Jvc dla-hd990/950/550 [Text View]

Lawguy

08-06-09, 07:17 AM

John Ballentine

08-06-09, 07:57 AM

I may have to try one. :)

Looking forward to your review:)

Mike_WI

08-06-09, 09:35 AM

Looking forward to your review:)
What, no review yet! This thread is already a day old.;):)

I'll stick with my RS20 for a while no matter what, but always interesting to see the next generation features.

Mike

gamelover360

08-06-09, 10:07 AM

My prediction is that lamp based PJ's are near the end of their lifecycle. In 5 years there will be LED based machines that are giving the same performance as a $30 000 lamp based PJ of today.....but with a longer lifespan and no dimming or bulb replacement! Oh, and probably cost around $5 000.

Having said that, I feel that lamp based PJ's are going to be ahead of LED PJ's when it comes to performance/cost considerations for a few years. LED's are still going to take a couple years to work out the kinks and get more from the LED lightsource (better software, etc.).

I am looking for a Pj for my new HT at the end of this year, so it seems like a great time to be getting a lamp based Pj that you plan to keep for about 5 years. That is my plan.

As exciting and enticing as JVC's new top line model, I will still find it hard to drop $10 000 + on a lamp based PJ, when I feel that the new JVC 950 or the new $8 000 Sony PJ (VW90) will fit the bill nicely.

Maybe even the Panny 4000!

Exciting times to be a shopper.

lovingdvd

08-06-09, 11:21 AM

Frame Interpolation excites me not one bit but I am glad that it is being added so that people can stop complaining about the so-called motion handling issues. Now they will just complain about how FI stinks. Has anyone actually spent any time watching movies on a display with FI? I am not suggesting that JVC could not tinker with their panel refresh scheme to improve motion handling somewhat, but I am suggesting that what we see now with the RS series is not a flaw but a deliberate design decision...

Agreed. I don't know a lot about FI and the like, but from everything I've read on other projections, it sounds like a mixed bag at best, mostly with people complaining about the implementation and opting to turn such features off.

Here is my wish list for both major and minor improvements in not particular order:

- an improvement in the manufacturing process with alignment of panels to get more consistent convergence across units (i.e. no more "my convergence is great", "my convergence stinks"). The convergence of these projectors remains my top concern when purchasing a new one, and I won't purchase from anywhere without a liberal return policy for this reason).

- better convergence controls. 1 pixel movements across the entire screen is generally not very helpful. I agree that some solutions like Sony's .1 pixel increment is not great either because that causes scaling/processing. However it would be great if JVC could divide the screen into 4 or 16 zones and let you move 1 pixel independently in each zone!

- sharper lens. My RS20 is plenty sharp, but I'd like a bit more.

- it goes without saying, higher CR (better blacks and brighter images always welcome!)

- improve the ANSI CR significantly. I'd like to at least see it double into the 500-600:1 range. Doubt we'll see this happen anytime soon.

- better focus controls. This won't happen, but I actually prefer manual focus where I can sway the controls back and forth and hit that exact sweet spot. I never felt like I could quite reach that.

- better gamma adjustment controls. Anyone who's spent time working with these controls knows how fickle they can be and better be prepared to have hours on hand to dial this in right on your target numbers.

- eliminate the red tinge artifact (such as can be seen in referee zebra stripes during movement or scrolling tickets). This issue has been present since the RS1 and is tops on my list for what I want to see "fixed".

- add a 1% overscan adjustment. 2.5% is too much just to eliminate a few lines of garbage from a cable signal, but 1% would be perfect (and better than zooming out to hide it).

- fix what Greg refers to in general (not just with the RS20) as "image pumping" (temporary blurring/lose of focus in fine detail when an image moves, only to have it snag back into place when the movement stops).

What other types of improvements and features would you guys like to see?

mark haflich

08-06-09, 11:42 AM

Hi Ric. I would like a better lens as well but I think re sharpness there may be an inherent technological limitation of the panels compared to a DLP. See Mark Peterson`s blog. Of course a better lens could doa lot more than just sharpness.

Now there are mechanical panel adjustments available say on a barco which costs in the 100K range. But I think it unlikely to see adjustments for mechanical panel alignment on a projector anywhere in the price ranges we are looking at here. In an upscale JVC model they certainly could select light engine lens combos that could gurantee good convergence but using lens shift at all might throw that off due to CA as well as interchangeable lens making a lens image match not really dooable.

As far as rolling the dice, it all depends on what JVC specs misconvergence as. What`s a dealer to do with a within spec but not perfect machine? Dump it on the next purchaser? But for the best appearing convergence one must resign themselves to mounting the projector at screen center. Even with very very expensive lenses, once one uses lens shift to any great extent convergence appearance (really due to CA) will deteriorate. There really is no solution here other than mechanical or Sony type tricks.

madshi

08-06-09, 11:43 AM

it would be great if JVC could divide the screen into 4 or 16 zones and let you move 1 pixel independently in each zone!
That would look awful in motion. During camera pans you'd be able to "see" the zones.

millerwill

08-06-09, 12:21 PM

It does sound like the 950 is a very modest upgrade to the RS20, useful but marginal. This is one upgrade round I will hold off on. (I also skipped the RS2--hows that for willpower!).

The RS20 will keep me content until the LEDs (presumably, rather than lasers) replace the lamp, and become 'stable'; i.e., at least the 2nd gen of these products. I really don't see much improvement over the RS20 until then.

mark haflich

08-06-09, 12:22 PM

Madshi. Be nice. Some feel the Sony tricks don`t make things worse if used in moderation. Particularly a global one tenth or two shift. The problem is if you use significant lens shift, global is not enough. I don`t like the Sony tricks at all. WGR thinks they make things look better if used in moderation.

mark haflich

08-06-09, 12:24 PM

i think one will have to wait for the reviews to make a decision. Moreover, if a higher end comes along we will have to see what that brings and for how much. We really know very little now.

mlang46

08-06-09, 12:49 PM

Unless they improve the ANSI contrast the image performance will not improve dramatically

John Ballentine

08-06-09, 12:55 PM

John Ballentine

08-06-09, 01:00 PM

an improvement in the manufacturing process with alignment of panels to get more consistent convergence across units (i.e. no more "my convergence is great", "my convergence stinks"). The convergence of these projectors remains my top concern when purchasing a new one, and I won't purchase from anywhere without a liberal return policy for this reason).

This too - is my #1 concern when purchasing a new 3-panel projector. I've owned five in the last 7 years and ... NONE were aligned as well as I would have liked:( (and I'm not even close to expecting perfection in this regard).

noah katz

08-06-09, 02:11 PM

"JVC HD 950
Contraste : 80000:1
Luminosité : 1000 lumens
Dispositif interpolation de trames
Certifié ISF
CMS
Tarif : 6999 euros

JVC HD 550
Contraste : 50000:1
luminosité : 1200 lumens
Dispositif interpolation de trames
Pas de CMS
Tarif : 4999 euros"

Interesting that the 550 has pulled even further ahead in brightness, roughly the difference between high and low lamp power.

Warbie

08-06-09, 02:29 PM

darinp2

08-06-09, 02:37 PM

Ooh, that's tempting. One of my issues with the RS1 is that it didn't have the power to fill my 120" screen (1 gain) even with a new bulb. The RS1 is what, 6-700 lumens? 1200 should be just about right :)The RS1 was rated at 700 lumens. I don't know what it did for actual performance or how close this one will get to 1200 lumens.

--Darin

mark haflich

08-06-09, 02:54 PM

You add lumens and subtract on/off CR. But given the specs, on`off of the cheaper model would still permit a gamma of 2.5.

Daniel Hutnicki

08-06-09, 05:10 PM

"JVC HD 950
Contraste : 80000:1
Luminosité : 1000 lumens

those are some nice specs. JVC is pretty accurate with their lumens, so that should be a bright image. The funny thing is that I had a JVC G-11 which was running around 500:1 in contrast ratio. 80,000 vs 500 thats a nice jump. I want to thank Sony for getting JVC into the game

joerod

08-06-09, 05:14 PM

But Joe they are coming out with new Sonys too. Are you sure you're not going to want to try that one instead? :)

I have no allegiance to any brand. I just want what I consider best for my set up. What is important to me may not be to someone else...

xb1032

08-06-09, 05:14 PM

Can't wait to hear more about these projectors..

Xb1032, Do you know when Jason will be getting them in?

No. He mentioned he'd get them in before CES for testing I believe but I have no idea when he'll have them for sale.

joerod

08-06-09, 05:15 PM

Looking forward to your review:)

I spoke to my source today and I am looking forward to doing one. Thanks John. :)

joerod

08-06-09, 05:16 PM

But Joe they are coming out with new Sonys too. Are you sure you're not going to want to try that one instead? :)

And from what Mark said they are only coming out with one that I would be interested in... ;)

ChrisWiggles

08-06-09, 05:37 PM

frame interpolation doesn't excite me, but it may give them the potential to do some kind of black-frame insertion which would excite me.

The only other issue that I really would hope they address is the minor banding on motion.

joerod

08-06-09, 05:42 PM

I am with you Chris. I think when done right the DFI can be a plus. I also think MotionFlow for sports is a cool feature to have. This is an excellent idea and I am excited. Maybe my rant paid off? :D

noah katz

08-06-09, 06:15 PM

"You add lumens and subtract on/off CR."

Both spec's are higher, but that does raise the question of how they got the extra light, i.e., is CR in the brightest mode the same, better, or worse than for the previous models.

Lawguy

08-06-09, 07:29 PM

darinp2

08-06-09, 08:32 PM

The JVCs already do black frame insertion.It is mostly a different type though. Chris was talking more about black frames between frames to give the eyes time with basically no image. JVC does black within frames other than a small amount that would happen to be between frames (like 1/16th of a frame as opposed to Sony's half a frame).

--Darin

hrd

08-07-09, 12:12 AM

darinp2

08-07-09, 12:17 AM

Maybe I can get even money selling my RS20 and buying a new HD550. I'll lose nothing in contrast and gain 300 more lumens and a brand new bulb. :)That could be. I'm guessing that JVC will stay with the more saturated primary colors for the lower end model. Even without a CMS they could provide one mode that is more color accurate, but my guess is that they won't in order to keep the 2 models more differentiated. So, somebody else may choose the RS20 at the same price because of the CMS, where you or others might choose the HD550 for the lumens or frame interpolation (or if there is something else it will bring to the table).

--Darin

Mike_WI

08-07-09, 12:19 AM

hrd

08-07-09, 12:38 AM

That could be. I'm guessing that JVC will stay with the more saturated primary colors for the lower end model. Even without a CMS they could provide one mode that is more color accurate, but my guess is that they won't in order to keep the 2 models more differentiated. So, somebody else may choose the RS20 at the same price because of the CMS, where you or others might choose the HD550 for the lumens or frame interpolation (or if there is something else it will bring to the table).

--Darin
I don't care about the CMS. I have my RS20 in stage mode all the time these days. Natural mode, to me, is almost as good. I think the colors look fine in those modes, but you've reminded me of the early concern about the RS10 colors, all the talk about the reds being too strong, I believe it was. I hope that is not a deal-breaker for me. I don't need the extra clicks on the iris that the RS20 has over the RS10, either. Mine is at 0 all the time. I like bright.

Sherardp

08-07-09, 01:07 AM

decisions, decisions, not sure if I will jump on a 550 this round or not. I just bought the RS10 a few months back, I will definitely demo them though.

madshi

08-07-09, 06:24 AM

There's a rumor floating around German home cinema forums that JVC has worked on improving ANSI contrast for the new models (> 500:1), but the information/source seems to be contended. Can anybody with background information confirm/deny?

Lawguy

08-07-09, 08:42 AM

mark haflich

08-07-09, 09:07 AM

No one at JVC USA has one yet. Noone has specs other than what we have seen. None of this is unusual. What would be unusual would be if significant quanties are shippable in September. Cedia is a month away. Too early given the way Japan JVC communicates to JVC USA for the US folks to know much. LG you need a Japanese contact. Every dealer has JVC US contacts. But they can`t give out info they simply don`t have yet.

Lawguy

08-07-09, 09:20 AM

LG you need a Japanese contact.

You bet. I tried hunting down the designer, Alex Kobayashi, in connection with the CMS firmware, but my trail on him ran cold. If anyone knows his e-mail address and is otherwise able to send it to me, please PM me.

Deja Vu

08-07-09, 09:45 AM

Lawguy

08-07-09, 09:57 AM

??? I've watched lots of movies on an Epson 7500 with FI (recently upgraded FW) set to low. It is very smooth and extremely sharp and DOES NOT look like video (retains a film look). It is a great image and except for black levels I'd take this image over the one produced by my gamma corrected Sony G90! FI set to medium or high makes film look like video; however, it is simply stunning with animation - the amount of depth in the image is spectacular. There are no noticeable artifacts when set to "low" but some are noticeable, at times, when set to medium or high. What FI can look like on one display is not necessarily what it looks like on another display - even changing settings can make a huge difference. Why members here should be prejudiced against something they often haven't tested for themselves is disappointing, especially when they comment about it in a negative way.

I actually spent quite a bit of time with the Epson. I don't like its FI implementation. I saw artifacts when watching Bourne Identity and lots of them. 24p has its own issues, but I prefer them. Reasonable people can disagree.

gandley

08-07-09, 09:57 AM

well from somebody who has a japanese JVC contact (engineer) said that a new model would be coming that would feature FI and improved ANSI contrast. At the time it was said like only one new high end model was coming.
I was told that a fair few moths ago around the time i sold the HD750, so far the FI claim has held true.

the higher end model will have higher ansi CR without a doubt and it could be that which seperates it from the other two models but thats IMHO

I think we will see an improved ANSI CR but i dont think it will be 500+:1 but im happy to be surprised.

Mr Harkness could most likly back me up on this as i told him the above a long time ago.

Still FWIW, as will need TBC

madshi

08-07-09, 10:00 AM

I actually spent quite a bit of time with the Epson.
Old or new firmware? Reportedly there's a big difference in the FI implementation...

gandley

08-07-09, 10:02 AM

You bet. I tried hunting down the designer, Alex Kobayashi, in connection with the CMS firmware, but my trail on him ran cold. If anyone knows his e-mail address and is otherwise able to send it to me, please PM me.

Didnt you watch the movie, mr Kobayashi does not exsist, its a name of the bottom of a cup.:)

Lawguy

08-07-09, 10:04 AM

Lawguy

08-07-09, 10:05 AM

Old or new firmware? Reportedly there's a big difference in the FI implementation...

