I call myself a 'new to calibration' guy because I know nothing about calibration.

I will read all the stickies, don't worry.

I have a Sony 52V4100 for 2 weeks and I have a problem with it which is that I think everything I watch on the TV which you can see lights or sunlight (in the actual show) is too bright and is starting to get on my nerve. I have 2 weeks before I can take it back, but I would love to try to solve this problem. I think if I could calibrate the TV correctly, it would be solved.

I would want to calibrate it myself. I tried the AV 709 thing on this website but I have no filter and nothing and it seems I get clipping alot. So for a 'dummy' like me, is it just better for me to go buy a calibration dvd (hopefully it comes with good instruction and I also need the filters) or if I read all the stuff on this website, will it allow me to calibrate it good?

I really want to try to keep this tv set!

Thanks for your input.

Start with 'Avia II: Guide To Home Theater' if you only have a standard DVD player. If you have an HD DVD or Blu-ray player, get 'Digital Video Essentials: HD Basics.' Those will get you started with a foundation via narrated tutorials and basic test patterns. After that, you can consider going deeper yourself or hiring a pro.

Start with 'Avia II: Guide To Home Theater' if you only have a standard DVD player. If you have an HD DVD or Blu-ray player, get 'Digital Video Essentials: HD Basics.' Those will get you started with a foundation via narrated tutorials and basic test patterns. After that, you can consider going deeper yourself or hiring a pro.

I can get 'Digital Video Essentials: HD Basics.' at FS or sony store or do I need to get it online or any specialized store in my area (if there is any) has that?

Thanks for the help!

I can get 'Digital Video Essentials: HD Basics.' at FS or sony store or do I need to get it online or any specialized store in my area (if there is any) has that?

Thanks for the help!

Try Amazon. It may be hard to find at a local store. If you have Netflix, they do offer it for rental.

What is the best way for a 'dummy' to calibrate his new LCD TV


Hire a professional.

Anything else for a dummy will not be the "best" way.

Hire a professional.

Anything else for a dummy will not be the "best" way.

Yeah... That is true, but we all started somewhere.

I think if someone gets the above mentioned discs, they could at least make their set much better that what comes out of the box.

So i suggest following that advice, the AVIA, DVE discs and go through them. You will be surprised at ow much you can get done.

Ultimately, you may want a pro to ISF calibrate your set if you are still not satisfied, but go ahead, get one of the discs and give it a shot. Anything you do can be undone, by setting things back. After all, you're not going to access any service menu.

Mike

Yeah... That is true, but we all started somewhere.

I think if someone gets the above mentioned discs, they could at least make their set much better that what comes out of the box.

So i suggest following that advice, the AVIA, DVE discs and go through them. You will be surprised at ow much you can get done.

Ultimately, you may want a pro to ISF calibrate your set if you are still not satisfied, but go ahead, get one of the discs and give it a shot. Anything you do can be undone, by setting things back. After all, you're not going to access any service menu.

Mike

yes every body started somewhere stick to that!

here (http://www.curtpalme.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10457) is a good actually am not aware of any better guides out there.
so detailed and holds your hand until the end.

yes every body started somewhere stick to that!

here (http://www.curtpalme.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10457) is a good actually am not aware of any better guides out there.
so detailed and holds your hand until the end.


The question was "What is the best way for a 'dummy' to calibrate his new LCD TV"

Yes, everyone has to start somewhere, but that is not the BEST way for dummy to get his TV properly calibrated. It's without a doubt, the WORST way.

There is no better (and efficient) way to learn than by hiring a competent professional that will take the time to educate and answer questions during the calibration process.

I agree with GeorgeAB's advice. It won't be truly calibrated, but it will be greatly improved over the default settings, IMHO.

Once you get acclimated to the (significant) changes, you can better evaluate whether or not you feel hiring a professional to get you all the way there is prudent.

The question was "What is the best way for a 'dummy' to calibrate his new LCD TV"

Yes, everyone has to start somewhere, but that is not the BEST way for dummy to get his TV properly calibrated. It's without a doubt, the WORST way.

I did mention getting a pro if they weren't satisfied. The Curt Palme site does a commendable job of answering a lot of questions... If you're on this forum, my guess is that you're probably a bit "less" of a dummy that most.

But agreed as the best - for almost anyone - is a pro, but if the person is willing to read, they can learn much, and accomplish much. As long as they avoid any service menus! Everything can be re-set, no harm, no foul.....

The question was "What is the best way for a 'dummy' to calibrate his new LCD TV"

Yes, everyone has to start somewhere, but that is not the BEST way for dummy to get his TV properly calibrated. It's without a doubt, the WORST way.

So Randy what would you recommend as a way for a dummy to get started? Kal over at Curt Palme does an excellent job of detailing what is needed and how to do it for as little cost. We have not seen the calibration guide for dummies by Randy yet.

Jeez, I'm not a 'dummy'! I really tought 'dummy' in these cases was used to described somebody that knows nothing about one subject. I could have used 'noob'. When doing something, I like to get to know a bit about the stuff, but right now, time is not on my side because the calibration subject requires tons of reading!

Thanks for all the advice. I will read the guide which hold my hand. I got tons of questions, but just no time to read and educate myself right now. I need to configure my ps3 also for blu rays and there is a thread with like 1k posts (man a lot of reading).

I went to the ISF fwebsite to see if there was a professional calibrator. There was one in my town, I called and they said they DIDN'T have the right tool for the new technology stuff, only the old !?!? I don't quite understand how they can be on ISF website and can't do it.

Jeez, I'm not a 'dummy'! I really tought 'dummy' in these cases was used to described somebody that knows nothing about one subject. I could have used 'noob'. When doing something, I like to get to know a bit about the stuff, but right now, time is not on my side because the calibration subject requires tons of reading!

Thanks for all the advice. I will read the guide which hold my hand. I got tons of questions, but just no time to read and educate myself right now. I need to configure my ps3 also for blu rays and there is a thread with like 1k posts (man a lot of reading).

