Viewsonic VP2365wb/LED: Does monitor response matter for video capture?

[Mejnour]

After wise suggestion by kpmedia post#5 and lordsmurf post#13, I am more decided than never to get a Viewsonic monitor.

Right now I got a offer on the table 165$ for a WB model! (no death pixel) I guess I can live in a dark room...

One last thing bug me now, looking at Viewsonic specs we can see that they have different Response Time

• VP2365wb 14ms (typ)
• VP2365LED 6ms (GTG)

Can that be a issue?

Thanks

P.S. WB stand for what? I could not find! I hope this WB is spyder3 calibration enable.

[kpmedia]

VP2365wb is the model number of a CCFL-lit LCD.
VP2365-LED is the model number of the same monitor, but with LED instead of CCFL light source. Still an LCD.

The only time response time really comes into play is when you're playing high-fps video games. It leads to blurring and mouse trails.
For work -- including video work -- this makes no difference. 14ms is the same as 6ms, for our needs.

The biggest difference between the LED and the CCFL is that the LED has a higher candela of about +100. In layman's terms, the output is about 25% brighter. That can help for video work. For photo work, the CCFL is better. Spyder units should handle the CCFL without any issue. The LED monitors are the ones that have more issues with calibration, as not all calibration devices are compatible with that light source. I've not yet had time to calibrate my LED carefully, so no clue (off-hand) if the Spyder 3 works on it. I'll cross that road when I come to it.

I've done plenty of video work with both monitors. No complaints with either. These are $300+ monitors, on average. So $165 is a great deal.

[Mejnour]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kpmedia

VP2365wb is the model number of a CCFL-lit LCD.
VP2365-LED is the model number of the same monitor, but with LED instead of CCFL light source. Still an LCD.

The only time response time really comes into play is when you're playing high-fps video games. It leads to blurring and mouse trails.
For work -- including video work -- this makes no difference. 14ms is the same as 6ms, for our needs.

The biggest difference between the LED and the CCFL is that the LED has a higher candela of about +100. In layman's terms, the output is about 25% brighter. That can help for video work. For photo work, the CCFL is better. Spyder units should handle the CCFL without any issue. The LED monitors are the ones that have more issues with calibration, as not all calibration devices are compatible with that light source. I've not yet had time to calibrate my LED carefully, so no clue (off-hand) if the Spyder 3 works on it. I'll cross that road when I come to it.

I've done plenty of video work with both monitors. No complaints with either. These are $300+ monitors, on average. So $165 is a great deal.

Hi kpmedia,

Finally I got spyder studio (spyder4elite) kit to calibrate monitors and printers.
Now I can finally calibrate my CCFL viewsonic vp2365WB.

Have you some experience about chosing the target values (gamut, temperature, etc...) for our interest, in that case vhs capture. Example, I read that it's recommanded to use manufacture standards (gamut 2.2 for PC and 1.8 for MAC and 6500K). But to be honest my taste would be more for a gamut of 1.8 wich is MAC standard and a temperature 5500-6000K.

What would be your advice?

Any others advice from forums members are welcome too...

Thanks

[lordsmurf]

It's really a case of reading the manual. This info should be in there.

I'm still using the LED as my main capture monitor.
My other LED is starting to get a weird shadow thing on the far right edge, but it's not for video. And my blind spots block it out anyway, so I never put anything on that side of the screen.

Using Avia for calibration.

This was an unanswered question or unresolved issue found during a site audit. It's hard to have an FAQ when the answers are missing, or final outcomes are unknown. At The Digital FAQ support forum, questions are never intentionally ignored, and may have been missed due to a forum glitch or human error. More details on the audit. (In some cases, threads have been edited/updated with newer information.)