPX and the new MBPr. Could be pretty interested. Especially if it fairly cooks whilst running 3 monitors!