I went to the ISF fwebsite to see if there was a professional calibrator. There was one in my town, I called and they said they DIDN'T have the right tool for the new technology stuff, only the old !?!? I don't quite understand how they can be on ISF website and can't do it.

Unfortunately, all this does take time...

If you really don't want to spend the time, you may not learn what you need to, and a pro may be the way to go. You can generally find competent ISF people that service your area. I'd look at a broader geographical range....

Unfortunately, all this does take time...

If you really don't want to spend the time, you may not learn what you need to, and a pro may be the way to go. You can generally find competent ISF people that service your area. I'd look at a broader geographical range....

I will spend time reading and learning when I get time. The closest ISF is at 2 hours from where I live and the TV won't fit in my car lol.

I'm mostly with the picture I got right now. There is just one thing getting on my nerve and that is why I want to try and calibrate it :)

everything I watch on the TV which you can see lights or sunlight (in the actual show) is too bright and is starting to get on my nerve.

If the TV has a backlight you can try turning that down, and you can reduce picture (contrast).

So Randy what would you recommend as a way for a dummy to get started? Kal over at Curt Palme does an excellent job of detailing what is needed and how to do it for as little cost. We have not seen the calibration guide for dummies by Randy yet.

Interesting comparing apples with oranges and spinning away. I have in the past suggested that exact Curt Palme article in the past for people who have asked about a guide to get started calibrating their sets, as noted here :http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=15688661#post15688661

You must be more interested in selling meters instead of answer the topic/question the OP asked "What is the best way for a 'dummy' to calibrate his new LCD TV", which my post answered.

You must be more interested in selling meters instead of answer the topic/question the OP asked "What is the best way for a 'dummy' to calibrate his new LCD TV", which my post answered.

Post changed and title, no more dummy because I'm a start little guy!:D

You know what really helped me calibrate my television to satisfaction? I put my laptop on my knee and pulled up screenshots of Blu-Ray movies I own from a site like bluray.com, and then put in my own copy of the film on the television and scanned the disc to find the same frame. Then I'd compare what I could see, and if I was missing any details on the television then I knew I had my blacks too dark or dynamic contrast too high. It also helped determine color. I did this with several dark scenes and several light scenes until I found a balance that got me the most out of each, and until I was more happy with the picture on my television than on my laptop. Before I calibrated, the default settings the television came with actually looked significantly worse than what I could see on my computer screen! When I was finished, I could see all of the details I was seeing on the computer, and a whole lot more color depth.

You know what really helped me calibrate my television to satisfaction? I put my laptop on my knee and pulled up screenshots of Blu-Ray movies I own from a site like bluray.com, and then put in my own copy of the film on the television and scanned the disc to find the same frame. Then I'd compare what I could see, and if I was missing any details on the television then I knew I had my blacks too dark or dynamic contrast too high. It also helped determine color. I did this with several dark scenes and several light scenes until I found a balance that got me the most out of each, and until I was more happy with the picture on my television than on my laptop. Before I calibrated, the default settings the television came with actually looked significantly worse than what I could see on my computer screen! When I was finished, I could see all of the details I was seeing on the computer, and a whole lot more color depth.

OK - so for this to work you have to have 2 things...
1) - The screen shot itself has to be "perfect" with the black level correct, color correct, etc... it has to be a "calibrated" reference image.
2) - The Laptop has to be calibrated... with a meter. The black level has to be correct, the gamma has to be appropriate, color has to be accurate, etc.

It's HIGHLY unlikey (not impossible, but HIGHLY unlikely) the image being used is an accurate representation of what the film frame should look like - it could be too bright or too dark or color shifted... you can't assume that a screen image from any website is remotely accurate. Laptops are often notoriously difficult to calibrate to any reasonable accuracy because their video subsystems tend to be "limited" in available adjustments compared to specialized video adapters you might find in an HTPC.

So you can achieve a rough "match" with this method, but the question is... what are you matching? It's not likely to be anything accurate. So the next question, then, is "does matching something that's not accurate improve the images or not"? Hard to know without measurements from a meter.

OK - so for this to work you have to have 2 things...
1) - The screen shot itself has to be "perfect" with the black level correct, color correct, etc... it has to be a "calibrated" reference image.
2) - The Laptop has to be calibrated... with a meter. The black level has to be correct, the gamma has to be appropriate, color has to be accurate, etc.

It's HIGHLY unlikey (not impossible, but HIGHLY unlikely) the image being used is an accurate representation of what the film frame should look like - it could be too bright or too dark or color shifted... you can't assume that a screen image from any website is remotely accurate. Laptops are often notoriously difficult to calibrate to any reasonable accuracy because their video subsystems tend to be "limited" in available adjustments compared to specialized video adapters you might find in an HTPC.

So you can achieve a rough "match" with this method, but the question is... what are you matching? It's not likely to be anything accurate. So the next question, then, is "does matching something that's not accurate improve the images or not"? Hard to know without measurements from a meter.
The point isn't to match the laptop; it's just helpful to have a second source of the same image for comparison sake. If the color looks more natural on the dimly-lit, low-saturation laptop or there's all kinds of details in the whites or blacks that can't be seen on the television, then it becomes obvious more steps need to be taken.

The point isn't to match the laptop; it's just helpful to have a second source of the same image for comparison sake. If the color looks more natural on the dimly-lit, low-saturation laptop or there's all kinds of details in the whites or blacks that can't be seen on the television, then it becomes obvious more steps need to be taken.

If the source isn't accurate, you are simply using an inaccurate "reference". For example... if you go to 5 websites and download their image of a Blu-ray disc cover shot (the same title from every site), then put them side by side, they will very likely all be completely different (unless they were copied from the same source file). One may be dark with little shadow detail, another may be quite light with much more shadow detail, a third may be too blue, the forth could be undersaturated, and the fifth could have too much yellow. Which one should be your reference? Unless you are holding an original Blu-ray in your hand to use as a comparison, anything you download from an online source is HIGHLY suspect - it could be MUCH too bright, MUCH too saturated (or undersaturated), etc. etc. - the online image, in fact, has little chance of representing the image the director and cinematographer intended you to see. So using it as any sort of comparison is really no help.

