Video Editing Monitor Recommendations

[VideoTechMan]

I have used CRT monitors for several years to do my video/audio editing work on, but seeing as how one of them finally gave up the ghost, I wanted to look into getting LCD monitors for my new A/V editing workstation setup.

Prefer to use DVI so I will have to look into the video card with dual DVI output. I am looking into perhaps getting a 20" or up to 23" size monitor. Probably widescreen too since I plan to work more with WS video down the line. As I may plan to edit HD video down the line should I get a 1920x1080 based monitor? I know that CRT's were well-regarded in color accuracy and accurate blacks. Are LCD's capable of this as well?

What do you guys who do video work on a regular basis recommend? Thanks!

[dragonkeeper]

I switched my two 21 Sony crts for for 2 Samsung 22 wide screen monitors and am very glad i did. The CRT had better color and picture in my opinion, but the truth of the matter is most people who watch HD content do so on a LCD monitor. I thought it would be best to view the content the same way the majority my customers will, on an LCD display.

The colors and blacks on an LCD is not as good as CRT but its not that far off (depending on the technology used in the LCD display).

[VideoTechMan]

Thanks for the input! I'll look into the Samsung monitors, they seem pretty reliable.

[16mmJunkie]

Yep....I use two Samsung XL2370 on one of editing stations and am very happy with them as well!

[lordsmurf]

Samsung XL2370

It's not accurate, though. Sorry to be disagreeable.

In fact, I'd go so far to call it (and most LCD monitors in general) useless for anything but the average home user that doesn't care about image quality. I'm not talking little nitpick quality differences, either -- HUGE, HUGE differences in quality, wholly inaccurate.

If you want accuracy, buy this one (Viewsonic 23" $280):
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/658413-REG/Viewsonic_VP2365WB_VP2365wb_23_Widesc...3167/KBID/4166

Other okay choices include:
LG 21" $170 - http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004SBCG72/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=thdifa-20&link...SIN=B004SBCG72
LG 23" $220 - http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004KM4AQY/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=thdifa-20&link...SIN=B004KM4AQY

I don't like the LG as much because the shiny bezel around the screen is distracting at time.

HP is junk, Dell is junk, Samsung is junk. Don't buy those, you'll regret it, if you want accuracy.

These are all low-price entry-level models of IPS panels, too. The higher end ones start at about $500 and go well into 4-digit pricing.

[edDV]

I use 23" Samsung monitors for the Vegas/Premiere/FinalCut menus but always use video monitors to judge levels, gamma and color balance. You really need both waveform monitors in the edit program and a separate calibrated video monitor to get close.

For SD I still use CRT interlace monitors (Sony PVM's). For HD I double-tripple check with a mix of levels calibrated CRT and LED HDTV sets because at this location I can't afford an HD broadcast monitor. All HDTV sets attempt to auto-adjust both levels and chroma balance. In some you can turn these functions off and you should to make color judgements of your video.

Broadcast/Professional monitors are designed to accurately display your video as it is (warts and all) without auto-correction. That way you can fine correct visually.

Computer monitors follow different gamma and chroma standards. It is difficult to get video accurate color on a computer monitor. You can get black and white levels close using test patterns such as SMPTE or Belle Nuit.
http://www.belle-nuit.com/testchart.html

[16mmJunkie]

[QUOTE=lordsmurf;2100488]

Samsung XL2370

It's not accurate, though. Sorry to be disagreeable.

QUOTE]

That's fine...everyone is entitled to their opinion.....in all fairness I did have to color calibrate them(as with most monitors I have purchased over the years)... guess I'm just a home user who doesn't care. So Smurf...which monitors do you use? That was the OP question...


And I'll agree with Ed that the only true way would be to use a video monitor for a accurate quality image. No computer monitor will be more accurate

[lordsmurf]

On the computers, I'm using IPS panels (LG and ViewSonic, both current and previous models). Video output is then double checked on calibrated CRTs. I won't call it 100% pure accuracy, but it's about as close as you can get without diarrhea of the wallet.

The test patterns posted by edDV are almost perfect on this monitor I'm looking at now. The value of 4 and 0 are maybe a tad too close, but that's about it. Gradients are 100% perfect, not even the slightest hints of posterizing or compression loss.

