Video editing: glossy or matte monitor

hello friends,
i am about to buy a new monitor for myself but am not able to make a decision. should i go for glossy monitor or matte monitor. i find colors on glossy monitor very sharp and vivid.
i am planning to go for hp 2009f model which is 20". it is a glossy monitor.
i wanted to know which one shud i go for.
my main work wud be video editing and animation. is there anyone around who is using lcd monitor for video editing and animation?
kindly englighten.
regards

Hi Catch,
You are in a catch 22 situation.
First of all, 20" is about minimum dimensions for a single display. Second, HP is pretty expensive for what they offer. I have a notebook with a 16.4" glossy screen and my personal feeling is it shows much more vivid colors than a matte screen. OK for office applications, but not for editing. I also have two 20" monitors for my video machine, which are matte. I do recognize that the colors are not as vibrant as on a glossy screen, but much more natural. Neither are suitable for color correction, so it boils down to personal taste. For color correction you need a properly calibrated CRT monitor or a high end LCD ($ 4K+) monitor.

Similar Messages

Best Monitors for video editing??? NEC LCD2690WUXi² Vs 24"Apple GLOSSY LED

I am so stuck finding the right monitor for video editing in my price range i just cant afford the 30" apple cinema display, what is next best solution out there...?
Is Anyone using the NEC LCD2690WUXi² Monitors? from what i can tell they are better than the 24" apple LED displays for video editing as...
a) anti glare screen & can be properly colour calibrated
b) 26" screen Vs 24" screen size
c) got DVI-I & DVI-D Connectors so compatible with NVIDIA GT 120 outputs (1 Mini DisplayPort and 1 dual-link DVI-D)
i would love the 30" apple but the NEC comes in at 1/2 the price so i can eventually buy two & i would have definitely taken the 24" but its just not suitable for professional video editing from everything I've read - mainly due to glossy screen, colours & calibration
pls can anyone help with any display solutions/setups
warmest regards
graeme
Oh PS do the NEC LCD2690WUXi² work flawlessly with the latest "Nehalem" Mac Pros?

Not sure if that model number is here or not, but these are supposed to be very good for color work, though I do know that my old shops are still using their CRT's.
http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Series/?series=171d9fbb-281e-44d8-be67-14d146 e8ada0
Third party monitors are having some trouble with the new Macs. Mostly because of the mini-display ports on the newest Apple supplied cards, but there seem to be other issues as well. You can definitely expect to use the DVI port and leave the mini display for whatever Apple will force on us next.
Apples 24"? Well, it works fine for most but in Apples own description of the display it was made to connect laptops to.
Edit: I'm sorry, for video work? Most anything in the upper end is fine.
Message was edited by: Samsara

Dual 17'' Displays and an NTSC Monitor for Video Editing

I am trying to hook up two 17'' apple monitors and an NTSC television monitor for video editing, but all I have on the back of my G5 tower is one ADC plug and one DVI plug. Any advice on how to make this work would be greatly appreciated.

If you run in anything other than the LCD's native resolution your graphics card will be resampling the image. This inevitably distorts the image as pixels must be discarded to create the display. Typically this softens the image.
Cheers,
Neale
Insanity is hereditary, you get it from your children

LCD Monitor for Video Editing: Resolution Concern

I am trying to select an LCD monitor for my newly built computer. I have zeroed in on the DELL SP2309W, 23" Full HD Widescreen Flat Panel Monitor with Webcam. The optical resolution is Higher than Full HD at 2048 x 1152.
It is my understanding that Higher than HD Resolution is good for multi-tasking (but DVD movies get stretched and therefore the quality of your videos goes down.), but is it good for video editing with Premiere Elements 7 or 8? Should I be looking at monitors with 1920 x 1080 resolution?

If you run in anything other than the LCD's native resolution your graphics card will be resampling the image. This inevitably distorts the image as pixels must be discarded to create the display. Typically this softens the image.
Cheers,
Neale
Insanity is hereditary, you get it from your children

Best Monitors for Video editing?