Test patterns from a test/setup disc are much more appropriate and helpful. Digital Video Essentials HD Basics (Blu-ray) sells for less than $20 at Amazon - that's the sort of reference people should be looking at. You don't need to see a scene from a movie to know your display is setup correctly with that disc - in fact, after using that disc, your display will be better than images you can find online in regards to black level, color, tint, sharpness, etc.

Dummy=Hiring a pro EVERY SINGLE TIME. You will never learn nothing, they want you to keep comming back.

Smart guy= Joining avs forums, learning from other owners what the best settings they recommend. And then using your own judgement what looks best.

Dummy=Hiring a pro EVERY SINGLE TIME. You will never learn nothing, they want you to keep comming back.

Smart guy= Joining avs forums, learning from other owners what the best settings they recommend. And then using your own judgement what looks best.

Thats what I did, the problem is I have 1 more week to try to tweek it or I return it. Blacks are black (turn contrast on) but every shot of tv shows and movie that shows sunlight or light really pops up too bright on the tv which kinda blinds me. CSI newyork and original CSI, whatching those really pains me. Lights emitting from the lightbubs and sunlight showing thru windows and also reflecting on items is realllllly painful to watch. its so bright, it makes like a star ( You know when you drive at night in a rainy day, and you see the car lights coming at you and it makes like a star, showing exceeding light north east west and south....well thats my problem)

This was why I wanted to learn about calibration and I will, but I have 1 week to return the TV, sony's new firmware will come this week, and this is why I wanted to try to fix it asap without me knowing stuff cause if its a tv defect, I can actully return it you know.

...
Blacks are black (turn contrast on) but every shot of tv shows and movie that shows sunlight or light really pops up too bright on the tv which kinda blinds me. CSI newyork and original CSI, whatching those really pains me. Lights emitting from the lightbubs and sunlight showing thru windows and also reflecting on items is realllllly painful to watch. its so bright, it makes like a star ( You know when you drive at night in a rainy day, and you see the car lights coming at you and it makes like a star, showing exceeding light north east west and south....well thats my problem)
...

My wife complained of images like the ones you describe when I had the Contrast set too high on my Samsung LCD. I had tried following the advice of setting Contrast as high as I could without seeing or measuring color shift, which maximized the overall contrast ratio to more than 2000:1. But with a measured light intensity greater than 50 ftL, bright white seemed to generate reflections, or effects that overwhelmed anything nearby on the screen. When I went back to an earlier range of calibration, with the maximum white light in the range of 45 ftL, this effect disappeared and my wife was happy. (I know. You don't have the instruments so the numbers per se don't mean a lot to you.)

So it sounds to me as if you should back off on the Backlight (or whatever Sony calls this control) or the Contrast a little, and you'll be happier with the result. There are several discussions in this forum on how to set Contrast, including the criteria to use, some of which require instruments but most require just a calibration DVD. As George suggested at the top, the DVE and AVIA disks come with lots of explanations for the newcomer. Backlight is the generally recommended control to reduce the overall illumination, as it preserves the maximum contrast ratio.

Bob - Bill's latest reply is probably the best you can do, since you are not convinced you're only "evaluating" the set. Those two discs are going to be the only way you may have to get an idea of what the set is like.

You MUST take the time to follow the process.

Have you tried the Sony forums looking for assistance? I know in the Samsung forums there are many helping hands.

Bob - Bill's latest reply is probably the best you can do, since you are not convinced you're only "evaluating" the set. Those two discs are going to be the only way you may have to get an idea of what the set is like.

You MUST take the time to follow the process.

Have you tried the Sony forums looking for assistance? I know in the Samsung forums there are many helping hands.

I will go check sony forums and yes I will take the time to follow the process since I got a bit more now.

Thanks everyone for your inputs!

Dummy=Hiring a pro EVERY SINGLE TIME. You will never learn nothing, they want you to keep comming back.

Smart guy= Joining avs forums, learning from other owners what the best settings they recommend. And then using your own judgement what looks best.


Your advice might have some validity to it if HDTVs were built to Hospital grade or Military Specs.

Unfortunately, parts that have a high degree of variance in their specs will never perform similarly - and the errors are compounded through various stages.

There might be extremely slight differences from model to model. But from my experience all models perform pretty close and are consistent.

Zues is a user who has no experience with a calibrated image, and simply runs around ranting about the concept of accurate images in general. Please pay no attention to the troll.

Seems you took time out chris for that, you should take your own advice. I wouldn't recommend anyone listen to your advice either, in audio or video. Lets be honest, you think your little bookshelf surround sound speakers are better than full range floorstanders, and watch blurry black crush crt projector :(

There might be extremely slight differences from model to model. But from my experience all models perform pretty close and are consistent.

And I will ask for the second time, what experience do you have with scientific equipment to back up that claim - or is it just what you think you perceive with your "calibrated eyes"?

Not only my experience but countless reviews also. A tv or projector that measures and has good color accuracy will usually perform as the reviews states. A tv or projector with noteable bad color accuracy the same. Now you can try to skew that and say the manufacturers calibrated them special for the reviews, but i don't buy it. Especially when many perform poor. But go ahead and listen to those who say all models of even the exact same kind perform differently. Do you have any 'claims' they all perform differently? Maybe with different sources is all i can imagine.

Not only my experience but countless reviews also. A tv or projector that measures and has good color accuracy will usually perform as the reviews states. A tv or projector with noteable bad color accuracy the same. Now you can try to skew that and say the manufacturers calibrated them special for the reviews, but i don't buy it. Especially when many perform poor. But go ahead and listen to those who say all models of even the exact same kind perform differently. Do you have any 'claims' they all perform differently? Maybe with different sources is all i can imagine.

Yes as can anyone that has measured multiple sets knows the differences are great - especially as the different light sources age.

As I monitor a large number of sets that are never turned off, a months worth of use can be accumulated in a week - and a years worth of use in just 3. The differences can happen quicker than one would expect, also depending on what part of the life cycle the set/light source is in.