New.

dc_pilgrim

08-07-09, 10:08 AM

Didnt you watch the movie, mr Kobayashi does not exsist, its a name of the bottom of a cup.:)

Zing!

Highlander_AVS

08-07-09, 10:25 AM

... 24p has its own issues, but I prefer them. ...

:D Can I make a Poster to attach in My theater with this phrase ?? :D
:cool:

Lawguy

08-07-09, 11:01 AM

:D Can I make a Poster to attach in My theater with this phrase ?? :D
:cool:

Why not? I would love higher frame rate sources but I don't think it will happen any time soon. :(

I was speculating that someone should develop an adaptive FI that only works when fast motion is present. It seems possible to do but I don't know it would look.

mark haflich

08-07-09, 11:07 AM

Improved ANSI CR would be great for the high end model. I wonder given DILA chip technology how one could improve ANSI. There are chip structural issues as to why ANSI is higher on a DLP and on\off lower and the opposite re DILA. Dittofor pixel structure sharpness. So how could one improve ANSI for a DILA. Is it possible that there is a new improved chip? I would think that if ANSI jumped up on the 550 and 950, the press releases would tout the increase. I am asking, not telling here.

Highlander_AVS

08-07-09, 11:26 AM

Why not? I would love higher frame rate sources but I don't think it will happen any time soon. :(

I was speculating that someone should develop an adaptive FI that only works when fast motion is present. It seems possible to do but I don't know it would look.

Again, completely agree with you ;)

Thanks God, The one like Us, will can disable FI on the new 950 for native 24p matherials :cool:

R Harkness

08-07-09, 11:42 AM

Steve Smith

08-07-09, 12:25 PM

I'm in the same boat. I came across a great deal on a used RS20 in April. Thought I would be done a long time ago but my project is talking way longer than anticipated. The 4 way motorized masking system is what REALLY slowed me down. I'm going to try and resist temptation and stay with the RS20. It helps that I'm not going to Cedia this year :).

mark haflich

08-07-09, 12:27 PM

HT construction can indeed follow Murphy`s law. when that happens its not the projector that the chump, its the HT owner who feels like a chump when, of course, he\she isn`t.

noah katz

08-07-09, 12:51 PM

"I would love higher frame rate sources but I don't think it will happen any time soon."

Not to go OT, but why would that look much different than FI done well, by which mean the interpolated frames are "good".

Speaking of which, has anyone ever captured and looked at one; are they sharp?

"I wonder given DILA chip technology how one could improve ANSI. There are chip structural issues as to why ANSI is higher on a DLP and on\off lower and the opposite re DILA."

I believe that's true for pixel to pixel contrast, but not for larger areas, for which I'd guess it's something to do w/polarization.

Thebes

08-07-09, 01:18 PM

Hi,

if you want, you can order one in Germany :

http://www.grobi-shop.tv/index.php

;)

Available at the end of september.

Lawguy

08-07-09, 01:31 PM

"I would love higher frame rate sources but I don't think it will happen any time soon."

Not to go OT, but why would that look much different than FI done well, by which mean the interpolated frames are "good".

In theory, there should be little difference. In reality, there is. Thus, it is the difference between theory and reality.

twenty/twenty

08-07-09, 03:02 PM

I'd like to see those new specs paired with an automatic zoom/shift 16:9/2.35 to one memory system like the panasonic has.

I'd also like to see an optional long throw zoom lens with 3.5 to one ratio.

John Ballentine

08-07-09, 05:25 PM

Hi,

if you want, you can order one in Germany :

http://www.grobi-shop.tv/index.php

;)

Available at the end of september.

Can't believe these new models will be available 2 weeks after CEDIA!

Had to wait till March for RS1. Had to wait till mid Dec for RS20.

Highlander_AVS

08-07-09, 05:35 PM

Right John ! :cool:

So, to All, Be Carefull !! ;)

Often, all are "mirrors for the birds " :D
All to get the reservation and money for the booking ..... :o
At last, the vprs wil be delivered when they will be available .... and sometimes ... later ... :mad:

I buy on-line only from well known sites and when the goodies are "Ready to Ship" but overall, NOT THIS KIND OF PRODUCTS .... VPR Are too much delicate ....

mlang46

08-07-09, 06:09 PM

ChrisWiggles

08-07-09, 06:13 PM

The JVCs already do black frame insertion.

Of more significance, to better mimic film/CRT motion. The amount of black happening in the JVC isn't really visible, (at least to me), and so the image is more or less static sample-and-hold, or at least effectively equivalent visually (even though black is happening very fast in its refresh). I've gotten pretty used to the JVC motion, even on video games where it was really bad for me at first, but there definitely is a difference compared to the kind of motion you get with CRT decay, or with film projection shutters, which is IMO superior.

ChrisWiggles

08-07-09, 06:14 PM

And I also forgot to mention ANSI, an improvement in ANSI would be greatly welcomed as well. ANSI is good on the JVC, but it could be better. And on/off could be better too as always, but it's quite goos as is.

Bulldogger

08-07-09, 07:38 PM

I feel the same way (I skipped the RS2 as well).

Me too. My plan is that the RS20 will be my last bulb projector. With the CMS working, I am completely happy with it. Looks like JVC has a plan to offer models with some improvements every year. I will sit on the sideline until the "improvements" flat line somewhat.

mark haflich

08-07-09, 07:50 PM

No one has seen it yet. Wait till WGR reviews it. Who are you guys saying I`ll stick with my RS20 trying to fool. Your selves or us? I think anyone wanting to bet 50 to 50 that anyone posting here I`ll wait ,won`t and would come out ahead. People posting here are projector addicts. I really don`t care what you did when you were younger. You are addicts now. Face your addiction and quit lying to mama.

dbbarron

08-07-09, 08:19 PM

Lawguy

08-07-09, 08:42 PM

Of more significance, to better mimic film/CRT motion. The amount of black happening in the JVC isn't really visible, (at least to me), and so the image is more or less static sample-and-hold, or at least effectively equivalent visually (even though black is happening very fast in its refresh). I've gotten pretty used to the JVC motion, even on video games where it was really bad for me at first, but there definitely is a difference compared to the kind of motion you get with CRT decay, or with film projection shutters, which is IMO superior.

Gottcha.

Lawguy

08-07-09, 08:45 PM

Looks like JVC has a plan to offer models with some improvements every year.

Yeah. I bet they have a production ready Laser powered Infinity contrast 1000:1 ANSI projector but will role it out feature by feature over the next 10 years.

That's why we need strong competition!

lorjam

08-07-09, 09:42 PM

People posting here are projector addicts. I really don`t care what you did when you were younger. You are addicts now. Face your addiction and quit lying to mama.

Dr. Mark is wise in the ways of PJ addicts.:)

Warbie

08-07-09, 10:03 PM

Anyone think the 550 will be substantially (or at all) less than the RS10?

Trying to decide whether to pick up a refurb RS2 or jump at the 550 when avail.
550 will be almost double the cost and I'm living happily with an HX2 right now.
108" screen in batcave, so the RS2 will illuminate to 16FC.

db

I'd go for the 550. It'll be considerably brighter than the RS2, which isn't as bright as the RS1, which I don't find bright enough for 110". I hope that makes sense :)

Thebes

08-08-09, 12:42 AM

Can't believe these new models will be available 2 weeks after CEDIA!

Had to wait till March for RS1. Had to wait till mid Dec for RS20.

Hi,

IMO, it's not the same thing.

What is really new on the HD950/550, only frame interpolation, it's all (if there are no mistake in the first new from C4H and Cinemotion).

The HD1 was a real new projector and a little less the HD750/350. Here it's only slightly modification, no ?

It seems too it will be the same "box" as the RS10/RS20 :

http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/6696/page1j.jpg

madshi

08-08-09, 02:21 AM

What is really new on the HD950/550, only frame interpolation, it's all (if there are no mistake in the first new from C4H and Cinemotion).
Huh?

cine4home: "So ist es JVC gelungen, die beiden wichtigsten Eckdaten – das Kontrastverhältnis und die Projektionshelligkeit – deutlich zu steigern."

Thebes

08-08-09, 05:11 AM

Huh?

cine4home: "So ist es JVC gelungen, die beiden wichtigsten Eckdaten – das Kontrastverhältnis und die Projektionshelligkeit – deutlich zu steigern."

Hi,

I agree, but IMO this is not a modification, only one improvement. It will be necessary moreover check with measurements (there already was many difference for contrast ratio measures, especially on the 350 (RS10).

madshi

08-08-09, 05:30 AM

I agree, but IMO this is not a modification, only one improvement.
Why do you feel a need to differ between "modification" and "improvement"? Any positive change is welcome, it doesn't matter if it's a new feature or improved image quality or whatever. And it's just not right to say that FI is the only difference between HD750 and HD950, if contrast and brightness have improved, too.

It will be necessary moreover check with measurements (there already was many difference for contrast ratio measures, especially on the 350 (RS10).
Yes, of course. I fully agree that we need to wait for reviews before we can really judge the new models...

Thebes

08-08-09, 05:44 AM

Hi,

I think you don't read exactly what I wrote before :

[...]

What is really new on the HD950/550, only frame interpolation, it's all (if there are no mistake in the first new from C4H and Cinemotion).

Cine4Home

08-08-09, 06:39 AM

Hi,

IMO, it's not the same thing.

What is really new on the HD950/550, only frame interpolation, it's all (if there are no mistake in the first new from C4H and Cinemotion).

The HD1 was a real new projector and a little less the HD750/350. Here it's only slightly modification, no ?

The chassis of the HD350 / 750 is still "new". It is common practice, that a chassis is used for at least two generations before it gets replaced by a new one. Just remember Sanyo Z2 / Z3 or Z4 / Z5 or Z2000 / Z3000, or Panasonic PT-700 / 900, or PT 1000 / 2000 / 3000 or Mitsubishi HC 5000 / 6000 or JVC HD1 / 100 and so on, and so on....

If manufacturors wouldn't do that, the projectors would easily cost twice or triple as much. Besides, there is simply no way to develop a whole new chassis in just like 10 months of time.

And afterall, just look at the inside-pictures we took of the HD350, this chassis is built like a tank. To be honest, we have seldom seen a better construction than the current JVC chassis and the actual prices are really fair for what you get. Hardly any other manufacturer matches that ratio of built quality / price. So, there is not much to improve with the current chassis.

Soon, we will offer a first coverage...

Regards,
Ekkehart

madshi

08-08-09, 06:43 AM

I think you don't read exactly what I wrote before :

I don't understand what you mean. Does your interpretation of "new" exclude improvements in contrast and brightness? If so, looking only at "new" things IMO paints an incomplete picture. But maybe we're just splitting hairs over semantics here. My point is that FI is (according to the cine4home news) not the only thing that is different between HD750 and HD950. Actually I find contrast and brightness improvements more important than the added FI.

Soon, we will offer a first coverage...
:D

Thebes

08-08-09, 07:05 AM

Hi,

because, (IMHO) improvement of contrast ratio could'nt be useful if you haven't a real batcave.

The same thing for brightness, if you don't use a screen at 3,5 meters wide (16/9eme) where is the interest to have a projector with 1 000 lumens ?

It's the reason why it's only improvement ( because, always IMO in many many case, it couldn't be useful). Frame Interpolation, maybe, or we can assume we'll see the difference ;).

mark haflich

08-08-09, 07:29 AM

Its all semantics. Suppose a part of the optical light engine is changed. Three new polarizers. Just an example. For a DLP, a different color wheel. Same chassis, but diiferent parts.

madshi

08-08-09, 07:42 AM

because, (IMHO) improvement of contrast ratio could'nt be useful if you haven't a real batcave.
Well, I have a real batcave... :) But on/off improvements also help in a non-batcave (as long as there's no light source other than the projector).

The same thing for brightness, if you don't use a screen at 3,5 meters wide (16/9eme) where is the interest to have a projector with 1 000 lumens ?
(1) A projector which is specced to 1000 lumens usually has quite a bit less than that at D65.
(2) Lamps get dimmer with age.
(3) If there's any ambient light (not in my case), every bit of added brightness helps.
(4) With a brighter projector you can close the manual iris down a bit further to get increased native contrast (see cine4home HD750 review).
(5) You can put a real bright projector to ECO mode first and later switch to HIGH mode once the lamp has dimmed a lot. This allows you to use the lamp much longer with adequate brightness...

Thebes

08-08-09, 07:56 AM

:D

But, in many many case, you can use an HD 750 (except if you have a real batcave or a screen 3,5 meter wide) and in this case, at the end of the day, where is the difference : "Frame Interpolation".;)

Highlander_AVS

08-08-09, 10:21 AM

Anyone, already knows how will be named the models form the PRO division ?? :confused::D
Will we have RS30 (HD950) and RS15 (HD550) ??? :confused::D;)

coldmachine

08-08-09, 10:56 AM

improvement of contrast ratio could'nt be useful if you haven't a real batcave.

Thats simply wrong. A batcave is not needed to appreciate high CR.

The same thing for brightness, if you don't use a screen at 3,5 meters wide (16/9eme) where is the interest to have a projector with 1 000 lumens ?

Also wrong. 1000 lumen is not a number for large screens at all.

A 3.5m 16:9 image is quite large. My 2 small screens are 3.5m @ 2.35, which is a good deal smaller. Their gain is a standard 1.3 perf, which is 1.15 final gain. With 1000 D65 lumen that will yield 20.5 fl. The way JVCs fade, that will rapidly drop to around 13fl. That is nowhere near bright enough.

I currently view at 25fl, so need a PJ that will deliver this after fading as I have yet to see a high gain screen I consider acceptable. 20fl is now rapidly becoming the De facto standard.

I think most people will be glad that JVC are improving the capability of their machines, in areas where its currently possible. I certainly am.

Thebes

08-08-09, 11:07 AM

Hi,

can you see a difference between these black level anywhere out a batcave ? :

- 0.0125 lumens
- 0.018 lumens
- 0.024 lumens
- 0.0333 lumens

and for Brightness, SMPTE Reference is 14 fL (or 16 fL open air). If you prefer more bright, it's your taste, but 14 fL are sufficient IMO :D.

Free

08-08-09, 11:16 AM

I agree, the smaller improvements are welcome, and speak to the fact that this is already a really great projector. I will probably buy a new one, as the combination of features and performance, and price on the RS20, as well as the reliability of this projector make me happy to pick up another one with incremental improvements.