Hey guys. I'm looking at an NEC monitor for editing my stills, and am wondering if this will be suitable for video editing?
Models I'm considering are:
http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop-monitors/pa241w-bk
http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop-monitors/pa242w-bk
http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop-monitors/pa271w-bk
These monitors are great for stills, as they cam emulate paper types well, but do I need a more "vibrant" monitor for video? Just worried that my video will look a bit off on these monitors, as it's such a different medium?
If they aren't suitable, what brand/models are considered good? (Professional level).
Cheers,
Ben

Hey Fuzzy, sorry about the format of this reply. Not sure to quote on here the way you did. Your points are addressed numerically.
1. I haven't seen the user manuals, but using http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop-monitors/pa271w-bk for example, under color gamut, there's no mention of Rec709. Compare that to: http://www.eizo.com.au/products/coloredge/cg276/index.html#tab02, under preset modes. Not to mention this entire page: http://www.eizo.com/global/solutions/graphics/video_editing_and_post_production.html.
Just seems like NEC isn't playing up their video editng credentials, and I wonder why?
If you can link me to a user manual for any of the above models, which shows that it ships with Rec709 I'd appreciate it.
2. I couldn't find that artcle, unless you mean: http://www.videomaker.com/article/15133-nec-multisync-pa271w-color-correct-lcd-display-rev iew. In any case, I meant NEC's marketing.
This page has nothing: http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop-monitors/pa271w-bk
The incedibly detailed marketing PDF here: http://www.nec-display-solutions.com/p/download/pr/File/cp/Products/LCD/Shared/Brochures/P DF-PASeries.pdf?fn=PASeries.pdf actually contains the phrase "A range of Professional Desktop Displays that are ideal for users in the Photography and Media, Architecture, Engineering, Industrial Design and Precision CAD fields. " (No mention of Video, although it is the first NEC document mentioning "Built in Rec-BT709")
You have to understand that for a comsumer such as myself, not spelling these things out is going to make me look for answers. Or go to a company that does spell it out.
3. Got it, thanks.
4. I think I get that. I'll read the article. But... do these NEC monitors comply?

Is a ATI Radeon X1900XT (512 MB) card enough to drive a single monitor for video editing

My son just given an older mac pro.
2 x 3 GHZ Quad Intel Xeon.
OSX Lion
The video card installed is an ATI Radeon X1900XT (512 MB)
Is this video card sufficient to drive a single monitor for video editing and basic graphics work in PhotoShop, etc?
Many thanks.

nothing I guess
Just noticed that you can add emoticons to these posts.

Using external monitor for video editing.

Hello all,
I own a IMAC that I use for video editing on FC7. I was wondering via Thunderbolt to VGA (or any other way) if there was a way to use an external moniter as my canvus and the internal comands to do so. Also the opinons of doing this. Good? Bad? any good ideas?
Thanks.

Eeewww! Oh, the horror of what you are trying to suggest!
No. A video signal for a computer display and a video signal intended for TV are very very different things. If you want to PROPERLY see what the video you shot looks like, a computer monitor is the LAST place to look. You want to use an HDTV at least. I'd even say avoid computer displays with HDMI inputs...but even those are better than VGA. VGA is a very low quality connection. DVI, HDMI...those are better.
But if your intention is to view your video at full quality...an HDTV is your better option.

Best monitor for video editing?

Hi,
I have been saving up for a Mac for sometime now and have decided to buy the new Mac Pro when it comes out this December.
I understand that it doesn't come with a monitor so I have been looking into which one would be best to get. I have never had to buy a separate monitor before as I have always had an iMac so maybe there is one that is very popular that most people use that I don't know about. It would mostly be used for video editing on Final Cut and a little bit of Motion and then other general things like music, photos, documents etc.
Ideally 24" or 27" and under £400.