As has been shown in the Bias Lighting Section, just because something measured D65 out of the box doesnt mean it will fall up to 1000K in less than 500 hours.

Furthermore, regardless of what you think (and its clear you have no knowledge of military or hospital grade equipment), the electronics components installed in most HDTVs today have large variances that has tolerances vs tolerances that all tend to add up.

Again, I continue to ask for the third time, please detail your Not only my experience but countless reviews also. experience and how you can make the claims you do without scientific instruments as it has been proven that humans cannot detect changes until they hit a rather large threshold.

Not only my experience but countless reviews also. A tv or projector that measures and has good color accuracy will usually perform as the reviews states. A tv or projector with noteable bad color accuracy the same. Now you can try to skew that and say the manufacturers calibrated them special for the reviews, but i don't buy it. Especially when many perform poor. But go ahead and listen to those who say all models of even the exact same kind perform differently. Do you have any 'claims' they all perform differently? Maybe with different sources is all i can imagine.

"Countless reviews" provide measurements on ONE display. I have copied "review settings" to the same model display I have on hand and get readings as much as 25% different than the review. I have calibrated about 30 samples of a single 50" Samsung plasma panel model (50A550, a current model due to be replaced shortly). These have 7 gamma settings and I've measured 2.3 gamma with User Menu gamma settings of -2, -1, 0, and +1 on various displays so which one should the average A550 owner use? Gamma will be off by about 0.1 for each setting. So if you pick the "0" setting your Gamma could be 2.3, but it could also be 2.4, 2.2, or 2.1 - and for me those choices aren't "close enough"... 2.4 is clearly too high on these panels and 2.3 is a more 3-D looking than 2.2. 2.1 is clearly too bright for movies in a dark room. These Samsungs also have CMS controls and White Balance controls and the "agreement" between panels is almost zero. The service menus in these panels don't even have the same settings everywhere (and this is before being "tampered with" by the owner or calibrator).

Chances of copied settings being better than settings you arrive at using a test/setup disc are maybe 1-in-10 at the very best, 1-in-20 is more realistic.

On the other hand, Pioneer Kuro panels don't have much variation in comparison... first, they lack many controls the Samsung panels have so there are fewer settings to deal with, and they are (especially the Elites) closer to being "right" than "lesser" plasmas. And when you (as a calibrator) do make adjustments, the adjustments tend to be fairly small. But STILL you don't make the same adjustments to every Kuro panel - even though the range of adjustment settings may be small, there's still a range and using the settings from some other panel isn't likely to be the best settings for another panel. I wish they were, I could calibrate a Kuro a lot faster if I didn't have to find the right settings for each panel.

You are wishing for something that is not true based on real measurements of real video displays.

Furthermore... not long ago, I calibrated a $15,000 Marantz projector with a $5000 Lumagen video processor and a motorized anamorphic lens with a 2.35:1 Stewart screen. They had been mail ordered from AVScience... the people who operate this forum. The projector and processor were calibrated together before they were shipped to the customer who had everything installed and was initially happy. I got called to calibrate the setup and was expecting a "touch-up" sort of calibration since the pair had already been calibrated before being shipped. What I got was quite large errors in grayscale, gamma, and color - as if no calibrating had ever been done. Did AVScience NOT calibrate the setup? No, I'm sure they did, there were settings changed in both the projector and Lumagen processor and I'm sure they got a good result. But 500 hours on the lamp and being setup in this specific room with this specific carpet, ceiling, walls with this specific screen, anamorphic lens, and these sources all conspired to make the CURRENT measured results VERY different that what AVScience achieved. The end result was spectacular on-site calibration. In another 500 hours, just the changes the lamp goes through will produce different measurements and different Lumagen settings. When the lamp is changed, everything CAN and often DOES change because lamps don't have consistent spectra from sample to sample. I used to work on high-end imaging systems and we had to test every lamp after a 50-hour burn-in for light spectra and 50% of the lamps were rejected. We started with $500 lamps and had to charge $2000 for them because of the testing and high numbers of unusable lamps.

You are dreaming if you think products built with components that have tolerances of +/-10% to +/-20% (mil spec components are NOT used in consumer video products) will be able to share settings with any reliability or even any improvement.

That said... yes, you can get some valuable info from various video display threads here... especially if someone has correctly evaluated the "junk" settings and made appropriate recommendations. But everything else (contrast, brightness, color, CMS, white balance) is just a guess because of equipment used for the measurements and the displays themselves. If someone properly analyzes the effects of the Sharpness control... that is one setting that can be reliably shared from display to display. Black Level is another that can be reliably shared (if everybody is using 16-235). But there aren't many like that.

Doug,

Thanks for the detailed, illuminating and persuasive response. Fortunately, such effort won't be completely wasted on the author of the post you were responding to. He has heard this all many times before, has refused to learn from expert testimony, and will likely reject your contribution as well. His posts appear to be chronically detached from rational thought. I'll link to this post of yours in the "Sharing Display Menu Settings?" sticky thread.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.
A Lion AV Consultants Affiliate

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

I also second what Doug said. And what george said too, unfortunately...

I never said copying exact settings the result would be perfectly calibrated for every panel. Just that you can have a great picture by choosing the correct picture mode, like sony warm, pioneer pure, and recommended brightness and contrast settings. Sure i will agree if you are talking white balance and cms adjustments. As you would be fine tuneing that extra 5% or so a pro calibrator would extract. My point is you can get 95% there just choosing correct modes, and brightness and contrast settings, which most people would be 100% happy with.

I never said copying exact settings the result would be perfectly calibrated for every panel. Just that you can have a great picture by choosing the correct picture mode, like sony warm, pioneer pure, and recommended brightness and contrast settings. Sure i will agree if you are talking white balance and cms adjustments. As you would be fine tuneing that extra 5% or so a pro calibrator would extract. My point is you can get 95% there just choosing correct modes, and brightness and contrast settings, which most people would be 100% happy with.

The mode thing (warm, pure, movie, ect.. by brand) is deffinetly an honest contribution.