I don't understand why Thebes is arguing against anyone buying a new model, based on HIS preferences. You know it wouldn't be an observable improvement if you were using the projector outside, on a bed sheet either, but that is not a reasonable argument.

clehner

08-08-09, 11:29 AM

Thats simply wrong. A batcave is not needed to appreciate high CR.

This fact should be well know by now. Thanks for repeating it.

However, you can repeat that another 100 times, it will come up again and again.

Thebes

08-08-09, 11:31 AM

Hi,

I don't argue against :) I,m trying to explain why improvement between the HD 750 and the 950 are not so important. For memory only 100 lumens (1000 lumens against 900 lumens) and they are not useful in many case.

And, IMO, it's the same problem for constrast.

So as I said, the real new thing (for common people) is FI, it's all.

Free

08-08-09, 11:36 AM

I think, by now, it is obvious that most of us around here, when it comes to A/V gear are not "common" people. All my Wife notices, is that the image is big, but I am not buying projectors for her.

darinp2

08-08-09, 11:45 AM

and for Brightness, SMPTE Reference is 14 fL (or 16 fL open air). If you prefer more bright, it's your taste, but 14 fL are sufficient IMO :D.You are arguing for non-batcaves, but in that case more lumens can mean that a person can use a darker screen and fight reflections better.

If you are arguing that the increases are small enough to not matter I can understand that, but if you are arguing that no amount of increase would matter unless a person has a batcave then I don't think that makes sense.

I am a big fan of higher on/off CR, but 50k:1 to 80k:1 isn't that big a leap. Smaller than 2k:1 to 3k:1 IMO even though it is a higher percentage.

--Darin

YetAnotherNewbie

08-08-09, 11:50 AM

I, for one, will wait and get the 550 (as my first projector!). First I looked at the AE3000, but then read all the good things about the HD350. However, not having the FI on the JVC was a negative, even if I was not going to use it for movies. Now with the 550, I feel it hits the sweet spot for me. I'm glad about any marginal increase in brightness, as I do want a 10-foot wide 2.35 screen, and my wife already objected to turning the basement into a batcave... In fact, I think I'll go for a Silverstar screen to get plasma-like picture, maximum quietness and longest bulb life.

Could someone @ AVS quote me that package? :)

clehner

08-08-09, 11:53 AM

So as I said, the real new thing (for common people) is FI, it's all.

Thanks, that is correct, of course. The improvement is only incremental. Some people will even upgrade for increments, though.

OTOH: Nobody currently owning or planning to buy a RS20/HD750 has to worry about anything.

dbbarron

08-08-09, 11:58 AM

Can anyone specular what the selling price for the 550 will be in the US relative to the 350?

YetAnotherNewbie

08-08-09, 12:18 PM

Can anyone specular what the selling price for the 550 will be in the US relative to the 350?

I would speculate $500 ~ $1000 more for the 550... Pure speculation though, per your request.

madshi

08-08-09, 12:29 PM

can you see a difference between these black level anywhere out a batcave ? :

- 0.0125 lumens
- 0.018 lumens
- 0.024 lumens
- 0.0333 lumens
If there's no other light source than the projector then you can see the difference between the black levels in a room with white walls/ceiling just as fine as in a batcave. Think about it: If the projector is the only light source and if there's a really dark scene (e.g. a full blackout), then there's simply no light that could be reflected by the white walls/ceiling. So any difference in black level is just as visible in a white colored room compared to a batcave.

Obviously as soon as the image content gets bright, the light colored wall/ceiling reflections will destroy ANSI and intra scene contrast. So: Light colored walls destroy ANSI and intra scene contrast, but they don't affect on/off contrast.

martinfarinha

08-08-09, 12:48 PM

coldmachine

08-08-09, 01:06 PM

Coldmachine,
Please don't blow a gasket but can you please explain why you say 20fl is becoming the standard in home theatre when from what I have read the SMPTE standard for movie theatre's is 16fl with no film in the gate? :confused: (Martin run's for cover and duck's)
Thanks in advance,
Martin.

Its what the ISF in general, and Joel Silver in particular, is putting forward as a desirable level for commercial digital cinema. Its also what an ever increasing number of AVS members see as an absolute minimum. Personally, Ive been at 25fl or over for a couple of years now and only see that increasing. Ive been shooting 2 Lumis units at over 30fl and loving it.

Also, when people quote the 16fl number, they should look into why that number was arrived at. It is related to equipment limitation that has no relevance to digital PJs. Ive seen absolutely pristine images projected at over 50fl with no issues whatsoever.

Lawguy

08-08-09, 01:08 PM

martinfarinha

08-08-09, 01:45 PM

Thank's for that speedy reply! Please forgive my quoting of the 16fl number but if a person looks into this issue then that is the number that is quoted by SMPTE and to most people that would be as far as they would look.
I do however have one small issue with what you are saying and that is regarding cinema equipment limitations, are you saying that every movie since the begining of cinema has been screened and viewed incorectly because the lamps were not bright enough?
I'm really not trying to be fecitious but just trying to get an idea of what would be correct in terms of the presentation of films.
That is kind of like saying that everyone who ever made or watched a movie has done so by an incorrect yardstick isn't it and only now with the advent of digital can we see it correctly?

RonF

08-08-09, 02:01 PM

Thats simply wrong. A batcave is not needed to appreciate high CR.

Also wrong. 1000 lumen is not a number for large screens at all.

A 3.5m 16:9 image is quite large. My 2 small screens are 3.5m @ 2.35, which is a good deal smaller. Their gain is a standard 1.3 perf, which is 1.15 final gain. With 1000 D65 lumen that will yield 20.5 fl. The way JVCs fade, that will rapidly drop to around 13fl. That is nowhere near bright enough.

I currently view at 25fl, so need a PJ that will deliver this after fading as I have yet to see a high gain screen I consider acceptable. 20fl is now rapidly becoming the De facto standard.

I think most people will be glad that JVC are improving the capability of their machines, in areas where its currently possible. I certainly am.

Thank you. I had begun to think my own preference for much higher than "spec" images was unnatural.

CM
I was going to PM you because I wanted your specific take, and if you know anyone who knows anyone who knows anything about the DMX video imaging process, that utilizes existing 2K Industrial DLP equipment? The link is in the "Better Than Imax?" thread dropping off the front page soon. But apparently you're not PM-able at present. What to do?

I would love your impressions. This has amazing implications and possibilities....but no one other than Blasst, who first posted about the film technology years ago and I now seem to want to comment.

madshi

08-08-09, 02:04 PM

are you saying that every movie since the begining of cinema has been screened and viewed incorectly because the lamps were not bright enough?
This is not a matter of "correct" or "incorrect". It's only a matter of different levels of image quality.

Chuck Anstey

08-08-09, 02:39 PM

With this FtL discussion, I wonder if the experts who are pushing for 20+ FtL have been experts for quite a while? The reason I bring it up is that if they are personally recommending brighter pictures then could it be because of their own aging eyes, which require a progressively brighter picture as they age? The SMPTE recommendation was based upon a scientific study of a broad range of people. It would seem that we need a new study to determine what the new brightness should be and not just personal expert recommendation.

The only issue I could see for a brighter picture is that even with my relatively low light output G70, after a several minute dark scene and then switching to a daylight scene is a little blinding. If a projector went from several minutes of <1 FtL and then instantly to over 30+ FtL it would be truly blinding and annoying. Also the reverse would be an issue when going from daytime to a nighttime scene and no one can see any details for a few minutes as the eyes adjust. Filmmakers would have to take that into account when making their movies and adjust accordingly. I guess one thing to do is always keep the picture bright enough to prevent the eyes from going towards nighttime vision mode. That could be done by having movie theaters no longer be dark but have a fair amount of ambient light like most people have when watching TV. Not sure I would like that. The point is there are penalties to be paid for having 100 IRE output higher and higher FtLamberts while still trying to have 0 IRE be truly black.

martinfarinha

08-08-09, 02:46 PM

Hi Madshi,
I understand where you are coming from but aren't you basing quality on brightness by saying that?
What I was trying to understand is that based on the little I know filmmakers since the begining of the industry have worked to a standard based on the limitations of the projection devices available and have chosen lenses, lighting and film stock based on these limitations.
My point is wouldn't showing these movies now at a brightness that was not available before change the overall look of the films being projected?

martinfarinha

08-08-09, 02:55 PM

Ouch Chuck, I was tiptoeing around gently but you went straight for the b#!ls! :p
Hope you have a flame resistant suit on.:D
Good luck,
Martin.

mistaforty

08-08-09, 03:02 PM

I am in the some would say, enviable position of outfitting my new home with av gear all over. So far I have put in a 50in g10 (master bdrm) 58b650 (fam room) 2 54in g10 ( in process for rec room yes i must watch morethan one football/basketball game at one time lol ) and since ill have plasmas everywhere I am leaning towards a projector for pre wired media room for general use mainly movies and bigger sporting events, either that or a 65in V10. Ive tried to research the projectors but most of the reviews are at least a year old. unless front projector tech does not progress as fast as most other av tech id think that info is outdated. "i dont need im a newbie handholding sympathy" lol but idont know a thing about front projectors. Ive never even considered it. but with a pre wired dedicated room and absolute lighting control overcoming two of the biggest hurdles usually involved, im now considering.

suggestions are more than welcome or just pointing me to a good source for recent reliable reviews and resources with info on the technology to help make an informed decision.

40

madshi

08-08-09, 03:05 PM

My suggestion is to move brightness related discussion to a more appropriate thread because it's really very much OT here. Here's a beautiful thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=984992

martinfarinha

08-08-09, 03:15 PM

Sorry Madshi,
I was just asking a question based on something that was said in an earlier post. Although it does seem a little off that if someone questions something and you dont like it you want to show them the door, your not related to my bank manager are you? All I am saying is Won't most films look odd or just be hard to watch if the brightness is too high, I fully understand that now we have the technology to make films based on the new specs but then aren't we turning our back on over 100 years of filmaking? I love technology but only as a means to an end. The idea of technology calling the shots over the content to me is just wrong. I'm sure now we have digital projection in theatres that the new breed of filmaker will embrase it but would I rather see the new "McG" movie over a 50 year old Hitchcock classic, a David Lean epic or a Kubric masterpiece?, not bloody likely! OK here you go, 'New JVC Projector look's great doesn't it?' Panic over, we're back to the original topic.;)

Highlander_AVS

08-08-09, 03:30 PM

... If a projector went from several minutes of <1 FtL and then instantly to over 30+ FtL it would be truly blinding and annoying. Also the reverse would be an issue when going from daytime to a nighttime scene and no one can see any details for a few minutes as the eyes adjust. ....

Generally, agree with you, even if the right FL to gets is subjetive and depends to several ambient and configuration factors ;)

This is the reason why with my RS20 and my configuration I stay with Low Lamp mode and -15 Iris with 400 hours lamp on my 120" 1:2 gain having 33 nits against the 50 nits with Low lamp/Iris =0, but white is too white and flashing kill my eyes .. I found 33 nits adeguate and perfect for my config. ;)

noah katz

08-08-09, 05:22 PM

"The SMPTE recommendation was based upon a scientific study of a broad range of people."

I thought what they learned was that brighter than 16 ft-L w/film made flicker too noticeable.

coldmachine

08-08-09, 05:29 PM

The SMPTE recommendation was based upon a scientific study of a broad range of people.

No, it was based on an equipment limitation that doesn't apply to digital machines.

coldmachine

08-08-09, 05:36 PM

I do however have one small issue with what you are saying and that is regarding cinema equipment limitations, are you saying that every movie since the begining of cinema has been screened and viewed incorectly because the lamps were not bright enough?

I'm not saying any such thing, and to suggest I am is a gross misrepresentation of my post.

ChrisWiggles

08-08-09, 07:08 PM

"The SMPTE recommendation was based upon a scientific study of a broad range of people."

I thought what they learned was that brighter than 16 ft-L w/film made flicker too noticeable.

Yeah I think that's part of it, there is also just the economy of bulbs that bright, which are expensive, and also really bright bulbs require a LOT of cooling, cooling for the film, the lenses, etc etc. Making extremely bright large-screen displays was very difficult, and still is very difficult. That's why projecting something as large as IMAX is no small feat.

I think that brighter home displays are alright, and will be better supported by higher quality content like BD or better. DVD has a lot of artifacts and compression noise which can really be exaggerated and made more visible on very bright large-screen displays if you're sitting at a large viewing angle. I find myself less satisfied with bright screens with lower quality content (broadcast HD, DVD, etc), compared with a good BD.

Chuck Anstey

08-08-09, 07:24 PM

No, it was based on an equipment limitation that doesn't apply to digital machines.

Fair enough but it still was based upon a broad base of people's sensitivity to that limitation because they could have just made the screens smaller to increase brightness. My point still stands that it should be done as a scientific study again using today's equipment and not just rely on the opinions of a few experts with aging eyes. At this point it would be based upon peoples' temperament for gray blacks (how black does black have to be?), peak brightness, and tolerance for rapid changes from overall dark scenes to overall bright scenes since we would no longer have the #1 issue that is flicker.

Chrisx510

08-08-09, 07:43 PM

Once the 950 comes out do you guys think the RS20 will drop in price? I have the RS2 right now but I would like to upgrade to the RS20.

Jason Turk

08-08-09, 08:26 PM

Once the 950 comes out do you guys think the RS20 will drop in price? I have the RS2 right now but I would like to upgrade to the RS20.

It might....all depends on stock/release time.

GoCaboNow

08-08-09, 09:34 PM

I hope JVC screws up the FI on these new units and takes a few years to perfect. (as I just bought the RS10 5 months ago and do not want to be forced to upgrade so quickly :) )

Sherardp

08-08-09, 10:26 PM

I hope JVC screws up the FI on these new units and takes a few years to perfect. (as I just bought the RS10 5 months ago and do not want to be forced to upgrade so quickly :) )

Singing in a pleasant tone " You are not alone........I am there with you......"

Haha, Im in the same boat.:D

lovingdvd

08-09-09, 12:01 AM

...And afterall, just look at the inside-pictures we took of the HD350, this chassis is built like a tank. To be honest, we have seldom seen a better construction than the current JVC chassis and the actual prices are really fair for what you get. Hardly any other manufacturer matches that ratio of built quality / price. So, there is not much to improve with the current chassis.

Soon, we will offer a first coverage...

