Boland Viewport 8.4 Day Bright Monitor. DHD84aDB

[Jens Piotrowski SOC]

Count me in.

 

 

Jens

[Lawrence Karman]

So Jens brought up the Hummingbird at the beginning of this thread, and while that comment was ignored (perhaps to keep this thread purely about the Boland), I'd love to hear if anyone has put these two monitors side by side. Actually, what I would love to see is a side-by-side objective evaluation of these plus the daylight Transvideo, Marshall and whatever else is out there at this point. Cinegear was not particular helpful in this regard, I was hoping to see lots of choices. Maybe this is something that we can put together via the Steadicam Guild, SOC or another banner and get the manufacturers to pony up...? It's certainly a timely concern as I think a lot of us are considering migrating to LCD once it becomes as viewable as the green screens (some will say it's already at this point, but it's always best to judge for oneself). I'm sort of picturing a line on monitors mounted on something like a rolling rotisserie where you can tilt them all simultaneously, spin the whole thing for different angles to the sun etc.

 

 

I too saw nothing at Cinegear that was helpful as far as monitors go. But let me ask this: if none of those small monitors are truly HD, just a scaled down version of it, then am I better off investing in a low priced down-converter and continuing to use my green screen or NTSC LCD's rather than spending far more on an expensive "HD" LCD with limited viewing angle?

[Jens Piotrowski SOC]

Hi Doc,

 

You are right, I don't need an HD signal on my monitor, viewing angle and brightness / sunlight visibility are much more important factors. That's why the Hummingbirds are the only type that I can recommend. They are not HD but extremely well visible in full (!) sunlight and at 4k a great deal. MK-V's fancy housing version is 8K !?!.

 

 

[Eric Fletcher S.O.C.]

I too saw nothing at Cinegear that was helpful as far as monitors go. But let me ask this: if none of those small monitors are truly HD, just a scaled down version of it, then am I better off investing in a low priced down-converter and continuing to use my green screen or NTSC LCD's rather than spending far more on an expensive "HD" LCD with limited viewing angle?

 

 

That seems to be the problem, Right now there are no true small HD monitors, the pixel density is too high. Until there is I'm staying with my NTSC Screen.

[Lawrence Karman]

Hi Doc,

 

You are right, I don't need an HD signal on my monitor, viewing angle and brightness / sunlight visibility are much more important factors. That's why the Hummingbirds are the only type that I can recommend. They are not HD but extremely well visible in full (!) sunlight and at 4k a great deal. MK-V's fancy housing version is 8K !?!.

 

 

 

 

Ahh the beautiful Cypress Rhodes University campus. Where did you purchase the Hummingbird?

[Mike McGowan SOC]

I love this debate only because I was of the same oppinion unitl I got my Boland. I thought the sun rose and set on my PRO monitor for the 8 years I used it.

 

By no true small HD monitors, what do you mean? It is definatly an HD monitor (at least in the sense that it excepts an HD signal).

 

In terms of it being small, it weighs less than the PRO monitor does and it fits nicley on the rig.

 

In terms of picture quality, I'm not sure how to tecnically qualify the monitor other than to say that the image is frickin fantastic!

 

Price point, 3 grand, no contest.

 

The BIG FAN ISSUE. Mind came with no fan at all. It was upgraded a few months ago and they added a fan. I've shot at min focus and had no problem with the fan (they must be changing the fan at the moment as I know a few of you are having switches put on theirs, maybe I have a different fan?)...

 

View angle, they need to make a longer steadicam arm for that to be an issue (or at least more of an issue that it is with a tube monitor or any monitor). The image is best head on, the greater the angle, the less you can see. I would say that if the tube monitor gives you more at sharper angles, the flat screen more than makes up for it in size and color.

 

And last, the sun. It's not super fun to have the sun right on any monitor (that's why they make hoods) but in terms of the image quality being less on the Boland than it is on the greenie, I say no. I've used both monitors in the islands. Hot summer sun shooting right smack onto the monitor and bleach white sandy beaches bouncing everything else. Sure, you loose something on the Boland but you do on the greenie as well. The Boland is just twice as big and in color.

 

In case you havent guessed, I like the Boland.

 

mm.

 

p.s.......... You would think with all the pimpin I do for Boland, Mike would hooke me up with something (MIKE BOLAND, NOTICE SUBTLE HINT HERE!!!).

[Eric Fletcher S.O.C.]

By no true small HD monitors, what do you mean? It is definatly an HD monitor (at least in the sense that it excepts an HD signal).

 

 

For it to be an HD monitor it needs to natively display a HD signal, NOT a scaled image. Otherwise it's a downconverting monitor and suffers from the issues of said downconverting.

[JobScholtze]

As i am looking for a HD monitor, i am trying to figure out wich route to go. The Transvideo is 1000 nits highbrite, 400 less than the Cine III

Also if the boland is 3 grand, the transvideo is way more expensive. Around 5500 us

How much nits das the Boland have? Size? Weight? Any experience between the 2 monitors?

 

Greetings

[Mike McGowan SOC]

1400 nits for boland...... never used the other one.

[Charles Papert]

At the time I was looking to put a plasma in the bedroom, I was told that at 42" and smaller, it's hard to see the difference between an HD display and an ED (extended definition, meaning it can accept the HD signal but the resolution maxes out at 480p). So I was carrying around the notion that at the sizes of our Steadicam monitors, it really wouldn't make that much of a difference.