Brightness and contrast settings should still be set by using a calibration disc even if it's just the THX menu from a pixar/lucasfilm disc, doing that in the native enviroment for the display is going to likely be more accurate than copy some one elses settings.

Earth to Zues........this is the 'Display Calibration' section of the forum! The relatively small percentage of video consumers that come here want to learn about calibrating their display, not how to avoid doing so. Copying other people's settings is not calibration. Your insistence on promoting yourself and alternatives to calibration belong in an alternative context other than this section of the forum.

Well there IS alternatives to anyone who comes in here for help to just tell them they need professional calibration. I mean take the op of this thread for example, the poor guy probably just needs a contrast adjustment, or maybe a new tv as lcd's are extremely bright-sharp displays, and the only advice from pro calibrators is to get pro calibration. Talk about promoting.

I mean take the op of this thread for example, the poor guy probably just needs a contrast adjustment, or maybe a new tv as lcd's are extremely bright-sharp displays, and the only advice from pro calibrators is to get pro calibration. Talk about promoting.

No, it wasn't.

This was the first post:
Start with 'Avia II: Guide To Home Theater' if you only have a standard DVD player. If you have an HD DVD or Blu-ray player, get 'Digital Video Essentials: HD Basics.' Those will get you started with a foundation via narrated tutorials and basic test patterns. After that, you can consider going deeper yourself or hiring a pro.

The first advice was to go buy a disc that has accurate patterns that you can use to optically (with your eye) calibrate the display.

That is the de facto, go to, advice in this forum.

Use a disc.

If that's not good enough then either buy a probe or hire somebody.

If the source isn't accurate, you are simply using an inaccurate "reference". For example... if you go to 5 websites and download their image of a Blu-ray disc cover shot (the same title from every site), then put them side by side, they will very likely all be completely different (unless they were copied from the same source file). One may be dark with little shadow detail, another may be quite light with much more shadow detail, a third may be too blue, the forth could be undersaturated, and the fifth could have too much yellow. Which one should be your reference? Unless you are holding an original Blu-ray in your hand to use as a comparison, anything you download from an online source is HIGHLY suspect - it could be MUCH too bright, MUCH too saturated (or undersaturated), etc. etc. - the online image, in fact, has little chance of representing the image the director and cinematographer intended you to see. So using it as any sort of comparison is really no help.
Erm, maybe I'm not being clear. What I display on the television is the actual blu-ray disc on pause. What I display on the computer monitor is the same blu-ray still image from a review site such as blu-ray.com. I realize this is not a scientific comparison and there are some variables, but it's a quick and dirty way to see if your television is even in the ballpark. It helped me realize how much detail in the shadows and highlights I was missing with the torch mode that my television originally came in. Before viewing the same frame on a computer screen void of image "enhancers", I was naive and thought dynamic mode and black adjust both set to high looked good.

I realize this is not "calibration", but it helps a dummy get the picture at least in the ballpark, and at no cost.

No, it wasn't.

This was the first post:


The first advice was to go buy a disc that has accurate patterns that you can use to optically (with your eye) calibrate the display.

That is the de facto, go to, advice in this forum.

Use a disc.

If that's not good enough then either buy a probe or hire somebody.


Seems you overlooked a couple posts from beachcomber and leeG.

Erm, maybe I'm not being clear. What I display on the television is the actual blu-ray disc on pause. What I display on the computer monitor is the same blu-ray still image from a review site such as blu-ray.com. I realize this is not a scientific comparison and there are some variables, but it's a quick and dirty way to see if your television is even in the ballpark. It helped me realize how much detail in the shadows and highlights I was missing with the torch mode that my television originally came in. Before viewing the same frame on a computer screen void of image "enhancers", I was naive and thought dynamic mode and black adjust both set to high looked good.

I realize this is not "calibration", but it helps a dummy get the picture at least in the ballpark, and at no cost.

That's a really bad way to do it, you know why?

Because your computer monitor could be just as far off as your TV, which one is right?

You've got two monitors neither of them is a reference.

Take the advice of the very first post, go out and spend the $20-$30 to pick up DVE-HD Basics and use that to calibrate, it's the best you can do with spending at least 5-10x as much.

Seems you overlooked a couple posts from beachcomber and leeG.

They chimed in, but they were not the first reply.

Also beachcombers comment was very tongue in cheek. If you've got an IQ of 65, you probably should hire a pro all that xyY stuff is likely to just get you confused.

Lee's response is also extremely valid, spending 4 hours with a pro listening and learning from them is probably worth 2 months of being on the forum, plus you'll get a calibration w/ equipment that is more accurate them most people would be willing to buy.

Neither of them are wrong per se and I think their comments coming after the initial buy a disc comment imply their advice was additive.

buy a disc,
but if you really aren't bright hire someone,
Also if you want to learn alot and get a good calibration hiring someone is very valuable.

Not bad advice really.
Using someone elses settings on the other hand produces results that are no more accurate than the original picture (As far as brightness/contrast/color/tint/cms goes).

Have you ever tried reasoning with a tree stump?

Sotti, did you ever think that a cd or a professional might still leave color oversaturated as far as color settings? I know there are standards, but how many displays are left at 0 color or even raised, and the vast majority of content results in oversaturated images? This is really my gripe with doing everything to standards and not using your own judgement. The vast majority of peoples screens that use cd's or even so called isf images look terribly oversaturated.

Have you ever tried reasoning with a tree stump?

No, this is why i try to avoid conversation with you. :)

Zues~

Why we have to revisit this time and time again, I do not know. Maybe you just have that many screws loose - you've certainly demonstrated a lack of ability to learn.

You've admitted that 1) you think calibration is a complete sham, and 2) you know nothing about calibration.

So what are you doing in the Calibration forum, in a thread about learning how to calibrate? Aside from stirring up trouble and trolling, I can't think of a legitimate reason. Contribute something positive and related or leave.

Sotti, did you ever think that a cd or a professional might still leave color oversaturated as far as color settings? I know there are standards, but how many displays are left at 0 color or even raised, and the vast majority of content results in oversaturated images? This is really my gripe with doing everything to standards and not using your own judgement. The vast majority of peoples screens that use cd's or even so called isf images look terribly oversaturated.

