Back to the talking of my TV
Ive messed with SBRT so much and its still at 31
and im still having the problem
thing is, i was having the same problem on my pc recently and instead of turning up the brightness i turned up the gamma and it fixed it completley, maybe ive just been messing with the wrong setting

Well I bit the bullet, gathered my courage and read over most of the kv-30hs420 service manual for safety precautions.

After which I removed the back and took a look at the magnets. Surprisingly the one sony had in the corner of question was losing its grip from the sticky tape and nearly hanging off.

I repositioned it and purchased some new mounting tape.

Viola corner geometry is fairly exact now:) Well as much as it could be on a crt.

Well I bit the bullet, gathered my courage and read over most of the kv-30hs420 service manual for safety precautions.

After which I removed the back and took a look at the magnets. Surprisingly the one sony had in the corner of question was losing its grip from the sticky tape and nearly hanging off.

I repositioned it and purchased some new mounting tape.

Viola corner geometry is fairly exact now:) Well as much as it could be on a crt.
Nice work!

Maybe someday I'll get up the nerve to take a look inside my set. Right now I like things as they are and have no need.

Thanks,

And it was stressful just to do so. I think I mayhave just been overly worried though as I took as many precautions as I could.

Even locked my poor cats in the bathroom until I was done;)

I have a KV-30HS420 and by mistake set my "Full" and "Wide Zoom" modes to look the same. What settings are "Wide Zoom" specific so I can attempt to restore it for viewing 4:3 material less stretched?

Thanks.

Can anybody explain the different effects between UBOF and SBOF, I know UBOF interacts with the brightness control but it seems SBOF does as well. I was just wanting to find out what the SBOF is supposed to be controling.

Thanks,

And it was stressful just to do so. I think I mayhave just been overly worried though as I took as many precautions as I could.

Even locked my poor cats in the bathroom until I was done;)
I don't think you can be too cautious working around the yoke of a crt. You did right.

That's funny about the cats! ;)

I have a KV-30HS420 and by mistake set my "Full" and "Wide Zoom" modes to look the same. What settings are "Wide Zoom" specific so I can attempt to restore it for viewing 4:3 material less stretched?

Thanks.

Hi, these are my default settings for "Widezoom" mode:

HSIZ: 47, VSIZ: 38.

There you go!

I ran into the same problem by the way when i started twidling with overscan, i did'nt realize that whatever i change the size of VSIZ to it affects the FULL Mode and WIDEZOOM MODE as well.

Can anybody explain the different effects between UBOF and SBOF, I know UBOF interacts with the brightness control but it seems SBOF does as well. I was just wanting to find out what the SBOF is supposed to be controling.See first page of attached document here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7046048&&#post7046048).

Well I bit the bullet, gathered my courage and read over most of the kv-30hs420 service manual for safety precautions.

After which I removed the back and took a look at the magnets. Surprisingly the one sony had in the corner of question was losing its grip from the sticky tape and nearly hanging off.

I repositioned it and purchased some new mounting tape.

Viola corner geometry is fairly exact now:) Well as much as it could be on a crt.

Awsome work, I was wondering if my convergence problem (in the same corner by chance) might not be a similar problem since my hs420 was a display model. I was curious about taking off the back, while the power was off, just to see if all the magnets and thier tape is in good condition. To do something like that, unplugged and all, is there anything special I need to know about other than unscrewing the back? Is there a link to the pertinent pages of the service manual?

Good job again!

Hi guys,

I purchased a KD-34XBR970 a week ago and I think I've become obsessed with correcting the picture geometry. I'm about ready to shell out the $350 to have it ISF calibrated just so I can go back to watching movies and playing Xbox 360 games instead of going into service mode for hours every night.

My question is, what setting would be causing these lines to bend at 45 degrees past the 5% overscan line on the bottom of the screen? I've fooled around with most of the geometry settings in 2701D and 2702D. I suppose I can use VPOS or VSIZE to move the bend lines off the screen so they are not visible. I hope this isn't a symptom of a problem?

Thanks,

Awsome work, I was wondering if my convergence problem (in the same corner by chance) might not be a similar problem since my hs420 was a display model. I was curious about taking off the back, while the power was off, just to see if all the magnets and thier tape is in good condition. To do something like that, unplugged and all, is there anything special I need to know about other than unscrewing the back? Is there a link to the pertinent pages of the service manual?

Good job again!
You just need to be extremely cautious of the components that can take you out. If you are new to this you might Google for some info on the risks of working on crts.

Please be careful. ;)

IMHO I would be extremely cautious working inside a tv set, it's just too dangerous of a risk just for some minor geometry touchup.

IMO i would just leave it alone, it's not worth your life just for some minor geometry issues.

Trust me, i've heard some pretty horrible horror stories of people getting killed working with high voltage parts in a CRT.

Some things are better left alone, Geometry will never be perfect on a CRT, it's just the nature of the beast.

Hi guys,

I purchased a KD-34XBR970 a week ago and I think I've become obsessed with correcting the picture geometry. I'm about ready to shell out the $350 to have it ISF calibrated just so I can go back to watching movies and playing Xbox 360 games instead of going into service mode for hours every night.

My question is, what setting would be causing these lines to bend at 45 degrees past the 5% overscan line on the bottom of the screen? I've fooled around with most of the geometry settings in 2701D and 2702D. I suppose I can use VPOS or VSIZE to move the bend lines off the screen so they are not visible. I hope this isn't a symptom of a problem?

Thanks,I have the same issue with my new 970. I have not gotten to put a test pattern up on it yet, but I noticed something while watching NUMB3RS. Mine isn't as dramatic as your's is. Mine is about a 45 degree deflection of about 2mm.

Hello, everyone and good night.

I own the KV30HS420

I'm curious about a couple things that I need some help with.

1. I used DVE to center up my screen as best I could, needed to actually reposition it in 480p. I thought it looked tons better, but now it seems that my Xbox 360 image is pushed off to the right. I don't have anything a the moment to capture the image, but let's say I'm running GRAW, well, the visor is fully visible on the left, but it's not on the right.

If I try to adjust this with HSIZ and HPOS, it moves to the right but it looks like it's squished on the right side. What I mean is it looks like the blue outline of the CrossCOM visor is pressed up against the right side of the screen.

I really wish I was able to show you the screen, to better help me explain. I usec the DVE overscan to fix the screen in SD and then teak it in 480p

2. I read on another site a few months back about a seperate Service Menu default listing for different serial numbered VEGA's. Does anyone know anything about this, or know what I'm even talking about?

Sorry if this has been asked but it's late and i'm exhausted. Any help would be greatle appreciated. Thank you.

I own the KV30HS420. I used DVE to center up my screen as best I could, needed to actually reposition it in 480p. I thought it looked tons better, but now it seems that my Xbox 360 image is pushed off to the right. If I try to adjust this with HSIZ and HPOS, it moves to the right but it looks like it's squished on the right side.I may be replying in the false belief that the 30HS420 has the same (or very similar) service menu as my 34XBR960. If that's not the case please disregard the following comments.

With the XBR960 there are TWO sets of adjustments for basic horizontal and vertical geometry tweaking: one for the "background raster", and a second for the "foreground image overlay". Each of these two sets of adjustments has, itself, two sets of tweaks... one set for the horizontal dimension and one set for the vertical dimension.

All told, "background" adjustments are for horizontal and vertical size and position (that's four service menu items), and similarly "foreground" adjustments are also for horizontal and vertical size and position (that's four more separate service menu items). Eight service menu items in total, four for horizontal and four for vertical.

You've only mentioned your 30HS420 adjustments to HSIZ and HPOS, but nothing else (at least for horizontal). That would suggest you've adjusted the "background raster" in the horizontal dimension but not the "foreground image overlay" in the horizontal dimension... assuming that there is the second set of service menu items on your set which I'm alluding to. If that's the case, perhaps working on the two "foreground" tweaks as well as the two "background" tweaks you've already addressed might accomplish what you're looking for.

You may have done much research already, but if you read this post (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6723557&&#post6723557) and all of the further posts that are referenced by it, you will find instructions on adjusting BOTH SETS OF TWEAKS, to properly reposition and resize both the vertical and horizontal dimensions for both background and foreground. Again, my posts deal with the XBR960 so my apologies if that discussion does not apply to the HS420.

If the service menus are similar then if you follow the recipe described by my series of posts you will get into the 2170D-1 service menu group to adjust VPOS and VSIZ (vertical position and vertical size of the background raster), the 2170D-2 group to adjust HPOS and HSIZ (horizontal position and horizontal size of the "background raster"), and the MID3 group to adjust VDHP, VDHS, VDVE, and VDVS (horizontal position, horizontal size, vertical position, and vertical size, respectively) of the "foreground image". MID3 is used to manipulate the "foreground image" on top of the "background raster" for the 720p/1080i inputs... at least on the XBR960.

If MID3 isn't present, or doesn't work, you might look at MID1. This group (which I believe has DDHP, DDHS, DDVE and DDVS instead) was present on some lower-end or older 34XBR, XS and HS models so MID1 might be what they used on the 30HS420.

Hope this is helpful, and not totally irrelevant for the 30HS420.

The 30HS420, although similar to the XBR, has a slightly different SM.

I noticed that some settings in the 30HS420, namely convergence and audio, work differently.

The 30HS420, although similar to the XBR, has a slightly different SM.

I noticed that some settings in the 30HS420, namely convergence and audio, work differently.
If you learn of any additional differences between the Service Menus of the HS420 versus the XBR960, would you be willing to post the areas in which there are differences? Not necessarily the minute details, just the areas in general?

I haven't spent a lot of time in the service menus of the two sets, since I don't own a HS420. I can only compare when I am in a store that has the two sets on display *and* I know the owner of the store.

The convergence settings are not available on the HS420, and also some audio settings (sub-bass, low-bass, etc. for the subwoofer have no effect on the HS420, since it does not have a subwoofer built into the set.)

Hi Guys,

My question got lost in the HS420 debate so I'll try again. (Have two weeks left on my return policy so have to figure this out pretty quick.) What setting would be causing the picture to bend at 45 degrees past the 5% overscan area on the bottom of the screen? Or is this a magnet/hardware issue that is off topic?

See attached photo on original post above.

Thanks

Hi Guys,

My question got lost in the HS420 debate so I'll try again. (Have two weeks left on my return policy so have to figure this out pretty quick.) What setting would be causing the picture to bend at 45 degrees past the 5% overscan area on the bottom of the screen? Or is this a magnet/hardware issue that is off topic?

See attached photo on original post above.

Thanks
Can I assume you've used a test pattern to adjust for overscan?

Hi Guys,

My question got lost in the HS420 debate so I'll try again. (Have two weeks left on my return policy so have to figure this out pretty quick.) What setting would be causing the picture to bend at 45 degrees past the 5% overscan area on the bottom of the screen? Or is this a magnet/hardware issue that is off topic?

See attached photo on original post above.

ThanksWas the TV like this when you got it? If so, consider the return/replacement.

Your problem looks like a geometry issue. Vertical size/position/linearity………. There will not be just one SM adjustment to correct the problem.

If you adjusted for overscan and created the problem, then there are hours of work to correct the geometry. ISF Calibration will not cover the geometry corrections for the basic fee.

I didn't notice the problem right away so I can't say if I was the cause or not. The settings I changed were VPOS. VSIZ, VCEN, VPIN, HPOS, HSIZ, HCNT, MPIN, PIN. I was too nervous to mess around with anything else. If I even thought I acidently hit a wrong key on the remote, I powered off and started over again. I only changed the values plus or minus a few numbers from there defaults and I made sure I wrote everything down. The top and sides are fine, only the bottom 1/4 inch is bent/distorted.

Did you follow rule #1 "write down all factory/initial settings before making any changes"?

Simple fix is to adjust VPOS and/or increase VSIZ till it is gone

Did you follow rule #1 "write down all factory/initial settings before making any changes"?

Simple fix is to adjust VPOS and/or increase VSIZ till it is gone

Well, I broke rule number one. I only wrote down the settings I changed. :eek:

Factory VSIZ was 36 and I adjusted it to 30 so the first set of lines on the test pattern were visible. I only saw the glitch when I was adjusting VPOS and I went up to far. So it's not visible with my current settings. Out of sight, out of mind. I was just worried it was the signs of a failure that was going to increase with time.

I think I'm going to quit fooling around with SM and just try to enjoy my TV. Changing settings to fix geometry gets to be too addicting. Better stop now!

Thanks guys :D

I was carefully correcting some basic geometry problems on my 3 week old KD-34XBR970 and had something interesting happen. Everything was going fine and then I started getting a loud, constant sound along with a test pattern displayed on the screen.

I tried turning off the TV and unplugging the set for a few minutes but the test pattern and sound return after turning the power on. I can still get to the Service Menu though.

I just got off the phone with Sony support; a service person will be out Wednesday. Anyone ever experience this phenomenon?

Awsome work, I was wondering if my convergence problem (in the same corner by chance) might not be a similar problem since my hs420 was a display model. I was curious about taking off the back, while the power was off, just to see if all the magnets and thier tape is in good condition. To do something like that, unplugged and all, is there anything special I need to know about other than unscrewing the back? Is there a link to the pertinent pages of the service manual?

Good job again!

Make sure you follow the safety precautions in the service manual. Touching the wrong things once you have the chassis open can do more than hurt "hurt" you. ;)

Even turned off and unplugged the set _can_ still maintain enough of a charge to cause you to have a "very" bad day.

kilaen,

First, enter the Service Mode and immediately press the MUTE. O.K., now navigate (backwards) to the QM menu (light blue letters) and scroll up on sub menu to PTRN. This value should be set to 0 in order to remove the pattern on the screen. There is ALWAYS an extremely loud tone that is generated when you bring up an internal test pattern. Be sure to MUTE (or VOL to zero) before entering this menu.
Hope this helps.

Regards,
Bryan

kilaen,

First, enter the Service Mode and immediately press the MUTE. O.K., now navigate (backwards) to the QM menu (light blue letters) and scroll up on sub menu to PTRN. This value should be set to 0 in order to remove the pattern on the screen. There is ALWAYS an extremely loud tone that is generated when you bring up an internal test pattern. Be sure to MUTE (or VOL to zero) before entering this menu.
Hope this helps.




That worked great thank you! I have no idea how it came on in the first place, I haven't touched anything from the "blue text" area.

Perhaps I'll keep the service appointment next week and have them professionally adjust the geometry etc.

I have a KV30HS420 with the slanted lines at the bottom of the screen like in post #1512. Is there a way to fix?

I've read through this thread and it's been very helpful for me in my own calibration, but I can't help but think that a general walkthrough post would be a godsend for a lot of people. I would imagine that this is fairly intimidating if you're not a very technical sort.

Hi, I've done some things with the Sony SM for my XBR960, but I can find the info in the SM to straighten the black bars the way they need to be. On both side when a 4:3 picture comes up the bars are wavy and then when 16:9 stuff comes up with a bar across top or bottom of the picture the bar is not straight at the ends either. Can anybody help me with this situation?

Back to the talking of my TV
Ive messed with SBRT so much and its still at 31
and im still having the problem
thing is, i was having the same problem on my pc recently and instead of turning up the brightness i turned up the gamma and it fixed it completley, maybe ive just been messing with the wrong setting

so im going to put sbrt at 29 and figure out which one is the gamma one, if anyone knows.. let me know cause i dont have time to go back reading right now..

ALSO, something exploded inside my TV, everything still works fine... dont know what the heck it was..

Hi guys,

I purchased a KD-34XBR970 a week ago and I think I've become obsessed with correcting the picture geometry. I'm about ready to shell out the $350 to have it ISF calibrated just so I can go back to watching movies and playing Xbox 360 games instead of going into service mode for hours every night.

My question is, what setting would be causing these lines to bend at 45 degrees past the 5% overscan line on the bottom of the screen? I've fooled around with most of the geometry settings in 2701D and 2702D. I suppose I can use VPOS or VSIZE to move the bend lines off the screen so they are not visible. I hope this isn't a symptom of a problem?

Thanks,

I just wanted to provide some feedback for this issue. My 30XS955 has the exact same problem, but it only shows up in 480p.
I don't know if its fixable or not...it might just have to be like that. (which sucks, I know)

I just wanted to provide some feedback for this issue. My 30XS955 has the exact same problem, but it only shows up in 480p.
I don't know if its fixable or not...it might just have to be like that. (which sucks, I know)

I might have missed a post, but it looks like 4 people with 3 different Sony TV models have this glitch. I'm surprised all the ISF and tech guys on here haven't seen this before. It would be nice to know if it's a SM setting or a magnet/electronics issue.

I might have missed a post, but it looks like 4 people with 3 different Sony TV models have this glitch. I'm surprised all the ISF and tech guys on here haven't seen this before. It would be nice to know if it's a SM setting or a magnet/electronics issue.

You have really got a bad attitude...!

Why don't you just read the post - search if you like - get smart. Then it will be OK to ask stupid questions - I don't think you will, unless you really are stupid.

You have really got a bad attitude...!

Why don't you just read the post - search if you like - get smart. Then it will be OK to ask stupid questions - I don't think you will, unless you really are stupid.

Do you get irritated easily? They have meds for that you know. If my initial question was so stupid and easy to answer, how about enlightening all of us that have this glitch.

Let me rephrase my last post so I don't offend the easily irritated. Since a few people have this problem on multiple Sony TV models, I concluded with my "stupidity" that this wasn't isolated to my TV, or the KD-34XBR970 in general. Since a few members with tech backgrounds responded to my initial post and didn't know what could cause this glitch, then it's surprising to me that this would be a new Sony glitch. I already did what I needed to do to fix this, I moved the bad geometry off the screen so it's not visible. Problem solved for me. I was responding to the post below. Wasn't meant to freak anyone out

"I just wanted to provide some feedback for this issue. My 30XS955 has the exact same problem, but it only shows up in 480p.
I don't know if its fixable or not...it might just have to be like that. (which sucks, I know)"

You have really got a bad attitude...!

Why don't you just read the post - search if you like - get smart. Then it will be OK to ask stupid questions - I don't think you will, unless you really are stupid.
WOW!

I surely didn't see any attitude in this. I must have really missed something. :confused:

I'd bet ptchristensen mistakenly quoted the wrong post, I certianly didn't see anything wrong with mikeinfargo's post, either ...... I'd even respond to it if I thought I had anything that would be helpful or informative to add, but I do not ...

Do you get irritated easily? They have meds for that you know. If my initial question was so stupid and easy to answer, how about enlightening all of us that have this glitch.

Let me rephrase my last post so I don't offend the easily irritated. Since a few people have this problem on multiple Sony TV models, I concluded with my "stupidity" that this wasn't isolated to my TV, or the KD-34XBR970 in general. Since a few members with tech backgrounds responded to my initial post and didn't know what could cause this glitch, then it's surprising to me that this would be a new Sony glitch. I already did what I needed to do to fix this, I moved the bad geometry off the screen so it's not visible. Problem solved for me. I was responding to the post below. Wasn't meant to freak anyone out

"I just wanted to provide some feedback for this issue. My 30XS955 has the exact same problem, but it only shows up in 480p.
I don't know if its fixable or not...it might just have to be like that. (which sucks, I know)"

So you don't even have a problem anymore - you are just speaking on behalf of the others with the same problem, without sharing with them how you solved it.

How noble of you...!

So you don't even have a problem anymore - you are just speaking on behalf of the others with the same problem, without sharing with them how you solved it.

How noble of you...!



I already did what I needed to do to fix this, I moved the bad geometry off the screen so it's not visible. Problem solved for me.


Sounds like Mike shared with us how he "solved" his problem, if ptchristensen would like more details concerning mike's above info, he should read the exchange between Mikeinfargo and GlenC on the last page ....

So you don't even have a problem anymore - you are just speaking on behalf of the others with the same problem, without sharing with them how you solved it.

How noble of you...!


Look PTCHRISTENSEN! I've been on this board for like a week, asked a question about one freakin issue with my new TV. I had three choices, exchange it, have Sony service it, or live with it. I followed the advice from another member that gave me a simple answer and didn't come off like a jack-arse like you. I still have the problem, I just don't' see it. If I violated the forum rules, I would hope a moderator would have said something or moved my post. The way I see it, you don't make the rules around here or have a say in what is an acceptable question or not. The funny thing is, you seem to be the one with the attitude, you obviously haven't read the last dozen posts, and you come off like you know everything but you haven't given any help on the subject. So I'm officially nominating you for the Biggest Douche in the Universe! :p

Sorry for wasting forum space with this. I'll bow out now. Thanks to the other members for backing me :)

Look PTCHRISTENSEN! I've been on this board for like a week, asked a question about one freakin issue with my new TV. I had three choices, exchange it, have Sony service it, or live with it. I followed the advice from another member that gave me a simple answer and didn't come off like a jack-arse like you. I still have the problem, I just don't' see it. If I violated the forum rules, I would hope a moderator would have said something or moved my post. The way I see it, you don't make the rules around here or have a say in what is an acceptable question or not. The funny thing is, you seem to be the one with the attitude, you obviously haven't read the last dozen posts, and you come off like you know everything but you haven't given any help on the subject. So I'm officially nominating you for the Biggest Douche in the Universe! :p

Sorry for wasting forum space with this. I'll bow out now. Thanks to the other members for backing me :)

There is nothing wrong with your question - it's your attitude. And your last mails clearly shows that I was right in my assumption.