 

At Lake Arrowhead last year I was curious to see what would happen if we sent the Ultrabrite HD signal, then compared it to a downconverted SD signal from the same camera. Much to my surprise it actually was a noticeable and significant difference. Then we did the same thing with the Flyer HD monitor, which I think has even less nominal resolution, but once again, the HD image looked notably better.

 

The real question is whether or not we "need" this extra resolution, but this also plays into the question of whether or not we "need" color on our displays, what is the optimal size display, etc. Ultimately that's all up to the operator. For me personally, a 7" 16x9 feels like the right size but 8.4" seems too big, where I would have to scan across the monitor in a way that feels distracting. I know I like looking at HD displays--after editing something on HD for a few days and then switching on my SD studio monitor, I am shocked by the "screen door" effect on the latter--and I'm pretty sure I will love having color also. But this of course is me, and I think that monitor preference falls into the category of high-level personal preference issues (like the vest) that can go a lot of different directions.

 

Nevertheless, I think there are some common guidelines that we would mostly all agree on, such as viewing angle, true daylight visibility (if I see another Pocket Par aimed at the surface of a monitor at a trade show, allegedly duplicating the effect of daylight on the screen--oy vey) and overall contrast. Comparing monitors by the specs seems doomed to failure, as it has been demonstrated to me that the nit rating can vary depending on how it is tested, whether it takes into account the anti-reflective coatings, transflective properties etc.

 

Here's hoping that we can swing a monitor shoot-out, it may be very illuminating (ha!) to even those who are convinced that their monitors are "the one".

[Alec Jarnagin SOC]

Indeed it is a personal preference. I have a friend who liked the Transvideo S-Bright more than the HD version so he bought it and a AJA down converter and still saved a bunch of money (and he can still use his frameline generator, elec. level, and transmit).

 

Its interesting that a difference can be seen while inputing an HD-SDI signal into a monitor versus an NTSC into the same monitor, but in some cases the standard def monitors are simply better monitors. I still like the contrast and viewing angles of my TB-6 along with the continually variable zoom function of the screen size. Clearly LCD monitors are taking over, but I'm waiting until there is an HD one with level, frameline, etc that does not cost what they currently do. At this rate, I'm not sure if that will be next week or in a couple of years....

 

Then there is the issue of getting HD-SDI through a PRO post without rewiring (if possible). Has anyone actually tested this or is it just conventional wisdom that says it will not work? Obviously, the level would need to be taken out of the equation.

[Mike McGowan SOC]

I did try running an HD signal down the post and it did not work but then I realized that the port my pro cable runs into on the boland is an sd port not an hd port. I'm guessing however that even if it was, the cable would not carry the signal........ As far as rewireing the post, wow, that would be difficult on a few levels. First, would you add a second spicket on the top stage for an hd in? Then the same problem at the bottom, do you have a second monitor out port?

 

It seems like it was about a year ago that I was talking about lcd monitors for a sled and several people were still of the, "it will never work" persuasion...... Kind of reminds me of the people that used to say film would NEVER be replaced by video. Looking at my calendar for 2008 I'm about 60/40 video/film, my first year with more video than film since I've been in the business.

[Imran Naqvi]

I've had a Blackbird monitor since 2004 and I can't think of a single time I've felt the screen lacked the punch I needed to see a frame.

 

That said, colour isn't accurate, but that hasn't stopped Directors looking at it and worrying (but that comes with the territory at my end of the production scale).

 

My main gripe is the the way that the screen has a polarised coating. The polarisation works best when viewing from above and has about 170 degree horizontal viewing angle. But the viewing angle from below is horrible, and that means if I have to tilt down I lose a lot of the image very quickly.

 

Generally this isn't a problem as I can adjust during block through, but if it happens unexpectedly during the shot I have to shoot using the force, not always fun if its an end frame lock off.

 

It's very good, but I don't like the added stress of worrying about losing my monitor when tilting down.

[Jens Piotrowski SOC]

Hi Doc,

 

I bought mine last year from Nebtek, they are the current dealer for Hummingbirds / Blackbirds. I'm using it in combination with the Sachtler monitor bracket to avoid those viewing angle issues. TJ Williams makes the Pro style bracket that mounts to the monitor ($250). Take a look at the posts below.

 

Cheers,

 

Jens

 

Blackbird Info (PDF on bottom of page)

 

http://www.steadicamforum.com/forums/index...?showtopic=7934

 

http://www.steadicamforum.com/forums/index...?showtopic=8042

[JobScholtze]

@ Charles

 

Dont get me wrong, i am very happy with my Cine III. But we get more and more forced in HD. It even starts more and more in multicam shoots where a downconverter isnt always an option. If it was me, i would stick with the sd much longer, as i really dont need a hd signal to frame. Hence, most of the time i use the greenscreen option anyway, as i feel its more easy for my eyes to scan my frame. Colors distracts more imo.

 

 

Mk-v is currently shipping v3 boxes that takes sd / sdi & hd signal. With post cable. I wonder how he das it. Can it be done? I mean h def signal true a lemo?

 

And a stupid question perhaps, but is there a downconverter that i could use for every hd camera?

 

 

 

Thx

Greetz