FYI: The idea that "no computer monitor will be accurate" is now a myth, and has been for about a year now. There was a big article in Broadcast Engineering earlier this year geared at debunking it. There are some very high-cost broadcast monitors available, as LCD panels. They're an evolution of IPS panels, if I recall correctly.

[16mmJunkie]

FYI: The idea that "no computer monitor will be accurate" is now a myth, and has been for about a year now. There was a big article in Broadcast Engineering earlier this year geared at debunking it. There are some very high-cost broadcast monitors available, as LCD panels. They're an evolution of IPS panels, if I recall correctly.

Yep...my pockets aren't that deep... Haven't seen anything at the trade shows yet that has made the statement a myth yet..but, I'm sure as tech moves forward they will become as easy as "plug and play".

[edDV]

FYI: The idea that "no computer monitor will be accurate" is now a myth, and has been for about a year now. There was a big article in Broadcast Engineering earlier this year geared at debunking it. There are some very high-cost broadcast monitors available, as LCD panels. They're an evolution of IPS panels, if I recall correctly.

Yep...my pockets aren't that deep... Haven't seen anything at the trade shows yet that has made the statement a myth yet..but, I'm sure as tech moves forward they will become as easy as "plug and play".

I agree on Brodacast LED monitors. I was talking about sub $500 typical computer monitors. Low priced consumer LED HDTV sets are mostly color tuned to Rec 709 with variable accuracy. In most cases they don't switch to Rec 601 color space for SD source like broadcast monitors generally do. This makes them inaccurate for SD editing/evaluation.

[sanlyn]

During the past couple of months I've gotten completely away from TN-type computer LCD's and managed to get up the bucks for two new monitors with IPS panels: the edge-lit LG IPS226v and the traditionally backlit HP ZR22W. Both are calibrated regularly with the XRite/EyeOne Display2 package, and I update the Xrite product every 18 months.

Like all of these funky, faddish LED panels, the LG has rotten screen uniformity at the edges, but I guess I'm getting used to it (sort of). For video it's a fast display (no judder or stutter problems with action scenes -- so far). One oddity in the LG's behavior (I understand the LG and the HP use the same LG-made panel) is that the darkest levels tend to lose detail, even when I brighten the picture to see what's going on. The more I use these two monitors, the more I'm aware that the LG's colors aren't quite "right". I know what my RGB response and gamma graphs are telling me (they're the smoothest response curves I've ever seen with consumer-level monitors. Sample here https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/335402-VHS-capture-critique?p=2083260&viewfull=1#post2083260). But there's just something odd about the color intensity levels. If I tone down saturation in my color work with the LG, the results look undersaturated on other monitors and TV's.

I have fewer objections to the HP ZR22W. I know that trying to match PC color/luma and TV color/luma is pretty much a guesswork trial-and-error job, but I always have better "luck" with the HP. Its color and gamma response curve look very nearly as nice as the LG (HP gamma is a little tighter), but the HP color and monochrome videos look cleaner and more convincing, almost movie-like. And none of the corner or other uniformity problems I see with LED's. Only problem: the HP's 11ms processor is a tad slow; there's occasional stutter in even moderate-motion videos. I realize the HP can probably be clocked faster (I read where gamers do this all the time), but the last thing I need to do is blow up a set that I'll never be able to afford to buy again.

My objection to the latest string of new IPS panels is their 6-bit processing. The dithering used to get umpteen million colors with these displays does manage to get good color accuracy IMHO (for LCD's, anyway, which are not and never will be as accurate as a good CRT). Bu that same dithering tends to mask noise, grain, and other artifacts of all kinds that immediately show up on HDTV's and even plasmas and my old CRT. That is, it seems to me the dithering is akin to noise reduction, which I don't want; if the video has noise or artifact problems, I want to see them before they hit my TV.

Despite LED lighting and dithering, I'm not going back to my old Samsung LCD's. Mine are 7 years old now and have always been calibrated, but the aging backlights are making good adjustment very difficult for Xrite. Each new RGB/gamma curve looks worse on these things. I think I can safely say that Samsung ain't what they were during those couple of good years I used them, but in deign, build and QC they seem to just get worse every year.

Now, if I could get my hands on a few cool grand in genuine $USD I'd be using a real live studio monitor for this work. Dream on.