Your original mail start with the usual "I might have missed a post...", which clearly means that you have made no efford to either read-through or search the thread on your issue. If you had you would have found dozens of answers.

Instead you proceed to taunt "all the IFS and tech guys", and express your surprise that no one has the answer. Ignoring that we have put the answer out there several times.

I will gladly repeat answers I have given, if I feel that the user has put some work into understanding his issue. Or if he comes right out and says that he doesn't understand the thread, or doesn't have the time to read-through the posts.

But you sir, have a bad attitude...!

Trust me, i've heard some pretty horrible horror stories of people getting killed working with high voltage parts in a CRT.

.


If ya gotta go, go with a smile :)

There is nothing wrong with your question - it's your attitude. And your last mails clearly shows that I was right in my assumption.

Your original mail start with the usual "I might have missed a post...", which clearly means that you have made no efford to either read-through or search the thread on your issue. If you had you would have found dozens of answers.

Instead you proceed to taunt "all the IFS and tech guys", and express your surprise that no one has the answer. Ignoring that we have put the answer out there several times.

I will gladly repeat answers I have given, if I feel that the user has put some work into understanding his issue. Or if he comes right out and says that he doesn't understand the thread, or doesn't have the time to read-through the posts.

But you sir, have a bad attitude...!
I really don't think it's fair to assume that the text "I might have missed a post..." automatically means a poster has committed the sin of blowing off the thread lazily. I agree that most who post like this have indeed spent no time researching their problem properly. I happen to have seen other posts by this poster and I believe the assertion of a "bad attitude" is just off the mark. It's easy to see how the subsequent posts, by all involved, went over the top.

This whole thing comes as a shock to me as I have respect for both players in this unfortunate correspondence. Maybe we can all move on and put this behind us?

Cheers! ;)

Hello,
I reset my TV like Bwill did in 1080i mode ie video 7, and just like him everything went nuts. I did the reset to user defaults. Ive been lurking in this thread for the last year and I was posting to Ken before this thread started on Agoraquest, and I'd appreciate some help. The TV makes a horrible popping noise on video 7 and scares the hell out of me. It's accompanied by flash spots on the sceen along with the last partial screen that has become distorted over the power on and offs and a strange offest red field. The frames also seem to be very slow and some kind of rough static is displayed in the background at about a frame a second.

I remember Ken had a problem like this he didnt post about till long after it happened and I havent been able to find it. I think it involved leaving the TV off for over a week but I could be wrong my middle term memory isnt what it used to be.

Maybe there should be a disclaimer at the beginning of this thread not to do this since really I don't believe we did anything wrong, and these posts are so far along in the thread that others will not see them(just trying to help others). I mean its only logical that it should work, but now I see that they use these guns on multiple screens or at least the firmware. The factory defaults are not the defaults stored in the rom. Thing about my situation is is I think the flashing and popping is damaging my screen. I mean it has to be those kinds of noises only come from large voltage jumps....... It's Loud.

call a sony tech or tv tech, it's for your own safety, don't take chances..life is too short.

Hello,
I reset my TV like Bwill did in 1080i mode ie video 7, and just like him everything went nuts. I did the reset to user defaults. Ive been lurking in this thread for the last year and I was posting to Ken before this thread started on Agoraquest, and I'd appreciate some help.Okay, but you make it tough! There are lots of folks who are eager to help, but NONE of us can read minds! So when you or anyone else asks a question, give required specifics and use *enough* words to describe the problem so we don't have to ask questions or research previous posts just to figiure out what you're talking about.

"I reset my TV ..." What TV? What model? How did you reset it? Are you talking about service mode or not?Maybe there should be a disclaimer at the beginning of this thread not to do thisLook at my article #02, post #3, for that exact caution, and it has been repeated over and over again. This is, of course, about the *service-mode* reset.I mean its only logical that it should work, but now I see that they use these guns on multiple screens or at least the firmware.What are you talking about?

call a sony tech or tv tech, it's for your own safety, don't take chances..life is too short.Dude, just because you are frightened of electricity doesn't mean every one alse should be! The 34kV wiring is very well protected, and you can even touch the wires without consequence -- but I still wouldn't! The red wire that goes from the high-voltage transformer at the right-rear of the chassis up to a rubber-covered "button" on the side of the CRT is the only thing you really should stay away from: Try not to bump the wire with your hands or a tool, and don't touch the CRT within 3" of the rubber-covered "button" -- unless the set has been off for a half-hour or so.

The electricity is not going to leap out at you and spark you to death! Obviously I'm promoting wisdom and understanding, here, over paranoia. (The greater danger is that, if you do get shocked, your arm or hand + tool is liable to twitch uncontrollably, and you will break something -- like the neck of the CRT!)

If you pull the back off the set to fool with the magnets, just stay away from the red HV wire and don't drop any metal tools onto any circuit boards. Pull the plastic rear cover *straight* off without banging it against anything inside.

The point is leave that stuff to the professionals, why you encourage people to open their sets and work on their tv is beyond me not only is it extremely dangerous but you could also wreck the tv if you don't know what your doing.

So NO, i'm against your encouragement of opening tv's for the safety of others.

I've heard some very atrocious horror stories of people getting killed doing such a thing.

I've been electricuted a few times, and it does'nt feel good beleive me!

To mikeinfargo and others with the "45º bend-at-the-bottom" problem: The primary reason for overscan is to hide defects at the outer limits of the raster, unlike with computer monitors, which display everything you send to them. My 36XS955 doesn't have your problem, but other garbage and nonlinearities are present in that area, and at the left and right, too. So the overscan hides it, no problem. If you are pushing for distortion-free zero-percent overscan, IMHO you are asking for aomething the set was not designed to deliver.

That said, I wonder what causes that particular distortion. It is as if the timing of some internal sync pulse is a bit off. If it were my set, I can think of a few parameters I might tweak a bit to see what happens, being careful to backtrack if matters get worse or the picture disappears or goes bonkers.

You might possible experiment with 2170P-2: CLPP~SNYP (#7-11).

Also in MID1: #1-DVPH, #9-MDVP.
In MID2: #2-DRVP.
In MID3: #2-VDVE, and any of #4-11: VDVO~VFRV.

A quick look at the deflection parameters in 2170D doesn't give me any clues.

Keep your eye on that "bending" region on-screen, and click a parameter's value up or down just one notch to see if anything improves. If nothing changes, click back immediately to the old settings. Same if the picture screws up terribly. If you want to revert to your last-saved settings, press 8 (screen > "READ") then Enter.

The usual cautions apply. Write down a log of what you are doing, especially the old settings. Don't click any three-button combinations or you might Reset the TV accidentally, not good! Go slowly. If you have pressed a button that puts "INI" or "RESET" onto the screen, STOP and wait for it to clear. If you discover something useful, post about it here.

Don't try to access any channels with the number buttons -- they don't work that way in service mode. You have to use the two up/down channel buttons.

Read Post #3 in this thread for navigation particulars.

And, please, please, don't start or persist in any personal insult-wars here, or NO ONE will help you.

I've heard some very atrocious horror stories of people getting killed doing such a thing.Yes, and driving to the store, and crossing raging rivers on logs, and bicycling anywhere near cars and trucks. So? We''re adults, here. Pick your level of risk, and go with it! I am not recommending that people take the back off their sets -- just note certain cautions if you choose to do it, that's all. Knowledge and care trump fear every time! If YOU are not comfortable with the process, then by all means don't do it.

What I try to tell others is to avoid a casual approach to the inner workings of a set with the back off. If one gives the set its due respect, and follows the key safety rules then there's a good chance of a very good outcome.

I worked for a computer company for 8 years in Silicon Valley where we actually assembled our own crt monitors. It was along this (manufacturing) line that most accidents occured. People had been given more than adequate safety training but the day-in, day-out montony of doing the same thing every day tended to cause folks to be way too casual around these tubes. The injuries ranged from small shocks to emergencies involving an ambulance trip to the hospital. It always boiled down to stupid mistakes. People trying to work too fast and not paying sufficient attention to what they were doing.

I would not advise anyone to work around the tube unless they had an electronics background, or relatively similar experience, and took the proper precautions. Electricity is not something to be afraid of, but it demands the utmost respect.

I am not recommending that people take the back off their sets -- just note certain cautions if you choose to do it, that's all.

Good i'm glad we can agree on something! and leave it to the professionals which none of us are.

Actually Ken doesnt an increased vertical front porch fix his problem? With a corresponding decrease in the back porch maintaining frequencies?(also christensen you were right that mikeinfargo is a lazy kid but at the same time that isssue was never addressed in the thread so for others why not just help him) Ken I would assume that we are talking about reseting the service mode and you guys are big on others searching old posts why not you? You guys completely ignored Bwill when this happened to him. Also I been lurking in here for a year let's assume I'm on the level and not have contempt for everyone, ok.

CAUTION: AVOID keys 7 and 9, as they are part of a key-sequence that can reset all of the deflection or image-decoding settings back to a "factory-newborn" state. If you think you’ve hit any key by accident, STOP. In a few seconds it will revert back to SERVICE mode, as you’ll see at the right side of the screen. All dangerous key-sequences are combinations of *three* keys, by the way.

That is not enough in my opinion it does not accurately describe the pitfall it more indicates to me on a fresh reading that you will lose your work. Its also probably not a factory newborn state its probably a factory newborn state for the boards(circuit boards whatever you wanna call them Im more familiar with PC boards) not for the TV. Which leads to your other question.


Quote:
I mean its only logical that it should work, but now I see that they use these guns on multiple screens or at least the firmware.
What are you talking about?

What I'm talking about is I think they use these guns and or boards and or firmwares in multiple screens and the firmware must be set to recognize your screen therefore when you reset it you cant just go in and tweak mid values until you have some other values and its not version values and id values theres something more to it because I entered them and I still have the same problem(yes I wrote them all down along the excel spreadsheet with the service code definitions on them) the 480I is fine as it probably displays fine on all sets(even after a reset) but anytime I switch to an HD input I get problems just like so many on agoraquest have described.(run-on sorry reads how you can imagine me saying it)

I have an old KV32HS500 not like that information is going to help anything

Mat who said anything about the back of the TV being off.

I had my set at a SONY authorized service center for geometry problems. They replaced an entire board. I got my TV back yesterday and things are worse. I guess the dealer did not do any geometry adjustments.
My question is when SONY authorized dealers do geometry adjustments, do they have specs and instructions from SONY as to how to procede, step by step
??

Mat who said anything about the back of the TV being off.

You spelt my name wrong:D

You have to read way in the beginning of the thread, to adjust some of the focus, and convergance adjustments with the permaloy magnets you need to take the cover off.

Fred all they have is the service guide and some expensive tools(or they are supposed to), Honestly, I trust my own eye and time and the fact i have drive cause its my screen to do it myself. Aside from my most recent problem I can do the rest. My screen was in good condition with Ken's help of course along with others. Just get the service manual read the thread and its not so bad its just getting in the head of the guys that wrote this manual. I think Ken said on another thread it runs linux and some of the combinations are complex but the rest are very beneficial and easy to do.

Matt, I read that the day that happened. Remember the guy with the japanese tv tech? I pmed him and got that techs number. I know what the best magnets are. You just dont know who your messing with do you.

From Post #3: "CAUTION: AVOID keys 7 and 9, as they are part of a key-sequence that can reset all of the deflection or image-decoding settings back to a "factory-newborn" state. If you think you’ve hit any key by accident, STOP. In a few seconds it will revert back to SERVICE mode, as you’ll see at the right side of the screen. All dangerous key-sequences are combinations of *three* keys, by the way."

That is not enough in my opinion it does not accurately describe the pitfall it more indicates to me on a fresh reading that you will lose your work. Its also probably not a factory newborn state its probably a factory newborn state for the boards(circuit boards whatever you wanna call them Im more familiar with PC boards) not for the TV.I stated that caution as clearly as I could without using language that talks down to anyone, and I stand by it. Further, that warning has been repeated by myself and others over and over again throughout this thread. The consequences of resetting the TV are so cataclysmic for any one set that I can't imagine the insane amount of work required to just get it back to the way it was before the "accident."

Now, along comes someone who ignores the cautions, presses buttons without thinking or whatever, and resets the TV, then comes onto this forum and says, "My Bad, please help!"

There is no way on earth I can conceive of restoring someone's set via this forum; that's why the cautions have been repeated and stated in plain language. Having done my bit, offered lots of help, and advised due caution, I personally will not get involved in coaching someone in this global restoration of their set, sorry. What form do you think this "help" would take? A couple weeks of forum-message or email back-and-forth without my ever seeing the set? Various data charts have been posted, and one can try the default settings first, then make additional changes that have been suggested in this forum. Or call a service tech and pay for them to fix it. Or not. Getting further involved post-accident is not how I want to spend my time contributing (further) to this forum. I will leave it to others.

There you go with that contemp again we are not little kids. It didnt say anything close to cataclysmic and its not that bad you just dont know the ans. Ken you do not know everything and I'm not an idiot, ok. There are techs that arent paid that well that know all this too. This is not rocketscience or nuclear power.

Fred all they have is the service guide and some expensive tools(or they are supposed to), Honestly, I trust my own eye and time and the fact i have drive cause its my screen to do it myself. Aside from my most recent problem I can do the rest. My screen was in good condition with Ken's help of course along with others. Just get the service manual read the thread and its not so bad its just getting in the head of the guys that wrote this manual. I think Ken said on another thread it runs linux and some of the combinations are complex but the rest are very beneficial and easy to do.

Matt, I read that the day that happened. Remember the guy with the japanese tv tech? I pmed him and got that techs number. I know what the best magnets are. You just dont know who your messing with do you.


FYI there is no such thing as best magnets, tech's just use permaloy magnets to alighn the convergance.

You just dont know who your messing with do you :confused: Can you enlighten me a bit? not sure what that is about.

so im going to put sbrt at 29 and figure out which one is the gamma one, if anyone knows.. let me know cause i dont have time to go back reading right now..

ALSO, something exploded inside my TV, everything still works fine... dont know what the heck it was..

wierd green blob appeared but dissappeared later... and if someone could answer my question

wierd green blob appeared but dissappeared later... and if someone could answer my question

The green glob is either a magnetic interferance issue or a color purity problem. Do you have any unshielded speakers next to the tv?


As for your darkness issue i don't know what to tell you, i pretty much told you everything i know, either something in your video chain is clipping blacks or you may have a faulty 360 or cable.

wierd green blob appeared but dissappeared later... and if someone could answer my questionOn bright area? Intense electron flow in very bright area of picture heats up the aperture grille, warping it, causing pink or green splotches. When the brightness subsides, the color blob disappears. I can make it happen easily on my 36" XS955, so I reduce the brightness for certain test patterns. Normal video rarely causes the problem. Worst for me is very bright video from top to bottom at far left or right. On a total-white screen, a slightly greenish area forms to the left of center and disappears when the brightness is reduced.

I can't imagine how an aperture-grille tube this big can be even this glitch-free! Three cheers for precision manufacturing!

irhxcbcziuzxs, SurfingMatt27 -- Please, you need to download and examine this chart (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7046048&&#post7046048) so you can see all of the service-mode parameters that affect black level and brightness. You guys keep talking like SBRT is "the One" and that some value of SBRT is "Right." It's not and there isn't! Several settings *interact* to determine black level, and until you understand this, you will stay confused. SBRT=31 just happens to be in the middle of its range and has no special importance.

irhxcbcziuzxs - If you want to keep hammering on this one special problem you have, you might consider starting another thread that focuses on it. If your set is under warranty, ferchrissake get a tech to come out and look at it!

ive pretty much determined that SBRT isnt the problem, which setting it may be, im not sure... maybe some gamma setting as i had the same problem on my PC and gamma fixed it up in a jiffy, but as ive been away for awhile i forgot what settings do what, and generally i have a lack of time...

I have a 30HS420, and it's really hard to get a good viewing level for the 360 games without setting GAMM to a high level. If you set SBRT or UBOF too high it will wash out the blacks, and I don't really feel like raising the Contrast/Picture setting in the user menu.

exactly, my sbrt is washing out the blacks but im not getting the shadow detail and still having black crush only the black crush is washed out,

but this is what everything is at right now...

sbrt - 31
ubof - 3
ucof - 5
gamm - 2

There you go with that contemp again we are not little kids. It didnt say anything close to cataclysmic and its not that bad you just dont know the ans. Ken you do not know everything and I'm not an idiot, ok. There are techs that arent paid that well that know all this too. This is not rocketscience or nuclear power.
So, it's not rocket science, and you're not a little kid. And even low paid techs know this stuff. So how come you can't figure it out?

Being a year-long lurker amounts to absolutely nothing.

Here's what it says on the first post of this thread:

"...the undisciplined or impulsive (you know who you are!) may wish to avoid any of this."

If you don't know what you're doing, stay out of the Service Menu. You pay your quarter and you take your chances. No one held a gun to your head. You went barging into your SM and screwed-up your tv. And now you want to take others to task and complain you weren't adequately warned?

Take responsibility for your own errors. If something here isn't good enough for you, then take some time to improve on it. Try making a contribution. Anybody can complain. :rolleyes:

Look, I fixed it. I know what you know, and now I know more. You have no room to talk down to me. :)
Also, I think I should thank the Sony Service Manual, and the guy with the pdf from the xbr and all the definitions. You guys would deserve some credit, but you have cashed it all out in arrogance and contempt so you dont deserve a thing. See, when mike said you dont own this forum, he should have proved it by proving that you cant do anything to stop him making you look like you truly are. A script kiddie that went leet over one thread in one of the largest forums on the net. I mean really control yourself, and stop making yourself out to be a joke.

come on boys, get pissed crank out the Frank Sinatra & get some Karaoke going

Will

Newbie here.
Can anyone direct me to a thread concerning just the color and
brightness settings on the new 34" Wega XBR Super Fine Pitch?
I'm pretty sure it's the KD-34XBR970, though it does say Super
Fine Pitch. HAs that controversy been resolved? Anyway, I know
the basics of Drive and Bias controls as well as some of Gamma
and Red Push. I found the consumer 'Monitor' button and turned
off the Red push and have to run the tint way over on 7 Red to
get faces to begin to look non-yellow. I set up a friend's 35" JVC
square flat tube TV last year with Menu access found on the internet. I finally got the black and white linear throughout all
the gray tones and got reasonably good fleshtones from the
horrible Comcast analog cable. DVDs look superb.
So, for this other friend, does anyone have a final set of tweaks
for getting the B&W linear while also achieving decent flesh tones? I've heard mention of Green push. Ugh. I haven't watched
the TV enough to see the gamut of Blue/Greens, which many new
CRT sets are pushing to mimic the color of plasmas.
Thanks to anyone who can direct me to just the color/gamma
settings. It's too dark and the black and white is purply and the
flesh tones are jaundiced at best, bileous at worst...thanks!

I found the discussions. Thanxabunch!

For some reason it is not saving my setting. After I change the settings, I press mute and power off, then power back on. I see that my settings have all been reverted.

What's the problem?

For some reason it is not saving my setting. After I change the settings, I press mute and power off, then power back on. I see that my settings have all been reverted.

What's the problem?

mute + enter, before power off/on

lol Thanks. I was going to kill myself (extreme exaggeration).

Looks like ISF calibration can wait a little while.

exactly, my sbrt is washing out the blacks but im not getting the shadow detail and still having black crush only the black crush is washed out,

but this is what everything is at right now...

sbrt - 31
ubof - 3
ucof - 5
gamm - 2

Try raising the _CUT settings...I have found they are the best way to increase shadow detail without washing the image out. Of course, when you raise the _CUT settings, you have to decrease the corresponding _DRV settings to compensate. Every two increases in the _CUT settings requires about 1 decrease in the _DRV settings.

