Color calibrating your monitor? (Seeing "true" color of your video captures)

[baywatch242000]

Greetings Digitalfaq members!

My name is Mya and I have been a lurker for years and just joined up as I am going to be starting my own analog to digital video conversion projects. I've learned so much great information over the years here that I feel fairly confident my projects will be a success.

I hope this is not a redundant question as I've used the search functions and didn't find an answer to my question. If there is anyone out there that can offer some friendly advice regarding the following, I'd certainly appreciate it...

I'm wondering how you experienced analog to digital folks see the "true color" of your transfers on your monitor? I ask this because each monitor seems calibrated slightly different - some have colors that pop while others, perhaps older ones, might not be displaying the true color of what the capture really is. It also seems that certain brands of monitors have their own unique nuances, characteristics and visual enhancements. This could lead to user/archiver mistakes such as unnecessarily color-correcting a capture that doesn't need it, or brightening a capture that is already bright enough, but because of the display you're viewing it on, it just appears darker than the footage really is. Not seeing what the true transfer really looks like would be a recipe for disaster prompting unnecessary post-capture cleanup and could easily ruin the footage.

In a nutshell....how do you know what you're seeing on your monitor is representative of what the capture looks like and not a skewed visual based on the way your computer/monitor is displaying it?

I appreciate any tips, suggestions and ideas. Thanks so much!

[dpalomaki]

The most reliable way is to buy a quality professional video monitor (as opposed to a TV set or computer monitor), but they are not cheap. You also should have a good video output card for your computer as well for evaluating/editing the video you captured on the video monitor.

Most computer monitors and graphics cards are not great for video (they were designed for a different color space). TV sets may include various automatic signal processing capabilities "improve" the image. These include automatic color/tint, brightness/contrast range, noise reduction, and overscan issues. Thus they may hide imperfections in the video signal they are fed, or just be misadjusted (typical), and may lack the user controls needed to allow precise adjustment/calibration.

I use a BlackMagic Intensity Pro to drive a video display from by NLE works tatuion (and to capture analog video). I also use a HD Spark to drive video output on a system from Edius NLE.

If you want to check your capture system an option would be to feed it a known calibrated source (e.g., SMPTE color bars from a video signal generator) and view the resulting captured file with a NLE that includes a vector scope/waveform capability.

[themaster1]

Quote:

Originally Posted by baywatch242000

In a nutshell....how do you know what you're seeing on your monitor is representative of what the capture looks like and not a skewed visual based on the way your computer/monitor is displaying it?

dpalomaki said it first here you need a calibrated monitor and one that support SD and HD matrices .

the poor's man solution would be to use videoscopes analyse the raw video and after editing with avisynth for example, at the end of your script:

function int2mode(int index) { return Select(index, "classic", "levels", "color") }
AviSource("MyVideo.avi"
ColorYUV(analyze=true)
Histogram(int2mode(1)) 
# or you can analyse in RGB (pick one of these 3 below):
HistogramRGBParade()
HistogramRGBLevels # primary colors (red,green blue)
HistogramCMYLevels(range=true) # secondary colors (cyan,magenta,yellow)

You need the histogram YCM filter:
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=164720

[premiumcapture]

I always found it better to work on a TV as a monitor as you see how you will end up viewing it anyways. Colors will not be as precise as a 4:4:4 monitor, but it will be viewed as it would be seen on a DVD or distributed copy.

[dpalomaki]

Quote:

I always found it better to work on a TV as a monitor as you see how you will end up viewing it anyways.
Read more: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=31397#ixzz2yP jtYKIz

If you intend to always view it on that playback system (set and player). Different TV sets maybe set up differently resulting in different looks. And who knows what the sets auto picture adjustments might be doing to a signal that is a bit off. The point with a calibrated monitor and system is to ensure the captured/edited material is dead on specification resulting in a good image on any set that is on spec and thus ensuring the widest usability of the video. That said, using a TV (several different sets actually) as a check on the final product is a good thing to do. And if a TV is what one has for editing, it is still likely better than a typical computer monitor - just be sure to get its settings right.

A source file that is spot on (0 dB) and a viewing system that is spot on (0 dB) is good. A source that is -3 dB (low) and a viewer that is +3 dB (high), nets out to about even due to offsetting problems - but shadows and/or highlights may suffer. But if both are +3 dB (or -3 dB) we may have significant problems.