[sanlyn]

I forgot: check out this excellent and popular site, if you haven't already:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews.htm

[lordsmurf]

I'm not a fan of LED. I think it's overrated to a degree.
Good idea on the science, but maybe not the best follow-through on how it really works.

Theory vs practice. I've preached this for years.

[sanlyn]

I'm not a fan of LED. I think it's overrated to a degree.

I don't care for it. Poor screen uniformity, no visible benefit ("thinner is better"? I don't buy it). Bad idea to begin with it. Most of the time, hype about cooler operation is just that: hype. Apparently mass market gullibility rules again, as all the makers follow suit. I still like the backlighted HP better, even if I have to live with occasional motion stutter. To get backlighted IPS, it's getting so you have to go with too-big a monitor or fork over more than mere mortals can afford.

[NJRoadfan]

Anyone have any opinion on the HP LP2475W for video work? Its a 24" 1920x1200 (16:10) high gamut IPS display. Right now I'm using a Samsung Syncmaster 940MW (combo monitor/multi system TV) which I'm avoiding doing color work on since its probably way off in calibration.

[sanlyn]

Anyone have any opinion on the HP LP2475W for video work? Its a 24" 1920x1200 (16:10) high gamut IPS display. Right now I'm using a Samsung Syncmaster 940MW (combo monitor/multi system TV) which I'm avoiding doing color work on since its probably way off in calibration.

Ask yourself why you require a high gamut display and if you have a graphics card and calibration kit that can handle it. The LP2475W's color out of the box, like many PC monitors, has deltaE color errors > 10 and a default color temp that's too low for video work. It can be calibrated to almost-perfect color (although still high gamut, which requires high-gamut calibration probes and software). It uses an LM240WU4 H-IPS panel made by LG (Dell, Apple, NEC, and many new IPS monitors use similar LG panels). Its screen size doesn't quite match to 16:9 HD, so you'll need a graphics card that can display 1920x1200 without distorting your video.

An exhaustive test of this monitor is at http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/hp_lp2475w.htm . try TftCentral's main page for a long list of professional monitor reviews, including the newer HP ZR24W.

[NJRoadfan]

Its screen size doesn't quite match to 16:9 HD, so you'll need a graphics card that can display 1920x1200 without distorting your video.

I actually prefer 16:10 and my video card can handle 1920x1200 with no problem. What also caught my eye was the variety of inputs. Not too many monitors come with Dual DVI-I (takes VGA or DVI), DisplayPort, HDMI, composite, s-video, and component jacks, plus the video connections take PAL/SECAM/NTSC video. High gamut isn't a requirement, it just happens to be a feature of the monitor. The ZR24W seems like a huge step back, it appears to be the typical cheapening of a product but marketed as "new and improved".

Oh, and for previewing I still stick with a CRT TV. If I need a real CRT computer monitor, I do have a nice 20" Sun (Sony built) GDM-20E20 sitting in the basement that I can use.

[sanlyn]

There is great admiration at my house for CRT's. The ZR24W is an improvement in color accuracy, gamut (d-luma levels) and gamma tracking. Too bad they had to flub it on lesser screen uniformity with those LED lamps.

[sanlyn]

This LG IPS226 I'm looking at right now does have its good points. Maybe it's just my imagination, but its color/contrast doesn't seem to settle for almost an hour on power-up. That's seems a bit unusual. Maybe it's those LED's? This is my first in-home experience with LG, which I didn't care for in the past. I never cared much for HP, either, but the RZ22W seems to be an exception with HP (even if it is a little sluggish). I guess I'll eventually take a tip from lordsmurf and try a ViewSonic IPS. But IMHO, images in all these new IPS machines are starting to look alike after calibration (maybe because LG makes most of those panels?). In any case, they're a huge improvement in color accuracy over today's Samsungs, which appear to be going straight downhill.

[OldMedia]

Samsung XL2370

If you want accuracy, buy this one (Viewsonic 23" $280):
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/658413-REG/Viewsonic_VP2365WB_VP2365wb_23_Widesc...3167/KBID/4166

.

Since my Sony 9" PVM montior just died (though I was contemplating getting rid of it anyways to save room). Since then I have probably spent too much time researching LCD monitors, and asking colleages for recomendations for use in my small transfer setup. The one monitor that kept coming up was (at least for this price range, and the size I was looking for 21"-23") was the NEC P221W 22" inch monitor. Even the people in the pro photo section at B&H brought up this monitor with out me mentioning it... because I had my heart set on a monitor that had "IPS" in the marquee.