I'm very intrigued by the gamut question as it relates to HDTV.
The original NTSC standard used a green phosphor with much less
yellow and only plasma screens come close to this standard today.
They actually overshoot the standard, which renders many greens
and blue greens in deeper hues than are achievable on CRT sets.
My thinking on the out-of-the-box settings on the Sony is that
they were emulating the plasma gamut by tinkering with the
other values to bring up the deep greens and turquoises.
Does anyone else see this? It's not that the CRT phosphors are
deficient for the most part. They produce a much better yellow
and render flesh tones more readily than plasmas. But the
plasmas have a 'new look' which emphasizes turquoise and
emerald greens. It would be great if Sony would publish a set of
values that would restore true color fidelity to these sets!
Out of the box, I use 'Monitor' to kill the red push and then move
the tint control to 7 on the red side to kill the green face tones.
White type embedded in a blue background looks pink, which
makes me wonder about the color temp -- even when it's set to
'cool' which is supposed to be the bluest. I have yet to go into
the service menu, since I'm still reading the posts for courage.
I was naive enough to think that all HDTVS would meet a certain
and exacting standard the way computers do. HA!

Try raising the _CUT settings...I have found they are the best way to increase shadow detail without washing the image out. Of course, when you raise the _CUT settings, you have to raise the corresponding _DRV settings to compensate. Every two increases in the _CUT settings seems to equal about 1 decrease in the _DRV settings.

anyone else got anything to say on this?

I have the service manual.
I guess I was looking to see if anyone had an inside track as to SONY's suggested step by step instructions on how to bring back the factory geometry and guidelines to look for in doing so.

As of this posting I am waiting for an "authorized" SONY dealer to come here again and try to make my geometry close to factory original. Frankly, I don’t think he knows any more than what I have read and tried in here.

Lastly, I hope you guys don’t take this forum as a competition to see who knows the most. That will surely ruin this nice forum.

Hello all,
I have asked this a few times before, but let me elaborate. I am trying to determine if I am having an issue with the color decoder chip in my set. I see a lot of color banding in most all of the sources I input (DVD via XBOX 360 and a cheap Sony player both using component output, XBOX 360 games, and standard cable.) Since I don't own a reference grade DVD player, how can I determine if there is an issue with my set. As I understand it, most of the color banding issues come from the DVD player and not the source material and the pros in the mastering studio use CRTs because they are generally capable of displaying more colors than other display types.
To explain further as to why I think it may be my set, when I enter the Service Menu QM pattern menu # 10 I am seeing 1/8" discreet steps instead of (what I believe should be) a smooth gradient.
I am also seeing a fair amount of random noise when I scrutinize the screen. Maybe this could be related to a voltage or dirty power issue. (Just an extremely uneducated guess.)
Again, I have inquired about this in the past and the sound of crickets was maddening! :rolleyes:
Please, any input would be greatly appreciated!

Bryan

As I understand it, most of the color banding issues come from the DVD player and not the source material and the pros in the mastering studio use CRTs because they are generally capable of displaying more colors than other display types.Yes, but only with an analog signal path all the way to the CRT.
To explain further as to why I think it may be my set, when I enter the Service Menu QM pattern menu # 10 I am seeing 1/8" discreet steps instead of (what I believe should be) a smooth gradient.What you are seeing seems normal and the best digital TV will do. Each primary color is digitized into 256 steps, and your computer in "high color" does the same. 1/8" bands X 256 = 32" -- about right for your screen. The 1/8" banding you are seeing for primary colors is in the source, inherent in digital video.

When the banding gets coarser, you have something else going on. If I fiddle with the "Brightness" and "Contrast" controls in my Panasonic S97 DVD player, I immediately see coarser banding, as color levels have to be dropped or doubled to change the response curve (a crude resampling). So I never mess with those, but use the TV's adjustments instead, which are not acccomplished digitally.

Thanks for the response, KenTech! Very enlightening! I must ask then, do you experience banding to one degree or another with all your sources? What must it be like for people with 60" screens? :eek:
Will HD-DVD remedy this issue? I assume not since even an internal gradient seems to be displayed in 24 bits/256x3 steps. I am not a huge videophile, but I can't believe that this is the first time I have heard that our displays are only in 24bit depth.
Yes, at times the banding can vary up to 1" wide if the color difference in a wide swath of sky varies just a bit. The variation in color seems to be more than a few steps of separation in brightness.
As you can see, I'm having a hard time swallowing that this is something everyone experiences. :confused:
So there it is, I'm stuck. Well, It's good to know that I DO just have to live with it.
Thanks again,

Bryan

Will HD-DVD remedy this issue? I assume not since even an internal gradient seems to be displayed in 24 bits/256x3 steps. I am not a huge videophile, but I can't believe that this is the first time I have heard that our displays are only in 24bit depth.
Yes, at times the banding can vary up to 1" wide if the color difference in a wide swath of sky varies just a bit. The variation in color seems to be more than a few steps of separation in brightness.
As you can see, I'm having a hard time swallowing that this is something everyone experiences.I have just attempted to read several documents and Web pages on HDTV definitions, and I am having a hard time identifying any information about bit depth. 8 bits per color is one of the digital-video standards, but broadcast HDTV may be 10 bits (1024 levels) per color. High-end rendering software boasts 12-bit internal processing, but I believe it has to be sampled down to meet the HDTV standard, which may be 10-bit per color, indeed. That doesn't say that your *source* isn't 8-bit. That 1/8" banding is visible on the #10 test pattern could be evidence that the *test pattern* is being *generated* at 8 bits. (I have exactly the same TV chassis as you do.)

On DVDs with subtle gradients of brightness/color, banding is always visible, unless it's very grainy, which acts like a dither. Example: In Monsters Inc., when Sully puts the kid to bed, flickering candlelight on the wall makes banding pretty obvious, and I think it's in the DVD, as my players all render it exactly the same. (I think DVD is 8-bit.) Same with ocean backgrounds in Finding Nemo -- a torture test for banding.

So my word on this certainly is not definitive, and I'm having a hard time clarifying it for myself. Maybe someone else has the answer to this one: What IS the bit depth for the HDTV standard?

In regular watching of HDTV broadcasts, my attention is not called to any banding. Real-world images tend to mask it.

One reason I mentioned 8 bits is because the digitized SD video from a digital video camera (DV-25) or analog/digital converter (say a Canopus ADC-100) has 8-bit luminance values. White is 255, black is 0. But HDTV may be much better.

I'm very intrigued by the gamut question as it relates to HDTV.
The original NTSC standard used a green phosphor with much less
yellow and only plasma screens come close to this standard today.
They actually overshoot the standard, which renders many greens
and blue greens in deeper hues than are achievable on CRT sets. <snip>There are some good sites online that explain how the gamut of the different technologies relate to the defined digital-TV standards. Here is a good example. There are others.

http://www.displaymate.com/shootout.html

KenTech,

Thanks again for your answers and enlightening investigation into this subject.
I have been known to be excruciatingly critical of how things perform. Seems I expect too much from my current equipment. Not that I am disappointed, this is by far the BEST picture I've seen from a set. It just opens the door for the enrapturing tendrils of "the perfect picture" to take hold of my easily distracted thoughts!

Regards,

Bryan

p.s. I'm glad this thread has had some time to cool-down. I was a little afraid to come back after the tone that was set a week ago. Cheers everyone!

Maybe someone else has the answer to this one: What IS the bit depth for the HDTV standard?


Know what you mean, Ken - some of this stuff can be difficult to dig up and "Decipher" properly ....

If I am reading some of the below correctly, I think it is 8bit(chrominance or luminance) by the time it gets to us via ATSC/MPEG2 encoding at the "source"(a broadcaster, for instance).

So, I believe this offers a fair summary, which AFAIK is correct :

This ( http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ISSUES/what_is_ATSC.html ) says :

"For ATSC MPEG-2 the colors are represented as Y, Pr, and Pb, which are defined as:

Y = Red+Green+Blue (Y is also called intensity or luminance and is sometimes depicted as white.)

Pr = Red-Y

Pb = Blue-Y (Pr and Pb are the color information, or chrominance.)

There is only one Pr and Pb pixel for every four Y pixels. Thus 720p has 1280*720=921,600 Y pixels plus 230,400 Pr pixels plus 230,400 Pb pixels.........

Although the color information is at a lower resolution, human eyes can rarely sense this at the correct sitting distance ........

The Y information is encoded as an 8-bit number. Pr and Pb likewise are 8-bit numbers. The monitor will eventually convert YPrPb into RGB. The number of bits per visible pixel averages out to 12, not 24...... "

:end quote

-------------------------------------------------------------------------


There are some good sites online that explain how the gamut of the different technologies relate to the defined digital-TV standards.


Also, for those interested, Detailed info on ATSC standard(used for DTV/HD in U.S.) in the form of downloadable(free) PDF white papers can be found here :

http://www.atsc.org/standards.html

The document labeled "A/54A "ATSC Recommended Practice: Guide to the Use of the ATSC Digital Television Standard" is probably the one I use or refer to most often - Here's a direct link to it :

http://www.atsc.org/standards/a_54a.pdf

Back to "HDTV color" ... On Page 22, Section 5.2.2 of the A54 document it says :

:quote

"5.2.2 Precision of Samples
Samples are typically obtained using analog-to-digital converter circuits with 10-bit precision. After studio processing, the various luminance and chrominance samples will typically be represented using 8 or 10 bits per sample for luminance and 8 bits per sample for each chrominance component. The limit of precision of the MPEG-2 Main Profile is 8 bits per sample for each of the luminance and chrominance components."

:end quote

Note on above : I wouldn't think A/D conversion would be needed for a signal that is already "digital" such as a Network HD feed.

Section 5.2.1.3 (also on page 22) also has some info that may be of some interest here concerning color and ATSC :
:quote

5.2.1.3 Colorimetry
For the purposes of the Digital Television Standard, “colorimetry” means the combination ofcolor primaries, transfer characteristics, and matrix coefficients. Video inputs conforming to SMPTE 274M and SMPTE 296M have the same colorimetry; in this document, this will be referred to as SMPTE 274M colorimetry. Note that SMPTE 274M colorimetry is the same as ITU-R BT. 709 Part 2 colorimetry. Video inputs corresponding to ITU-R BT. 601-5 should have SMPTE 170M colorimetry. ISO/IEC 13818-2 allows the encoder to signal the input colorimetry parameter values to the decoder. If sequence_display_extension() is not present in the bit stream, or if color_description is zero, the color primaries, transfer characteristics, and matrix coefficients are assumed to be implicitly defined by the application. Therefore, the colorimetry should always be explicitly signaled using sequence_display_extension(). If this information is not transmitted, receiver behavior cannot be predicted.

In generating bit streams, broadcasters should understand that some receivers will display 480-line formats according to SMPTE 170M colorimetry (value 0x06) and 720- and 1080-line formats according to SMPTE 274M colorimetry (value 0x01). It is believed that few receivers will display properly the other colorimetry combinations allowed by ISO/IEC 13818-2. Legacy material using SMPTE 240M colorimetry should be treated as if it used ITU-R BT. 709 Part 2 colorimetry.

:end quote

Hope some of the above is of some interest ...

As the owner of a XBR970 I've just purchased a couple of day ago, I have submerged myself into this thread, as fascinating as it is long, so I am still in the process of reading it throughout.

But in the meantime, maybe someone could help me with a couple of doubts:

- first, is there any way to go to a "printer friendly" version of the whole thread? It would be much easier if I could carry with me a hard copy of this on paper that I can read when I ride the bus and at times like that.

- and secondly, I have searched throughout the entire thread (both manually and using the "search" feature) and, as far as I have been able to determine, the only pdfs for service menus are those attached to the very first post. Does that mean that I can use those to enter the service menu of the XBR970?

Thanks in advance, and I will surely be back after getting up to date with the thread.

There have been a number of attachments added throughout this thread. You may just have to read everything to locate them. As far as I know, the access code to enter the SM works for the 970 just fine.

Please - only go into the SM if you intend to be diligent about recording the default values BEFORE adjusting anything. If you do not intend to do this then it would be better if you stay out of the SM.

(3) I revisited all of my LANDING settings from #0 thru 6. #6, TESW, turns off the corner compensation of #0-3, LT-RB, so you can choose settings for EWSP and ENSW that give a most-even color for the screen. Put up a white or gray full screen (my black crosshatch-on-gray will do), not too bright, stand back a ways, set TESW to 1, and set EWSP and ENSW for best evenness. Then turn TESW back to 0 and tweak LT-RB for best corners -- minimum color, minimum darkening. (Don't stare; move your eyes around.) I improved mine. Something a tech said to me reminded me that there *are* set-orientation adjustments, and EW and NS look like east-west and north-south to me. I ended up with different settings than I had before and a more-even screen.

Ken,

I made some of these adjustments, and was able to improve evenness a little; however, the top to bottom left and right sides are a slightly redder white than the top to bottom center of the screen. Is there anyway to further improve upon this??

Thanks.

There have been a number of attachments added throughout this thread. You may just have to read everything to locate them. As far as I know, the access code to enter the SM works for the 970 just fine.

Please - only go into the SM if you intend to be diligent about recording the default values BEFORE adjusting anything. If you do not intend to do this then it would be better if you stay out of the SM.

Thank you for your prompt reply.

I scanned throughout the entire thread page by page, making a search on each of them for XBR970, but I guess I missed them. I will try harder.

But, from your words, I understand that somebody posted an access code specific for the XBR970, is that right? Or should I use those on the first page?

As for going into the SM, thanks for your sensible warning, but don't worry. This is not the first TV set I tinker with, and I always write down every value before touching anything, so I can go back to factory settings if needed, of course.

Thank you for your prompt reply.

I scanned throughout the entire thread page by page, making a search on each of them for XBR970, but I guess I missed them. I will try harder.

But, from your words, I understand that somebody posted an access code specific for the XBR970, is that right? Or should I use those on the first page?

As for going into the SM, thanks for your sensible warning, but don't worry. This is not the first TV set I tinker with, and I always write down every value before touching anything, so I can go back to factory settings if needed, of course.
Oops!

You will see no posts with attachments with references to the 970. I sure wish I'd seen that sooner and maybe could have saved you some time. :confused:

You can most probably assume that everything in here that refers to the HS420 series, and probably even the XS/XBR series sets applies to the 970. The HS420 models are closest to your 970.

By all meams, use the access code from the first page to get into the SM. Glad to hear you've done this before. ;)

Cheers!

KenTech and Others...

I would really appreciate it if you would review the thread referrenced below and clarify things for those of us participating in the thread. Essentially, the discussion is centered around what the Sony crt HD sets are doing with SD signals. Is everything really scaled to 1080i, or do these sets actually deliver 480p and 960i via DRC and other built-in technlologies?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=682879

Please weigh-in over in the referenced thread, and here is also if you like.

Thanks a bunch guys!

2170D-1 and 2170D-2 are universal raster or "picture frame" settings? (except where noted in the manual) 2170D-2 -- #3 -SLIN adjust stretch of picture horizontally ?
MID1 #0 thru 5 is universal, and # 8 through 12 is picture size on the raster and can be adjusted to viewer preference?
MID3 is mainly 1080i and 720p adjustments?
MID2 is mainly 480i adjustments?


Has anyone posted information on MID3 #'s 4 through 11?

Has anyone posted information on 2170D-3 #'s 1 and 2 ?
When I follow the manual to center the raster I get a mirror effect on the right side of the raster. Is this normal?


Thanks in advance. :)

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=682879
Please weigh-in over in the referenced thread, and here is also if you like.I just posted my observations here. (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7771970&&#post7771970)

I guess I would prefer if that discussion didn't "leak" back into this service-mode thread.

I just posted my observations here. (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7771970&&#post7771970)

I guess I would prefer if that discussion didn't "leak" back into this service-mode thread.
I heartily agree.

This thread is one of facts, figures, thoughtful analysis and reasoned inquiries.

Let's keep it that way. ;)

And thanks for lending your insights to the other thread.

2170D-1 and 2170D-2 are universal raster or "picture frame" settings? (except where noted in the manual) 2170D-2 -- #3 -SLIN adjust stretch of picture horizontally ? . . . MID1 #0 thru 5 is universal, and # 8 through 12 is picture size on the raster and can be adjusted to viewer preference?One day I tried to figure all this out, and I took notes.

It looks like 2170D-2 #0-5 are universal, indeed. #6 is a luminance-color delay setting, and #7 is a "Y-S" delay setting, whatever that is. #8-11 seem very similar to four items in 0-5, above, but the scope of the settings can be adjusted per several frame types (VGA, "Others," etc.).

SLIN isn't a general stretch adjustment but varies the s-curve compensation for the dimension it affects (I forget; vertical?)
MID3 is mainly 1080i and 720p adjustments?
MID2 is mainly 480i adjustments?That seems to jive with my notes.
Has anyone posted information on MID3 #'s 4 through 11?Yes. They seem to be esoteric pulse and timing parameters, with abbreviations for phase-locked-loop, width (pulse), start, stop, field reverse, etc. I doubt that tinkering with these are to any benefit, as they are likely adjusted with instruments connected.
Has anyone posted information on 2170D-3 #'s 1 and 2 ?2170D-3 #0-6 control the blanking "shutters" that prevent the electron guns from spraying the sides of the CRT where reflected energy could cause glow and contrast reduction. You have to turn these off to confidently center a raster and picture or even adjust overscan.

#0-HBLK and #3-VBLK are the "master switches" for this function, horizintal and vertical, respectively. The other four parameters are the widths of the blanking shutters (blanked areas). Higher is wider.

A normal procedure for adjustment would be: Turn off the blanking entirely with the switches. Do your centering and overscan adjustments. Then turn the blanking back on, and adjust the four shutters until they just creep into the visible raster; then back off the settings a bit until they disappear off the edge of the screen. Now the electron beams are cut off beyond the edge of the phosphor area.
When I follow the manual to center the raster I get a mirror effect on the right side of the raster. Is this normal?Are you being careful to distimguish between positioning the raster and positioning the picture on the raster? In an orthodox adjustment process from the service manual, 2170D-2 #0-HCNT centers the raster (scanned area) on the CRT. Then #1-HPOS centers the picture (video frame) on the raster. You can push the video frame so far to the right or left that it appears to "wrap" back on itself. Is this what you mean?

Note that some of the size adjustments in MID1 leave one edge stationary while extending the other edge, unlike the actions in 2170D-1 and -2. This can be confusing if you don't see it at first.

I hope this is some help. I concentrated on this one afternoon in the winter and got it right for my set, then have left it alone for months. So these are not fresh memories, and my notes are somewhat cryptic.

On my TV--a 30xs955--I notice two vertical bars a few inches in from both the left and right sides of the screen. They are only really visible against a very bright image, and they appear as slightly brighter bars extending the entire height of the screen. What happens is, when text is scrolling across the screen or the camera pans, the picture seems to curve when it hits those two spots. It's like the entire image dips down and comes back up once it's past those bars. Does that make sense? What could cause something like this, and can it be fixed?


My 30XS955 does the exact same thing. It's bad enough where I want to smash the CRT in with a hammer and call it a day.

In all seriousness, when I first got my set it had a major color purity problem on the left side of the screen. There was a HUGE yellow spot that you could see on anything that wasn't dark. I called a Sony-authorized tech out to come fix it, and he did, but shortly thereafter I noticed the TV having this effect extremely pronounced in approximately the same area that had the yellow problem. I think the tech just attached some magnets to the back of the set to fix the color problem but in the process totally f'd up the geometry.

If you look at a crosshatch pattern you can see that the boxes in the pattern become smaller (horizontally compressed) where the picture appears to "dip." Logically I thought that adjusting SLIN would help alleviate the problem, and it does (but does not eliminate it), but at the expense of round objects looking like footballs on the sides of the screen. This of course is unacceptable and I'm at my wits end since my 90-day in-home warranty has expired on the set, and am strongly debating just shelling out the cash to get a competent tech to look at it.

I had the back of my set off to see if I could tell if the tech had attached a glob of magnets to the affected area but I got gunshy after staring at the set's innards for a few minutes.

Since the tube is still under warranty, would it be worth the effort to try and sort this out with Sony? Is there some service mode setting I may be unaware of that would help?

I apologize for the long read.

alphacorvus,

Welcome to AVS!

I'm curious, did you buy your set new, or was it possibly open box or a refurb? Just curious.

While I can't help you with possible SM adjustments, there are many others here that will contribute to those possibilities.

Welcome to AVS!

I've been a lurker for several months now, but thanks for the welcome. In that time I think I've read nearly every post in this thread.


I'm curious, did you buy your set new, or was it possibly open box or a refurb? Just curious.

Brand new, in box in October 2005. I probably should have exchanged it right away after I noticed it, but when you nearly kill yourself placing a TV that weighs more than you onto a TV stand you get reluctant to move it again :D. And from what I remember originally, the color problem was the only issue...which isn't something I thought was going to be a big deal.