Regards,
Ekkehart

Agree. Although I would prefer a centered lens and connections on the back, I am overall happy with the casing and its the least thing I'd like to see changed. I have a feeling that the extra brightness, contrast and quiet operation has a lot to do with this design which also makes me happy to see them continue it. :)

Mark Petersen

08-09-09, 12:06 AM

Sony has already shown that 450:1 or thereabouts ANSI contrast with LCOS is possible. It wouldn't surprise me if JVC is able to hit 500:1 or so if they decided to go after ANSI contrast in this go around.

The RS20 is already a killer machine for the price and if they bump the on/off and lumens up a bit and double the ANSI contrast, I think the results will be noticeable.

I agree with some of the other sentiments about FI. If the implementation is subtle, it could be a nice addition. But if they decide to go after the really fluid 60hz video soap opera look, I don't think that I'll like it, unless maybe to watch sports or something.

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 01:50 AM

I'm not saying any such thing, and to suggest I am is a gross misrepresentation of my post.

Easy Cowboy,
"Gross misrepresentation"?
I asked a question based on your quote of "the new de facto standard" of 20 to 30fl.
I also said that from what I have read movie theatres are supposed to calibrated to 16fl (with no film in the gate) according to SMPTE. You replied that people only quote that number because they have not looked deeply enough and that it's based on equipment limitations, right?
If you say that SMPTE only based the 16fl number on equipment limitations then how else is a person supposed to read your comments other than that everything pre-digital has been sub standard?
I'm sorry if you don't like your statement's being questioned but there is no need to become so defensive. I am just trying to understand the reasons for people all of a sudden wanting to create a new standard when most people never thought the old one was broke including as far as I know SMPTE (at least for "film" projection).
And before I and only I am accused of taking this thread off topic I would like to say that I believe my comment's are very much on topic as this thread is about a projector that cannot achieve 20 to 30 fl on a screen size that most people would want to pair this unit with.
I am just trying to undertand why a person would need (not want, that is a seperate issue) a brighter projector than the new JVC 950 or any other projector of similar specs for an average screen size.
Let's all play nice, it's a big enough sand box for everyone to play in!:)

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 03:03 AM

(Sorry, this post was based on a previous post by "coldmachine" where Mr Machine said that I was "Cretinous" that now seems to have been removed. FYI.)

"Cretinous?"
Wow, what a pretentious ass you are sir!
Try reading it all again Very Slowly, I don't believe anyone who can read or understand English would find anything I have said "Cretinous" or even unreasonable based on what you have said so far in this thread.
If I am wrong then please feel free to explain why you belive I am wrong or how I have misconstrued your comment's.
I don't take kindly to insults, especialy from a person who will not back up or even defend his comments in a reasonable or adult fashion (just dismiss a person with name calling).
I thought the idea of these forums was reasonable debate and the sharing of knowledge, not a forum for self appointed experts who "get out of their prams" if they dont like what someone else has to say or questions their self righteous authority on a given subject.
I do not feel there is any more to add to this matter and I am sure my question will be answered by a more reasonable member of this forum, not a person who over the years I have witnessed on this forum become engaged in many unpleasent debates with other members (and most times have his arse handed to him on a plate, but amazingly still come back for more) under the dillusion that he has to be right!
Have a pleasant day,
Martin.
P.S. I will happily delete or retract this post if Mr Machine would like to be more reasonable and enter into the spirit of debate as was intended by myself from the begining!

madshi

08-09-09, 03:29 AM

"Gross misrepresentation"?
coldmachine posts:
X > Y

martinfarinha claims that coldmachine stated:
Y = incorrect

To me that qualifies as a gross misrepresentation of coldmachines post.

And before I and only I am accused of taking this thread off topic I would like to say that I believe my comment's are very much on topic as this thread is about a projector that cannot achieve 20 to 30 fl on a screen size that most people would want to pair this unit with.
Thread topic: new JVC models HD950/550

Discussion about "Is the added brightness in the new JVC models useful?":
Borderline On-Topic

Fight over "What is the general screen brightness we aim for with any projector?":
Off-Topic, separate 18 pages long (!!) thread already exists

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 03:37 AM

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 04:00 AM

Dear Madshi,
Give me a break, I'm done on that topic as stated. If I missrepresented anyone then prove it in a reasonable way. Until that time get off my case, who are you his lawyer? I'm trying to stay on topic. I asked a question based on something that was said by another poster on this thread.
I have nothing but respect for the people who take time to share their wealth of experience on here but sometimes it can begin to feel like a members only club when someone takes exception if they are asked a question they do not like. As I said in my previous post read it again slowly, I am not being malicious or trying to bait anyone at all in any way, shape or form.
I am a big fan of the new JVC projectors and would like to find out more and get other peoples input and views on this new model just like everyone else on here. obviously one of the main questions regarding any projector is 'is it up to the task'? If there is someone on here saying that in terms of brightness it will never achieve the new standard of light output then any reasonable person would ask the question 'what are you basing that on?', that is all I have done.

coldmachine

08-09-09, 04:37 AM

If there is someone on here saying that in terms of brightness it will never achieve the new standard of light output then any reasonable person would ask the question 'what are you basing that on?', that is all I have done.

No one is saying that at all. There is no standard of light output. That's very a very different thing to on screen brightness.

As I said in my previous post read it again slowly, I am not being malicious or trying to bait anyone at all in any way, shape or form.

If that were the case, why post the following

Ouch Chuck, I was tiptoeing around gently but you went straight for the b#!ls! :p

The quote above illustrates that you were not simply seeking information or clarification. Its also clear that neither of you really understand what was being said,

I think its time you moved on and let the thread get back on topic.

Open another thread for any OT questions you may have.

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 05:01 AM

Give it up, You know you were out of line. That's why you deleted the post calling me "cretinous".
My response to chucks post only shows that I was trying to get an answer by being polite and not just stating that I thought you were outright wrong.
(I am not saying there was anything wrong with Chucks post, the gentleman is just more outspoken than I am!)
Please do not try to be condescending to me again as I am nobody's fool and will not tollerate being spoken down to by someone as socialy inadequate and rude as yourself.
If I continue to be maligned I will keep defending myself which I feel would not be fair to the thread or the original poster.
Grow up!
Actually before this goes any further would an impartial moderator please read through the last coulple of pages and see if they think I have said anything wrong, false or unwarrented!
Thank You.

Thebes

08-09-09, 05:41 AM

Does anyone know if the 950 is THX certified like the 750/RS20?
I see it is now ISF certified but I was wondering if they had dropped one in favor of the other or if they are going all out in licence fee's on this model to prove their point that it can jump through any hoop you wish to throw at it?
Specs do look fantastic at this price point, it's a great time to be a movie/home theatre fan isnt it?:)

Hi,

in accordance with Cinemotion information, the 950 is THX certified too. You're right about the ISF Certification, it seems too me it's new (compare to the 750), but I don't know what is it exactly : "Night and Day" mode or a "hide" setting for professionnal ?

coldmachine

08-09-09, 05:51 AM

Give it up, You know you were out of line. That's why you deleted the post calling me "cretinous".

I was not out of line at any point. I simply provided you with an answer, which you subsequently, and continually, distorted in such a cretinous manner.

Please do not try to be condescending to me again as I am nobody's fool

If you perceive condescension when none is present, or intended, it would seem that you are actually everyone's fool. Remember, it was you who asked for clarification and chose to grossly misrepresent it when it was given.

As was said earlier, its time for you to move on, get back on topic, or start another thread.

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 05:57 AM

Thanks Thebes,
It does seem that JVC are on a mission to show what can be achieved at a reasonably low price point. This can only be good for the consumer as it will keep the other manufacturers on their toe's. Makes a change for the consumer to make out like bandit's. To think just a few years ago the price you would have to pay to achieve the quality being offered now at a fraction of the price is just staggering.

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 06:17 AM

Coldmachine,
You obviously have trouble understanding and using the English language, I asked for a moderator to look at it and decide if I have been at all out of line.
You however decide to respond with yet another condescending post containing more insults.
And as for telling me to move on, Maybe you should move on as all you seem to do is troll around looking for products that you feel are inferior and then lecture people as to why they are inferior.
Crawl back in your hole little boy, you are just making yourself look an even bigger bully!
If you had not noticed I am trying to ask questions related to the thread and be a part this topic as I am genuinely interested in this projector, are you?
Or are you just here to pontificate as usual?

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 06:37 AM

Excuse me? Where did I show any negativity towards JVC's product?
You Sir are being ridiculous!, I'm sure this is just your tactic to bait a person into becoming very offensive and having them thrown off of the forum.
You are just a forum bully, plain and simple.

coldmachine

08-09-09, 06:41 AM

Excuse me? Where did I show any negativity towards JVC's product?

You didn't, I confused you with someone else in this thread. I withdraw that statement, and apologize for making it, it was a genuine mistake.

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 07:04 AM

Accepted Sir,
This is pointless, all we are doing is having a very unnecasary arguement based on a missunderstanding. Please re-read my posts and try to see where I am coming from. If you think I made a rash judgement based on your answer then please tell me why in a friendly way. All you have to say is 'Martin, you got the wrong end of the stick and here is why and this is my take on it...'
I have no wish to carry on with this foolishness as it will only end with everybody getting peed off with both of us and then I won't find out the information I am looking for as nobody will want to talk to me.
I do not wish to as we say in the UK 'Piss on my chip's'
Truce?

Gary Lightfoot

08-09-09, 07:17 AM

Joel Silver is recommending 20fL for HD material only, and less for SD due to it's limitations. He also suggests you have a different set up for SD for that reason

With SD material I personally find 12fL is a good limit (ymmv) but prefer less as higher can enhance image artefacts and make them too visible. HD has far less in the way of artefacts so a higher fL can be used.

Gary

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 07:26 AM

Hi Gary,
Does Mr Silver mean a different calibrated preset for each or a completely different projector/screen system for each?

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 07:36 AM

Once the 950 comes out do you guys think the RS20 will drop in price? I have the RS2 right now but I would like to upgrade to the RS20.

Chris, I just saw one place in the UK advertising the 750 for £4500 and before a couple of days ago I personaly had not seen it for much less than £5500.

I would guess you should see the same level of depreciation as the RS2 had when the RS20 hit the shelves, I think that's only fair to assume.

Lawguy

08-09-09, 07:53 AM

coldmachine

08-09-09, 08:08 AM

Hi Gary,
Does Mr Silver mean a different calibrated preset for each or a completely different projector/screen system for each?

Just a different maximum brightness, due to SD artefacts.

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 08:36 AM

So you should be able to set two different presets within the projector, one for SD and one for HD and switch as desired between the calibrated brightness levels? Does the HD750/RS20 allow you to do this and switch on the fly? If so I would assume that the 950 would follow suit.

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 08:46 AM

Jason Turk

08-09-09, 08:52 AM

The only thing I am a little dissapointed about this projector is that I naively hoped it would be offered with a long throw lens option, but I guess at this price point that is a little greedy.:rolleyes:

They go to 2.8...that is about as long as any projector sans the ones with separately available lenses (most end closer to 2.4). What TR did you need?

gandley

08-09-09, 09:02 AM

Chris, I just saw one place in the UK advertising the 750 for £4500 and before a couple of days ago I personaly had not seen it for much less than £5500.

I would guess you should see the same level of depreciation as the RS2 had when the RS20 hit the shelves, I think that's only fair to assume.

you could get it cheaper than £4500 from day of release if you looked around.;)

andrewfee

08-09-09, 09:03 AM

Not that I'll be buying one anyway (far outside my price range and I just bought a new projector 6 months ago) but is anyone else disappointed that they still haven't implemented a dynamic iris yet?

Sure, they may already have the highest native on/off contrast of any digital projector already, but an iris can be implemented to be virtually transparent and significantly improve contrast.

For example, if the brightest object in a scene (excluding specular highlights) was 90% grey, the iris could get you an extra 20% contrast at gamma 2.22. The further down the iris works, the bigger the advantages are. If it worked down to 75% grey, you could effectively double the contrast of the image.

Of course there are limits on what can be done before it is noticeable, but even if the iris only worked down to 95% grey, you would be gaining 11% contrast at gamma 2.22. (the higher the gamma, the more contrast you gain)

gandley

08-09-09, 09:11 AM

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 09:17 AM

Hi Jason,
If I were looking to use a 120" wide 2.40:1 screen with an anamorphic lens and have two row's of seating and have the projector in a room behind the screening room then going by what I have read the projector would have to be at the furthest limits in terms of lens position and would seriously limit it's light output, or just be impossible as far as I understand. I'm basing this on going somewhere in between the SMPTE and THX specs for viewing distance to screen and leaving space behind the rear row of seats as to not be on top of the surrounds. I know that is being a little greedy and most people would only think of trying this with much higher end equipment. That's why I hoped for a much longer throw lens so that at a distance of around twenty feet or more from the screen the brightness would not be compromised.
As I said I know I'm being unrealistic with projectors at this price point.

Highlander_AVS

08-09-09, 09:28 AM

..... but is anyone else disappointed that they still haven't implemented a dynamic iris yet?
....

THE DAY JVC WILL MAKE A DYNAMIC IRIS I'LL CHANGE BRAND AND PRODUCTS !! :mad:

The weakness point of the other technologies is proper that !
No one other than JVC can obtain on/off and the same dynamics without the use of a dynamic iris !

D-ila won in that and could show it's deepest dark and it's higher light white simultaneously in the SAME FRAME !! :cool:

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 09:43 AM

you could get it cheaper than £4500 from day of release if you looked around.;)

I dont doubt that for a second but I had not seen it advertised in a banner ad for that price until yesterday which leads me to believe that the UK distributors and retailers who hold stock are already looking to start offloading ASAP.

Jason Turk

08-09-09, 09:50 AM

Cine4Home

08-09-09, 09:54 AM

THE DAY JVC WILL MAKE A DYNAMIC IRIS I'LL CHANGE BRAND AND PRODUCTS !! :mad:

The weakness point of the other technologies is proper that !
No one other than JVC can obtain on/off and the same dynamics without the use of a dynamic iris !

D-ila won in that and could show it's deepest dark and it's higher light white simultaneously in the SAME FRAME !! :cool:

With such a high native contrast as the one of the JVCs, you could do a perfect DI and once and for all solve all Contrast-discussions...