Well obviously you don't like a calibrated image, so you probably shouldn't come here.

Personally I've never calibrated a TV with a CD before, audio doesn't really have anything to do with picture quality, so I can see how using a CD to calibrate your display could leave colors over saturated, but when I've used a DVD they've always looked pretty good.

Then when you take it a step further and equip a competent calibrator with a high quality colorimeter or a spectrophotometer chances are if you think the colors are over saturated it's a you problem.

Well obviously you don't like a calibrated image, so you probably shouldn't come here.

Personally I've never calibrated a TV with a CD before.


Ok, let me guess, you have had all your displays professionaly calibrated. Right?

Zues~

Why we have to revisit this time and time again, I do not know


Yeah, i don't know why you continue to stalk me. If you have nothing to add except i don't know what i'm talking about then don't keep ALWAYS responding. It's not my problem you will never learn about what a correct image looks like, and have zero confidence in any of your own ability. And your results are nothing more than what a geek squad kid can do.

Then when you take it a step further and equip a competent calibrator with a high quality colorimeter or a spectrophotometer chances are if you think the colors are over saturated it's a you problem.

No, because i don't need a colorimeter to tell me, i know. That's the difference. No more of a difference than knowing where your perfect brightness setting should be at. Unfortunately setting color intensity is not as accurate.

Ok, let me guess, you have had all your displays professionaly calibrated. Right?

No but I have a chroma5 and calman, so I do have a really good idea of what my saturation should look like.

I went the incremental, learn it my self and end up spending 2-3 times as much as if I just paid some one once. But in the process I have found what reference looks like and verified it against the specifications the engineers who master our content use.

No, because i don't need a colorimeter to tell me, i know. That's the difference.

Then it's just a subjective opinion without fact or merit.

Then it's just a subjective opinion without fact or merit.


Just like the opinion carmen electra is a good looking women?

No but I have a chroma5 and calman, so I do have a really good idea of what my saturation should look like.


Not really, since you are trusting your equipment 100%.

Just like the opinion carmen electra is a good looking women?

dude she's seriously busted, getting old, getting fake and I wouldn't touch her with a 10ft pole at this point.

Maybe back before she started dating prince.

Not really, since you are trusting your equipment 100%.

Do you have a good reason why you shouldn't trust a brand new factory calibrated piece of equipment?

dude she's seriously busted, getting old, getting fake and I wouldn't touch her with a 10ft pole at this point.


Lets run with this, certainly she was hot in her younger years, but just a little ageing she can look washed up, like many, and we can tell that. But we can't tell what a oversaturated image looks like, cartoon colors, red-pink push etc? Do we really need a photo research colormeter to confirm this?

Lets run with this, certainly she was hot in her younger years, but just a little ageing she can look washed up, like many, and we can tell that. But we can't tell what a oversaturated image looks like, cartoon colors, red-pink push etc? Do we really need a photo research colormeter to confirm this?

Okay so TV are like women.

My TV has given me two children.

WTF your analogy doesn't hold.
Hotter is subjective.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Reference standards can be measures and calibrated.

You don't need a colorimeter to adjust saturation especially with as far off as it often is OTB but lets look at margin of error:
naked eye
blue filter
colorimeter
spectrophotometer

I guarantee you cannot do better with your naked eye than I can with my colorimeter.

Nobody is saying that out of the box is correct. We are just saying use a reference when eyeballing your set AND that using a reference and doing it yourself will be better than coping someone else's "reference" settings.

I guarantee you cannot do better with your naked eye than I can with my colorimeter.


You don't need to tell me that, i know that you and many others feel that way. Regardless how the end result picture looks. It's all data and numbers. I guess we will have to agree to disagree as i feel the human eye is the best video calibration tool ever to be devised.

please keep on topic and stop the bickering

Thanks

You don't need to tell me that, i know that you and many others feel that way. Regardless how the end result picture looks. It's all data and numbers. I guess we will have to agree to disagree as i feel the human eye is the best video calibration tool ever to be devised.

For brightness, contrast, color/tint and sharpness yes the eye is the best tool you have in your kit but only after you know what to look for, have a bit of experience and a source to create the needed patterns or sample clips. As for white balance, gamma and gamut the eye is to adaptive for it to work and you need other tools be it optical comparators, colorimeters, spectroradiometers and even just a light meter. And now with the manufactures getting on board and making the necessary controls available within the user menus having the correct tools to perform a complete calibration is even more crucial.

My point is you can get 95% there just choosing correct modes, and brightness and contrast settings, which most people would be 100% happy with.

You see, this is why you are always crossing swords with everybody in this forum. You are obviously trying to promote that if you can reach some mediocre level of performance that is "watchable", and noticably better than how it was out of the box, people should be satisfied with that, instead of striving for the best. Well, the OP of this thread specifically asked for "the best", it says so in the thread title. So, telling him that doing it himself won't be "the best", is perfectly accurate. Who are you to tell people who want the best and actively try to find answers on how to get it, that they should just settle with a mediocre picture?

That's a really bad way to do it, you know why?

Because your computer monitor could be just as far off as your TV, which one is right?

You've got two monitors neither of them is a reference.
Why is this so hard to understand? Out of the box most LCDs come with all kinds of image "enhancements" cranked to the max, resulting in crushed blacks, blown out whites and unnaturally saturated colors. Computer monitors have no such "enhancements", therefore the image will appear much more natural. Comparing the two simply allows a dummy like myself to realize the picture looks better — and shows more detail — without all of those "enhancements" enabled. Without this simple comparison, I'd have been none the wiser.

I'm just talking about getting the picture in the ballpark here, which is all a "dummy" really needs.

Your little homily about other settings getting you 95% of the way to "calibration" is also wildly incorrect. As I said, I routinely see settings that produce errors in the range of 25%. That "pre-calibrated" projector/processor combination I mentioned had errors as large as 40% in some parameters. I don't consider errors that large to be within the realm of 95%/5%, nor should you if you have any integrity.