More and more I think it's something that a tech is going to have to adjust physically, rather than anything that can be achieved in the SM.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rasdock
On my TV--a 30xs955--I notice two vertical bars a few inches in from both the left and right sides of the screen. They are only really visible against a very bright image, and they appear as slightly brighter bars extending the entire height of the screen. What happens is, when text is scrolling across the screen or the camera pans, the picture seems to curve when it hits those two spots. It's like the entire image dips down and comes back up once it's past those bars. Does that make sense? What could cause something like this, and can it be fixed?

Every single Sony HS, XS or XBR960 I have seen has these; it must be a by-product of Sony's design. When I first go my set, I thought it could be a defect, but when I went back to the stores to look at floor models, they could be always be found. I think that a lot people simply never notice them, and/or perhaps they are less pronounced on some sets. Mine are fairly minimal, and don't bother me much. When the set is well calibrated, it serves to minimize them.

BTW,

I recently made what I feel is big discovery for setting white/greyscale. When adjusting the _DRV and _CUT settings, start with jacking up RDRV and RCUT to a maximum of 63, then only adjust GDRV, BDRV, GCUT and BCUT settings - leaving RDRV and RCUT at 63 each. This will result in a need to lower overall contrast a bit. Furthermore, the closer the corresponding GDRV/GCUT and BDRV/BCUT are to each other, the better the picture looks. In other words, play around with the settings until your GDRV and GCUT settings are the same value; do same with BDRV and BCUT. I'm not sure why this is the case, but the whole picture just comes together perfectly when the corresponding value for each color are the same or very near the same.

Following these two guidelines has given me by far the best picture I have seen with my set (30XS955)

I'm using:

RDRV = 63
GDRV = 31
BDRV = 27
RCUT = 63
GCUT = 30
BCUT = 27

I had to play around with it for a long time to get an accurate greyscale. I had settled with GCUT at 31 for a while, but had an ever so slight, tiny green push, which I corrected by lowering it one value.

I highly recommend everyone try this; the results are stunning. Shadow detail is awesome now with zero wash out and deeper blacks. Amazing.

BTW,

I recently made what I feel is big discovery for setting white/greyscale. When adjusting the _DRV and _CUT settings, start with jacking up RDRV and RCUT to a maximum of 63, then only adjust GDRV, BDRV, GCUT and BCUT settings - leaving RDRV and RCUT at 63 each. This will result in a need to lower overall contrast a bit. Furthermore, the closer the corresponding GDRV/GCUT and BDRV/BCUT are to each other, the better the picture looks. In other words, play around with the settings until your GDRV and GCUT settings are the same value; do same with BDRV and BCUT. I'm not sure why this is the case, but the whole picture just comes together perfectly when the corresponding value for each color are the same or very near the same.

Following these two guidelines has given me by the best picture I have seen with my set (30XS955)

I'm using:

RDRV = 63
GDRV = 31
BDRV = 27
RCUT = 63
GCUT = 30
BCUT = 27

I had to play around with it for a long time to get these settings. I had GCUT at 31 for while, but had an ever so slight, tiny green push, which I corrected by lowering it one value. I highly recommend everyone try this; the results are stunning. Shadow detail is awesome now with zero wash out and deeper blacks. Amazing.
I'm curious, what are your values for the following settings in 2170P-4:
RYR
RYB
GYR
GYB

Thanks! ;)

I'm curious, what are your values for the following settings in 2170P-4:
RYR
RYB
GYR
GYB

Thanks! ;)

I'm using:

RYR = 14
RYB = 14
GYR = 6
GYB = 4

I also have my all my gamma values at zero.

Following these two guidelines has given me by far the best picture I have seen with my set (30XS955)

I'm using:

RDRV = 63
GDRV = 31
BDRV = 27
RCUT = 63
GCUT = 30
BCUT = 27

I highly recommend everyone try this; the results are stunning. Shadow detail is awesome now with zero wash out and deeper blacks. Amazing.Are you saying that you have obtained different results than if the settings were similarly in balance for good color and grayscale but were lower. For example, _DRV = 43-27-21 and _CUT = 43-21-24.

I have always assumed that these settings program a linear amplifying system in the video chain, and whether they average high or low doesn't matter because SBRT balances them against the Brightness slider setting. I opted to be in the middle of the range 0-63, and SBRT=29 balances those _DRV and _CUT settings above perfectly for me.

I have assumed that my setting _DRV and _CUT higher and SBRT lower would be exactly equivalent, unless we are runing into a nonlinearity in the video amplifiers that are controlled by these settings. This would be the equivalent of a crude and accidental gamma adjustment! But you've got me curious . . .

BTW, what SBRT are you using to balance this all out. Do you have the Brightness slider centered at 31?

Are you saying that you have obtained different results than if the settings were similarly in balance for good color and grayscale but were lower. For example, _DRV = 43-27-21 and _CUT = 43-21-24.

Yes, this is precisely what I am saying I have discovered.

I have always assumed that these settings program a linear amplifying system in the video chain, and whether they average high or low doesn't matter because SBRT balances them against the Brightness slider setting. I opted to be in the middle of the range 0-63, and SBRT=29 balances those _DRV and _CUT settings above perfectly for me.

Interesting - I have found the SBRT and _CUT settings to not be perfectly linear. For example, when using test patterns for black level, raising _CUT has a significantly reduced effect on washout compared to SBRT. In other words, for the amount of shadow detail increase attained from raising _CUT did not require a significant reduction in SBRT to compensate according to the black level test patterns I'm using with AVIA. It was this discovery that led me to try find an accurate grey scale using higher _CUT settings, which lead to higher _DRV settings as well.


I have assumed that my setting _DRV and _CUT higher and SBRT lower would be exactly equivalent, unless we are runing into a nonlinearity in the video amplifiers that are controlled by these settings. This would be the equivalent of a crude and accidental gamma adjustment! But you've got me curious . . .

Well, I hope you'll give it a try; the results suprised me as well. I have also found that the _DRV and "Picture" adjustment from the main menu are also not perfectly linear. I tried using higher _CUT settings than _DRV settings thinking I could just raise "Picture" to compensate, but it didn't look very good (or anywhere near as good as it looks now). For some reason, the picture just "comes together" best when the corresponding _CUT and _DRV values are the same or very close to the same, and set their highest. Of course, setting greyscale with these restrictions is much more difficult, and takes a lot of patience. Maybe I was just lucky enough to find the combination that met these parameters, but I now believe I have a near perfect greyscale. As previously stated, shadow detail is better than I have ever gotten it, and yet the blacks seem a little bit blacker. You have to see it to believe it - even some of the darkest scenes have depth and shadow detail without any washout.

BTW, what SBRT are you using to balance this all out. Do you have the Brightness slider centered at 31?

I concluded some time ago that the SBRT was the same exact adjustment as the Brightness slider from the main menu, so it seemed that it didn't matter if I centered it at 31 or not. I played with it and found no difference - if I brought SBRT up to 31, I simply had to bring down Brightness to 32. The relationship between the 2 seems 100% linear. My SBRT setting is 23 (23 was the factory setting), and I have Brightness at 40.

[QUOTE=I have always assumed that these settings program a linear amplifying system in the video chain, and whether they average high or low doesn't matter because SBRT balances them against the Brightness slider setting. I opted to be in the middle of the range 0-63, and SBRT=29 balances those _DRV and _CUT settings above perfectly for me.

I have assumed that my setting _DRV and _CUT higher and SBRT lower would be exactly equivalent, unless we are runing into a nonlinearity in the video amplifiers that are controlled by these settings. This would be the equivalent of a crude and accidental gamma adjustment! But you've got me curious . . .[/QUOTE]

Kentech, if you look at those service data listings for the older KD-34XBR2 it shows a non-linear relationship between cut @ 0, cut @ 31 & cut @ 63 !!!
Example:setting cut (r, g or b) to 0=-9dB gain. Setting cut to 31 (mid range) =0dB gain and setting cut to max (63) = +4dB gain.
Looks like the drive settings are almost linear....

Todd

Hi Folks:

I have an older KV36XBR800 (4:3) and have been trying to resolve the corner discoloration issues that alot of people have experienced - my problem is that the service menu for the 36XBR800 is less extensive, and there is no LANDING group to tweak.

I've tried searching the forums as well as this thread with no luck so far.

Does anybody know if I can make changes similar to codes 0-3 in the LANDING group of the 960 on my 800? Or am I just out of luck?

Thanks very much.

Looks like the drive settings are almost linear....

I found that the Drive settings are still significantly non linear, though not as much as the _CUT settings.

I found that the Drive settings are still significantly non linear, though not as much as the _CUT settings.

Take a look at the attached page.
I can't say that all sony DA4/x chassis behave this way.
It may be the red gun running out of steam that causes some of the non linear behavior. I think I noticed red starting to compress as I raised the Rdrv setting up past 55 (mine is at 52). The chart I mention is just how the electronic processing part of the chain may behave not how the actual CRT behaves.
What sort of measurement tools & test discs are you using to confirm your findings.

Kentech, if you look at those service data listings for the older KD-34XBR2 it shows a non-linear relationship between cut @ 0, cut @ 31 & cut @ 63 !!!
Example:setting cut (r, g or b) to 0=-9dB gain. Setting cut to 31 (mid range) =0dB gain and setting cut to max (63) = +4dB gain.
Looks like the drive settings are almost linear....That's not the nonlinearity I was referring to. I was proposing a possible nonlinearity in the instantaneous video voltage response, i.e. how much the screen brightness changes for a 0.2V change in video for (a) dark areas, (b) lighter areas. If this amplifying system does not have a strictly straight-line response and has instead sort of an S-curve, and lowering _DRV and _CUT pushed the video signal lower on that curve, shadow contrast will be lowered. (Contrast = the slope of the curve.) If we try the opposite, pushing the video higher on the curve by running _DRV and _CUT values up to near max, shadow contrast would be sugnificantly increased, and maybe highlight detail would be attenuated -- a "washed out" look. Note again: This is all hypothetical.

I'm not talking about the relationship between the _DRV and _CUT steps and what effect they have on dB of video gain, but how the amplifying system behaves after a setting has been changed. It's this latter effect that would change the appearance of the video onscreen by modifying (in an uncontrolled manner!) the shape of the video-response curve relative to the actual video signal. I am hoping it is linear, and nonlinearity is cotrolled by gamma and a couple other settings. But I can't prove anything. I am very likely to make some tests myself, as I am very curious whether the observations by RWetmore can be confirmed on my set.

It may be the red gun running out of steam that causes some of the non linear behavior. I think I noticed red starting to compress as I raised the Rdrv setting up past 55 (mine is at 52).Your wondering about this makes me ask: Are we under pressure to get the video signal properly "positioned" between cutoff and saturation, both for the CRT and the amplifiers, to make sure the three colors track so as to produce a perfect grayscale? It's not like one can just easily stick a 'scope probe on some signal line to see if there's rounding or clipping of the video. Some of the settings specification in the service manual explicitly refer to 'scope patters and voltages. Maybe this is important, we'll see.

An additional thought: If the response curvature added by the gamma circuits is fixed in position relative to cutoff and saturation, sliding the video signal up and down the curve will change the appearance quite a bit, indeed! We don't know in what order these parameters are applied and how independent they are.

It took me forever to get grayscale right. I thought for a while that I had to solve a yellowish-midtones probles by using a different gamma for the blue channel. Wrong! I hadn't adjusted the _CUT parameters correctly, and another effect had masked the real issue. Now my grayscale is dead-on, and the benefits for picture quality can't minimized. But all of my settings are sort of in the middle of the ranges for those adjustments, something I chose to do because it seemed reasonable and instinctively correct (speaking as an electronics engineer). Maybe I'll learn something really interesting by trying RWetmore's _DRV and _CUT settings philosophy (if that's not too strong a word :) )

It took me forever to get grayscale right. I thought for a while that I had to solve a yellowish-midtones probles by using a different gamma for the blue channel. Wrong! I hadn't adjusted the _CUT parameters correctly, and another effect had masked the real issue. Now my grayscale is dead-on, and the benefits for picture quality can't minimized. But all of my settings are sort of in the middle of the ranges for those adjustments, something I chose to do because it seemed reasonable and instinctively correct (speaking as an electronics engineer).

I remember your setting the gamb setting different Vs the red & blue.
I only recently was able to check my grayscale with a spydertv and using a spreadsheet to do the calculations (see calibration thread). I was not too far off from D65 but it could use a little further tweaking.
I have not done any changes to my Sony set in the last 6 months Since I have been preoccupied with calibrating a new Sharp LCD I have in my bedroom.
The Sony looks so much better in terms of color & depth of image (especially in dark areas) that I just wanted it to be my sanctuary when I'm fed up with the sharp !!!
Now that I have the Sharp with half a viewable picture, I plan to do re-visit the grayscale & color decoder on the Sony !!!
It will be interesting if Rwetmore's ideas will further improve the sony and are those results measurable ???

Todd

Maybe I'll learn something really interesting by trying RWetmore's _DRV and _CUT settings philosophy (if that's not too strong a word )

I hope you do....as I'm quite curious myself to find out why I'm getting these results (or perceived results).

Has anyone else given it a try?

I hope you do....as I'm quite curious myself to find out why I'm getting these results (or perceived results).

Has anyone else given it a try?

Didn't work for me, on my 344XBR960 - I got a heavy red cast

My settings are:

RDRV = 45
GDRV = 31
BDRV = 22
RCUT = 32
GCUT = 22
BCUT = 27

Hey KenTech, I've come across a very interesting discovery. I was having a lot of problems with my games and other sources looking washed out, I figured it had to do with the UBOF so I went ahead and lowered that to 0 with SBRT at 29. I then finally decided to run a Pluge pattern and see if I could solve the problem, the actual problem was that my SBRT was way too high supprisingly enough.It came from the factory at a default of 18, so that's where I started it at during the test pattern and sure enough it was set perfectly. Now all I have to do is adjust the UBOF for individual inputs (cause some are set too high and others are not set at all), my set was manufactured in November of last year so I'm wondering if maybe on the newer versions of these sets some of the default SM settings are pretty close to dead on. Of course some are not, but they're all pretty simple and easy to address. Once again I am using a 30HS420, I just thought that this information might help some who are having a problem with the washed out colors. I'm also interested in how you went about getting your grayscale dead on, I've read this entire post and I've seen that you have taken many different approaches towards this goal I was wondering what the breakthrough approach was. Maybe I missed it somewhere, it gets a little tedious looking through so many posts at times. Also I plugged in some of the settings that you have used on your setup for color and I must say that it brings mine pretty close to perfect. I'll try some more tweaking when I get out of my Visual Basic class today.

It is important to understand that Ken, and others have explained the adjustments and what they do. They have even explained adjustments they have made and the results of those adjustments. No two TVs will end up with all the settings the same.

No two TVs will display exactly the same even with the same equipment connected. The tolerances and design variables in components and continuous revisions in consumer electronics circuit designs make this nearly impossible.

The output signal of a DVD, STB, PC or game box will be slightly different (even with two identical units produced at the same time on the assembly line), the same goes for the TV. There are so many factors that affect settings, especially black level, brightness/sub brightness, that settings one uses will not be right for others. It could be close, or not. I have done a few of the 960s and none of the settings were exactly the same.

While this thread is very informative on the what and how-to, you still need to know what you are doing to get accurate results.

Didn't work for me, on my 344XBR960 - I got a heavy red cast

My settings are:

RDRV = 45
GDRV = 31
BDRV = 22
RCUT = 32
GCUT = 22
BCUT = 27

I wouldn't expect my settings to match from set to set. I would guess that virtually everyone's values for an accurate grey scale would be different using these guidelines. The point was to try get an get an accurate grey scale starting with RDRV and RCUT at 63 each, then only adjusting green and blue, trying to keep the corresponding _DRV and _CUT values as close as possible.

Has anyone tried to do this, succesfully gotten a good greyscale, and then compared the results with their previous settings?

I wouldn't expect my settings to match from set to set. I would guess that virtually everyone's values for an accurate grey scale would be different using these guidelines. The point was to try get an get an accurate grey scale starting with RDRV and RCUT at 63 each, then only adjusting green and blue, trying to keep the corresponding _DRV and _CUT values as close as possible.

Has anyone tried to do this, succesfully gotten a good greyscale, and then compared the results with their previous settings?What color temp are you looking for with this method? Grayscale is the proper balance of Red-Green-Blue (for the desired color temperature) at each luminance level from black to white.

It doesn’t work to just pick a setting for one color cut/drive and do a grayscale. There is an interaction between the cuts and drives. Your method may work at 30IRE and 80IRE, but may be off at 20/70. The art here, is to make the adjustments so the grayscale is uniform (minimal error) D65, from 10IRE to 100IRE, not just at one or two points. Cuts affect black levels and also impact drive settings. Every TV will display a different R/G/B luminance level due to phosphor and electronic variations.

Grayscale, to be uniform and accurate, needs to be done with calibrated measuring equipment. In addition to the test equipment reading the color of the grayscale, it also can/will measure the luminance, to calculate the gamma curve.

What color temp are you looking for with this method? Grayscale is the proper balance of Red-Green-Blue (for the desired color temperature) at each luminance level from black to white.

Well, I'm using the test xIRE thru 100IRE from the AVIA disc for greyscale, which is NTSC, so the color temperature would be D65.

It doesn’t work to just pick a setting for one color cut/drive and do a grayscale. There is an interaction between the cuts and drives. Your method may work at 30IRE and 80IRE, but may be off at 20/70. The art here, is to make the adjustments so the grayscale is uniform (minimal error) D65, from 10IRE to 100IRE, not just at one or two points. Cuts affect black levels and also impact drive settings. Every TV will display a different R/G/B luminance level due to phosphor and electronic variations.

I checked the greyscale in increments of 10 from black to 100IRE. There is virtually no coloration, except that which occurs from the slight uneveness of color purity that, I believe, virtually all of these sets have to some degree. I am aware that _CUT affects black levels, but it is very slight according the black level test pattern I'm using with AVIA. I have calibrated black level with the settings I came up with both before and after repeatedly to confirm.

Grayscale, to be uniform and accurate, needs to be done with calibrated measuring equipment

Or a picky eye that knows what to look for thanks to Ken's method and insights on the subject. Is mine perfect? I doubt it, but I bet it is within an acceptable range of say plus or minus 200 to 250 from 6500. No way to know for sure without a color measuring device, but I feel it is close enough not to justify the expense.

It doesn’t work to just pick a setting for one color cut/drive and do a grayscale.

Well, it seems that with NTSC, Red always has the highest value, which is why I chose it over the other two colors. I assume an accurate grey scale could not be achieved if I started with setting blues (or green) at 63, and only adjusted the values of green and red, for example.

The only reason I decided to try this was because according to my black level test patterns, the _CUT settings increased shadow detail with dramatically less washout than equivalent shadow detail increase achieved by raising SBRT. I was experimenting - that's all. I do not claim this is the "correct" or ideal method for setting greyscale; it seems clear to me that with these guidelines, setting greyscale would be much more difficult and restrictive.

I checked the greyscale in increments of 10 from black to 100IRE. There is virtually no coloration, except that which occurs from the slight uneveness of color purity.... They all might look gray to you, but you really don't know what temperature it really is and how close each one is to the other......

Or a picky eye that knows what to look for thanks to Ken's method and insights on the subject. Is mine perfect? I doubt it, but I bet it is within an acceptable range of say plus or minus 200 to 250 from 6500. No way to know for sure without a color measuring device, but I feel it is close enough not to justify the expense.Doing this visually with out a D65 reference, I would say more like a +/- 1000K and no telling what reference point.

You just need to be comfortable with the colors you are seeing. Can they be adjusted more accurately? probably. Do you need it more accurate? Only you know the answer........

They all might look gray to you, but you really don't know what temperature it really is and how close each one is to the other......

I'm not disputing this, but I don't see any coloration and the white looks pure white.

Doing this visually with out a D65 reference, I would say more like a +/- 1000K and no telling what reference point.

Well, I'd be willing bet it is much closer than this. As good as what a color measuring device can achieve, no. Even if a color measuring device confirmed it was accurate, I would still consider it to be somewhat lucky, and not a result of the eye being as good as the colorimeter.

You just need to be comfortable with the colors you are seeing. Can they be adjusted more accurately? probably. Do you need it more accurate? Only you know the answer........

I'm not looking for comfortable looking colors. I'm looking for unnatural coloration and/or slight pushes in the red, green, or blue direction. If one is persistant and anal enough, I believe they can get pretty close to 6500.