Even though it dosen't have "IPS" in the marquee it does have much of the same specs, and would be considered a wide gamut display.

Type LCD Viewable Size 22" Brightness 300cd/m2 Contrast Ratio 1000:1 Viewing Angle 178� horizontal, 178� vertical Pixel Dot Pitch 0.282mm Response Time 16ms Black-to-Black (8ms Gray-to-Gray) Panel Life Not Specified by Manufacturer Colors Supported 16.7 million out of a palette of 1.05 billion


I must say that looking at the monitors side by side the NEC - in addition to looking better also felt significantly stronger, and is built of a much higher quality (it does weigh alot for a 22" monitor). Nice matte finish for the screen, and it does not have a "flashy" polished platic body that can cause reflections or dsitractions. Its about 3.5''-3.75" deep, so its not lean and slim like a LED. If you use a color calibrator like the Spyder3, I would say that its pretty close to my Sony PVM 9", not 100% but close enough that I won't miss it. Also the NEC is on sale at B&H right now for $360.

I thought this would be another good option to add to the list of good computer monitors under $500.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/602072-REG/NEC_P221W_BK_MultiSync_P221W_BK_22_Widescreen.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/525535-REG/Datacolor_DC_S3P100_Spyder3Pro_Displa...on_System.html

[budwzr]

I wanted to look into getting LCD monitors for my new A/V editing workstation setup...

LCD is out and LED is in now. DVI is old hat too, VGA is in. Workstations are out, Monster laptops are in. SD is out, HD is in.

[sanlyn]

I wanted to look into getting LCD monitors for my new A/V editing workstation setup...

LCD is out and LED is in now. DVI is old hat too, VGA is in. Workstations are out, Monster laptops are in. SD is out, HD is in.

It's a shame LED's are in. Maybe the engineers can improve it. VGA should be in; slowpoke DVI never stood a chance. SD has been around since the late 19th century and isn't out yet; SD CRT's are still used to master and color-grade those BluRays everyone's paying extra for. I don't foresee serious video hobbyists, Pixar, or LucasFilm moving to laptops.

[sanlyn]

Even though it dosen't have "IPS" in the marquee it does have much of the same specs, and would be considered a wide gamut display.

There are important use and equipment considerations concerning wide gamut displays:

It's important to consider what colour space your content is based around. sRGB has long been the preferred colour space of all monitors, and is in fact the reference for the Windows operating system and the internet. As such, most content an average user would ever use is based on sRGB. If you view sRGB content on a wide gamut screen then this can lead to some colours looking incorrect as they are not mapped correctly to the output device. In practice this can lead to oversaturation, and greens and reds can often appear false or neon. Colour managed applications and a colour managed workflow can prevent this but for the average user the cross-compatibility of widely used sRGB content and a wide gamut screen may present problems and prove troublesome. Some users don't object to the over saturated and cartoony colours for their use, but to many, it is an issue.

- "Enhanced / Wide Colour Gamut CCFL Backlighting (WCG-CCFL)"
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/speccontent.htm

Also the NEC is on sale at B&H right now for $360.

Apparently NEC is changing some of its sRGB monitors over to LED (phooey), so there's a good chance the older models will drop to a price I can afford. I'd have an NEC now, but I was a few $$ short when I looked for ISP monitors.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/525535-REG/Datacolor_DC_S3P100_Spyder3Pro_Display_Calibration _System.html

I'd prefer any of several probes from EyeOne, but many have differing opinions. Here's a thorough Spyder3 evaluation:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/spyder3elite.htm
If you prefer a wide-gamut display, you'd need a calibration kit that can handle it. Of course, the price goes up. Fortunately some of the more expensive NEC SpectraViews come with calibration gear that can work with wide gamut -- another reason why I'd like to get my hands on a good NEC.

[OldMedia]

Even though it dosen't have "IPS" in the marquee it does have much of the same specs, and would be considered a wide gamut display.