I don't want 2 monitors, so a single 27inch model just what I need... plenty of room for PPro, or I can have a Word document and a Text file open and side by side
John,
That is personal taste and there is no discussing taste. However, from my perspective, and that is personal, I prefer 3840 x 1080 resolution with dual monitors over 1920 x 1080 with a single monitor, but that is because I very often have Firefox, Filezilla, Dreamweaver and some other applications open at the same time, switching between the Adobe forums, Gmail accounts, Notebook results from the PPBM5 data submissions, PPBM5 form submissions, MySQL access, phpadmin pages to update the database, the PPBM5 results pages and various DW .php pages for the maintenance of our database and switching back and forth between various versions of PR. I occasionally really run out of real estate with all these applications and could not consider a single monitor with only 1920 x 1080 resolution, even if it were a 105" screen. In the future I would even like to have a four monitor setup (with MPE hardware support) in a two by two configuration, so that I can freely move my application screens around.
If that happens, notice I say if and not when, my preference for a monitor would be something like 4 Samsung F2380 monitors. Small bezel, great display and panel, affordable.

Photo vs Video editing Monitors. Any difference?

Hey guys, I'm in the market for a new monitor, primarily for stills editing, but I want to make sure it's not just capable of, but GOOD for video editing/grading too (I'm new to it, but definitely plan to do a lot of it).
I'm looking at either an NEC or EIZO Monitor - 27" (Maybe 24"), but I haven't decided which one yet. This is primarily because they are the best screens for stills. If that doesn't hold true for video, please let me know what other brands/models I should look at.
Are there any differences between a good stills and a good video editing screen? What should I be on the lookout for?
I'm guessing response time would be one factor? The monitors I'm looking at seem to be about 6ms, although some are at around 8ms. (But I know there are 2ms monitors out there). Is that a major concern?
Anything else?
Cheers!
Ben

Haha, of course not.The full benefits? Look no further than LG 105" 5K TV
That is one heck of a TV. We are not that far from having the entire wall be a TV screen. It will most likely happen in my lifetime. It will certainly change the way houses are built, I imagine.
I was wondering if there's any use in a 1080p screen on my 5" Nexus 5, or in Retina displays on 15" MBPs.
That is kind of my point. I carry a smartphone with a 1920X1080 screen, and I seriously doubt that I would notice if it was replaced by a 1280X720 screen. After all, I don't hold it up to my eyes. On the other hand, there are times when I feel like doing that when I am watching software tutorials. But my eyes can't focus that close, so what is the point in such a high pixel count screen?
At 15" it might make a difference though.
My current 2560x1600 30-incher that I've been using for 5+ years was a huge step up from 1920x1200 24-inchers, and I expect 4K, even in a smaller form factor, would be a boon to use and work with.
I can see the point in a 2560X1600 for photography, even though I would have trouble justifying the cost. If I continue with photography in a more professional vein, I might have to consider something with a very high resolution. It might be a couple of years or more before I upgrade from my camera that can shoot 5 frames per second for quite a while, to one that shoots 24 frames per second indefinitely. We are really close and those CinemaRAW cameras are pretty exciting.
My question remains. You went from 24" to 30" when you went to the higher pixel count. Would it have been better even on a 24" screen? Perhaps. But how much better? We still need a good bang for our buck. Right? It has to be enough better to make it worth the money. How much better is certainly an individual thing with every user.
So, I imagine that 4K on a 42" or so might make a huge amount of sense, but until these old eyes see 4K on a 28" screen, I won't know if it is right for me.

Glossy or AntiGlare/Normal Res or High Res for Video Editing?

I will be purchasing a MacBook Pro 15" for Final Cut Pro video editing on the road. I'm trying to decide on the best purchase configuration for the display. Apple offers Glossy Widescreen, 1440 x 900 standard. High resolution 1680 x 1050 comes in either Glossy or Antiglare.
I'm wondering which configuration would be ideal. Are there any special display considerations for video work?
I'll be getting the 2.2 GHz i7 quad with the AMD Radeon HD 6750M with 1GB GDDR.