They all might look gray to you, but you really don't know what temperature it really is and how close each one is to the other......This matters much less than professional calibrators want you to believe. The human eye is adaptive and sees as white a considerable range of color temperatures. If the viewing environment is suitably dim (not black!), within a broad range the eye sees a satisfying white based on the actual maximum brightness displayed on-screen. If that is 6600K, who cares? Pink and greenish contamination seem to be less well tolerated, so freedom from those color biases is desirable. 6500K seems to be nearly in the middle of the range of acceptable "whites," so it is a reasonable goal if you have an instrument that you can use to calibrate -- that is, you might as well aim for 6500K.
Doing this visually with out a D65 reference, I would say more like a +/- 1000K and no telling what reference point.Sure. But there are some natural references, as I have mentioned before. Dense clouds illuminated by the sun at mid-day in an otherwise blue sky (fair-weather cumulus, etc.) are between 6500K and 6600K and have no contamination. I have personally calibrated two different computer monitors to 6500K each using two different calibration devices from two different manufacturers and compared with the "cloud" standard. The correspondence is very close and entirely adequate.
You just need to be comfortable with the colors you are seeing. Can they be adjusted more accurately? probably. Do you need it more accurate?Which raises the questions of, What is "accurate"? What do you mean by "need"? I'm aware of the meme that only 6500K is "accurate," but no one has made a case for that that isn't easily refuted. It is certainly refuted by the fact of the eye's adaptivity. Then "need" is defined by the eye. If, in addition to this, one has an emotional "need" to know that their display is exactly 6500K, well . . . that's their problem, isn't it, and they can pay big $$ to accomplish this with professional help. The purpose of this thread is to discuss as many methods as possible that an enterprising individual can use to make their own adjustments at minimal cost and with maximal empowerment (i.e. educatioin).
Even if a color measuring device confirmed it was accurate, I would still consider it to be somewhat lucky, and not a result of the eye being as good as the colorimeter. <snip> I'm not looking for comfortable looking colors. I'm looking for unnatural coloration and/or slight pushes in the red, green, or blue direction. If one is persistant and anal enough, I believe they can get pretty close to 6500.This is the whole point and spirit of this thread and the knowledge it can provide.

“Need” is a relative term. It can be a state of mind or a requirement. Just depends upon the situation.
Does everyone “need” their TV calibrated? NO, some want theirs calibrated.
Do you “need” a car with 500HP? Depends on what you are going to do with it.
Do you “need” test equipment? Depends upon what you need to measure or adjust. (do you want your Doctor to calibrate their medical monitors, used for diagnosis, by eye, without the proper calibration equipment?)

A color analyzer is the only way to reasonably measure grayscale from 10 IRE to 100 IRE. Additionally, with the color analyzer it is very easy to see plus green errors throughout the range and adjust accordingly.

Basically this situation is like taking a bearing ball and checking for size and roundness. You are checking with a tape measure, I have a micrometer. To you, the bearing is 3/8” and is round. To me, it is .370 +/- .004.

D65 is used because it is the industry standard most film based material is mastered to. Therefore, calibrating the entire grayscale as close to D65 as possible is intended to yield a picture displayed with the colors the director intended.

Professional calibration is not for everyone. Those who choose to have a professional calibrate their TVs grayscale, should expect accuracy in the calibration, not a “looks close enough”. DIY is a viable option for many, knowing they are accepting their results and tolerances as “good enough/close enough”, accurate or not.

D65 is used because it is the industry standard most film based material is mastered to. Therefore, calibrating the entire grayscale as close to D65 as possible is intended to yield a picture displayed with the colors the director intended.The common "director's intent" argument has no meaning at this link in the video-reporduction chain. If the eye perceives the intended whites in the video as white, and the releasing company has included white in an accurate DVD transfer, then slight off-coloration for effect (common) will be perceived exactly as intended, as the eye will calibrate to the saturated whites in the video just as it would in the theater. See The Matrix for an excellent example. Color biases in film are generally not applied to all tones evenly, since, in that case, no color bias would be perceived if it is subtle. It is the mid-tones that are biased slightly in color. Since the eye calibrates to the lightest tones (clear film, saturated video-white) if they are present, "cool" or "warm" or undersaturated color deviations are reproduced beautifully. Bottom line: It is the relative coloration of the different tones in a film that establish the "director's intent," as it does in the movie theater.Those who choose to have a professional calibrate their TVs grayscale, should expect accuracy in the calibration, not a “looks close enough”. DIY is a viable option for many, knowing they are accepting their results and tolerances as “good enough/close enough”, accurate or not.Again, you (a professional calibrator) are claiming special value for this "accuracy" in color temperature, and I maintain that it is a rationally indefensible position in spite of its use as a selling point. If a critical eye perceives a specific display's white-temperature as impressively natural and correct, it is good enough! It is likely better than any theater presentation, which is commonly greenish, too dim for great color, and with a grayish black level.

On the other hand, grayscale linearity is much more important, IMHO, and instrumentation in the hands of an expert will make this easier, but expensive. The DIY enthusiast will have to obsess somewhat over stepped-grayscale patterns on DVD and watch some B/W video to satisfy themselves that they've got it right. I know -- it certainly took me a while to get there. But they can get it right, as many of us who post here can attest.

People who have no interest in fiddling with the service codes -- and the discipline it requires not to screw things up -- are well-advised to pay a calibrator to do the job, as should those folks who find themselves adrift without success, confused, or frustrated by having tried. That's why any of us pay someone to do any job for us, no?

A color analyzer is the only way to reasonably measure grayscale from 10 IRE to 100 IRE. Additionally, with the color analyzer it is very easy to see plus green errors throughout the range and adjust accordingly.

Basically this situation is like taking a bearing ball and checking for size and roundness. You are checking with a tape measure, I have a micrometer. To you, the bearing is 3/8” and is round. To me, it is .370 +/- .004.

Well, if there is no practical performance loss, would +/- .004 matter? Acceptable tolerance ranges are are usually based on a cost/performance analysis. In the case of a TV calibration, such precision isn't going to significantly improve the performance and ultimate enjoyment of the product, in my opinion.

D65 is used because it is the industry standard most film based material is mastered to. Therefore, calibrating the entire grayscale as close to D65 as possible is intended to yield a picture displayed with the colors the director intended.

We know this - that's why we are using test patterns and scales which are mastered to the D65 standard.

Professional calibration is not for everyone. Those who choose to have a professional calibrate their TVs grayscale, should expect accuracy in the calibration, not a “looks close enough”.

Of course.

DIY is a viable option for many, knowing they are accepting their results and tolerances as “good enough/close enough”, accurate or not.

Or plenty accurate enough for practical application.

Well, if there is no practical performance loss, would +/- .004 matter? Acceptable tolerance ranges are are usually based on a cost/performance analysis. In the case of a TV calibration, such precision isn't going to significantly improve the performance and ultimate enjoyment of the product, in my opinion.I guess I should have used different numbers, the point being 3/8" = .375" not .370".

Intended application has a big impact. Aerospace versus house building tolerances are quite different. As for the TV, the eye can distinguish a .004 variation in the CIE coordinates where D65 is .313x/.329y. My life would be much simpler if I calibrated to 6500K (a range) instead of D65 (a point). If I can't get the TV to track evenly at D65 (most of the time), I make every effort to minimize the plus green errors throughout the range.

There is a standard, D65, if anyone pays for a calibration, they deserve the calibration to be as close to D65 as possible, no ifs ands or buts.

The common "director's intent" argument has no meaning at this link in the video-reporduction chain. If the eye perceives the intended whites in the video as white, and the releasing company has included white in an accurate DVD transfer, then slight off-coloration for effect (common) will be perceived exactly as intended, as the eye will calibrate to the saturated whites in the video just as it would in the theater. It has all its meaning here. The movie is mastered for white to be D65, not 9300K, not 7000K. "Close enough" is a tolerance you are willing to accept and the variation, however big it is, is not important to you, that is fine and acceptable. Many of the TVs on the market are set as high as 9000K (warm), and the general public sees that as white, however it is not the white as white is mastered on film and DVD. Directors have film developed and processed in different manners to provide specific visual effects they want to present. The only way to know you are seeing what the Director intended, is to know your display is as close to D65 as possible. Bottom line: It is the relative coloration of the different tones in a film that establish the "director's intent," as it does in the movie theater.All the more reason to accurately reproduce white at D65 and have accurate color decoding.Again, you (a professional calibrator) are claiming special value for this "accuracy" in color temperature, and I maintain that it is a rationally indefensible position in spite of its use as a selling point.I deliver what the customer is paying for. It is OK for you to believe that the D65 white in a movie looks white to you when displayed at something other than D65, for that matter you, or any of us, might be slightly color blind. Men, more than women, are colorblind to green, to some extent. If a critical eye perceives a specific display's white-temperature as impressively natural and correct, it is good enough! It is likely better than any theater presentation, which is commonly greenish, too dim for great color, and with a grayish black level."Good enough" again is an acceptance level, not the standard. You don't want you surgeon say, "looks like we got it all, good enough". TV calibration is not surgery, however the customers deserve the same level of performance, the best we can do.

There are many reading this forum for information and to learn. Some are veterans and some are new to video. Some are DIYers and some just want to understand the concepts. We should to cater to all. These threads need to be unbiased to retain participation and encourage input. I have never said you can't do a DIY calibration, I have indicated the variances might be greater than you think, and I say this from personal experience with my own Marquee CRT projector. I thought I had it close, but was I wrong. It looked great, but now it really looks much better.

The movie is mastered for white to be D65, not 9300K, not 7000K. . . . Many of the TVs on the market are set as high as 9000K (warm), and the general public sees that as white, however it is not the white as white is mastered on film and DVD.This is a straw-man argument. Nowhere in this thread is anyone advocating a color temperature (CT) setting that far from the decent mean of 6500K. Directors have film developed and processed in different manners to provide specific visual effects they want to present. The only way to know you are seeing what the Director intended, is to know your display is as close to D65 as possible.Wrong. You are pretending that the human eye has no adaptive power whatsoever. Linear grayscale reproduction is far more important.All the more reason to accurately reproduce white at D65 and have accurate color decoding.You are confusing relative color perceived by the adapted eye and absolute color measured by an instrument.I deliver what the customer is paying for.I should hope so. But first you have to make the case that exactly 6500 is "correct" rather than a good mean target and that a customer should pay for this extraordinary accuracy.It is OK for you to believe that the D65 white in a movie looks white to you when displayed at something other than D65, for that matter you, or any of us, might be slightly color blind.Hilarious, Glen! You are now equating "believing" with "perceiving." And are you proposing that the people who don't agree with you might be color blind? That's it! You've hit on it. Those of us who are color-blind don't need 6500K!"Good enough" again is an acceptance level, not the standard. You don't want you surgeon say, "looks like we got it all, good enough".. . . and so the stakes are as high as surgery? If the set is not 6500K, there's no hope of enjoying it? Another straw man.. . . the customers deserve the same level of performance, the best we can do.For what a calibrator charges, I should hope so. But you treat television as though it is a precision process, and it most certainly is not, as anyone who watches it can tell. I understand the sales pitch, Glen. But this is probably not the right forum thread to voice it.There are many reading this forum for information and to learn. Some are veterans and some are new to video. Some are DIYers and some just want to understand the concepts. We should to cater to all. These threads need to be unbiased to retain participation and encourage input.Actually this thread was specifically started to cater to those folks who have Sony CRT sets of DA-4 chassis design who wish to make their own adjustments via the service menu. My interest is in keeping it agenda-neutral and scientifically correct. You have, for example, ignored the established matter of color adaptation.I have never said you can't do a DIY calibration, I have indicated the variances might be greater than you think, and I say this from personal experience with my own Marquee CRT projector. I thought I had it close, but was I wrong. It looked great, but now it really looks much better.Many of us without instrumentation can make the same claim and keep $$ in our poclets. The scope of this particular discussion is very narrow: the purported "requirement" of a precise 6500K color temperature of white. No other aspect of your calibration routine is being questioned. If you are already doing a complete calibration, why not aim for 6500K, indeed!

Ken, your arrogance, narrow mindedness and lack of willingness to accept the existence of another, “measurable” means to achieve grayscale calibration is overwhelming. You are definitely possessed by a ravenous ego and the frequent use of “wrong” in reference to others, implies an insatiable need to be right.

There apparently should be a disclaimer on your thread stating it only should be read by owners of the DA-4 chassis wanting to do a DIY calibration only. Anyone disagreeing with or having an opinion or calibration method different than that of the author will be severely chastised. Heaven forbid that anyone would apply any information here to another TV.

It is also very interesting that you refuse to believe or acknowledge there is actually a standard for the color of white and that it exists as a measurable point. Is it a requirement for pleasurable viewing? NO, just a calibration target or reference.

It’s totally insane you think anyone, yourself included, can look at a TV displaying white of any color and the eye will adapt to it being a different color of white. I will agree, the eye and brain will tell you it is white, however it won’t change the color temperature you are seeing. You just don’t know it isn’t D65. If you were to place a TV displaying D65 next to a TV displaying, say, 6800K, for example, the eye will see the two different whites, plain and simple.

You profess you are more accurate with your white balance adjustment by looking at clouds in the sky, and preach that everyone can and should do it for them selves, but you never have measured your results. Some people value their time and would prefer to have it done in a few hours, nothing wrong with that. My guess, if someone measured your settings and found an unacceptable measurement, for a “professional” calibration, you would tell them there $10K test equipment is wrong.

One of the most accurate 960 grayscales I have achieved, varied between 6440K to 6550K from 30 IRE to 100 IRE, 10 IRE was 5838K and 20 IRE was 6220K these readings were influenced by the light in the room and the color of the walls causing a –blue situation. We can’t get them perfect with the test equipment, we can get close, minimize errors and we are able to acquire the calibration data and provide it to customers, documenting what they have paid for.

In an orthodox adjustment process from the service manual, 2170D-2 #0-HCNT centers the raster (scanned area) on the CRT. Then #1-HPOS centers the picture (video frame) on the raster. You can push the video frame so far to the right or left that it appears to "wrap" back on itself. Is this what you mean?


Not quite.....
I have the service manual and when I follow the set up procedures to center the raster, the right side of the raster has a double image. That image will go away when I turn the HBLK back to 1 from 0.

"Have I missed the battle"- Commodus

:D

Glen,

Ken has made a wealth of information available to the common man and has alleviated the suffering of not only I but hundreds of other Sony owners. Knowledge that otherwise might be privy to industry professionals such as yourself is now accessible to the commoner.Even in Australia this thread is frequently referred to. If it weren't for Ken my XBR910 would be in the trash heap and I would probably be seeing a Cardiologist by now!

Cheers!!

As a DY'er, I have learned a lot from this forum. I have even had an ISF pro (he gets paid) here to adjust my set. My experience is that the ISF person has the color detection instruments to guide him to make color adjustments. He can do this to all of my inputs in less than 1 hour. After that, what is there?
I have had the ISF person attempt to correct the geometry and a technician from a local company try to fix my geometry. In BOTH cases, it was hit or miss with them. Their knowledge of where to start first and procedures to follow were no better than what I have learned on here, and on my own. Maybe this is a case of SONY hiding the proper plan or sequence for adjusting the geometry, I am not sure.

In this forum I have found valuable information that has helped and some sketchy information that has confused.

If I were a certified ISF calibrator, I would not want to give out all of my information here, for obvious reasons. (we all want to make some money). On the other hand if you are an ISF calibrator and come in these forums, may I assume you come in to help and share?
As far as post from those who are not ISF calibrators, I see a common thread. That thread attempts a give and take of ideas and information.

As for me, I still wrestle with geometry issues. My latest "trick" was to cut a piece of plexi glass to fit my TV screen. On the plexi glass I drew a calibration pattern of squares and one centered circle. I put it up to my screen and try to match it with a pattern generated from my cd player, or my computer. It has helped a lot, as I am unable to tell if all squares on an generated pattern are the same size on my screen.

KD-34XBR960

No doubt there is a lot of valuable information in this thread going way beyond the ISF calibration scope. While it is directed at the DA-4 chassis, information and concepts in here apply to many other displays. I have agreed many times to the value of this thread. Ken is overly obsessed with the idea that a ISF Calibration is useless and a waste of money, "his" personal opinion. On top of that, most of the input I have tried to contribute or opinions I have expressed have been met by Ken with a seemingly favorite word, “WRONG”. He is clearly expressing that this is his parade.

Another misunderstanding seems to be the actual scope of an ISF Calibration. Advanced geometry is something that is not supported by the ISF. This is generally referred to service technicians. Geometry is/can be a complex process and one that many repair techs don’t even want to do. It is very time consuming. I have a background with CRT projectors and therefore, offer advanced geometry to those who desire the service, within limits. The goal of the basic ISF calibration is to take a video system (TV, DVD, STB etc.), that is working properly, and adjust the picture for its best performance including grayscale. The $225-$250 for an ISF tech to calibrate one input is not all that costly for the few hours of work and travel. Many calibrators offer varying levels of calibration service. At this time, I don’t open the 960 and adjust the magnets.

I can easily refrain from any further comments in this thread. Ken seems to make it apparent he doesn’t want my participation or differing opinions. My time may be better spent with others.

While I may disagree with the cost of and ISF "calibration" and the actual time needed to do the job, it is just that. It is my "opinion" . I know the equipment is expensive and I know there is travel involved. So, for me, the question becomes, am I paying for calibration, or the equipment and travel. For now, those that have the equipment and the training are few and far between and of course that means the price reflects the need versus the availablility.

Like I said, this is just my opinion, and it is not meant to provoke or insight any kind of anger or negative response.

As far as geometry goes, it has been very hard to find the information that I believe I need to do a decent job. Having said that, I have had two service techs attempt adjustment and left with part of my pic "jittery". I have corrected that problem myself through information here and on the net in general.

One day I hope to find all the info I need to make the corrections I want. It seemes to me that anyone who attempts to correct my geometry does not bring with them the expertise to get it done right with out "guessing".
This has all been my experience, and as they say, your experience may vary depending.

So, keep posting info and helping out.

You get what you pay for.....a cheap quick calibration will be just that, cheap and quick. it takes time to get things right, especially if you don't want to make a return visit. One thing you need to keep in mind is the service menu adjustments were put there by the design engineers. They are usually the only ones that know what they do. As needed, through problems, they may tell factory service techs to adjust something. There is no overall reference telling what each adjustment is, know one really knows. Some discoveries are based upon experimentation.

Rates charged for calibration are fairly consistent. A calibrator that really does a good job and spends the necessary time isn’t making much money. Yes the fees help cover the misc expenses, research time, travel time, cost of equipment, taxes, training, etc. Experience will generally surface in reduced time spent calibrating, it won’t guarantee a better calibration.

Not quite.....
I have the service manual and when I follow the set up procedures to center the raster, the right side of the raster has a double image. That image will go away when I turn the HBLK back to 1 from 0.

HBLK=0 turns off the horizontal edge "blanking shutters" on the sides : 2170D3 LBLK+RBLK. This allows allows you to see the true edges of the raster, and thus center the raster.

In which case the double image on the right side that occurs with HBLK=0 occurs just as Ken described.

KenTech & GlenC,

You are both awesome, as are your contributions here. No slight to GlenC, but the "tip of the hat" must go to KenTech for the passion, time and energy spent on this thread.

I try never to say never, but I doubt there will ever come a time when I will understand things at KenTech's level. I definitely can read and appreciate all that's written here, but it's not in my plans to become that good. Because of this, I will eventually get my set calibrated by a pro. And I can think of no pro more qualified and more passionate for display purity than GlenC. If Ken lived close by, I would probably try to coerce him into coming over and helping me with my set. But that's not the spirit of this thread, as he has tried his best to give all owners the knowledge to do it themselves.

I feel badly when the conflicting views reach a fever pitch like this week. In simpleton's terms, it's kinda like watching mommy and daddy fight. I have so much respect for both players. But I must also respect their right to disagree, sometimes strongly disagree. I also believe that good ultimately comes from these battles, which ultimately benefits us all.

Cheers to KenTech and GlenC!

HBLK=0 turns off the horizontal edge "blanking shutters" on the sides : 2170D3 LBLK+RBLK. This allows allows you to see the true edges of the raster, and thus center the raster.

In which case the double image on the right side that occurs with HBLK=0 occurs just as Ken described.

What?

I believe Ken was trying to see if the seemingly mirror image on the right side of the raster was caused by the picture pallet being moved to far. All I can say is, I set up the raster to center using HCNT and following the service manual. All the manual says is to set NBLK to zero and the AGNG to 2. It also wants you to set HPOS and HSIZ to 31. When I do this, the right side of the raster has a double image.

Ok...this maybe an oooops. I just checked again and it seems its the AGNG setting to 2, that brings up the washed out look and the double image to the right side of the raster.

I have the service manual and when I follow the set up procedures to center the raster, the right side of the raster has a double image. That image will go away when I turn the HBLK back to 1 from 0.I guess this is another reason for the usual overscan and blanking the garbage at the edge. When I first did the raster and image centering, I was appalled at how whacked out the raster was on all edges: nonlinearities, weird extra lines, foldovers, etc. So much for a zero overscan on this CRT-TV!