Regards,
Ekkehart

gandley

08-09-09, 09:58 AM

My JVC was to be located 19ft-20ft ish from the screen and in a test it was plenty bright. Could run it in low lamp mode if i liked. this was on a 16:9 110ins screen.
If the 950 is brighter still, then i cant see 21ft being an issue at all.

gandley

08-09-09, 09:59 AM

THE DAY JVC WILL MAKE A DYNAMIC IRIS I'LL CHANGE BRAND AND PRODUCTS !! :mad:

The weakness point of the other technologies is proper that !
No one other than JVC can obtain on/off and the same dynamics without the use of a dynamic iris !

D-ila won in that and could show it's deepest dark and it's higher light white simultaneously in the SAME FRAME !! :cool:

yeah but the point is you have that dynamic range natively already, will adding a DI strip that away?

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 10:07 AM

andrewfee

08-09-09, 10:07 AM

problem is DI's are not perfect either.
I suspect once they cant get much more CR out of Licos then they may go to a DI at this point.

Looks like JVC are getting returns from what there doing with the panels rather than setting up a DI system.
They certainly aren't perfect, but that's mostly to do with how they're implemented. Seeing as the JVCs are so high contrast, you could be very conservative with it (or offer different modes) which would provide a noticeable improvement to contrast, without any real drawbacks.

THE DAY JVC WILL MAKE A DYNAMIC IRIS I'LL CHANGE BRAND AND PRODUCTS !! :mad:

The weakness point of the other technologies is proper that !
No one other than JVC can obtain on/off and the same dynamics without the use of a dynamic iris !

D-ila won in that and could show it's deepest dark and it's higher light white simultaneously in the SAME FRAME !! :cool:
It sounds like you're thinking of the way an old iris worked, which was simply to adjust the amount of light coming out of the projector. Newer dynamic iris implementations redistribute the values as well as lowering the amount of light.

In this case, the panels are capable of 80,000:1 on/off contrast. You will only ever see 80,000:1 if you have an image that has 100% white, and 0% black simultaneously.

If you are running at gamma 2.22 and you have an image where the brightest object in the scene is only 90% grey, you're losing a lot of contrast as 90% grey is ≈21% darker than white.

To keep the numbers simple, lets assume 100% white is 100cd/m².

If you have no DI and 100% is 100cd/m², 90% grey is ≈79cd/m² so your 80,000:1 has dropped to 63,000:1.

If you have an old style DI, maybe it would simply dim the lamp 10%. This dims both the while level and black level by 10% so contrast ratio is the same 63,000:1, the image is just dimmer.

If you have a DI where the values of the scene are redistributed, there are real contrast gains to be made. If you shift 90% grey (the brightest object in the scene) to 100% on the panel your contrast is back up to 80,000:1. You then close the iris 21% to get back to the original brightness value for 90% grey.

This displays the scene at the same 79cd/m² brightness as you would have had without the dynamic iris, but your black level has dropped 21%.

For this example, I'm going to do a bit of rounding, and assume that the projector is 1000:1 just to keep the numbers simple:

|90% Grey|Black Level|Contrast Ratio
No Dynamic Iris|80 cd/m²|0.10 cd/m²|800:1
Uncompensated DI|72 cd/m²|0.09 cd/m²|800:1
Compensated DI|80 cd/m²|0.08 cd/m²|1000:1

The further down the dynamic iris works, the greater the contrast gains are. The problem is that the more you stretch the values of the scene, the more likely you are to encounter things like posterisation. (banding)

You can probably go to at least 90% if not lower without any noticeable side-effects.

The problem with some DI implementations is that they will either go to far and become noticeable, or they are allowed to clip highlights to improve contrast further. If it's done right, there's not really much in the way of drawbacks.

And of course, with 80,000:1 native on/off CR, if you don't like it you can simply turn it off. (but even with a lowly 4,000:1 Sony projector, I find that I prefer the DI on when I had been expecting to hate it)

Jason Turk

08-09-09, 10:15 AM

gandley

08-09-09, 10:18 AM

Jason,
I would say that 21 foot is about correct maybe slightly more.
Dustin,
That is great and very positive news for me, I wont ask you about fl measurements as I'm kind of fl weary now if you know what I mean!;)

Not sure on the Fl number. I had a sim2 in the same location and the JVC was alot brighter, almost twice as bright.
Now have a Benq w20000 set up at 17ft and again its not quite as bright as the JVC

What i would suggest is you go to a good dealer and get a inhome demo of the JVC, that way you can see how bright it will be and see if it fits your requirements. a good dealer will be happy to offer this.

Should add though that the JVC is so so quiet that having it closer to the screen will not bother one at all even with it almost right above your head.

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 10:19 AM

Hold on, This is a thread about a new projector and it's already six pages long and it feels like something is missing!
Where is Ohlson and his Laser post?:(
Come on Ohlson it wouldn't be the same without you!:)

Highlander_AVS

08-09-09, 10:24 AM

With such a high native contrast as the one of the JVCs, you could do a perfect DI and once and for all solve all Contrast-discussions...

Regards,
Ekkehart

Yeah .. but Sorry ... I didn't believe to servo DI ... even the fastest one by Panasonic is sometime noticeable to my eyes :rolleyes:
I prefer the Iris AS IS !! (not extreme results; BUT, more important, NO DRAWBACKS;) ):cool:
To solve forever any kind of Contrast-discussion I hopefully point to a Laser Scan technology :cool:

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 10:35 AM

Not sure on the Fl number. I had a sim2 in the same location and the JVC was alot brighter, almost twice as bright.
Now have a Benq w20000 set up at 17ft and again its not quite as bright as the JVC

What i would suggest is you go to a good dealer and get a inhome demo of the JVC, that way you can see how bright it will be and see if it fits your requirements. a good dealer will be happy to offer this.

Should add though that the JVC is so so quiet that having it closer to the screen will not bother one at all even with it almost right above your head.

Thanks dustin,
I can't really have a home demo from a dealer as I would be wasting their time as I would buy as a trade customer as I have been in the trade since 94.
I have never dealt with jvc which is why i'm so interested in researching their products as from what I have seen and read they seem to be my cup of tea.
I would not consider a three chip dlp as they are way out of my price range and I am very, very susceptible to rainbows from single chip dlp so I am left with the option of lcos/sxrd/lcd and out of what I have seen it's close but I found the JVC to be the closest to ticking all the right boxes for me.

Gary Lightfoot

08-09-09, 10:40 AM

Yeah .. but Sorry ... I didn't believe to servo DI ... even the fastest one by Panasonic is sometime noticeable to my eyes :rolleyes:

The SONY DI tends to be invisible in operation and better than the others IMHO which as you say, are often visible.

Gary

John Ballentine

08-09-09, 11:15 AM

martinfarinha

08-09-09, 11:21 AM

Thanks John,
This is all very encouraging to say the least.
Thanks Again,
Martin.

darinp2

08-09-09, 12:34 PM

Not that I'll be buying one anyway (far outside my price range and I just bought a new projector 6 months ago) but is anyone else disappointed that they still haven't implemented a dynamic iris yet?Very much so. The technology exists to go better than we can get, but it just belongs to 2 (or more) different companies. I appreciated where JVC has taken things, but combine JVCs high native CR with Sony's DI implementation with maybe some modifications and I think things would be even better. For the most part 3x-4x or so from native on/off CR to dynamic on/off CR is about the limit I've seen for DIs without causing too much harm, but with JVCs high native on/off CR to begin with they could be less aggressive on the top end and more aggressive on the bottom end or maybe just go more aggressive on the bottom end. They might even have enough native on/off CR to begin with to be able to go to complete blackouts (or block enough of the light that people couldn't see the screen for minutes if their room wasn't lighting it up). They would likely have to go to an iris that would shut all the way or also add a shutter for more light blocking than the closed down iris.

It seems that over the last couple of years some people have been confused and thought that the advantage JVC had over Sony was that JVC didn't have a DI, when the advantage JVC has had is the higher native on/off CR. That wasn't from not having a DI as JVC has an iris, they just don't move it during video. If Sony didn't have a DI they would be even further behind JVC in the whole on/off CR department to most people (since I think most people use the DI on the Sony because they prefer their projectors with it enabled instead of disabled).
THE DAY JVC WILL MAKE A DYNAMIC IRIS I'LL CHANGE BRAND AND PRODUCTS !! :mad:

The weakness point of the other technologies is proper that !
No one other than JVC can obtain on/off and the same dynamics without the use of a dynamic iris !

D-ila won in that and could show it's deepest dark and it's higher light white simultaneously in the SAME FRAME !! :cool:Sorry, but that isn't rational. Why would you avoid buying a product because it had a feature you didn't have to use? The weakness point of the Sony's isn't the DI. That makes no sense. The DI can be turned off. The weakness point of the Sony's is the lower native on/off CR.

And JVC can't obtain the same on/off CR and dynamics without a DI as they could with a good DI. What JVC does is impressive, but not as impressive as the same projector with a DI could be. JVC can show their deepest black and higher light white simultaneously in the same frame because they have limited their deepest black to something more gray by not using a DI. You make it sound like having the more gray black than could be available for many scenes is a good thing.

Also, JVC can only do their deepest black and brightest white in the same scene for one iris position. Given that the manual iris has to be shut down in order to get to get their deepest black (and also higher on/off CR) they can't do their brightest white and their deepest black at the same time, only those for a single iris position. People have to go to lower lumens for peak white for the highest on/off CR and deepest blacks. With a DI system people could have the iris open for the brightest scenes for the rated lumens and get the deepest black the projector is capable of for the darkest scenes (depending on implementation, like where they might allow the iris to start partway closed).

Aside from the point of people being able to disable a DI, when things blackout in movies why would I want my screen to be visible unless making it invisible (or at least invisible for longer) couldn't be done without me seeing artifacts from that?

If JVC goes to LEDs and then doesn't allow them to be used a dynamic way I will figure they most likely either have irrational thoughts about dynamic systems or they figure they can get people with marketing bragging about how they don't use a dynamic system.

If JVC includes a dynamic system in the future people should be able to try the projector with it enabled versus it disabled and see what they think. I think it pretty much goes without saying that if JVC adds a dynamic system anytime soon they will allow the user to choose whether it is enabled or not.

I would probably pay a couple grand extra for a good DI with one of these JVCs if I had that option and I would be considering the next Sony less if JVC had all else like it is except also a good DI. As it is I want to see whatever Sony comes up with too (assuming the model Mark has talked about shows up) and compare the frame interpolation modes between them. If Sony's is way better in that department it could sway me that direction, but would be less likely to than if Sony didn't have a good DI or JVC did.

I hope somebody else like Panasonic will step out with basically a zoned DI (like a 4 panel system with one panel defocused), but I'm not counting on it.

--Darin

darinp2

08-09-09, 01:12 PM

Joel Silver is recommending 20fL for HD material only, and less for SD due to it's limitations. He also suggests you have a different set up for SD for that reasonGiven some of the misinformation that has come out from people who are teachers for ISF or have been in the past I wonder if Joel Silver understands the relevance of on/off CR and how it relates to the above. Put another way, I wonder if he recommends that people just lower the Contrast setting for their display to get to the lower ft-lamberts or if he recommends doing it in a way that doesn't hurt the on/off CR.

Although he might accidentally get to something that works as the lower on/off CR for SD might help hide some artifacts too.

I would be interested in seeing more detail on how he recommends people get to the lower ft-lamberts and why he prefers that method.

--Darin

coldmachine

08-09-09, 01:12 PM

Very much so. The technology exists to go better than we can get, but it just belongs to 2 (or more) different companies. I appreciated where JVC has taken things, but combine JVCs high native CR with Sony's DI implementation with maybe some modifications and I think things would be even better. For the most part 3x-4x or so from native on/off CR to dynamic on/off CR is about the limit I've seen for DIs without causing too much harm, but with JVCs high native on/off CR to begin with they could be less aggressive on the top end and more aggressive on the bottom end or maybe just go more aggressive on the bottom end. They might even have enough native on/off CR to begin with to be able to go to complete blackouts (or block enough of the light that people couldn't see the screen for minutes if their room wasn't lighting it up). They would likely have to go to an iris that would shut all the way or also add a shutter for more light blocking than the closed down iris.

It seems that over the last couple of years some people have been confused and thought that the advantage JVC had over Sony was that JVC didn't have a DI, when the advantage JVC has had is the higher native on/off CR. That wasn't from not having a DI as JVC has an iris, they just don't move it during video. If Sony didn't have a DI they would be even further behind JVC in the whole on/off CR department to most people (since I think most people use the DI on the Sony because they prefer their projectors with it enabled instead of disabled).
Sorry, but that isn't rational. Why would you avoid buying a product because it had a feature you didn't have to use? The weakness point of the Sony's isn't the DI. That makes no sense. The DI can be turned off. The weakness point of the Sony's is the lower native on/off CR.

And JVC can't obtain the same on/off CR and dynamics without a DI as they could with a good DI. What JVC does is impressive, but not as impressive as the same projector with a DI could be. JVC can show their deepest black and higher light white simultaneously in the same frame because they have limited their deepest black to something more gray by not using a DI. You make it sound like having the more gray black than could be available for many scenes is a good thing.

Also, JVC can only do their deepest black and brightest white in the same scene for one iris position. Given that the manual iris has to be shut down in order to get to get their deepest black (and also higher on/off CR) they can't do their brightest white and their deepest black at the same time, only those for a single iris position. People have to go to lower lumens for peak white for the highest on/off CR and deepest blacks. With a DI system people could have the iris open for the brightest scenes for the rated lumens and get the deepest black the projector is capable of for the darkest scenes (depending on implementation, like where they might allow the iris to start partway closed).

Aside from the point of people being able to disable a DI, when things blackout in movies why would I want my screen to be visible unless making it invisible (or at least invisible for longer) couldn't be done without me seeing artifacts from that?

If JVC goes to LEDs and then doesn't allow them to be used a dynamic way I will figure they most likely either have irrational thoughts about dynamic systems or they figure they can get people with marketing bragging about how they don't use a dynamic system.

If JVC includes a dynamic system in the future people should be able to try the projector with it enabled versus it disabled and see what they think. I think it pretty much goes without saying that if JVC adds a dynamic system anytime soon they will allow the user to choose whether it is enabled or not.

I would probably pay a couple grand extra for a good DI with one of these JVCs if I had that option and I would be considering the next Sony less if JVC had all else like it is except also a good DI. As it is I want to see whatever Sony comes up with too (assuming the model Mark has talked about shows up) and compare the frame interpolation modes between them. If Sony's is way better in that department it could sway me that direction, but would be less likely to than if Sony didn't have a good DI or JVC did.

I hope somebody else like Panasonic will step out with basically a zoned DI (like a 4 panel system with one panel defocused), but I'm not counting on it.

