So I'm thinking about upgrading my monitor to one of these ultrawides. I have a work machine and personal machine and like the idea of a monitor with KVM switching capabilities, picture by picture, USB dock etc. I noticed at the lower price point, like Philips, they cover 84% of P3, whereas at double the price, like BenQ, they are pre calibrated and cover 98% of P3. 

From a video editing point of view, does this matter enough to pay double the price? I obviously do color grading but not so much by eye, I'm using references from other sources, lumetri scopes etc. I wonder if the higher end models are aimed more at people/professionals shooting their own footage/photographs and then grade it? Anyone use a calibrated color accurate monitor?

Happy to pay for the top end but don't want to throw away money on something I don't really need.

Thanks

Just get yourself a colorimeter and calibrate whatever monitor you get. You can get a used X-Rite i1Display Pro for a little over $100, well worth it. Plus you can calibrate your TV while you're at it.

(2023-01-17, 03:38 PM)stwd4nder2 Wrote: Just get yourself a colorimeter and calibrate whatever monitor you get. You can get a used X-Rite i1Display Pro for a little over $100, well worth it. Plus you can calibrate your TV while you're at it.

This was the first thing that came to my mind also. A color meter would go a long way to help and any pro/prosumer monitor would come with their own calibration equipment anyway. I was lucky enough to borrow someone's X-Rite and it made all the difference.

Otherwise I hear the Acer color grading monitors are pretty good and (relatively) "low" cost.

(2023-01-17, 04:47 PM)PDB Wrote:

(2023-01-17, 03:38 PM)stwd4nder2 Wrote: Just get yourself a colorimeter and calibrate whatever monitor you get. You can get a used X-Rite i1Display Pro for a little over $100, well worth it. Plus you can calibrate your TV while you're at it.

This was the first thing that came to my mind also. A color meter would go a long way to help and any pro/prosumer monitor would come with their own calibration equipment anyway. I was lucky enough to borrow someone's X-Rite and it made all the difference.

Otherwise I hear the Acer color grading monitors are pretty good and (relatively) "low" cost.

Thanks - but I'm assuming though that the ability for a monitor to hit a certain level of a color space is based on the panel? So whilst calibrating it will improve whichever monitor I go for - would a panel that can achieve a higher percentage of P3 make enough real world difference for what I'm going to be doing on it to justify double the cost?

(2023-01-17, 04:57 PM)alleycat Wrote: Thanks - but I'm assuming though that the ability for a monitor to hit a certain level of a color space is based on the panel? So whilst calibrating it will improve whichever monitor I go for - would a panel that can achieve a higher percentage of P3 make enough real world difference for what I'm going to be doing on it to justify double the cost?

Yeah that is true. Calibrating a monitor isn't going to give it the magical ability to encompass more of the DCI-P3 or 2020 spectrum. You would need another panel/monitor to do that. Calibration is just going to make what your existing monitor does now, much, much better.

I guess it comes down to what you plan to do. If you stick with 709 projects, I would just calibrate what you have. Unless its too old, most monitors the last few years will do all of the 709. Personally, I wouldn't bother with the P3 stats. Very few people master in P3 because it is only really used in cinemas (yes I know UHD can do P3 but its a non-starter). Its 2020 (and HDR) that would be more important if you are looking to do UHD projects or just future proofing. So I would look at how much of the 2020 spectrum a monitor can do.

(2023-01-17, 05:05 PM)PDB Wrote:

(2023-01-17, 04:57 PM)alleycat Wrote: Thanks - but I'm assuming though that the ability for a monitor to hit a certain level of a color space is based on the panel? So whilst calibrating it will improve whichever monitor I go for - would a panel that can achieve a higher percentage of P3 make enough real world difference for what I'm going to be doing on it to justify double the cost?

Yeah that is true. Calibrating a monitor isn't going to give it the magical ability to encompass more of the DCI-P3 or 2020 spectrum. You would need another panel/monitor to do that. Calibration is just going to make what your existing monitor does now, much, much better.

I guess it comes down to what you plan to do. If you stick with 709 projects, I would just calibrate what you have. Unless its too old, most monitors the last few years will do all of the 709. Personally, I wouldn't bother with the P3 stats. Very few people master in P3 because it is only really used in cinemas (yes I know UHD can do P3 but its a non-starter). Its 2020 (and HDR) that would be more important if you are looking to do UHD project or just future proofing. So I would look at how much of the 2020 spectrum a monitor can do.

Perfect thanks - think I'll go for the cheaper option and use some of the savings to put towards a calibration tool. Current monitor is pretty old.

For Rec709 get an old Apple Cinema Display like the 30" version or a 24". you find them for like pittance. If you're on a PC, there are lots of LG panels which are 98% + accurate and they are dirt cheap in 1080p. Ultrawides are great, the LG 5K that was Apple approved also is good. Same for the 4K (but don't use the 4K if you're on a Mac, it doesn't scale well).
If you want to work with HDR and Dolby Vision, the 5000 bucks Apple recent display is good, but I read some other cheaper Apple displays also can replace 80 000 $ + monitors with minimal improvement for those.