With only 4% overscan and the appropriate blanking to keep the beam off the sides of the CRT, I got my observed picture to be nearly perfect. The proper centering of the raster, and then the video frame on the raster, allows you to minumize the overscan. I don't think I can go any lower than 4% on my set without revealing those edge "special effects." You sorta have to balance things, and it all sounds normal to me.

What?


Just what I said, I see no reason to repeat it.


All I can say is, I set up the raster to center using HCNT and following the service manual. All the manual says is to set NBLK to zero and the AGNG to 2. It also wants you to set HPOS and HSIZ to 31.


Yes, I did that as well(I assume you mean HBLK), and noticed Raster was properly centered at the factory on my set.


When I do this, the right side of the raster has a double image.

Yes, the "double image" on my set with HBLK=0 extends about 5" or so from Right side of raster, of course I would have never seen it had I not temporarily turned off the blanking shutters using "HBLK=0" to center the raster.

And, if you set HBLK to 1 (again, turns on the Horizontal blanking shutters just as I said it does, and just as has been covered a few times earlier in this thread) the "double image goes away, just as it should .... You'll see the same thing if you set HBLK to "1" and "RBLK" to either it's maximum or minimum value(I forget which one - I think Minimum.), or somewhat "near it".

I set up the raster to center using HCNT and following the service manual. All the manual says is to set NBLK to zero and the AGNG to 2. It also wants you to set HPOS and HSIZ to 31. When I do this, the right side of the raster has a double image.Where (i.e. what page or section, of the service manual for what set) are the instructions to set HPOS and HSIZ to 31? is this just to begin with, or to end up with?

Clearly these are adjustment controls meaning they are intended to be tweaks, not constants for us to live with.

Just in passing, I did my 1080i H/V position/size and overscan tweaks using a 1920x1080i test pattern projected by DisplayMate for Windows Video Edition on my PC, connected to my XBR960 from the DVI-to-component output of my PC's ATI Radeon 9800 Pro video card. The ATI Catalyst video drivers had the XBR960 set as a second monitor running at 1080i, 1920x1080 resolution. Other 1080i tweaking values were HBLK=1 and VBLK=1. Associated values at 1080i (also unchanged from the factory defaults) were LBLK=51, RBLK=31, TBLK=4 and BBLK=6.

And at 1080i I ended up with HCNT=32, HPOS=32, HSIZ=41, VPOS=28, and VSIZ=32. I have no anomalies on any of the four edges at 1080i.

Where (i.e. what page or section, of the service manual for what set) are the instructions to set HPOS and HSIZ to 31? is this just to begin with, or to end up with?


Pg. 41 - Section 2-8 of KD-30XS955/34XBR960/34XS955/36XS955 service manual.

Setting HCNT/HPOS to 31 isn't really important IMO, other than it being a mid-range value to "start with", such as, say, if you've "lost" the adjustments done at the factory for some reason. However, setting HBLK=0 (or values for RBLK/LBLK that will "get rid" of the side shutters so you can see the true edge of raster) is important. Setting 2170P-2 AGNG temporarily to 2 doesn't seem to actually "move" or effect the posistion or size of raster in any useful way on my set(KD34XBR960, manufactured in PA Jan 2005) for centering raster but I did it anyway when checking centering because it "said so" ...

Here's what it says(sorry for the formatting, it's easier on the eyes if if you look at the chart in the printed version) :

:quote

2-8. H RASTER CENTER ADJUSTMENT
Preparation:
• Input a monoscope signal.
• Set to NTSC (DRC) mode.

1. Set to Service Mode and adjust as follows:

CXA2170P-2
NO. Name Control Function Data
05 AGNG AGING 1, AGING 2 2

CXA2170D-2
NO. Name Control Function Avg. Data
02 HSIZ Horiz Size 31
01 HPOS Horiz Position 31

CXA2170D-3
NO. Name Control Function Avg. Data
00 HBLK Blanking Enable 0

2. Reduce HSIZ to see sides of raster. (See Figure A)
3. Adjust H-Center with CXA2170D-2.
4. Adjust to the best screen position with H-CENT and write data.
5. Restore aging, HSIZ and HBLK to original condition.

:end quote



I have no anomalies on any of the four edges at 1080i.

There shouldn't be any with your settings. However, Set HBLK temporarily to 0 (or LBLK=63/RBLK=0 - unless I have that backwards and it's LBLK=0/RBLK=63 to "remvoe" the "side shutters" that keep the beam from hitting side of the tube) and reduce HSIZ so you can see the true edges of the raster and you'll likely see some "anomalies".

BTW, FWIW(not much) HCNT=38(the setting from the factory) centers the raster on my set(KD34XBR960). I checked it with several different sources, including via setting MID1/BCOL=6 (BCOL=0 is black, BCOL=15 is white) to a higher value, which can be used to create, for example "grey bars" on the side of a 480i DRC processed signal used with "normal" (4x3) screen viewing mode or for a grey background for "twin view".

...I can easily refrain from any further comments in this thread..
.


you can't do that Glen cause without these heated discussions bums like me wouldn't learn anything!!

If I had an ISF calibrator where I live in Australia I wouldn't have endured 2 years of Sony's trained chimp technicians.

For guys like me, this thread, and everyone in it, is as good as it gets.

Will

Where (i.e. what page or section, of the service manual for what set) are the instructions to set HPOS and HSIZ to 31? is this just to begin with, or to end up with? . . . Clearly these are adjustment controls meaning they are intended to be tweaks, not constants for us to live with.The manual (this is section 2.8) commonly does not use very clear English. Those values are temporary starting points.

Suppose you have a TV that is already adjusted (but maybe not perfectly), and now you want to perfectly center the raster and frame. I would first note the original settings of HPOS and HSIZ before proceeding, just for insurance. Then change them to 31 and proceed as the manual says -- temporary values for the purposes of this centering adjustment.

Having performed the centering opeation, you might now have new values for HPOS and HCNT, and so you accept those, and return AGNG to 0 and HBLK to 1. But HSIZ can be returned to the former value, or you can reconsider your overscan, having tweaked those messy edges. (And readjust the blanking shutters.) I was able to reduce overscan to 3-4% from the much higher value it had been. There's no magic value for HSIZ. On my 36XS955 it ended up at 30. HCNT ended up at 36, and HPOS at 25.

I believe the temporary AGNG=2 switch renders all of the raster visible, including what is normally hiding in the blanked vertical- and horizintal-retrace intervals.

I believe the temporary AGNG=2 switch renders all of the raster visible, including what is normally hiding in the blanked vertical- and horizintal-retrace intervals.

Could be, or perhaps it could have a "different" effect per set model(4x3 tube vs 16x9 tube/etc).

As I noted in my last post : on my KD34XBR960 as I recall(and I do recall as I made a note of it) I could see no discernable difference in the "size" or appearance of edges of the raster concerning setting AGNG=2(even though I did so anyway) instead of AGNG=0 while centering raster(yes, with HBLK=0 and HSIZ set so I could see both edges), and while looking at the horizontal edges of raster.

Either way, HCNT=38 centers the raster on my set, with 2170P2/AGNG=0 or 2. Not that it matters, as it's no big deal to set AGNG temporarily to 2 while centering raster .....

I don't recall what I experienced with this with the vertical edges of raster and VBLK=0/etc.

A couple of general points here. These are magnetic deflection devices and to a slight extent, geo magnetism will affect alignment differently in different parts of the globe. The settings of the magnetic rings on the neck of the tube can also affect centering. This is why a setting of 31 is right for one TV and 38 or something else will yield the same results on another TV.

As for the AGNG, if memory serves me, it totally illuminates the full raster even if the image doesn’t fill the raster. This can be helpful at times. Re-configuring the geometry is not for the casual tweaker. Every adjustment can come into play during a major re-configuration, size, phase, linearity, position and on and on and on. There is so much “ping-pong” adjusting it is a lengthy exercise in patience and slowly converging on the desired result. I have adjusted the geometry and centering on the 960 to achieve 0% overscan, however the input signals and programming doesn’t work well with 0%. This is a major reason why many newer digital, fixed pixel displays are being produced with 2% overscan and not adjustable to 0%.

As for the AGNG, if memory serves me, it totally illuminates the full raster even if the image doesn’t fill the raster.


I think that certianly makes sense. In my case, I believe I was using an "Image" which does fill the entire raster, so perhaps that is why I did not notice a difference in raster "size", or any differences at the edge of the raster with AGNG=0 vs. AGNG=2.

Every adjustment can come into play during a major re-configuration, size, phase, linearity, position and on and on and on.



The settings of the magnetic rings on the neck of the tube can also affect centering.


Excellent post Glen(in it's entirety) ! And, I don't think the first quote above concerning how "every adjustment can come into play" can be stressed enough for those who may not be completely familiar with such "issues", and also the importance of writing down the factory adjusted values before you change anything, in case you need to go back to it ...

Having went through this on another set/model of DV-CRT I own, which was extremely poorly aligned at the factory in this regard -- and, given that on that set, after much time and effort I was able to make significant improvements from the factory settings, I am certianly very aware of everything you've said ... I would not want to add up the time I spent with deflection issues on that particular set .. However, given the set was an inexpenisve model, seeing the results of the improvements made was quite "satisfiying" ...

Anyhow -- Concerning my Sony DA-4 Chassis set(KD34XBR960) - On my particular set -- a few things I've noticed which I think are along those lines follow :

While HCNT=38 (the factory adjusted value) centers raster horizontally on my set, HCNT=40 offers slightly(very slighly) improved horizontal linearity. As another example, change "SLIN" value, and I(and I expect everyone else who changes it) will need to adjust HSIZ as well for proper aspect ratio.

As another example, the value used for VPOS effects geometry(SCRL doesn't) : perhaps most visably to an extent somewhat similar(but still "different") to the effects of "PPHA", and perhaps in a slightly "different" way, somewhat similar to the effects of VANG/LANG, and also I believe the "straightness" of horizontal lines are effected slightly by VPOS as well. I have in fact spent a bit of time trying to see if I can find a value for VPOS that makes things "better" than the factory value(as a similar adjustment on another model set made for quite an improvement) -- enough time to say with confidence the factory value of 26 is best ....

---------------------------


On my set, I suspect the permalloy assemblies(magnets - i.e. "chevron magnets") placed on the back of the tube in various places at the factory may also be a factor concerning "geometry" issues, particluarly perhaps why I expect It may be difficult to improve upon the factory adjusted SM values concerning a couple of "small" distortions, given the alignment in this regard already performed at the factory.

Luckily, however -- On my particular set, although I have spent a bit of time improving, or trying to improve geometry issues(various small "distortions", lets say), and I have been able to achieve some improvement while making sure I haven't made anything "worse" -- more improvement probably really isn't necessary, nor do I feel motivated to spend much more time on it.

Thankfully for the most part it seems they did a fairly good job with alignment of this set at the factory, perhaps especially in regards to deflection, or "geometry". Concerning effects of Earth's magnetic field, perhaps it is beneficial to some very small degree that I'm only a few hundred miles West of the plant in Eastern PA where the set was assembled, as I believe the effects of the Earth's magnetic field should be extremely similar, and, my set does face west(not because I planned it that way, just by luck I suppose), which I believe I had read is how the set is to be placed for alignment ....

For instance : Vertical Linearity(as evidenced by "measuring" the distance between horizontal lines with a cross hatch pattern up) was/is right on the money from the factory. And most thankfully, there are no "bends" in horizontal lines which are "generally" noticable, nor is there much more than a 1/16" or so difference along any Horizontal line in a cross-hatch pattern as measured from say, the bezel as a reference point. Circles in the AVIA 16x9 circle hatch pattern are circles ---- although, with HCNT=38(factory adjusted "default" value on my set) the small right circles are slightly wider than tall, and the small left circles are very slightly taller than wide - not noticable by looking at them really -- but noticable via measurement - They're perfect circles with HCNT=40, and yes, that inprovement in Horizontal linearity (Note: also evidenced by measuring the distance between vertical lines "across the screen" in cross hatch pattern and comparing any differences in different portions of screen)includes using all factory set values being used other than HCNT=40....

On my set(only relevant to my set of course, although perhaps it may be of some small value for folks) --- To quickly summarize What I have done regarding geometry+overscan which has involved changes+improvement (of course, I don't keep any changes that don't offer any improvments) has been :

#1) Reducing overscan to about 4.5%(it was about 8% from the factory - yikes)

#2). changing S-correction parameter slightly -- "SLIN=6" from "SLIN=5" factory value - which not only slightly improved the "straightness" of vertical lines, but also improved horizontal Linearity, as you might imagine.

3). Adjusted Blanking shutters(horizontal+vertical) slightly.

4). For proper AR to result for "zoom" mode, ASPT needed to be changed from factory value of "43" to "52". The factory default value of "43" results in "squished" circles(wider than they are tall, although proper AR/proper circles occur in say "full" or "normal" mode), including with all "factory" settings used elsewhere ..... I did find that rather odd, surely folks would rather have more of the top/bottom "cropped off" in "zoom mode" rather than to view programming(including letterboxed 16x9 programs) with distorted aspect ratio ..... As I do not believe it has been mentioned on this thread, I'm am curious if others have ran into this as well ....

I haven't settled yet on "HCNT=40"(slightly improved horizontal linearity) or "HCNT=38"(centers raster), as I haven't yet spent the time to detirmine whether or not HCNT=40 makes anything else "worse", and, I can't really see a difference just "looking at the screen" -- However, with overscan at around 4.5%, I can currently use either value for HCNT while keeping proper centering or causing any problems "on the edges" of the visable frame without changing anything else other than HPOS and RBLK/LBLK.

That was probably more than anyone wanted to know, Sorry!

Ken is overly obsessed with the idea that a ISF Calibration is useless and a waste of money, "his" personal opinion. On top of that, most of the input I have tried to contribute or opinions I have expressed have been met by Ken with a seemingly favorite word, “WRONG”. He is clearly expressing that this is his parade.No point is analyzing Glen's defensiveness. I have never said that competent calibration is useless, ISF or otherwise. It is a cost/benefit matter, and readers of this forum can make the decision how to spend their dollars. And I have said that several times!

I am, however, dedicated to defending technical points I make with supportive science and other sources. The reason I have little respect for the exaggerated claim of the "need" for exact 6500K white-point calibration is because the scientific evidence is not in its favor but rather argues for the adaptiveness of human vision, aka "color constancy." (Google it!) Meaning that, with a little work, one can come within a few hundred K of 6500K, and (very important) the viewer's eye will never sense that something is wrong. Glen's essential argument that "You gotta get that 6500K just right, or you don't know what you're missing" smacks of the promotion of the calibration profession, of which he is a member. It appears to instill doubt rather than enlightenment -- and of course, certified calibrators are waiting for your call . . .

The argument of "director's intent" is specious. The consistency of professional monitors used to make production and artistic decisions is a certain requirement, and 6500K is the accepted standard. That that must now be extended to the home TV or something is wrong is a claim that has not been made rationally; it just keeps getting repeated. Repetition does not make it true. The science argues that, if grayscale is linear (light and dark tones are the same color) and the white point is near 6500K, you will sense completely any "director's intent." Shall I post a few technical references?Ken seems to make it apparent he doesn’t want my participation or differing opinions.Yeah, like there haven't been a wide variety of differing opinions expressed in this thread! I've learned a lot from these opinions, too, and sometimes thay set me off on a new quest to figure something out -- and I have said so here. All contributors can be proud of the successful history of this thread!

I also stated in the last couple posts of mine:

"People who have no interest in fiddling with the service codes -- and the discipline it requires not to screw things up -- are well-advised to pay a calibrator to do the job, as should those folks who find themselves adrift without success, confused, or frustrated by having tried. That's why any of us pay someone to do any job for us, no?"

and

"The scope of this particular discussion is very narrow: the purported "requirement" of a precise 6500K color temperature of white. No other aspect of [Glen's] calibration routine is being questioned."
He is clearly expressing that this is his parade.It should be clear that I will do what I can to keep this thread aligned with its original purpose as stated in message #1, and that is to be a service to the DIY enthusiast and focused on the Sony direct-view TVs that share the DA-4 chassis and their service codes. Of course, relevant science can be discussed. But there are other threads for other specific purposes, notably one called Display Calibration.

I guess I should have used different numbers, the point being 3/8" = .375" not .370".

Intended application has a big impact. Aerospace versus house building tolerances are quite different. As for the TV, the eye can distinguish a .004 variation in the CIE coordinates where D65 is .313x/.329y. My life would be much simpler if I calibrated to 6500K (a range) instead of D65 (a point). If I can't get the TV to track evenly at D65 (most of the time), I make every effort to minimize the plus green errors throughout the range.

There is a standard, D65, if anyone pays for a calibration, they deserve the calibration to be as close to D65 as possible, no ifs ands or buts.

Glen,

I have nothing against anyone getting an ISF calibration from someone such as yourself. In fact, I wouldn't even discourage it or try to talk someone out of it if they wanted it. It has value, and many benefit greatly from it. The information in this thread, as clear and detailed as it is, is still far beyond anything the average consumer is willing to delve into.

That being said, I want to make clear that I do not believe that my "DIY" calibration is as accurate as yours would be with all of your knowledge, equipment, etc.. I do believe, however, that it is likely in the right ball park of say a reference of +/- 250 from 6500 with hopefully not more than a 300-500 variation from that reference from 10-100 IRE. I am pleased with the results I have gotten, which are an astronomical improvement of the factory settings.

IMO, this the best thread ever. I have been able to improve my set ten fold, including many things that go significantly beyond what an ISF calibration covers, and I haven't spent a single penny on any of it. On top of this, I have learned a great deal about TV adjustments in general, which will benefit me in the future when I eventually upgrade to another display.

One, I have never stated you have to have the grayscale at 6500K to enjoy viewing. I have merely stated that I strive for an accurate grayscale as close to D65 as possible. Additionally, with my equipment, I can be relatively sure I did not error plus green.

I will say, just as 2 + 2 = 4, if a movie is mastered at D65 and white is displayed at any other color temperature, what you are seeing is different from the original or intended. Can you tell the difference?, depends on the variance. In a technical sense (this is measurable), if white is plus blue, from D65, then the secondary colors, with blue (magenta and cyan), will also be off (plus blue). Each of the NTSC and HDTV primary and secondary colors have specific CIE x/y coordinates defining the colorspace.

CRT TVs strong point is color fidelity, because SMPTE developed the color space around the available colors of phosphor. The CRT weak point is geometry and focus. Compromise is necessary with all displays, none exist that are the best on all points. The best CRT DV would probably be the Sony BVM series, for serious dollars. I have a BVM-1310 13” that is NTSC only, 480i, however displays an awesome picture from a DVD via component. This was originally a $5K monitor.

As for improving the grayscale from “factory” that can be a tough task, by eye. Generally, the 960s I have seen, have been within 200K to 300K of 6500K and some within 200K throughout the entire grayscale. Geometry is another thing, it can be all over the place, magnetics………..

Those of you that have calibrated your own TVs, care to tell us the number of hours you have invested?

I really don’t understand how some can take comments about ISF calibration trying to achieve a D65 grayscale, for a paying customer, as anything more than providing a deserved/expected level of professional service. I don’t care if you have a 5500K low IRE and a 12000K white grayscale.

There is nothing un-scientific about using calibrated measuring equipment to set the grayscale to the industry standard.

...Those of you that have calibrated your own TVs, care to tell us the number of hours you have invested?

I really don’t understand how some can take comments about ISF calibration trying to achieve a D65 grayscale, for a paying customer, as anything more than providing a deserved/expected level of professional service. I don’t care if you have a 5500K low IRE and a 12000K white grayscale.

There is nothing un-scientific about using calibrated measuring equipment to set the grayscale to the industry standard.
Time is the issue for me.

I have the technical "chops" to learn what I need from this thread and perform a DIY calibration, thanks to KenTech. But the time would be prohibitive. And it's just a personal thing. The number of extracirricular activities in which I'm involved, and the priorities at which I place them, just do not allow me to take the time required to do justice to my tv.

Time for all of us is very valuable. If I compare the hourly rate at which I'm paid, to the "averaged hourly rate" charged by a pro calibrator, I save significant money by paying a pro calibrator to do the job. AND, I get a much better product because of his investment in the proper equipment and his acquired knowledge.

Like I said, this is just for my personal situation. I believe I get a super deal from a pro calibrator when all is said and done. I regret not having the time to study and do it myself, but by paying a pro I get to spend the time gained with those involved in my higher priorities.

Cheers! ;)

Generally, the 960s I have seen, have been within 200K to 300K of 6500K and some within 200K throughout the entire grayscale.