--Darin

A nice concise, articulate and insightful post.

mlang46

08-09-09, 01:37 PM

I have been advocating a 4th panel for JVC to increase their ANSI contrast which is the main defect in their projectors. They have already done it in prototypes obtaining contrast ratios of 150,000 to one and those prototypes were built 2 years ago. There native on/off contrast is greater than most projectors with DI. The biggest performance improvement will come when they improve their ANSI contrast or more accurately when they decrease the optical crosstalk from optical scattering.

Gary Lightfoot

08-09-09, 01:45 PM

Given some of the misinformation that has come out from people who are teachers for ISF or have been in the past I wonder if Joel Silver understands the relevance of on/off CR and how it relates to the above. Put another way, I wonder if he recommends that people just lower the Contrast setting for their display to get to the lower ft-lamberts or if he recommends doing it in a way that doesn't hurt the on/off CR.

Although he might accidentally get to something that works as the lower on/off CR for SD might help hide some artifacts too.

I would be interested in seeing more detail on how he recommends people get to the lower ft-lamberts and why he prefers that method.

--Darin

Hi Darin,

Good point.

He didn't give details in that repect, but did mention that with the difference in SD source material being quite variable he did suggest that the really poor quality material would probably be better left to smaller displays - any deficiencies would be shown up on a display set for HD material (SD was based on a 1939 standard designed for small screens so should probably be displayed that way!). I've a feeling (and this is purely speculation on my part) that Joel has left SD behind and is moving forward purely with HD.

Personally I'm happy with cinema levels of reflectance so I'd use that for everything, especially as I still have a lot of DVDs in my collection..

Gary

Cine4Home

08-09-09, 01:50 PM

Darin and Andrew are absolutely right.

Given the high native contrast of the JVC, it would be possible to implement a DI, which works without sideffects and increases the On / Off contrast easily to 200,000:1.

With a good realtime gamma correction, the Intra-Scene contrast would be improved by a very high margin also, especially for Scenes with lower APL.

But I doubt we will ever see that. The engineers seem to have that "we do not need a DI because DILA is so great anyway" attitude, which is unfortunate. If I was an engineer, I would use the current leap and improve it even more to leave all other technologies far, far behind.

Regards,
Ekkehart

mlang46

08-09-09, 01:59 PM

Darin and Andrew are absolutely right.

Given the high native contrast of the JVC, it would be possible to implement a DI, which works without sideffects and increases the On / Off contrast easily to 200,000:1.

With a good realtime gamma correction, the Intra-Scene contrast would be improved by a very high margin also, especially for Scenes with lower APL.

But I doubt we will ever see that. The engineers ssem to have that "we do not need a DI because DILA is so great anyway" attitude, which is unfortunate. If I was an engineer, I would use the current leap and improve it even more to leave all other technologies far, far behind.

Regards,
Ekkehart

but what would a DI do for mixed APl scenes and high apl scenes. Would they get more improvement increasing their native Ansi contrast from 250 -300/1 to 600-700/1 or using a DI and increasing their on/off from 50.000/1 to 200,000/1.

darinp2

08-09-09, 02:11 PM

I have been advocating a 4th panel for JVC to increase their ANSI contrast which is the main defect in their projectors.How would they increase the ANSI CR (at least in a significant way) with that? Are you saying that the 4th panel needs to be last? If it was first I don't see how it would have a big impact on ANSI CR. If the 4th panel is last, how does it affect pixel structure on the screen (including that the other 3 panels might not be converged perfectly)? Is that panel defocussed?

--Darin

madshi

08-09-09, 02:25 PM

I have been advocating a 4th panel for JVC to increase their ANSI contrast which is the main defect in their projectors. They have already done it in prototypes obtaining contrast ratios of 150,000 to one and those prototypes were built 2 years ago.
Why only 150,000:1? I would have thought that a 4th panel would increase on/off contrast much more than that. I mean in theory the 4th panel should square the native on/off contrast, shouldn't it?

Cine4Home

08-09-09, 03:19 PM

but what would a DI do for mixed APl scenes and high apl scenes. Would they get more improvement increasing their native Ansi contrast from 250 -300/1 to 600-700/1 or using a DI and increasing their on/off from 50.000/1 to 200,000/1.

Obviously high APL scenes would improve more by doubling the ANSI contrast. On the other side, with a DI you can get more light out compatred to the static Iris the JVCs have at the moment.

I did not say, that a higher ANSI is not worth it for optimized rooms, but a DI would be good also.

Regards,
Ekkehart

darinp2

08-09-09, 04:50 PM

but what would a DI do for mixed APl scenes and high apl scenes.I'll give you something, but it is due to the unique nature of the JVC RS20 and I hope they have this fixed in the new models. Besides the factor that Ekkehart mentioned with being able to get more light for bright scenes by having the iris open for them than closing the manual iris now to get more on/off CR, there is another factor too since with the RS20 the ANSI CR goes down as the iris is closed down (at least in did on mine). So, having a DI could provide more ANSI CR for a person who cares about blacks in general by allowing them to combine the highest ANSI CR with the highest on/off CR. Something that wasn't possible with my RS20.

On/off CR can also affect bright scenes even where it seems like it wouldn't be a factor. The reason is that it can affect the gamma that a person feels is reasonable overall and then that gamma can affect the higher APL scenes if the projector is trying to keep the same general gamma curve (which is how things normally are). The gamma can change the contrast ratio between 80% video level objects and 20% video level objects with the higher gamma providing the higher contrast ratio between those, but the difference for those between 2.4 gamma and 2.5 gamma isn't that big. This is more of a factor between things like 2.2 gamma and 2.4 gamma.

Increasing the ANSI CR from say 300:1 to 700:1 would be great though, especially if they increased MTF at full resolution or close to full resolution a large amount too.

--Darin

Mark Petersen

08-09-09, 05:14 PM

Will there be a review coming from you Mark? I enjoy your site! Keep it up.

Thanks for the kind words LG. I hope to do a review of the new JVC at some point, but the question will be when. Ekkhart will satisfy all of the early questions and I'm not sure when I can get my hands on one after that. I am working on it though :)

Very much so. The technology exists to go better than we can get, but it just belongs to 2 (or more) different companies. I appreciated where JVC has taken things, but combine JVCs high native CR with Sony's DI implementation with maybe some modifications and I think things would be even better. For the most part 3x-4x or so from native on/off CR to dynamic on/off CR is about the limit I've seen for DIs without causing too much harm, but with JVCs high native on/off CR to begin with they could be less aggressive on the top end and more aggressive on the bottom end or maybe just go more aggressive on the bottom end. They might even have enough native on/off CR to begin with to be able to go to complete blackouts (or block enough of the light that people couldn't see the screen for minutes if their room wasn't lighting it up). They would likely have to go to an iris that would shut all the way or also add a shutter for more light blocking than the closed down iris.

I'm not going to hold my breath for a DI on a JVC. JVC seems to have become the anti-DI company, at least that's how they market it, and as we have agreed to disagree in the past, I can see some logic in that marketing plan.

If I were going to hope for a DI though, I'd love to see them add a DI like the Planar's. Something not very agressive when bright whites are present, but more agressive with mid whites. Imagine what AVP: Requiem would look like with 80K:1 native and the more agressive boost in most of those scenes :) The results could easily be the equivalent of 2x the native 80k:1 on/off.

Chuck Anstey

08-09-09, 07:36 PM

Could JVC not using a DI be a patent problem? If it costs JVC both the cost of the DI hardware plus a licensing fee then they could reasonably claim the additional cost isn't worth the contrast gain.

One more thing as many are discussion huge contrast ratios at very low light levels. The human eye can only perceive about 64 levels of gray at one time. That is why a white wall can look black when a bright light is projected on it. Our standard 8-bit displays are 4 times the limit of most people's eyes when viewing a full range image. I think this is one of the reasons there has not been a big push for 12-bit or 16-bit displays because no one could really take advantage of them. There is a huge advantage of recording in higher bit-depth. Also current HD specs only allow 8-bit grayscale so even though HDMI can support 12-bit, Bluray cannot. An 80000:1 contrast ratio for a picture with 0 to 30 IRE is a bit overkill at this time.

Personally I would like to see 12 bit displays become the norm because I believe there is a visible although subtle improvement in the final image and definitely when the image is mostly dark. The biggest impediment to true high quality images is the reduced color space. If they could ever create a display technology that is 12-bit and cover the entire color space of human eyes then we would effectively have perfection. The only thing that would be missing is the full dynamic range of human eyes from bright sunlight to near total darkness but that probably isn't very useful for displaying movies.

dbbarron

08-09-09, 07:58 PM

Judging by the sheer number of other manufacturers using DIs, I'd suspect there is no problem getting a reasonable license to the extent one may be necessary under one or more party's patents. Of course, there may be a cost and I will not speculate on how JVC views the ROI with respect to their projectors. As JVC is one of the few (if only) not using DI, perhaps they view this as a marketing advantage.

Mark Petersen

08-09-09, 11:42 PM

As JVC is one of the few (if only) not using DI, perhaps they view this as a marketing advantage.

Yeah that's my take on it too, although I just looked at the JVC Pro website and the slightly negative DI verbiage that I remember reading during the RS20 launch seems to have been removed.

darinp2

08-10-09, 12:37 AM

But I doubt we will ever see that. The engineers seem to have that "we do not need a DI because DILA is so great anyway" attitude, which is unfortunate.Is it the engineers? If so then I think that is unfortunate too. As an example, if the on/off CR at 50k:1 speced was so great with the RS20 that a DI wouldn't have made the images better overall to a lot of people then why should anybody spend extra money to get JVC's new model for the 80k:1 on/off CR? If they were holding back on purpose because they knew a good DI would improve the images, but didn't want to give people too much at one time so they could get them to upgrade later, or if there wasn't time to implement one right, then I could understand them not doing it for those business reasons. But if they didn't do it because they thought it wouldn't improve the images even if they did a good implementation, then to me that is pure ignorance and the fact that they are upping their native on/off CRs proves that they knew they hadn't already gotten to no room for improvement to their absolute black levels.
If I were going to hope for a DI though, I'd love to see them add a DI like the Planar's.If JVC did a DI I would expect it to be at least as good as Planar's. While a lot of expertise went into Planar's, they also had to start from something like 3k:1 native on/off CR. I think it would be much easier to start with 30k:1 or higher.
Imagine what AVP: Requiem would look like with 80K:1 native and the more agressive boost in most of those scenes :) Especially since AVP:R doesn't seem to have anything above around 70-75% video level in general from what I've checked. Even things like a bright planet on a dark background don't even come close to 100% video level and so leave extra room for a DI to do its thing. BTW: I would love to see a shootout of the new RS20 replacement with the Samsung A900B that included chapter 13 of the unrated version of AVP:R. That is a scene where a Predator is fighting Aliens down in a sewer where it is very dark. The Samsung would likely show some advantages in bright scenes, but in a side-by-side it could look pretty washed out compared to a newer JVC (like the RS20 or its replacement) in this area, especially if the Samsung was used without its DI.
As JVC is one of the few (if only) not using DI, perhaps they view this as a marketing advantage.Could be. They might be banking on it being a complicated enough subject that people won't figure out that their projectors would be even better to most people who care about this area with a good DI on top of what they already bring to the table, or figure it is complicated enough that even if they improved their projectors with a DI it would be hard to explain to people why theirs was better and have it stick. Or maybe they don't know enough themselves and their marketing is basically what they believe, misguided or not. I wonder how many people who are involved in this for JVC would disable the iris on the higher end Sony if they were forced to live with it for a year and got to see the images that result with the DI disabled or the DI enabled. Or would disable a DI all the time on the JVC if it had a good one and they were using it at home.

I think it is too bad that nobody else has really stepped up and competed well enough to force JVC's hand here. I have to give JVC credit for doing so well in getting their native on/off CRs up and it isn't their fault that others haven't competed well enough against them, but I would still like to see somebody else do it. Like a 4 panel projector or Sony getting their native on/off CR up much higher and combining that with their DI. The first LED DLP doesn't seem like it has had the best decisions backing it in this area to compete better with the JVCs and unfortunately TI just hasn't even stayed in the same ballpark as JVC for native on/off CR over the last few years after being ahead of JVC in this area back then.

--Darin

Elkhunter

08-10-09, 01:01 AM

darinp2

08-10-09, 01:15 AM

As far as what JVC has accomplished as far as native on/off CR versus what TI has accomplished with their manufacturers, I was thinking about it some more and decided to look back at what each was doing at certain points in the last few years.

In December of 2003 I believe the best native on/off CR going from actual performance with a DLP was a little over 4000:1 (from the Sharp 12k) and the best native on/off CR with a DILA was around 700:1 (from the HX1U). Now I think the best from a DLP is around 10k:1 (Marantz 11S2) and the best from a released DILA is around 40k:1 or a little higher (from the RS20).

So, in 5 years the DLPs have improved their best native on/off CR by about 150%, while JVC has improved theirs about 5600%, not even counting their upcoming models.

And it looks like the first LED DLP is going to go backwards, with native on/off CR at maybe 3k:1, unless they do something to improve it. Yes, it has a dynamic system, but so far it has less native on/off CR than I was getting in 2003 with my Sharp 11k (Japanese version of the 12k).

And what about the last 3 years? As of 3 years ago JVC hadn't released the RS1 and their highest native on/off CR was maybe 2400:1 or so with the HD2K or HD10K, IIRC. The Marantz 11S1 was out at that time according to projectorcentral.com and the rating was 6500:1 on/off CR, but I think it was probably more like 5000:1 calibrated (I don't remember the numbers from mine). And part of the CR improvement from the 11S1 to the 12S1 was from things Marantz did. It doesn't seem like the Darkchip2, Darkchip3, and Darkchip4 from TI are that much different as far as native on/off CR and the 1080p Darkchip2 seems like it has been out for quite a while. Maybe 4 years. Not sure if that is right, but seems like it and I think it must have been out by 3 years ago. In the time from the Darkchip2 to now TI might have improved the native on/off CR from the chips 50% and some of their manufacturers have added a little bit themselves. But they can only do so much with the chips that TI provides.

In the last 3 years JVC has gone from around 2400:1 being their best native on/off CR to around 40k:1 and now it looks like they will go even higher very soon. If they go to 60k:1 that would be about 2400% improvement in that time in that area.

I hope TI shows up with something new at the chip level. I think the Darkchip4 was introduced 2 years ago and really wasn't that big a step at that.