I have the hi res anti glare and thi sis better than the glossy in my opinion because I can do my work faster without being distracted by reflections that move or being blinded by light from behind me bouncing off the screen. I also can use my macbook pro outside a lot better than the glossy one. I am a graduate student so papers and presentations are mainly what i do for school. I edit ton of video and pictures and the antiglare is my recommendation to you. Obviously it is your choice ultimately, but I hope my input helps you out John,

New Video Editing Monitor

Hi guys.
I regularly work with video editing and I'm looking for a new monitor, my budget is not very high so I need to do a good choice.
For me the most important thing is image quality, I need a monitor I can trust the colors.
I was thinking of getting a DELL monitor because I always heard good things about them.
I would really apreciate if you could help me.
Thanks in advance.
César

César_Sousa wrote:
For me the most important thing is image quality, I need a monitor I can trust the colors.
Depends on what your output will be. If you are only going to show your video on the web, then a computer monitor that you can get a good calibration on should do fine. Calibration buys you a defined working space -- a solid neutral axis, no color casts, known edges of gamut, proper contrast, etc. All monitors will vary from this to some degree, but your calibrated monitor will show you the median, which is what you want for WYSIWYG work. So the people looking at your web videos will see something pretty close to what you intended.
OTOH, if you output will be DVD / BD, or broadcast TV, few computer monitors will show you the correct working space, which for HDTV is Rec.709. If you want WYSIWYG, you'll have to have Rec.709, there's no real way around it. This will take a production monitor (or an expensive computer monitor -- a couple of the Eizos can do this, and the HP Dreamcolor if it's still in production), which is considerably more expensive than a computer monitor. Low end production monitors start around 10x your budget, largely because they are made in much smaller numbers than computer monitors, and have much higher specifications; they just cost more to make.
If you want to output for a film print, you're talking real money. It's been awhile; I don't remember what the "standard" film working space is called, and of course it will vary somewhat depending on the film stock and the film recorder being targeted. But making a film print for distribution is sort of a silly thing to do these days.
A better path would be to a DCP (digital cinema package) which requires the CIE XYZ color space. There are monitors that support this too, and way beyond most budgets, save those of post-production houses.
If you are stuck with your budget and still want to author DVDs, about the best you can do is use a decent computer monitor, use the sRGB (not Adobe RGB or any wider gamut working space), calibrate it (without calibration you've got little hope of WYSISYG), and bump your contrast up to approximate Rec.709. Then work primarily off your scopes (waveform monitor, vectorscope, RGB parade) and not primarily off what you see. Burn a DVD / BD, and iterate making corrections and burning discs until you get what you want. It's an imprecise and much slower workflow, but it's doable in a budget pinch.
EDIT: You might also want to pick up a copy of Van Hurkman's Color Correction Handbook. Does a much better job explaining what you need than I can possibly do. And it's a wonderfully accessible tour of color correction. Answers questions you haven't thought to ask yet. At least, it does for me.

Which Studio Reference Monitors for a video edit suite?

Sorry that this questions does not have to much to do with Final Cut/Logic Pro though i don't know where i can ask people how know an video edit suite.
I'm looking at buying some Studio reference monitor and have found a pair i think are going to have what i need, untill the question of what happens if i wanted to go from a 2 monitor system and then the need came around for editing 5.1 dolby sound.
The monitors i'm looking at are Roland DS-5 2-way active digital Reference monitors. these have built in amps.
thanks for the help

my suggestion would be to get something that's an industry standard. that way you can somewhat insure that you're hearing what everyone else is hearing. this is important. i use genelec monitors and i love them. if you have a small room get some 1030 or 8040 monitors.. if you have a larger room, go for a pair of 1031's or 8050's.. then add from there.. also make sure to get a totally passive attenuator: ie.. a-designs atty, or maybe even go into the dangerous line to if you want surrond.. also you have the nautilus stuff and more.. but make sure to take the standard high road and you won't regret it in the end. i have gone from totally crappy monitors to genelecs and everything in between. which means that i have lost money on upgrades when i should have just started with the standard from the beginning..