Am I correct in assuming you may be reffering to use of the "warm" Color Temp offset on XBR960, which is labeled in the menu as "NTSC Color standard" ?


Those of you that have calibrated your own TVs, care to tell us the number of hours you have invested?


Quite a bit of time, and quite a bit of fun(including reading this thread). It would be difficult to estimate any sort of "round figure' how much time or fun .... As, for example often I will make adjustments during "ordinary viewing time", while I'm watching TV, after noticing something here or there, or reading something here and trying it. It is not as if it is a task with "hours invested" such as if one were an hourly worker cleaning horse stables ..... As for the most time spent working within SM on any particular "task" involving my set outside of "ordinary viewing time", I'd have to say I've probably spent the most time with the "image processing settings"(although indeed those can't be boiled down to one, "bone fide" task), as has been discussed on this thread previously.

Is a "detailed" DIY calibration for everyone? Of course not, noone is saying it is .....



As for improving the grayscale from “factory” that can be a tough task, by eye.


I think one thing that is great about this thread, and BOTH Ken and your (and others) comments on Greyscale is that it is one of the very, very few places I know of where good, accurate info is available to assist those who *do* try to improve upon greyscale "by eye", so to speak ....

Am I correct in assuming you may be referring to use of the "warm" Color Temp offset on XBR960, which is labeled in the menu as "NTSC Color standard" ?Yes, but that is only if you haven't changed the Cut/Drive settings. Typically, I will calibrate the Neutral color which seems to be set around 8000K from the factory. This leaves me with the option to adjust Warm to 5500K, for those who like it for old B&W movies, and the Cool for other possible color correction needs, like the effects room color and daytime lighting can have on grayscale.

Once, calibrating a RPTV in a slightly yellow room, (Yellow is made with Red and Green), I was working on the grayscale, every time the sun hit the wall of the room as the clouds/overcast was starting to clear, my readings kept going minus blue. This was the most effective, hands-on, demonstration of the significant impact of the viewing environment affecting grayscale.

Just as a reminder, grayscale, on the Sony is global, with two offsets available, Cool/Warm. The "white balance" adjustment for each of the inputs and scan-rates is fine tuned with the individual offsets.

Yes, but that is only if you haven't changed the Cut/Drive settings.


What I do is "keep" the warm offset the same as was the case from the factory for reference, and use Neutral+cool for my own settings(I primarily use the cool offset for expermientation..)

So, From the factory I had :

Neutral/ RDRV~BCUT : 32-22-24-32-21-17

Factory Warm Offset values (RDOF~BCOF for "warm") : 31-26-16-31-27-19 - Note that this results in "effective" values which would be the same as using RDRV~BCUT = 32-17-9-32-17-5.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Currently, I'm using RDRV~BCUT(for "Netural" selection via user menu) = 32-17-9-32-16-9 for normal viewing and for "warm Offset" values (RDOF~BCOF for "warm") - 31-31-31-31-32-27 - which results in "effective" values which would be the exactly the same as the factory default for warm offset as "applied" to RDRV~BCUT : 32-17-9-32-17-5.

--------------

In a dark room, The Factory "warm" offset has slight "greenish tint" to greyscale(as evidenced with color "off" and a grey step pattern, or B&W programming/etc.), otherwise I believe it's generally fairly close to 6500K ...... It is easily evident that the factory "cool" and "neutral" settings are very much on the "cool" side ....

You are aware, that all of the grayscales revolve around the “neutral” cuts and drives? If you reduce blue in neutral, you will reduce blue in cool and warm. If you reduce the C/D offset in cool or warm, there is no affect on the other color temps.

If you reduce blue in “neutral”, then, yes, warm might look a little green. When you reduce blue, you effectively increase green and red a little.

Don’t get too caught up in any mathematical relationships to the cut drive and offset numbers. This is an analog device with three different phosphors. If you reduce R/G/B DRV all by 1, the color will most likely change. The luminance level of the three will react differently.

Greenish, can also result from watching +blue color temps. I have seen it before myself. Things just didn't look right, so I brought out my D65 B&W monitor to verify what i was seeing.

You are aware, that all of the grayscales revolve around the “neutral” cuts and drives?


Yes, I believe that should have been apparent from my last post? Sorry if I was not clear enough ... I did notice there was a typo when I typed "BDRV~BCUT" although I meant to refer to the entire RDRV~BCUT, I have edited my post to fix this error.

Update: oops, when editing that noticed I also incorrectly indicated in last post I am currently using "GCOF=30" for my current warm offset ... I've also corrected this, it is GCOF=32".


If you reduce blue in neutral, you will reduce blue in cool and warm. If you reduce the C/D offset in cool or warm, there is no affect on the other color temps.


Right. As another example, If I were to say, raise GCUT to "17" from its current "16", I would then change GCOF for "warm offset" to "31", to keep warm offset the same as the values which resulted from the factory for "warm offset" ..... (you may need to refer to my last post to hopefully understand what I'm talking about there .....)


If you reduce blue in “neutral”, then, yes, warm might look a little green. When you reduce blue, you effectively increase green and red a little.


Of course. Yes, I know this. If you look at the values I provided in my last post, you'll see my warm offset REMAINS exactly the same as it was when I received the set new - not the actual values, but the "actual" result is the same.

I adjust the values for warm offset ,accordingly so it allways remains the
"same as it was from the factory whenever I change the values for neutral .... Again -- so I have the same exact "result" on screen for "warm offset" as was the case with the factory adjusted values, I don't USE the exact same values for RDOF~BCOF, obviouosly since I've changed RDRV~BCUT ...

For example -- Factory setting for "BCUT"=17. Factory setting for "warm offset" BCOF=19 --- Which is exactly the SAME for "warm" as if I were using "BCUT=5" which of course would effect only "neutral" directly.

In other words, I could change RDRV~BCUT to 32-17-9-32-17-5 and I would get exactly the same thing for "neutral" as what results with the factory(or current) warm offset.

For the RDOF~BCOF values(for cool or warm offsets), "31" is "0" offset from the RDRV~BCUT values, Numbers less than 31 are (minus) offset, numbers greater than "31" are "plus" offset. Therefore, if I have BCUT=9 which effects "neutral(and neutral is what I use for actually watching the set), Warm offset BCOF=27 equates to a BCUT value of "5" ... In other words, when I switch to "warm offset" in the user menu, it would be the same thing as having BCUT=5 If I were using "neutral".

I hope what I tried to say in my last post is clearer now?

Also, Just to clarify, other than being curious if you were reffering to "warm offset" conerning your comment about 960s you've worked with being near 6500K, I don't believe I was asking any questions regarding this subject, nevertheless, as allways thanks for your comments and additional insight, as it may be useful to others whom are reading.


Don’t get too caught up in any mathematical relationships to the cut drive and offset numbers. This is an analog device with three different phosphors.


I'm well aware of this, I am not getting caught up in "mathmatical relationships", and in no way shape or form has my adjustments of greyscale ever tried to "look for" a mathmatical "relationship" .....

The factory values for Warm offset(RDOF~BCOF) which equate to RDRV~BDRV = 32-17-9-32-17-5 aren't Mine, They were the values which "effectively" result for "warm offset" from the factory. I hope that makes sense, it is a little difficult to say what I'm trying to say in a completely "accurate, or precise way given the way the "offsets" work. Or, at least I can't seem to come up with a good way to say it so folks understand what I'm saying .....

I am not currently using RDRV~BCUT 32-17-9-32-16-9(to clarify that IS what I'm using, and "neutral" primarily for viewing) because of any Mathmatical relationship, I'm using it because of what I see, and because of how my black+white levels are set elsewhere ......... And no, I cannot say arriving at those "values" was "easy" without say, The use of an optical compartor such as Your Sony B&W pro monitor to, or the equipment used by a ISF calibrator .... Nor can I say, obviously with any certianity that it's 6500K/D65 ..... Of course, while it might be nice to be able to say that, I really have no need to say that either, all I really care about is how it "looks" ....

While I do have what I believe would be decent optical comparators to use to some extent = the best one weighs 150lbs(Toshiba 34HF84) and would need to be carried down a flight of stairs. I did have a pro B&W monitor in the garage, but I sold it several years ago, and can't vouch for weather or not it was 6500K .... And, note that no, for the 34HF84 I do not have any verfiable "scientific proof" that it's greyscale is D65/6500K(using it's warm offset) or very close to it, as was the case I believe with my RCAF38310 as well(the XBR960 is a warranty replacement for it), however, BOTH of those sets just had "perfect"(or close to it) looking greyscale from the factory to my eyes(the RCA may have been just a slight bit +red+a bit on the warm side with its warm offset).

And, I also believe my eyes are probably pretty good at knowing what ~6500K "white" looks like(just like the clouds at mid-day Ken has mentioned). Perhaps part of that comes from 30 years taking photographs(many of them in "outdoor enviornments), and 10 years of doing photo editing work on some of those photos on a PC(I even still use film and a 35mm film(negative) scanner, believe it or not, even though I use digital as well) .... I don't know ...

For lack of a better, "scientific" way to say it(and no, this really isn't "entirely accurate", either) --- The way I "see "white" on the screen from a set with a hopefully well calibrated greyscale(D65/6500K), is just the perfect "blend" of R/G/B ...... If white, and every step of grey, and "black" as well doesn't "look right" then I have a problem ..... If that is somehow "incorrect", well honestly, I really don't care ...

As long as I see nice, "perfect" whites(such as the white of mid-day clouds, as ken has mentioned) and "linear greyscale" without color contamination(too blue, too green, or too red) from IRE 0 (black, IRE 7.5 for NTSC of course) to IRE 100 (whilte), I really don't care what the actual "values" being used are, or what the Color temp is .... Of course, the R/B offsets CBOF/CROF come into play here as well when you "increase" the color slider above "0" ... The methods of adjustment to CBOF/CROF Ken has described previously has worked very well for me as well .... No change in "tint" with good B&W program material(the kind without all the added tint they ad in sometimes) throughout range of "brightness" and "color" slider ... Same thing as well -- Neutral grey throughout brightness/color slider range with video black up on the screen .....

Maybe that's not the way it is "supposed to be", but I surely certianly seem to like it ....


If you reduce R/G/B DRV all by 1, the color will most likely change. The luminance level of the three will react differently.


Absolutely. In fact, Currently On my set R/G/B DRV(32-17-9) remains the same for Neutral(what I use for viewing) as "equates" to the warm offset values from the factory(as I hopefully explained well enough before).


Greenish, can also result from watching +blue color temps. I have seen it before myself. Things just didn't look right, so I brought out my D65 B&W monitor to verify what i was seeing.

I believe I can say fairly confidently This wasn't/isn't a result of watching and becoming used to +Blue color temps, although I can live with a slight bit of +blue, or +red moreso than I can +green (for some reason +green "greyscale is especially annoying to me) ....

Clearly, there was +green going on with the "warm" offset(factory netural+cool were just WAY too cool/too blue), and it appeared to my eyes that perhaps the "warm offset" is/was(again, I've kept it allways so warm offset remains exactly as it was from the factory) perhaps just a tad on the "warm" side .... hard to say though, for all I know, it could be a bit on the "cool" side of 6500K ....

Of course, using what was the "factory" warm offset as a reference(or using experimental "cool" offset values that are very close to neutral), all it takes is +1 or -1 for any value of RDRV~BCUT from my prefereed "neutural" settings for things to look "not right" .... Too warm, too cool, +blue, +red, +green/etc ...

Since I can detect and have a "problem" with a difference as little as +1 or -1 for any value of RDRV~BCUT from my "preferred" values, it certianly seems to me I must have things awfully close to how I "want them" ..... Is it 6500K, and conform to D65? I dunno, but it certianly looks awfully good to me ... I've spent enough time with this to say I certianly can't seem to find another set of values that look "better", and I've tried quite a few of them for relatively extended periods of time ....

(for some reason +green "greyscale is especially annoying to me) .... As it is for most.

Green is the easiest color to see. If you look at the CIE chart, the majority of it is green. Next comes red and blue is the least visible. Some CRT RPTVs don’t even have focus rings on the blue tubes. Anyway back to the point, to error +green is a major no-no. This is why I offered information about D65 vs. 6500K for calibration with a color analyzer. You can easily see if there is a +green issue. Therefore, my choice is to error +blue, if I can’t get D65. Even +red is noticeable, especially in the low IREs.

The whole goal is getting the TV to perform the best for yourself or the customer. If it looks good to you, you are happy……. One thing I have noticed since I have had my Displays calibrated, I know the color is right and if the picture doesn’t look right, it might be intentional or problems with the broadcast. I continually adjust brightness for different programs or lighting conditions, but never get into color saturation or tint. Viewing is much more pleasurable.

If I were tweaking my 960 without calibration equipment, I would leave neutral at factory and adjust the Cool and Warm offsets to watch. I would use warm for low light/night and cool for daytime, compensating for room color.

I cannot comment on the validity of keeping the offset relationship the same. For me, it would have to be proven with measurements. From my earlier comment, I am not sure increasing the offset 1 to compensate for a reduction in cut/drive will give uniform results. The actual delta in cut/drive voltages for each step change may not be the same delta for the offsets.

I cannot comment on the validity of keeping the offset relationship the same.

From what I can tell what results on screen seems to be exactly the same whether it is #1: RDRV~BCUT 32-17-9-32-17-5, or (as from the factory) :

#2) RDRV~BCUT : 32-22-24-32-21-17

Warm Offset : RDOF~BCOF : 31-26-16-31-27-19

No difference ..... Both(#1 or #2 --- Using "warm offset" for #2) appear exactly the same on screen, slightly +green.

I believe All RDOF~BCOF are are + or - values from the RDRV~BCUT values. If you are using all "31" for RDOF~BCOF, and then Lower RDOF by 1 for "warm offset" it is the same result as lowering RDRV by one value while using "neutral".

Now, There are a couple of other "offset" controls that are available as well besides RDOF~BCOF.


I am not sure increasing the offset 1 to compensate for a reduction in cut/drive will give uniform results. The actual delta in cut/drive voltages for each step change may not be the same delta for the offsets.


While I understand what you are saying --- It has not been my experience that they are not the same, and if they are in fact not the same, it really doesn't matter all that much if "warm" offset is not a "perfect" reference for me to the factory default(and, that is all I use it for I have no actual use for the factory value as far as using it to "watch" programming), in any case it's similair enough that it's still "greenish" greyscale(the exact same "tint" of green no less) and from what I recall, looks exactly the same as far as my ability to "compare" it(with the "factory defaults" exactly as they were for RDRV~BCUT and warm RDOF~BCOF) from one time to another ....

I cannot comment on the validity of keeping the offset relationship the same. For me, it would have to be proven with measurements. .


Had a wild thought. Here's a demonstration. Not sure if it is a 100% accurate way to "demonstrate" this, but it's the best I could come up with.

Attached screenshots are both using Warm offset, with the following values :

Top ---- factory defaults :

RDRV~BCUT= 32-22-24-32-21-17

Warm Offset=31-26-16-31-27-19

Bottom - My "adjustments" :

Neutral= 32-17-9-32-16-9

Warm Offset = 31-31-31-31-32-27

Can you "measure" whether they are the same, or if you are so interested, is perhaps there is something else I can do with a digital camera screenshot which would allow you to "measure" or detect any differences that might be present given the two sets of values above ?

In any case, They(top vs bottom greyscale) certianly look the same to me via this "side by side"(well top and bottom) comparision ....

Further notes follow :

Note this is Greyscale Vertical step pattern from avia, I set the display for "full" mode.

I used manual exposure settings on the digital camera which were set identically for both top+bottom shots. Besides the RDRV~BCUT and Warm offset RDOF~BCOF values, nothing else was changed on the set. Also note that with photo editing software, I didn't quite "crop" each shot exactly the same -- I did however use a gamma correction tool once I had both shots "combined", so that it would effect both images exactly the same - I did this as the "exposure" was a little "dark". Also note that the darker portion of top image is an "artifact" of the still photography due to the scanning on the TV and the amount of time the shutter was open/etc.

While of course I doubt this is any where near an accurate way to show what the greyscale actually "is" "on the screen" and as it appears to my eye, I'd think it should show you any differences in greyscale between the two images as described above. What is funny though, is even though the PC/monitor I'm using is not in the same room, from what I can tell, it does seem to look very much the same on my CRT PC monitor(which does have a 6500K Temp setting, which I am in fact using) as it does on the screen of the TV concerning the slight "greenishness" ....

Those of you that have calibrated your own TVs, care to tell us the number of hours you have invested?

I have spent at least 12+ hours, maybe double that even, but that's for everything - not just greyscale.

So I guess no one has yet tried getting a good greyscale with high _DRV and _CUT values as I have?

I used manual exposure settings on the digital camera which were set identically for both top+bottom shots. <snip> from what I can tell, it does seem to look very much the same on my CRT PC monitor(which does have a 6500K Temp setting, which I am in fact using) as it does on the screen of the TV concerning the slight "greenishness" ....Jeff, you didn't say, but did you set the camera on manual color-balance? Most digital cameras are really competent at balancing out differing scene illumination to produce a satisfying image resembling what you perceived at the time. If you choose Daylight or Clouds or manually balance the camera for one screen, then the other screen will be properly compared. Otherwise the camera in Auto-CB mode could be cancelling the difference based on the lightest tones or whatever it uses. (My Canon digital camera and GL-2 video camera do this extremely well!)

Second, looking at your image on my calibrated computer screen (perfect grayscale & CT of 6500K), I see that the darker tones are quite greenish-yellow. Is this the way it appears to your eyes? (I hope not.) It would indicate that you need to add considerable blue and maybe remove a little green in the _CUT settings, and reverse-adjust the _DRV just a bit to keep the white point the same. On the other hand, this greenishness could entirely be an artifact of your picture-taking situation, I can't tell.

Attached is a very useful test pattern I built up from other patterns that show absolutely neutral grays in addition to the near-white and near-black regions.

Jeff,

I don’t have a lot of time to spend with this, and I can’t measure the color temps, (pictures too small), however, I see the following:

Top picture has a little more red in the low IRE.
Bottom picture has a slightly lower gamma curve.
The color of both grayscales appear close enough to not really be an issue, not sure which one is right. If I were to choose which to use, I would use the top for night and the bottom for day. A lower gamma curve will be better in ambient light situations. Can’t say about the +red.

So I guess no one has yet tried getting a good greyscale with high _DRV and _CUT values as I have? Not sure what you mean by “high”. If you mean high values (40s-60s), then you can be introducing many other issues adversely affecting Gamma, Black level, White level, clipping…… There is no reason to go there. The tube will only display a certain luminance level before blooming begins. Staying below that point is necessary for proper resolution.

Second, looking at your image on my calibrated computer screen (perfect grayscale & CT of 6500K), I see that the darker tones are quite greenish-yellow.

They look greenish on my monitor too, though my monitor isn't calibrated.

Attached is a very useful test pattern I built up from other patterns that shown absolutely neutral grays in addition to the near-white and near-black regions.

Ken, this pattern looks grey on my monitor, so my seeing green with Jeff's pattern is consistent.

I have been playing with my settings some more, and I think I have improved upon what I listed before. My settings now:

RDRV = 63
GDRV = 33
BDRV = 33

RCUT = 63
GCUT = 34
BCUT = 32

Upon more detailed scutiny, I detected a slightly reddish and greenish push with the previous settings, and tried some new adjustments. I think now, I probably have a little plus blue, but the slight green and red appears to be gone. I wish I could photgraph my screen like Jeff.

Note this is Greyscale Vertical step pattern from avia, I set the display for "full" mode.I should mention some of the problems with grayscale patterns.

A top-to-bottom pattern is likely to warp the aperture-grille slightly (but not permamently!) after a few seconds, altering the color of that bar slightly. Reducing the brightness way down doesn't necessarily eliminate the problem. Top-to-bottom bright areas are a challenge for aperture-grille stability! I'm glad that these Sony DA-4 sets have an aggressive average-brightness limiter for full-screen white/bright, common in advertising.

Further, a CRT screen can have slight color variations over its major dimensions. It is much better to put up a pattern that has several small grayscal step-patterns in different locations onscreen. This would have to be a custom pattern for memory-stick use or fed from a computer source; I know of none on the usual test DVDs. The source doesn't matter, since this adjustment can be done with Color slider set to Min in the User Menus.

A grayscale step pattern should not have too many steps or be a continuous gradient; the eye will have a harder time seeing errors between diffrent-brightness steps. I have used the simple coarse scale on the image I just posted with great success. Moreover, with the different gray steps in close proximity to each other, the eye will see color differences between then easily.

Jeff, you didn't say, but did you set the camera on manual color-balance?


I had it set for complete manual control(other than I allowed it to auto focus) ---- "simulated" ASA 200 "film speed", F4.5, 1/15 sec. shutter speed. No auto color balancing going on.