--Darin

darinp2

08-10-09, 01:21 AM

I'm interested in the HD950 (as a Panny 200 owner, an upgrade is long over due).

However, from reading the recent posts in this thread, I have doubts as to whether the projector would be bright enough for me.

Question:
In a true batcave (all lights/leds are taped over), with a throw of 19'-10", and with the center of the lens 13" above the center of a 159" HP screen, what would be the fl with a HD950 set to maximum brightness ???

What would the fl be with the current RS20 ???We don't know how bright the new one will be and it depends on where you seating positions are. But, going with the information you have, your screen is about 75 square feet if it is 16:9. You would be more toward the shorter end of the throw for the projector, so the brighter end. Ignoring screen gain for a second, if you could get 600 real lumens your ft-lamberts would be 600/75, or about 8 ft-lamberts. If you were sitting in a real good spot a little under the projector you might get 2.4 gain, giving you 8*2.4 or 19.2 ft-lamberts to that viewing position.

You might want to close the iris down some until the bulb dims. :)

Of course, if you are sitting at a lower gain position like 1.5 gain you would be looking at 8*1.5, or 12 ft-lamberts with the above assumptions.

--Darin

mark haflich

08-10-09, 01:30 AM

Last year I advocated and hoped and speculated that the RS20 would have a DI. Most shouted me down.

I bitched continually about the crappy lens in the RS1 and RS2 and the lack of a CMS to tame the over saturated colors. From what I hear the shame of having a few of us post that the three primary colors could not be put in focus at the same time including one prominant reviewer was instrumental in getting them to fix the lens problems by going toa cheaper supplier who supplied a much better lens for the same bucks. God bless the Chinese and God save the Japenese. Masive public criticism here and in England pushed them into a CMS and eventually getting it to work.

Most consumers haven`t a clue about DIs or the lack of them. Its a numbers game in marketing. The only way to get them to add a DI is public pressure and that is hard for us to accomplish because its omission is not a glaring fault in the machines. Its just something that we who are so much smarter than them want so badly because it would result in a quantum jump in performance. But we have no abillity to shame them into doing it and from what I suspect our JVC friends here in the US have no ability to get the Japanese to do it and to say it would be a good thing would no be politically correct with JVC marketing. Just my rambling thoughts.

mark haflich

08-10-09, 01:40 AM

Nice summary Darin. But its stil lso troublesome re all the baby steps when JVC could so easily and cheaply add a DI and give us a giant step. Also there are polarizers out there which while very costly (something like $2000 for 3 in large quantities) with no other chages could gives a HUGH increase in performance.

Highlander_AVS

08-10-09, 05:33 AM

The SONY DI tends to be invisible in operation and better than the others IMHO which as you say, are often visible.

Gary

Sorry, not agree ;)
I see the DI on Sony, both VW200 and VW80 ( I tested them in several sessions ... ) , this was one of the reason I renew my thrust in JVC and upgraded my old HD100 with my actual RS20 :cool:
DI ?? No Party !! :D

Ohlson

08-10-09, 05:52 AM

I think JVC is hoping to have leds or lasers ready before the market conditions forces them to go with a dynamic mechanical iris. JVC has listened I think when they gave us an adjustable iris and a CMS. If they can provide DI functionality from controling leds ar lasers I think that is what they prefer.

We know that JVC is playing with lasers and 4-panels. I am hoping they can implement either or both in a product. Going with lasers and DI could give us what we need and 4-panels is possible not necessary since it as not just an advantage.

Highlander_AVS

08-10-09, 05:53 AM

......
Given the high native contrast of the JVC, it would be possible to implement a DI, which works without sideffects and increases the On / Off contrast easily to 200,000:1.
This is the point !!
I Cannot believe it can be done with absolutely FREE from SideEffects ... :p
........
But I doubt we will ever see that. The engineers seem to have that "we do not need a DI because DILA is so great anyway" ..

Completely agree with JVC ! :cool:
Hope too they never do a DI ... It's one of their FLAG and Arrows in the Bag to Advice in Advertizing !!
"WE DO BETTER WITHOUT THE NEED OF ANY DI " :D:cool:

Highlander_AVS

08-10-09, 06:01 AM

.....

I'm not going to hold my breath for a DI on a JVC. JVC seems to have become the anti-DI company, at least that's how they market it, and as we have agreed to disagree in the past, I can see some logic in that marketing plan.
......

Completely agree with you and with JVC choices and philosofy :cool:

madshi

08-10-09, 06:08 AM

We know that JVC is playing with lasers and 4-panels. I am hoping they can implement either or both in a product. Going with lasers and DI could give us what we need and 4-panels is possible not necessary since it as not just an advantage.
What disadvantage do you see in 4 panels (apart from higher cost, obviously)?

Highlander_AVS

08-10-09, 06:25 AM

Thebes

08-10-09, 06:27 AM

Hi,

Here, there are a thread about On/Off contrast, Ansi Contrast link to APL Contrast (IMO, same thing as intra-scene contrast), with or without DI and the DI effect's measures ;) :

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=781060

Sorry,

mistake, see the post after :

Thebes

08-10-09, 06:50 AM

Sorry,

I don't use the update :

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=852467

Lawguy

08-10-09, 07:27 AM

I feel the same way about a Dynamic Iris as I do about FI: I would be glad to have it but I doubt that I would use it. I say this, of course, without having seen how it might work so I admit it might be better than I expect, understanding that a DI functions best when on/off is natively high.

My theory is that JVC's path for model improvements is clear and that JVC engineers are already confident that they can boost on/off CR (either through polarizer improvements, laser modulation or something else) to astronomical levels without the use of a traditional DI. If this is so, why would JVC spend the time to develop a DI? Furthermore, without real competition on this spec, why would JVC do anything other than just roll its improvements out slowly? This is why we need legitimate competition in this area of the market.

I also find it funny that people are complaining about improvements being necessary to a projector with a native on/off spec of 80k:1.

mark haflich

08-10-09, 08:16 AM

Hi LG. I think there is a difference between speced native on\off and useable on\off. With the RS20 for example, while 50,000 was obtainable with the iris set toits smallest opening, most could not do this without making the picture too dim. Nevertheless,usuable on\off on the RS20 is high enough to reach a gammma of 2.5 without crush.Ref blacklevels still have a way to go with fade to blacks still looking quite gray.

Raising native to 80,000, might result in a usuable on\off in the 60,000 to 70,000 area. Unfortunately this will not result in much visable improvement. While gamma could be raised, historical testing has shown that things get too contrasty once gammas get much higher than 2.5. Remember using a gamma of 2.5 is clearly a viewer preference. Some like it, others prefer a lower gamma. but clearly, once gamma gets above 2.6, things will be too contrasty to look real.

The real benefit here of raising the on\off above RS20 levels is the inherent lowering of the black ref level.. In this area, we have a long way to go and a useable on\off of even 80,000 doesn`t get us there.

I am sorry but those who rant about the deficiencies of a DI and applaud JVC for not offering the choice of using one are . . . . As long as the user can switch a DI off, they would not suffer if JVC included one.doing so would not be very expensive and I think would lead to very increased sales because JVC would trample the 3 chip market.

Condoning the metered improvement, heh heh, will give em 30,000 more this year when for a few bucks we could give them say 200,000 more is a travisty.

i have more to say but there is little point in saying it. A DI from JVC is not going to happen and that`s a shame for many of us.

Lawguy

08-10-09, 08:40 AM

Hi LG. I think there is a difference between speced native on\off and useable on\off. With the RS20 for example, while 50,000 was obtainable with the iris set toits smallest opening, most could not do this without making the picture too dim.

Not true, especially if you have a screen with some gain.

If JVC, is, in fact, holding off on certain improvements, is it a travisty? For me, I guess it is because I probably have at least a few upgrades in me. For JVC, it makes a lot of sense.

I still think it is crazy, given the competition, for people to speculate about improving contrast in an 80k:1 native projector. Yeah. It may not be very noticable as compared to a 50k:1 projector, but when your nearest competition so far is (just a guess) 20k:1, it kind of puts things in perspective.

I watched a Movie called Eden Log over the weekend. It was mentioned in another thread. Horrible movie overall, but some interesting test material. It is very dark through out. The opening sequence is in a totally dark room that has a light that flickers on and off every second or two: slower than a strobe but that kind of effect. On the RS20, when the lights went out, an imprint of the bright image remained burned in my retinas and slowly faded. This was kind of nice because my eyes never had a chance to adapt to the complete darkness and the bright areas were very bright. I wonder how this scene would look with a DI? Would the image still be burned in my retinas when the lights went out or would the DI tone down those bright portions? If the DI took away the effect that I saw, I simply would not use it.

Eden Log also shows that we have a way to go still with black levels. In extended dark scenes, blacks became less convincing. Still, very nice over all, but you can see where improvement is needed as dark scenes are long enough for every photon to become visible as our eyes adjust.

mark haflich

08-10-09, 09:16 AM

I wonder what percentage of JVC`s projector sales ar our entities upgrading from earlier JVC projectors.. I wonder how many additional sales JC would make if they offered a DI particularly this year or model year. Some scenes might not do well with a DI switched on but implementations such as that done in the Planar 8150, which was the work of mainly one engineer over part of a year, makes those instances relatively rare. In any event, one can switch them off. Sure with it on it might spoil the movie for you just like any digital could spoil any movie for anybody because of the fade to blacks or mainly black scenes. just depends on the viewer. Oh. that`s OK given no artifacts with the on every two seconds light? just depends on what bothers you or maybe who here bothers you.

mark haflich

08-10-09, 09:23 AM

BTW. Anybody out there running an RS20 on a regular basis with the iris closed to the maximum?

GaryB_UK

08-10-09, 09:26 AM

Lawguy

08-10-09, 09:27 AM

Oh. that`s OK given no artifacts with the on every two seconds light? just depends on what bothers you or maybe who here bothers you.

My point wasn't really about artifacts that a DI may introduce (and they surely will). My point is that when using a DI, you may miss seeing certain information because the DI renders it invisible or not as intense. Everything looks fine except that you are not seeing everything you are supposed to see. I recall lots of posts and pictures on this in the past as it related to Sony's DI. As far as I know, no one has taken one of these current generation DI projectors and put it through the ringer to see what detail is being lost, if any. I know that there are engineering solutions to this issue (gamma adjustments/lamp headroom) but I still lack confidence in DI-given contrast as opposed to native contrast.

See here for description of brightness compression. (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=11796321#post11796321)

Lawguy

08-10-09, 09:28 AM

BTW. Anybody out there running an RS20 on a regular basis with the iris closed to the maximum?

Me. Low Lamp mode also.

Franin

08-10-09, 10:12 AM

andrewfee

08-10-09, 10:28 AM

Completely agree with JVC ! :cool:
Hope too they never do a DI ... It's one of their FLAG and Arrows in the Bag to Advice in Advertizing !!
"WE DO BETTER WITHOUT THE NEED OF ANY DI " :D:cool:
And yet they could do significantly better with a DI on top of their great native contrast performance. 80,000:1 is great, but wouldn't you rather have 150,000:1 or more?

The opening sequence is in a totally dark room that has a light that flickers on and off every second or two: slower than a strobe but that kind of effect. On the RS20, when the lights went out, an imprint of the bright image remained burned in my retinas and slowly faded. This was kind of nice because my eyes never had a chance to adapt to the complete darkness and the bright areas were very bright. I wonder how this scene would look with a DI? Would the image still be burned in my retinas when the lights went out or would the DI tone down those bright portions? If the DI took away the effect that I saw, I simply would not use it.
An old style DI which only adjusted the amount of light coming from a projector would have possibly dimmed the bright images.

A gamma compensated DI keeps bright scenes bright, it only lowers the brightness of dark scenes.

My point wasn't really about artifacts that a DI may introduce (and they surely will). My point is that when using a DI, you may miss seeing certain information because the DI renders it invisible or not as intense. Everything looks fine except that you are not seeing everything you are supposed to see. I recall lots of posts and pictures on this in the past as it related to Sony's DI. As far as I know, no one has taken one of these current generation DI projectors and put it through the ringer to see what detail is being lost, if any. I know that there are engineering solutions to this issue (gamma adjustments/lamp headroom) but I still lack confidence in DI-given contrast as opposed to native contrast.

See here for description of brightness compression. (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=11796321#post11796321)
Brightness compression is dependant on the algorithm used for the DI, and was a problem with older DIs. It's maybe not been eliminated yet, but I can't think of any scenes where it has been an issue with my HW10.

I've not done specific testing, but I have one preset using the DI and one with it disabled. Any time where I have seen clipping and thought “hmm, I wonder if the DI is causing that” it has turned out to be clipped in the source.

mark haflich

08-10-09, 10:54 AM

Highlander_AVS

08-10-09, 10:54 AM

BTW. Anybody out there running an RS20 on a regular basis with the iris closed to the maximum?

Me ! :D

Lamp to Normal, Iris -15 Max Wide position Zoom, 120" (118" to be precise ) diag gain 1:2, 33nits results just enough for me and my room ;)

@Lawguy
Lamp could be Normal or High ( didn't exists Low ) only to be precise ;)

Lawguy

08-10-09, 11:04 AM

And yet they could do significantly better with a DI on top of their great native contrast performance. 80,000:1 is great, but wouldn't you rather have 150,000:1 or more?

An old style DI which only adjusted the amount of light coming from a projector would have possibly dimmed the bright images.

A gamma compensated DI keeps bright scenes bright, it only lowers the brightness of dark scenes.

Brightness compression is dependant on the algorithm used for the DI, and was a problem with older DIs. It's maybe not been eliminated yet, but I can't think of any scenes where it has been an issue with my HW10.

I've not done specific testing, but I have one preset using the DI and one with it disabled. Any time where I have seen clipping and thought “hmm, I wonder if the DI is causing that” it has turned out to be clipped in the source.

This is kind of getting off topic, but in at least some newer implementations, like Planar's, the DI is less aggressive. It does not suffer from brightness compression but would clip brightness in small, bright features in dark scenes.

There is no question that a DI is an overall benefit in the Sonys or Planar because they have much more modest native contrast. When you have a projector with a 80k:1 CR, my question becomes, are you willing to make a certain set of sacrifices in order to achieve certain benefits. I am not sure that I would make those sacrifices, but again, we don't have this real world choice to make because this solution does not exist.

Lawguy

08-10-09, 11:10 AM

In all fairness to LG, that scene might cause some visible slow pumping. I don`t know because I don`t have the disc and I don`t want to buy it but if LG lends it to me I will test it out on my Planar 8150.

