Rec. 709 luminance level according to SMPTE

Do you mean the peak luminance output?

My advice is to ignore it and set your display as high as it will go without clipping or run-out in any channels.

Rec709 doesn't define a reference luminance or a reference viewing environment. There are some other specs which describe this in various ways which I am less familiar with.

How bright you want depends on the size of the screen, ambient lighting, backlighting, and viewer preference. Most of the recommendations around here are more about pleasing ranges that are commonly targeted, which are rather arbitrary but which fit well within a particular viewing environment.

I mean, just ballpark on something like a plasma, I might target a range of 20-40 foot lamberts depending on lighting conditions and the type of content the viewer is most concerned about (brighter for sports & TV, dimmer for mainly movies for instance). That would be ~70 to ~140 nits, roughly. I would target probably 10 to 20 footlamberts for a large projection screen in a darkish or dark room, again depending.

That's just my viewing preference, I think those are reasonable value ranges, but I'm sure others will chime in as well.

I don't recall the SMPTE specs that describe in more detail the studio environment, but it's important to note that as most of our viewing environments deviate from that type of viewing environment and screen size, we have to make some intelligent derivations based on that standard which lead to different but appropriate conclusions that match how our particular viewing environment differs.

Rec709 is essentially entirely concerned with scanning standards, signals, etc. It's not concerned as much(or really at all) with the studio environment, the display, etc. That's where SMPE standards come in, and I believe there are also some other ITU standards that provide some guidance there. I don't have any of those, I believe I have one ITU standard regarding comparing high-definition video quality, which isn't really what we're talking about exactly, but it gives some desired traits about the viewing environment lighting, lighting lcoation, etc, and peak luminance of the screen of 150-250 cd/m2

I have a hard copy, and can't find a version online. I know I did get it online at some point, but I don't know if it is still out there on the net.

It is, specifically, ITU-R BT.710-4 "Subjective Assessment Methods for Image Quality in High-Definition Television."

You might have better luck searching. And as I said, I believe there are some more relevant SMPTE documents on the subject, I was hoping others would chime in.

These are not free:
SMPTE RP 166: 'Critical Viewing Conditions For Evaluation Of Color Television Pictures'
SMPTE RP 167: 'Alignment Of NTSC Color Picture Monitors'

THX promulgates best practice for theatres and their recommendations are often co-opted by HT folks.

Poynton claims that the standard for studio reference display luminance is 80 cd/m2 (23 fL) for EBU and 120 cd/m2 (35 fL) for SMPTE on p. 24 of this document

http://www.poynton.com/notes/PU-PR-I...n-PU-PR-IS.pdf

However, I don't know specifically which SMPTE standard he refers to.

The DCI standard for cinema luminance is 48 cd/m2 (14 fL).

That would be RP166. At 100% stimulus (they say 100IRE) a reference white field should have the chromaticity of D65 and an aim luminance of 120cd/m2 or 35fL.

Is there an assumption about the display size and viewing distance for the "studio" setting? I would think the approapriate luminance level should be a function of those two.

Yes, distance is 5 times screen height. At the time I suspect there was not much variance in grading bay BVM size. There was probably greater variance in luminance -- anywhere from 80-120 seems to be common.

These specs are not for consumer use although they've been widely adopted by some enthusiasts. They are for color grading and similar tasks.

Thanks for the info! BTW, what's BVM?

EDIT: I think I found the answer. BVM = Broadcast Video Monitor: a CRT?

Actually I'd say it was the sony FW900 monitor you'd find in the majority of digital film grading situations.

The big(ish) BVMs were only really used to keep the client happy. For critical color decisions they'd usually nip over to the FW900 as it was usually lutted and kept up to date.

Well I was speaking generically about a studio monitor rather than the classic Sony BVM CRT.

The Sony BVM product line is now LCD based and I've heard that in the US Panasonic is infiltrating mastering bays.

Naturally, since I just some random gadget lover, I leave it to folks like Mr.D to speak authoritatively about digital grading.

If you have the requisite dollars (i.e. BVM CRT dollars) I think you can get quite good LCD based displays.

It's terribly off-topic but perhaps Mr.D can share some thoughts.

Im curious to why studios went from reference crt displays to lcds? Wouldnt have reference plasmas been better?

Well back when I was looking for a combination new desktop monitor/emergency Kuro replacement I poked around and looked at pro gear from people like FSI and eCinema. The eCinema DPX is supposed to act like the Kuro ECC and have 0 MLL and the FSI 1770 is supposed to be excellent particularly given the price. At the end naturally I couldn't afford a $40k DPX and couldn't quite justify $3k for a 17" backup monitor.

Again this is an complete outsider looking into the world of pro gear hence my request to Mr.D.

Ebay is your best bet for a FW900 but bear in mind they have probably been hammered and may not have much life left in them. The apple cinema screens are okay, some of the Dells are okay , Eizos are pretty good. I've calibrated all these and done film work on them.

The high end LCDs tend to be very expensive.

Sony stopped making tubes a few years back and the stocks only lasted about 2 years.

No idea . Consider the FW900 was about $5000 when it was new.