Erm, maybe I'm not being clear. What I display on the television is the actual blu-ray disc on pause. What I display on the computer monitor is the same blu-ray still image from a review site such as blu-ray.com. I realize this is not a scientific comparison and there are some variables, but it's a quick and dirty way to see if your television is even in the ballpark. It helped me realize how much detail in the shadows and highlights I was missing with the torch mode that my television originally came in. Before viewing the same frame on a computer screen void of image "enhancers", I was naive and thought dynamic mode and black adjust both set to high looked good.

I realize this is not "calibration", but it helps a dummy get the picture at least in the ballpark, and at no cost.

No, I realize EXACTLY what you are saying. Perhaps you do not realize that I retired after 34 years of supporting, designing, and testing professional imaging products. It is difficult for me to calmly explain -- over and over again -- why what you are doing is so inaccurate. This is the AVScience Forum and the goals here generally lean towards processes and equipment to get the best possible images from home video systems. These forums are not generally "about" getting mediocre images and calling that "good enough".

I have spent, literally, decades, perfecting What-You-See-Is-What-You-Get imaging systems. I know what it takes to do what you are suggesting and I know how inaccurate web images are. Web images are NOTORIOUSLY inaccurate and inconsistent from site to site. You can't trust ANY of them to represent what the real movie frame is supposed to look like. The image you are looking at on your computer could be MUCH too bright or MUCH too dark, or MUCH too yellow, or MUCH too blue... just because it came from some web site doesn't make the image accurate. It can be off as much or more than your TV.

I tried opening some "screen shots" for movies I own on Blu-ray on my laptop (which is calibrated by the way, and yours is not so your laptop is already not a good reference) and the screen shots picked from 3 different sites do not match the appearance of the image on my video display. Now... the image on my video display is calibrated with a meter. My LAPTOP was calibrated as much as it could be (not all that much) with the same meter.

My laptop has an HD DVD drive. If I put an HD DVD in my laptop and capture a frame, then remove the HD DVD and put it in my HD DVD player and look at the same image on my TV - guess what... the laptop and TV match reasonably well. There are still some differences, but the TV I am using has many more calibration controls than my laptop has. Now, bring up the same scene from a web site and the image is quite a bit off in easily observable ways. So you are attempting to use inaccurate images on an inaccurate laptop to make accurate images (from an actual Blu-ray disc) look similar on your inaccurate TV. I assume you have seen how much images can be changed in PhotoShop? You can change ANYTHING about an image using PhotoShop. Websites use PhotoShop or something similar to convert images to appropriate sizes for their web pages and most of the time, the images are messed with in some other way - most often because the person re-sizing the image is not on a computer with a calibrated monitor so they think the image is "wrong" when the capture is probably more accurate than their final result.

I'm just saying that your process is fraught with inaccuracies at every step. And it is not nearly as useful as using a sub-$20 test/setup disc like Digital Video Essentials HD Basics (see amazon.com for the sub-$20 price) for setting the TV's basic controls. The test disc will bypass the inaccuracies of your laptop, the inaccuracies of image you choose to use, and your TV's "issues" and show you without any inaccuracies exactly how to set those controls to make the images look right - regardless of how they look on a laptop. After setting up your TV with the test/setup disc, it will reproduce Blu-ray frames more accurately than the screen shots you look at on your laptop. And once again... these are the AVScience Forums. It's our job to strive for BETTER images with FEWER adjustment errors as much as possible. The first step towards that goal is a well-designed test/setup disc like Digital Video Essentials HD Basics.

You don't need to tell me that, i know that you and many others feel that way. Regardless how the end result picture looks. It's all data and numbers. I guess we will have to agree to disagree as i feel the human eye is the best video calibration tool ever to be devised.

That's an astounding statement for someone with no education about human vision (or calibration). There are optical illusions you can access on line that show things like a YELLOW segment of an object appearing to be gray to the human eye. A meter reads the color as yellow, the eye says the color is gray unless you isolate the segment from its surroundings, then it looks YELLOW again. There are MANY other examples including motion illusions like colored dots that literally disappear (which may explain why people fail to "see" emergency vehicles with flashing lights and bright colors and crash right into them way too often). Human vision is HIGHLY flawed as anyone who has ever studied human vision will happily expound on in endless detail.

Yet human vision sets the "rules" for how meters measure color. A meter would be useless if it measured color differently than we see color. A meter that is fooled by optical illusions as human vision is would be worthless so the engineers who design meters avoid that design flaw.

Another illusion happens when you look at a grayscale ramp, especially one with steps above 100% white... it is fairly common to see a color error below 100% or sometimes above 100% you ASSUME that pink tint you see in one step really is a pink tint. In reality, your eye will assume the step with the most BLUE is the White-est step and that can make a nearby step look pink even though the pink step really is an accurate white. Meters are needed to keep from being fooled by things like that. Our vision is a remarkable thing, but it is not "meter quality". The people who design meters don't do so in a vacuum. They first learn how human vision works and how to make meters that replicate what we see (with accuracy and repeatability) and they also make sure that meters are not fooled by the same things that fool human vision.

If I put up 3 window patterns that have different brightness levels, you can tell me which is the darkest and which is the brightest, but you can't tell me which one is 30 fL. You'd be guessing. The meter can tell you which one is 30 fL (or which one is closest to 30 fL) and that turns out to be a pretty useful thing to know when you are calibrating a video display.

Why is someone like you with so little interest in or understanding of science, engineering, education, and the pursuit of excellence so obsessed with twisting the world (and video display accuracy) back into the scientific backwaters? If you were the best the human race could do, we'd never have landed on the moon, developed the computer, made roads, or gotten out of the caves. By your way of thinking, the cave man with the first lathe who could make wheels that were pretty round was just a rip-off artist since your 95%-round wheels (which were really 60% round) were just as good. Your logic would also make interchangeable parts impossible, and when you talk on your cell phone, connecting and staying connected just 60% of the time would be good enough. Email that included just 60% of the characters in the original message would also be good enough - I mean the 60% cell phone service would only cost $15 a month. Who would pay $50 a month for a service that's 99.5% reliable anyway? Nobody but a fool.