Much of the sentiment against DIs here is by people who don`t have much observational experience with good recent DI implementations.
Now some like me, darin, Ekkehart do have considerable observational experience with recent DI implementations and funny how those people advocate its addition.

I got it from Netflix, Mark, so it is in the mail back already. I wasn't talking about image pumping, although that scene may well have some. I was talking about a loss of intensity in certain dark scenes.

There is no question that Planar's DI is a net positive. But, the Planar does not have 80k:1 native CR.

Again, I suspect that JVC has already staked out a path to much higher CRs. If so, why are we talking about DIs?

Lawguy

08-10-09, 11:11 AM

@Lawguy
Lamp could be Normal or High ( didn't exists Low ) only to be precise ;)

It was the translation, I swear!

Highlander_AVS

08-10-09, 11:17 AM

...
Much of the sentiment against DIs here is by people who don`t have much observational experience with good recent DI implementations.....

Please, .. Sorry in which machines were implemented the "Last Generation DI " you're talking about ?? :confused:

I had several sessions of several hours with Planar 8150, 8130 - Panasonic 3000 and Sony Vw200 and it's last VW80.
With the above models I ever seen the DI intervent ! Where plus, where minus noticeable but always seen ... :(

I really think that it's impossible to have a such kind of this electronic "trick" without any kind of it's own drawbacks ... :o

Go "Pure", go "Natural", avoid "Tricks and fashion Mods"
Live Happy without DI !! :D :cool:

mark haflich

08-10-09, 11:23 AM

the Planar DI does cause some artifacts on ocassion but only very rarely. I leave it on all the time. I rarely use torture tests. In normal content I see no artifacts.

Highlander_AVS

08-10-09, 11:36 AM

madshi

08-10-09, 11:46 AM

Right .... That's the point !
On Planar and others, DI MUST BE leaved ON .. otherwise I see too lost in CR ... and or a black too high or a back "drowned "... :o

On JVC there's no the need to go further what they give to us, otherwise, to pretend more, we're going to introduce unusefull and unwanted artifacts ...
That is your opinion. Can you allow us other guys to have our own opinion, please? I want an HD950 with a DI. You don't like DIs, I get that. So you can turn it off. No reason to deny the DI to those of us who want it.

Ok, I'd trade the DI in for a 4th panel. That should make all of us happy...

Highlander_AVS

08-10-09, 11:59 AM

That is your opinion.
Shure it is ;)
Sincerely, as I think, imho, It's too the JVC philosophy and point of view ;)
Going to the Target without tricks :cool:

Can you allow us other guys to have our own opinion, please? I want an HD950 with a DI. You don't like DIs, I get that. So you can turn it off. No reason to deny the DI to those of us who want it.

Ok, I'd trade the DI in for a 4th panel. That should make all of us happy...

Yes, Of course, we're here to exchange our humble opinions ;)

Lawguy

08-10-09, 11:59 AM

I want an HD950 with a DI.

Assuming that the HD950 doesn't have one, if next year's model had native CR of 120k:1 but no DI, would you take that over a PJ with an 80k:1 native CR but 200k:1 with a DI engaged?

gamelover360

08-10-09, 12:05 PM

I think its clear that the JVC's will not have a DI this year.....it would have been leaked or they would tout it among the feature list.

The On off is already good enough, but to me the real questions is the ansi number.

madshi

08-10-09, 12:06 PM

Assuming that the HD950 doesn't have one, if next year's model had native CR of 120k:1 but no DI, would you take that over a PJ with an 80k:1 native CR but 200k:1 with a DI engaged?
All else being equal, if those CRs were true (not just marketing) and if the DI implementation was a good one (Sony, Planar etc), then I'd take the one with 80k/200k:1. I'm a black level junky. And I don't seem to see DI artifacts. Furthermore I expect that with such a high native CR, DI artifacts should be even less visible than with current Sony/Planar etc models.

andrewfee

08-10-09, 12:11 PM

Assuming that the HD950 doesn't have one, if next year's model had native CR of 120k:1 but no DI, would you take that over a PJ with an 80k:1 native CR but 200k:1 with a DI engaged?Assuming 2.22 gamma, once the brightest object in the scene is below 85% grey, the 80,000:1 CR projector with a DI has more contrast.

Lawguy

08-10-09, 12:11 PM

All else being equal, if those CRs were true (not just marketing) and if the DI implementation was a good one (Sony, Planar etc), then I'd take the one with 80k/200k:1. I'm a black level junky. And I don't seem to see DI artifacts. Furthermore I expect that with such a high native CR, DI artifacts should be even less visible than with current Sony/Planar etc models.

It is not the artificats (although they will be there) . . . it is the things that you never get to see or see but with less intensity! These kinds of issues will only crop up through a scene by scene comparison of different projectors. Still, I'm with you. Add it. I don't have to use it. One qualification: Don't let it slow down development of ultra-high native CR.

Highlander_AVS

08-10-09, 12:15 PM

.... but to me the real questions is the ansi number.

I suppose that ANSI will be natural increased in the 950 due to it's 120Hz core panels implemented to work with FI ;)
A faster commutation helps naturally ANSI number too ;)

ChrisWiggles

08-10-09, 12:16 PM

My point wasn't really about artifacts that a DI may introduce (and they surely will). My point is that when using a DI, you may miss seeing certain information because the DI renders it invisible or not as intense. Everything looks fine except that you are not seeing everything you are supposed to see. I recall lots of posts and pictures on this in the past as it related to Sony's DI. As far as I know, no one has taken one of these current generation DI projectors and put it through the ringer to see what detail is being lost, if any. I know that there are engineering solutions to this issue (gamma adjustments/lamp headroom) but I still lack confidence in DI-given contrast as opposed to native contrast.

See here for description of brightness compression. (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=11796321#post11796321)

You're right, however, if you don't use a DI you're also seeing things not as you are supposed to see, it's just a different tradeoff. When you're not using a DI, you will be miss "seeing certain information" in dark scenes, like black, that will be wrong (or more wrong) if you turn the DI off. You can't only look at what may be affected negatively by the DI in judging the merits of a DI, but also the benefits.

As for the comparison of DI given contrast versus native contrast, this is a false comparison, obviously natively achieving an on/off range is superior to achieving that same on/off range with a DI, nobody argues with that. The fair comparison is the native range of a projector, versus the enhanced on/off range with the help of a DI. That is a more complex question, and each has its own set of benefits, and how much improved the image is and how much is sacrificed depends on how good and how conservative the DI implementation is.

There are some displays with DI implementations that I don't like. There are some that are exceptional and that I like very much. It is fair to be critical, but it isn't fair to characterize a DI as some kind of operation that is only deviating from standard or what "should be seen" because it is also at the same time improving the performance of certain things that can't otherwise be seen properly without it, namely, black, shadow details and instantaneous contrast in low-APL scenes.

Highlander_AVS

08-10-09, 12:22 PM

.... Still, I'm with you. Add it. I don't have to use it. One qualification: Don't let it slow down development of ultra-high native CR.

Again with you ;)

It could become an Alibi to slowdown, and uniformate to others competitors ... :(

Anyway, imho the DI absence must be "understood":
For a part of you it's a "missed feature", for me ( i think JVC ) and others, it's a "Prestige" :cool:

madshi

08-10-09, 12:24 PM

it is the things that you never get to see or see but with less intensity!
I don't think that a good non-agressive DI implementation has to have that problem. E.g. how about this:

(1) When the brightest pixel in a frame asks for 100% brightness, the DI is turned off completely for that frame.
(2) When the brightest pixel in a frame is less than 100% brightness, the frame is remapped (basically it's artificially spread so that after the remap the brightest pixel shows 100% brightness again) and the DI closes down accordingly.

I don't know if that is how good DI implementations work these days. But such a DI implementation would not have *any* side effects - except that the black level could pulsate/pump, if the brightness of the brightest pixel varies a lot from frame to frame. But with such a high native contrast, the black level pumping shouldn't be too bad, I guess. This is where the high native CR helps making the DI artifacts less visible...

Highlander_AVS

08-10-09, 12:39 PM

...This is where the high native CR helps making the DI artifacts less visible...

Ok.. but why we must accept and asking for a "trojan horse" of artifacts even if less visible on high native CR machines ??? :confused: ;)

I remember on RS20 that with first firmware I got a really good compromise avoiding a great part of clippings ;) BUT Clippings stay There !! Few, but stay there, and I and others didn't had peace until Firmware fix in order to eliminate undersaturations and clippings :cool:

Lawguy

08-10-09, 01:22 PM

You're right, however, if you don't use a DI you're also seeing things not as you are supposed to see, it's just a different tradeoff. When you're not using a DI, you will be miss "seeing certain information" in dark scenes, like black, that will be wrong (or more wrong) if you turn the DI off. You can't only look at what may be affected negatively by the DI in judging the merits of a DI, but also the benefits.

As for the comparison of DI given contrast versus native contrast, this is a false comparison, obviously natively achieving an on/off range is superior to achieving that same on/off range with a DI, nobody argues with that. The fair comparison is the native range of a projector, versus the enhanced on/off range with the help of a DI. That is a more complex question, and each has its own set of benefits, and how much improved the image is and how much is sacrificed depends on how good and how conservative the DI implementation is.

There are some displays with DI implementations that I don't like. There are some that are exceptional and that I like very much. It is fair to be critical, but it isn't fair to characterize a DI as some kind of operation that is only deviating from standard or what "should be seen" because it is also at the same time improving the performance of certain things that can't otherwise be seen properly without it, namely, black, shadow details and instantaneous contrast in low-APL scenes.

Your points are well taken but I think you are responding to an argugment that I didn't make. I already stated several times that DIs have been a net benefit to certain models. I just question whether JVC should spend the time and money developing a DI when it aparently has no problem giving us real usuable native contrast increases year after year. I don't think I am characterizing DIs in general as anything, especially the DI that doesn't exist that is under discussion here.

It is a rather curious thing I think for people to be demanding a DI in D-ILA, when DIs began to be used in DLP and LCD only after those technologies had claimed most of the native contrast increases that were easily possible. I guess I see a DI as another way of saying "we give up" at least when it comes to native contrast. If we saw one on a JVC, I would be afraid that we would be in for a long hard road ahead.

Daniel Hutnicki

08-10-09, 01:23 PM

I wonder what percentage of JVC`s projector sales ar our entities upgrading from earlier JVC projectors

From what I see its not that big of a percentage. There are three groups, the guys who buy the projector just to see what its like and then sell it, those have to upgrade and those who are first going in or upgrading from an older machine. This would be the biggest group

Lawguy

08-10-09, 01:24 PM

(1) When the brightest pixel in a frame asks for 100% brightness, the DI is turned off completely for that frame.
(2) When the brightest pixel in a frame is less than 100% brightness, the frame is remapped (basically it's artificially spread so that after the remap the brightest pixel shows 100% brightness again) and the DI closes down accordingly.

If you can, read Greg Roger's review of the Planar in which he describes how its DI works. It is similar to how you describe.

millerwill

08-10-09, 01:27 PM

Lawguy

08-10-09, 01:31 PM

How likely do you guys think it is that JVC will have led (or laser, which I think is less likely) illumination implemented next year? That, to me, would be the only new development that will re-awaken the upgrade bug.

I am hoping that this new higher end JVC that will be released is laser powered but I think that the chances are small that it will be.

millerwill

08-10-09, 01:34 PM

I am hoping that this new higher end JVC that will be released is laser powered but I think that the chances are small that it will be.

By 'next year' I meant coming out in the fall of '10, i.e., a year from the upcoming CEDIA.

Highlander_AVS

08-10-09, 01:35 PM

Yeah ...
I too, think that first we will pass through 1 or 2 generation of LED machine before to have a JVC Laser machine ... :(

Daniel Hutnicki

08-10-09, 01:37 PM

I dont see JVC as leader in technology. Its not a negative at all, some companies like to be the first one to rush out with a technology and others like to see it more perfected before they release it.

Highlander_AVS

08-10-09, 01:37 PM

By 'next year' I meant coming out in the fall of '10, i.e., a year from the upcoming CEDIA.

My "bird" told me not before 2011 ... :o

Highlander_AVS

08-10-09, 01:43 PM

andrewfee

08-10-09, 01:43 PM

Going back to the 80k with an iris vs 120k without question that was posted, I put this image together which will hopefully explain things better for people that are completely opposed to the idea of a dynamic iris.

The dimmer the brightest pixel is in the scene below 85% grey, the greater the contrast difference between the two projectors would be.

<image removed due to mistakes>

If the contrast of the projectors are the same (e.g. a JVC at 80k:1 with an iris vs one without) you're already gaining 11% contrast when the brightest pixel in the scene is only 95% grey. By 75% grey you have doubled the contrast at 2.22 gamma.

I don't think anyone here would disagree that a higher native on/off contrast ratio is better than the same contrast ratio achieved with an iris. Native on/off CR is far better than contrast achieved with the use of an iris.

My argument is that any projector, no matter how high its native contrast ratio is, would benefit from the use of a dynamic iris.

80,000:1 contrast is great, but there's still plenty of room for improvement beyond that.

madshi

08-10-09, 01:44 PM

I just question whether JVC should spend the time and money developing a DI when it aparently has no problem giving us real usuable native contrast increases year after year.
It may make sense for JVC to milk us customers by slowly raising CR year after year and making us all upgrading all the time. But you and I are not JVC employees and we probably don't have JVC stock, either (at least I don't). So I'm having trouble understanding your point of view. What makes sense for JVC or not is not of much interest to me. I want 1 million to 1 native CR. Now. For free. No, seriously. Of course it's great that JVC is improving native CR all the time! But adding a DI on top would make the JVC projectors even more attractive to me (quite a lot).

If you can, read Greg Roger's review of the Planar in which he describes how its DI works. It is similar to how you describe.
Great! So why would such a DI result in what you described as: "it is the things that you never get to see or see but with less intensity" ?

Of course if you compare:
(1) a projector with 10k/50k native/dynamic CR
(2) a projector with 50k native CR

It is obvious that (all else being equal) the projector (2) will produce a better image. But that is *not* what we're talking about here. We're talking about comparing:

(a) a HD950 with 80k:1 native CR
(b) a HD950+ with 80k/200k:1 native/dynamic CR

If you compare (a) and (b), why would there by any scene in any movie where there are things that you never get to see with projector (b) which you do see with projector (a), or with less intensity? I don't understand that...