We're in dire (I stress the word dire) need for an across-the-board display upgrade at work.
We're an independent video production company (
). Video editing is our bread and butter, and needless to say, we cut exclusively in FCPX We also do a fair amount of VFX and CG work.
Currently we're rocking some old school (brace yourselves) 20" Apple Cinema Displays (A1081) for our GUI monitors, and some low end LCD TV's for our refs.
We've got 4 main edit stations, 2x 2011 Mac Pros and 2x 2013 Mac Pros. Our main software packages are FCPX, Motion, Nuke, C4D, and a touch of Resolve every now and then.
I've been looking at the Eizo range, and they look ace, though they're a little pricey for our current budget.
So I was considering setting up each station with an HP Z27x for the GUI, and a Z24x for the reference monitor.
I've read mixed reviews. Some colour graders seem to hate them. But then, a lot of colour graders seem to hate most sub £10k monitors
As much as we pride ourselves on our work, we're by no means a high end colour grading facility. That said though, we do want a reasonable level of colour accuracy. And it seems like a good idea to have all of our monitors from the same range, right?
If anyone's got any suggestions/advice/thoughts, I'd be hugely appreciative
With the software you're using, the level of work that outputs, I'd go for a real broadcast monitor. Look at the Flanders Scientific monitors. Yes, you can use HD TV's, but every TV has its own built in filters and enhancement circuits that you can adjust and work around, but they're not true broadcast monitors. Monitors like the Dreamcolor are better than run of the mill computer monitors, but have their limits. So, why not a real broadcast monitor? You spent the money on the software, why skim on the one tool that will allow you a guarantee the best possible quality deliverables?