There are important use and equipment considerations concerning wide gamut displays:

It's important to consider what colour space your content is based around. sRGB has long been the preferred colour space of all monitors, and is in fact the reference for the Windows operating system and the internet. As such, most content an average user would ever use is based on sRGB. If you view sRGB content on a wide gamut screen then this can lead to some colours looking incorrect as they are not mapped correctly to the output device. In practice this can lead to oversaturation, and greens and reds can often appear false or neon. Colour managed applications and a colour managed workflow can prevent this but for the average user the cross-compatibility of widely used sRGB content and a wide gamut screen may present problems and prove troublesome. Some users don't object to the over saturated and cartoony colours for their use, but to many, it is an issue.

- "Enhanced / Wide Colour Gamut CCFL Backlighting (WCG-CCFL)"
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/speccontent.htm

Also the NEC is on sale at B&H right now for $360.

Apparently NEC is changing some of its sRGB monitors over to LED (phooey), so there's a good chance the older models will drop to a price I can afford. I'd have an NEC now, but I was a few $$ short when I looked for ISP monitors.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/525535-REG/Datacolor_DC_S3P100_Spyder3Pro_Display_Calibration _System.html

I'd prefer any of several probes from EyeOne, but many have differing opinions. Here's a thorough Spyder3 evaluation:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/spyder3elite.htm
If you prefer a wide-gamut display, you'd need a calibration kit that can handle it. Of course, the price goes up. Fortunately some of the more expensive NEC SpectraViews come with calibration gear that can work with wide gamut -- another reason why I'd like to get my hands on a good NEC.

You can set the NEC PSS1W I am using to sRGB, and other popular color gamuts for editing purposes. It is in the menu setting on the monitor.

The spyder 3 does cover wide gamut, and is recomended by NEC. They do recomend using there "spectraview" system. Which works well, and only costs about $70 more at around $200.

[NJRoadfan]

Wait, how is DVI old hat? The industry has been on the quest to kill VGA with HDMI and DisplayPort.

[sanlyn]

Been thinking of trying the Spyder3 myself, for plasma calibration. The EyeOne (except the very pricey Pro) aren't suitable for plasma TV. OK for LCD or CRT, but oversensitive to red IR from plasmas. I read where the Spyder-3 has built-in compensation for that. But I'm waiting for a big price-drop special: Spyder-3 doesn't deliver enough low-level accuracy at the MSRP price.

[lordsmurf]

LCD is out and LED is in now.

LED is the light source.
LCD is the display type.
You can't have an "LED" monitor.
You can have LCD with a LED light source, or an LCD with a CCFL light source.

LED is not superior. It has several drawbacks, in terms of overall image accuracy.

[edDV]

Those jumbo stadium displays are true LED monitors. Those use a multi-color LED per pixel.





Or a triad of three LEDs per pixel.

[budwzr]

Right, LED backlighting.

They ARE a bit dimmer, just a tad, but no heat, instant on, and little power. AND super thin, about half an inch. As far as color accuracy, I use sRGB mode and that's my reference palette for everything. It's pre-calibrated to a standard, no need to monkey with it.

[sanlyn]

Right, LED backlighting.

They ARE a bit dimmer, just a tad, but no heat, instant on, and little power. AND super thin, about half an inch. As far as color accuracy, I use sRGB mode and that's my reference palette for everything. It's pre-calibrated to a standard, no need to monkey with it.

Well, budwzr, everyone has their druthers. I don't know what you mean by:

- "dimmer". Unless you're sitting in a sunlighted area with your monitor facing a huge picture window and a noonday sun from 10 feet away, a monitor or LCD TV or CRT would burn at 110 to 130 cd/m2 for accuracy and good contrast and blacks. The LED and CCFL panels I see out there are in showroom ("volcano") mode at 250 to 350 cd/m2: too bright for serious work.

- "calibrated to a standard"? Which standard? Must be a pricey set, but I'd never depend on factory settings except with pro-sumer or better gear. RGB should be accurate with DeltaE errors under 4. Most good calibration kits can get even a cheap Acer down that far, and often below 2%.

A few big-name monitors out of the box are set somewhere in the neighborhood of what people refer to as sRGB standards. But, then, any of the hundreds of graphics card models out there can throw it off. Best to calibrate it yourself. I've seen a couple of sets from Dell (their panel lottery notwithstanding), NEC, and HP that were closer to spec when first turned up, but even those need a serious tweak or two before the owner can get down to business.

Depends on your specific needs, I guess.