What is the best Monitor for Video editing & Graphic Design?

Hi every one,
I would like to find out what is the best monitor for video editing and graphic design that you recomend, I am trying to buy one but not sure which one is good and not expansive.
Thanks very much

I don't want 2 monitors, so a single 27inch model just what I need... plenty of room for PPro, or I can have a Word document and a Text file open and side by side
John,
That is personal taste and there is no discussing taste. However, from my perspective, and that is personal, I prefer 3840 x 1080 resolution with dual monitors over 1920 x 1080 with a single monitor, but that is because I very often have Firefox, Filezilla, Dreamweaver and some other applications open at the same time, switching between the Adobe forums, Gmail accounts, Notebook results from the PPBM5 data submissions, PPBM5 form submissions, MySQL access, phpadmin pages to update the database, the PPBM5 results pages and various DW .php pages for the maintenance of our database and switching back and forth between various versions of PR. I occasionally really run out of real estate with all these applications and could not consider a single monitor with only 1920 x 1080 resolution, even if it were a 105" screen. In the future I would even like to have a four monitor setup (with MPE hardware support) in a two by two configuration, so that I can freely move my application screens around.
If that happens, notice I say if and not when, my preference for a monitor would be something like 4 Samsung F2380 monitors. Small bezel, great display and panel, affordable.

Better for Video Editing? MBP 13" or 15" w/9600M GT

I am planning on purchasing a Macbook Pro for relatively extensive use of Final Cut Pro (HD video) along with possibly some light Motion work and video transcoding. In addition I will be using it for photo editing and web editing. I don't plan on using it for any high-end gaming.
I will be purchasing a $200 24" external monitor to use most of the time along with external keyboard and mouse (so MBP screen size isn't an issue), but I need the portability and don't have the funds to purchase an additional dedicated desktop yet.
I am having trouble deciding between the 13" and the 15", mainly due to conflicting opinions I've been hearing over the importance of a dedicated graphics card for video editing. Salespeople at the Apple store tell me it's important and I should get the 15". Research online yielded heated forum arguments over whether it really makes a difference or not.
The price difference is quite significant though at the configurations I picked ($765) so I am seeking advice here for whether people think the cost difference is really justified for my needs. Note that both configurations include 4GB of RAM, smallest hard drive option (i've got external drives) and AppleCare protection.
Pricing with education discount after tax:
13" 2.26GHz - $1520
15" 2.66GHz w/9600M GT 256MB - $2285
*Is there a real difference in video editing performance and if so, is it really worth an extra $765? Or is there a better option that I'm not considering?*