Yeah, i don't know why you continue to stalk me. If you have nothing to add except i don't know what i'm talking about then don't keep ALWAYS responding. It's not my problem you will never learn about what a correct image looks like, and have zero confidence in any of your own ability. And your results are nothing more than what a geek squad kid can do.

Ad homenim attacks in lieu of a legitimate answer usually indicate a lack of ability to intelligently respond to a question. For everyone's benefit, I'll re-iterate:

1. You state that calibration is a sham.

2. You state that you know nothing about calibration, nor do you have a desire to learn.

3. You are posting in a calibration related thread, although the content of your posts is eithe personal attacks or non-calibration related - this is tantamount to trolling.

I'm surprised the mods haven't blocked you from posting in this forum all together. You have yet to make a beneficial contribution to any thread here. Are you really that attention starved that you feel the need to disrupt otherwise productive threads for your amusement?

I guess we will have to agree to disagree as i feel the human eye is the best video calibration tool ever to be devised.

As doug is far more patient in explaining than I am, this is bulls**t. One of the fundamental behaviors of the human vision system is adaptation to the dominant lighting with regards to color temperature. It is what allows us to see extremely well, and for things to appear normally, across a wide variety of lighting situations, from morning, to noon, to twilight, to incandescent lighting, to flourescents, etc etc. Yet because we adapt to the dominant light sources around us, things usually appear close to neutral white, or something close to it.

It is why it is almost impossible for humans to judge absolute greyscale color temperature with much accuracy, because unless it is grossly, unreasonably colored, if it is the only thing we are looking at then our visual system adjusts our perception so that it appears neutrally white.

It is why you have to white-balance a camera, or do so manually with film or filters in order for things to appear correct on a monitor. Our eyes do that for us automatically. A great benefit for real life viewing, but a great detriment to judging absolute color temperature in isolation without a known reference.

There are certain things that our eyes do incredibly well (seeing across an enormous dynamic range, for instance), but judging absolute color temperature is not one of them, because if we were able to do so, it would significantly cripple our real-world vision.

There are strengths and weaknesses to the human eye. Some of those weaknesses can be taken advantage of (for instance colorwheels on a 1-chip DLP to create the perception of white even though the display cannot output white light at all, or refresh on a CRT or with film to create illusions of smooth motion and a smooth picture).

So, needless to say, your stubbornness, and ignorance continue to astound.

Ad homenim attacks in lieu of a legitimate answer usually indicate a lack of ability to intelligently respond to a question. For everyone's benefit, I'll re-iterate:


The qeek squad grammar is not impressive.

Let's look at the facts.

Since you can't or are incapeable to judge by your eyes you buy inferior products with horrible accuracy. Then you pay as much as the projector for a device to make it accurate because you where incapeable of knowing it was inaccurate in the first place. Same with sxrd owners you could not tell major oversaturation. I'm positive your judgement in anything you buy there will be problems. You are a perfect candidate.

Seems you overlooked a couple posts from beachcomber and leeG.

Appears you have overlooked a few as well.

Not really, since you are trusting your equipment 100%.

OK - I'll make a deal with you.

Get on a plane - fly here.

Sit in front of a TV and 25 times the red, blue or green will be adjusted by 1 click up or down to change the Color Temp.

You will then identify if the color temp went up or down and which color was adjusted in the grey scale.

We will do the same with a meter.

If you get 80% correct (or a better percentage than the meter correct), I will personally pay you $25,000. Get 100% correct and I will pay you $50,000.

If you loose to the meter, you owe me $5000.

Both your cash and my cash will be placed in escrow prior to the test so neither can back out on payment.

A nice profit for a day's work if your eyes are the best calibration meter made, to use your words.

Ready to put up the cash for what should be an easy profit for you if you are as good as you say = as well as prove that your eyes are better than a meter?

Appears you have overlooked a few as well.



OK - I'll make a deal with you.

Get on a plane - fly here.

Sit in front of a TV and 25 times the red, blue or green will be adjusted by 1 click up or down to change the Color Temp.

You will then identify if the color temp went up or down and which color was adjusted in the grey scale.

We will do the same with a meter.

If you get 80% correct (or a better percentage than the meter correct), I will personally pay you $25,000. Get 100% correct and I will pay you $50,000.

If you loose to the meter, you owe me $5000.

Both your cash and my cash will be placed in escrow prior to the test so neither can back out on payment.

A nice profit for a day's work if your eyes are the best calibration meter made, to use your words.

Ready to put up the cash for what should be an easy profit for you if you are as good as you say = as well as prove that your eyes are better than a meter?

I'll take the meter for 5% of the bet.

Appears you have overlooked a few as well.



OK - I'll make a deal with you.

Get on a plane - fly here.

Sit in front of a TV and 25 times the red, blue or green will be adjusted by 1 click up or down to change the Color Temp.

You will then identify if the color temp went up or down and which color was adjusted in the grey scale.


Of'course i would not tell with 1 click. 3 clicks i would take that bet on the content i would pick.

Seriously now i think about it you could raise red 3 clicks or drop green 3 clicks which would result in not knowing if red was raised or green was dropped. So i would not take it. Regardless, adjusting white balance is not rocket science. You are only fine tuning that extra 5% if it's pushing a little green or red. Blue is easy. Get back to me when you have equipment that's capeable of adjusting the lows. Like my eye can.

Seriously now i think about it you could raise red 3 clicks or drop green 3 clicks which would result in not knowing if red was raised or green was dropped. So i would not take it. Regardless, adjusting white balance is not rocket science. You are only fine tuning that extra 5% if it's pushing a little green or red. Blue is easy. Get back to me when you have equipment that's capeable of adjusting the lows. Like my eye can.

Yes, I have equipment that will measure that low and beat your eye - which is the purpose of this test - you have to beat (or tie the meter) so problem solved.

Furthermore, luma would increase or decrease so yes, you could tell if color was added or subtracted.

Balls in your court.

You're just wasting your time. The lights are on, but no one's home.

thank you