Thanks everyone for the feedback!
Studio X wrote:
Are you planning on making any money at this or are you only in it for fun? Have you ever edited before? Have you ever edited with FCS before? What of the 44 billion HD formats are you planning on editing? Do you have a camera? What format does it record? If it's a flash media based device, what's your back up strategy? How are you planning to externally monitor the HD material ? What are you planning to use as media drives as the system drive should not be used for media capture or playback?
Still, I guess I come down on the side of "it doesn't matter as neither one is a serious editing machine". If I was in the market for a laptop and was limited to the current apple lineup, the only machine of interest is the 17" MacBookPro. The other two MacBookPros you are considering have no expresscard slot and come only with glossy screens - both are serious deficiencies in my world.
I do plan on using this computer professionally. I am a recent college graduate but do have professional FCS editing experience under my belt. However my work was done using both school and employer resources. I do have an archive of work in Mini DV(HDV) and AVCHD formats. I don't currently own an HD camera, however will likely be purchasing one in the near future. As far as externally monitoring HD material, what else would I need other than the 24" external monitor (perfectly capable of full HD) or a separate HDTV? In addition to several older usb2 external drives for backup I do have a 1TB 7200rpm external capable of FW800 and eSATA that I would use as a media drive.
I currently have an old 17" dell notebook with a glossy screen. The screen hasn't really bothered me, but the size and weight of the notebook has. And while the 17" MBP is a little lighter and smaller than my old dell, I would still prefer a 13" or 15". But from the opinions I've been hearing I'm steering away from the 13" and fully realize the downsides to the lack of ExpressCard slot in the current 15" as well. Still wondering while Apple decided to remove it.
MartinR wrote:
If budget is a primary constraint, then consider a refurbished 15" or 17" MBP from Apple, or a used MBP from a reputable supplier.
I hadn't checked into the refurbished options, but now that I did, I found a nice 15" (late 2008 unibody) configuration that would provide a lot more value for the buck. For about $550 more than the new 13" config I would get a faster processor, 2" bigger screen, 9600M 512mb GPU, double the internal storage, removable battery as well as the ExpressCard slot (even though its not listed in specs, it's there). The only trade off I can see is battery life.
http://store.apple.com/us/product/FC026LL/A?mco=MjE0NjE5MA

21.5" i7 vs 27" i5 -- which is more powerful? What about video editing?

I'm trying to decide between a 21.5" iMac with 1TB and i7 and the next step up -- the 27" with an i5.
My budget really was only for the 21.5 -- which comes out at 1699 -- the 27 would be 1999 --
My main current needs are: Animation (Flash, etc), CS Suite (40 layer Photoshop), other programming (HTML, CSS, Canvas, etc), and music (8 analog in, effects, Logic). I hope to start doing some HD video work (artistically) -- but due to focusing on music haven't really done much with it.
The person I spoke to at the store said if I were going to do "serious" video editing (Avid) then the 27" with the 1GB of memory on the video card would be better -- for video editing that is. He said that for everything else (CS Suite, etc -- and I believe he said Final Cut as well) the i7 with the 512MB video card would be better.
So -- here's the rub -- I'm on a limited budget and I think it might make more sense to put the extra 300 into RAM (they offered to bump the RAM to 12GB for $150 extra -- is that way too much?), or into an add'l monitor (I'm not taken with the glossy iMac screen as a main screen -- and that's also why the 27" screen wouldn't do much for me). I do want to do some video production, but I don't plan on getting Avid or anything like that anytime in the foreseeable future -- I'd probably be doing 10 min video pieces and for what I currently need the computer for the i7 with more RAM is much better. I just don't want to feel totally stupid down the road.
So:
21.5" iMac, 2.8 GHz i7, 1TB drive, 12GB RAM, Radeon 6750 with 512MB RAM
vs
27" iMac, 2.7 GHz i5, 1TB drive, 4 GB RAM, Radeon 6970 with 1GB RAM
Thanks

Similar question ... looking at nearly identical cost: 21" i7 2.8 vs. 27" i5 - both with the 512 6750 video card. (I'll buy my RAM upgrade on-line - will take either one to 16GB.)
Both have same video memory. I don't feel I need the bigger screen size if the processing power is a better value for video (can always add another, larger monitor).
This will be a video & audio editing computer. I have a TON of old Hi8 home movies to move to digital for archive and eventual editing, will capture via firewire Digital 8 Handicam.
My main new video projects will be <10 min - primarily for web delivery. Business sales/education and training. Pretty sure I'll want to upgrade with FCPX. I'm a believer in that you can always compress quality down, you can't enhance poor quality source up.
I have a background in video production (20 years ago), no expreience with NLE, but want to get back in.
I guess the i7 power will hold up longer and allow for growth of my abilities/uses of the software down the line ...
Maybe I've answered my own (& the OP's question) ...

Video editing: glossy or matte monitor

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for