Second, looking at your image on my calibrated computer screen (perfect grayscale & CT of 6500K), I see that the darker tones are quite greenish-yellow. Is this the way it appears to your eyes?


That is exactly how it appears to my eyes on screen in the darker tones(although it exists in lighter tones as well to some extent on the TV - correction/clarifaction - I meant with other sources, such as good B&W programming, I didn't notice it on this step pattern), and [clarification/update], is what I notice on the CRT PC monitor I'm using as well.


(I hope not.)


[remainder of post significantly updated for(hopefully) clarity's sake].

Don't worry Ken! The images were using the FACTORY greyscale settings for "warm offset" values, not my "preferred" settings.

Top image was with factory default RDRV~BCUT and factory default for Warm offset RDOF~BCOF. The bottom image was with my adjusted/preferred RDRV~BCUT settings and adjusting Warm RDOF~BCOF accordingly to hopefully, at least somewhat closely "match" the same results of the factory warm offset settings+factory RDRV~BCUT settings -- Assuming that +1 or -1 for an offset value(31 having no effect) RDOF~BDOF is the same "effect" if you are using one of the offsets(warm or cool user menu settings) as +1 or -1 is for RDRV~BCUT(If you are using "neutral" user menu settings), which may not be entirely correct, although I still believe it's at least very, very "close" to a correct assumption ...

So, The images you saw are not the greyscale settings I actually use for viewing programming.


It would indicate that you need to add considerable blue and maybe remove a little green in the _CUT settings, and reverse-adjust the _DRV just a bit to keep the white point the same.


That's pretty close to what I did months ago. Rasied BCUT by 4 values, lowered GCUT by one value from what you see in those images(more or less) Of course, actually "doing it" and finding what I "wanted" wasn't quite as "simple" as that ...

Top picture has a little more red in the low IRE.
Bottom picture has a slightly lower gamma curve.


Thanks for looking at those. The thing is, I have no idea --- even with the camera set with the same "manual" settings for each exposure ---, if the "exact" "EXACT" "greyscale" that resulted on screen for each pic was actually captured for EACH image once the shutter was opened -- Which is what I meant when I said I'm not sure if that method is 100% "accurate" ....

While they both look pretty much the same to my eyes, and therefore probably less "different" than if I were to change, say, ONLY BCUT by one or two values --- Just the fact that the camera captured that "dark area" at top of screen in one image due to the scanning frequencies the TV is using whereas it didn't in the other image tells me at least that is different from one exposure to the next ... So, Could any possible "artifacts of photography" cause the very slight different results you saw ? I don't know.

Jeff, you didn't say, but did you set the camera on manual color-balance? Most digital cameras are really competent at balancing out differing scene illumination to produce a satisfying image resembling what you perceived at the time. If you choose Daylight or Clouds or manually balance the camera for one screen, then the other screen will be properly compared. Otherwise the camera in Auto-CB mode could be cancelling the difference based on the lightest tones or whatever it uses. (My Canon digital camera and GL-2 video camera do this extremely well!)

Second, looking at your image on my calibrated computer screen (perfect grayscale & CT of 6500K), I see that the darker tones are quite greenish-yellow. Is this the way it appears to your eyes? (I hope not.) It would indicate that you need to add considerable blue and maybe remove a little green in the _CUT settings, and reverse-adjust the _DRV just a bit to keep the white point the same. On the other hand, this greenishness could entirely be an artifact of your picture-taking situation, I can't tell.


Sorry for quoting the same post twice -- Oops! To respond to the above in a 2nd, different way(if that's OK) :

I did in fact last night take a third photo (with the same "manual" exposure settings on the camera as the other two) ...

Another screenshot of the greyscale steps attached below :

The third photo is of the greyscale settings I actually USE and is the image at TOP in file attached to this message -- That's "netural" color temp in user menu, using my adjustments to RDRV~BCUT, which are : 32-17-9-32-16-9 ..... Again, this is the greyscale setting I actually USE currently, and for quite some time -- I'm really mainly concerned about dim room/dark room viewing, as the lighting conditions from the ambient light coming through the windows in the daytime vary greatly not only by time of day, but also by season(different sun angle, different light from reflection off the leaves in summer vs. no leaves in winter/etc/etc) ... At some point however, perhaps I may try to work out a slightly different version with one of the offsets for "daytime" viewing ...

The bottom image in attached screenshot is of Factory default using WARM offset -- Factory "default" settings for RDRV~BCUT AND factory default for RDOF~BCOF for "warm offset" were used for this image. It's the Same Image as the TOP image in the last post, except I resized it to match the size of the image at top, as I had moved the camera a bit last night(update: As you can also see, I didn't quite have the camera "level" for the top photo, sorry!) before I had the idea to go ahead and take a shot while using the greyscale I'm actually using as well .. Note" I can of course take a much higher resolution image+use much less compression, however since I knew the forum only allows 640x480 max size for JPG images, figured these would be "good enough" for our purposes ....

Oh, also forgot to mention earlier -- I took the photos in a completely dark room(except the light from the TV).

Again, sorry for the multiple posts!

They look greenish on my monitor too, though my monitor isn't calibrated.


Very interesting! I was expecting folks would probably see something quite a bit different once it got to their PC monitor -- Heck, it even surprised me that I am pretty much seeing the same thing on my PC monitor as I do on the XBR960's screen, given the greyscale settings on the set which I used for the photos .....

It does provide some motivation to :

#1) experiment a bit with taking some screenshots of the "greyscale" on other sets I have here, and compare those to the screenshots from the XBR960 ....

#2) Attempt to "tweak" things a bit for the photos - such as : use higher resolution for the shots/select better test patterns(and lower JPG compression ratio or the camera's "RAW" format), detirmine better exposure settings to use. If I do that, perhaps I can get more useful and "detailed" results for comparison's sake ....

Just something to add to the "list of fun stuff to do someday" on a "rainy weekend" ...... :)

so after a week and a half of deliberation as to whether to enter the service menu on my own, I gave it a shot. I have a 30xs955. I bought an avia disc and read this thread for days on end! and btw I wrote EVERYTHING DOWN and entered it all into an excell sheet on the computer and I still got confused at times. So I got into the service menu and destroyed 2170D-1, 2170D-2 and 2170D-4 with ease! My TV had 20% overscan on all sides and i reduced this to ~3%. My VSIZ was on 51 I lowered this to 42. My HSIZ was on 50 and i lowered this to 36, I wonder why they were set this high from the factory? (or the showroom floor i shoudl say :( ). This was the greatest thing to ever happen to my tv! I also fixed some geometry problems using some of the pincushions and trapezoids. I found myself messing with VANG and LANG a lot trying to find a medium between the two but ended up going back to the factory settings but I spent at least 45min on these two items. The DPQ settings in 2170D-4 were of great help also since the edges of my TV were blurry. I used an inverse crosshatch pattern to see the bluriness (was really noticeable in this pattern) and fixed as much of the blur as I could.

Now, that was all fine and dandy but what on earth does convergence of vertical lines do (D-CONV)?! I thought it had to do with geometry (ie, RUMB = right upper middle bow, YBWL = y-bow lower) but none of the settings I tried did anything I could see AT ALL. is there a trick to it?

anyways, thank the Lord for these forums, now I can fiddle with my TV in a way I never thought imaginable, it's pretty fun :)

Now, that was all fine and dandy but what on earth does convergence of vertical lines do (D-CONV)?! I thought it had to do with geometry (ie, RUMB = right upper middle bow, YBWL = y-bow lower) but none of the settings I tried did anything I could see AT ALL. is there a trick to it?


The D-CONV parameters allow you to improve any mis-convergence visable along vertical lines -- such as, if you put up a cross hatch pattern and see blue or red lines "next" to the white cross hatch pattern lines .. If you aren't seeing any of those "extra" blue or red lines along vertical lines in cross hatch pattern, then there is no reason for you to adjust any of the D-CONV settings.

Search this thread for D-CONV, or some of the settings(such as RUMB) and you should be able to find posts with more specific info concerning which area of the screen each control impacts. There is also a nice little chart showing what each control does in section 2-3.4 of the Service Manual(pg. 36~37).

RUMB for example would allow you to adjust for a misconvergence in Right upper portion of screen on vertical lines, with the "bow" being adjustable for any Red or blue "extra" lines that may be present ... You'd want to make the Red+blue lines "disappear" and "combine" with the White line as much as possible ....

There are no dynamic convergence settings available in the SM for any visable vertical mis-convergence, which may be visable on horizontal lines in a cross hatch pattern.

Hope some of this above is useful!



anyways, thank the Lord for these forums, now I can fiddle with my TV in a way I never thought imaginable, it's pretty fun


Excellent, and Amen :)

Iv got a big problem with my 36XS955. Iv noticed some pulsing in the picture for a while now, but a few days ago the picture expanded so a bit is lost on all sides. Is this something that can be fixed in the service menu, and if so, what would the procedure be? Id really appreciate some advice. Rick.

The third photo is of the greyscale settings I actually USE and is the image at TOP in file attached to this messageI am reposting your last image with a modification, which helps to show any errant coloration in the bars: I completely desaturated the bottom half of both screen photos. For the top image, the darker bars still have some coloration (i.e. the camera image has coloration). An assessment in Photoshop shows plus red and minus blue, relative to green, and the amounts are in about a 1:2 ratio, depending on the bar measured.

If you see what the photo shows, then you might try a _CUT correction of -1 red and +2 blue, and see if there is an improvement.

I'm not quite sure I trust a digital-camera photo of the screen yet, and my experience with several digital cameras is that "manual" operation guarantees total control over shutter, aperture, and internal gain (DIN boost). But autofocus and white balance are still automatic, unless they are explicitly set to be different. I'm suspicious of the perfect white represented in your photos; it would seem quite a coincidence if your camera's fixed white balance exactly matched your TV screen.

What camera are you using? Usually one can choose among a few fixed white balances (cloudy, sunlight, incandescent, etc.), auto (on-the-fly), and custom/manual, where you aim the camera at a known gray target, and press a button, capturing a balance for that light. It stays the same until you press the button again.

Some cameras have the ability to capture images in a RAW format, i.e. "digital negative." The camera makes no adjustments to the image whatever and sets only shutter, focus, and aperture. Then in Photoshop, or a similar program, you can make your own corrections, including white balance. If the camera's calibration isn't too far off, it will also report the color temperature of the detected illuminant, or you can tweak a CT slider in the RAW viewer until a selected "white" appears neutral on-screen, and then read CT from the slider. I haven't tried this yet, as I am confident of the grayscale linearity and white point of my several screens at present. But it's a worthwhile experiment.

We are assuming that the camera's response is quite linear in color response at differing brightness levels. I hope that's not expecting too much! I would eventually want to test this assumption against a known-linear grayscale pattern, either reflective (a Kodak card would work) or emittive (a calibrated screen). Better yet, just aim the camera at a uniform gray target and set manual color balance for the target. Then set several different exposures that would produce dark thru light versions of the target. Compare on the computer.

Iv got a big problem with my 36XS955. Iv noticed some pulsing in the picture for a while now, but a few days ago the picture expanded so a bit is lost on all sides. Is this something that can be fixed in the service menu, and if so, what would the procedure be? Id really appreciate some advice.I'm willing to bet it can't be adjusted away. If the picture is pulsing or twitching, and it didn't used to, an intermittent problem has developed. That's not an adjustment issue.

One likely thing that can affect the overall size of the picture (i.e. growth in all directions, not just vertical or horizintal) is a decrease in the high-voltage supply -- the 34.5kV beam-acceleration voltage. If a component is failing in a way that lowers this voltage, the picture would bloat in overall size and get slightly dimmer. Focus may change, too.

Time to get an assessment by a service tech who knows these sets. It's likely you could describe this verbally at a shop or show a tech a video of the problem.

Thanks for the reply, KenTech. Yeah, I think it's probably a power supply issue, God knows how much that would be to fix. (I knew I should have gotten the extended warranty!) One other odd thing has happened- the screen button is not fuunctioning. When i press screen it displays full mode, but i cant access any other mode.

The D-CONV parameters allow you to improve any mis-convergence visable along vertical lines -- such as, if you put up a cross hatch pattern and see blue or red lines "next" to the white cross hatch pattern lines .. If you aren't seeing any of those "extra" blue or red lines along vertical lines in cross hatch pattern, then there is no reason for you to adjust any of the D-CONV settings.

Search this thread for D-CONV, or some of the settings(such as RUMB) and you should be able to find posts with more specific info concerning which area of the screen each control impacts. There is also a nice little chart showing what each control does in section 2-3.4 of the Service Manual(pg. 36~37).

RUMB for example would allow you to adjust for a misconvergence in Right upper portion of screen on vertical lines, with the "bow" being adjustable for any Red or blue "extra" lines that may be present ... You'd want to make the Red+blue lines "disappear" and "combine" with the White line as much as possible ....

There are no dynamic convergence settings available in the SM for any visable vertical mis-convergence, which may be visable on horizontal lines in a cross hatch pattern.

Hope some of this above is useful!




Excellent, and Amen :)

oh excellent. I will delve into the D-Conv tonight and check it out, I do believe the upper left hand corner of my screen has a convergence problem like you described. thanks

I completely desaturated the bottom half of both screen photos.


You're way ahead of me Ken! What an excellent idea !


the darker bars still have some coloration (i.e. the camera image has coloration).


It is the best I've been able to come up with so far, although I don't think it is quite "perfect" yet, even if the camera shot doesn't quite match the screen ....


An assessment in Photoshop shows plus red and minus blue, relative to green, and the amounts are in about a 1:2 ratio, depending on the bar measured.


I do "see" the slight "Plus Red" on the TV screen, I'm not quite sure about the minus Blue, I haven't noticed that, In fact, if anything I thought it might be just a tad +blue.


If you see what the photo shows, then you might try a _CUT correction of -1 red and +2 blue, and see if there is an improvement.


It's *seems*pretty close to the same, I haven't had the time yet to stew on or attempt to "quantify" what any small diferences might be(which might be difficult since I don't have a calibrated PC monitor to use).

Anyhow, I'll have to try that(hopefully tonight), and see what comes of it, as I haven't tried that with -1 red. Previous experience seems to suggest changing only BCUT +1 or +2 might start puting things a little too much on the "blue" or "cool" side .....


I'm not quite sure I trust a digital-camera photo of the screen yet


Oh, I don't either ... I am however surprised at just how close it seems to be "working" -- even although -- as the below indicates I really didn't set up the exposures for "best" results" --

Not only because of what I see on my TV screen vs what I see on a PC monitor(if there are any small differences there, again I haven't quanitifed them yet as the PC+TV are in seperate rooms), but also, in a "general way" given what everyone on the thread who has commented on it has seen ...


, and my experience with several digital cameras is that "manual" operation guarantees total control over shutter, aperture, and internal gain (DIN boost). But autofocus and white balance are still automatic, unless they are explicitly set to be different. I'm suspicious of the perfect white represented in your photos; it would seem quite a coincidence if your camera's fixed white balance exactly matched your TV screen.


I did let the camera "autofocus", as if I used manual focus, my focus setting may have been lost when the camera automatically powered down If I didn't get to the next exposure "quickly enough".


What camera are you using? Usually one can choose among a few fixed white balances (cloudy, sunlight, incandescent, etc.), auto (on-the-fly), and custom/manual, where you aim the camera at a known gray target, and press a button, capturing a balance for that light. It stays the same until you press the button again.


This is a Canon PowerShot G1.

NOTE that also, the camera does have a "Black and white" mode, however you can't use it and manually adjust the exposure(except for manual focus), and, If I'm thinking about this right, we couldn't use it to photo a TV's greyscale and see the "color contamination issues ....


Anyhow --- A bit of a "correction" to an earlier post --- I did "erronously" leave the Camera's white balance settings on "auto"(white balance settings are detirmined by the camera) for all the photos I've posted. I had remembered the white balance settings incorrectly, as I thought I'd remembered I'd read they were "static" for "manual" mode, well I remembered wrong .... Here are the available white balance settings I can select :

Auto, Daylight, Cloudy, Tungsten lighting, Flouresent lighting, Flash and
Custom - The latter just as you say for "setting a custom value with a white sheet of paper, etc, to obtain the optimal white balance for the conditions ...."

-------------------------------------------------


Some cameras have the ability to capture images in a RAW format, i.e. "digital negative." The camera makes no adjustments to the image whatever and sets only shutter, focus, and aperture. Then in Photoshop, or a similar program, you can make your own corrections, including white balance. If the camera's calibration isn't too far off, it will also report the color temperature of the detected illuminant, or you can tweak a CT slider in the RAW viewer until a selected "white" appears neutral on-screen, and then read CT from the slider.


Yes, this camera does a "RAW format", back when I was using the camera more often, I used "RAW" images with photo editing software quite often, although I generally worked more with the TIF's I created after transfer from the camera.

And, I should be able to accomplish all those tasks -- It might be a while, but, when I get a chance I will do some further "experiments" and will post what I find.


We are assuming that the camera's response is quite linear in color response at differing brightness levels.


I'm really not assuming all that much so far, Ken ... Really, I have been surprised the images I've taken so far of the greyscale as it appears on screen are seemingly at least somewhat close to what they are on the set! Obviously, even with the camera's "auto white balance", you can clearly see the difference between the Set default's "warm" offset, and my current preferred "neutral" settings, which are (more or less per the "offset discussion), BCUT +4, and GCUT -1 from the factory "warm" setting .....


Better yet, just aim the camera at a uniform gray target and set manual color balance for the target. Then set several different exposures that would produce dark thru light versions of the target. Compare on the computer.

Yes, that seems like a good idea ..... Probably end up trying this as well as working with the RAW format+Photoshop and/or PSP ....

As I said, however -- It might be a while before you hear back from me on this! Many projects going on here currently, I can't quite "pause" many of them ;)

damn just my luck. so over the last month or so my HD channels have been like dying out. everything has become extrememly oversaturated and bleeding and what not. So i took the time tonight to read up on the service codes and i decided to go through and change pretty much all of the in hope to get everthing back to normal.

well in the end all looked very good again finally until i saved and turned off the tv. Now the picture still looks great but for the life of me a cant figure out how to fix my cable box guide. Its all bowed and distored and i've tryed like every setting and i just cant get it back to normal.

I even tried (8) - (enter) in hope to restore defaults to fix it and that didnt work either.

anyways if anyone has a complete list of service codes specifically for the KV32HS500 that would be so i could put them back the way they should be.

or if someone knows which codes might work best for this so i can get this fixed that would be great too.

thanx

I posted this question in a new thread but didn't get much of a response so I'll try here. My friend has a 40" XBR (not sure of exact model #) that seems to have gone out of focus. Can someone direct me to a post that discusses how to fix this if it's been covered before or provide some new info regarding this focus problem? Any help is greatly appreciated.

I posted this question in a new thread but didn't get much of a response so I'll try here. My friend has a 40" XBR (not sure of exact model #) that seems to have gone out of focus. Can someone direct me to a post that discusses how to fix this if it's been covered before or provide some new info regarding this focus problem? Any help is greatly appreciated.

Use the function "Search this thread". A search on "focus" will give you loads of reading material.

Anyone wanna buy a tv?

34 XBR960

Not to bug you fred, but this is the wrong forum for that. Anyway PM me as I need to replace mine.

Just wanted to ask you guys what you think about getting an XBR960 calibrated. Specifically wanted to ask, how do you know if the guy that is calibrating it is actually doing a good job? Is it possible to get a poor calibration? because people say that you need to get it "properly calibrated". If the person that is doing the calibration is ISF certified is that good enough or could an ISF certified tech do a poor job? I know that you'll probably say read through the forums to find my answer but I just don't have the time. Also, I saw in "Widescreen Review" magazine in the front of the magazine where they have a protocol for the ideal setup or home theater. They recommend a kelvin temperature calibration. Can the ISF techs do this? I'm just worried that I won't get a perfect calibration or near perfect. Any info would be greatly apreciated.

Just wanted to ask you guys what you think about getting an XBR960 calibrated. Specifically wanted to ask, how do you know if the guy that is calibrating it is actually doing a good job? Is it possible to get a poor calibration? because people say that you need to get it "properly calibrated". If the person that is doing the calibration is ISF certified is that good enough or could an ISF certified tech do a poor job? I know that you'll probably say read through the forums to find my answer but I just don't have the time. Also, I saw in "Widescreen Review" magazine in the front of the magazine where they have a protocol for the ideal setup or home theater. They recommend a kelvin temperature calibration. Can the ISF techs do this? I'm just worried that I won't get a perfect calibration or near perfect. Any info would be greatly apreciated.Interview your calibrator, ask questions.

Yeah, I know its the wrong forum. Thats why its only a few lines :)

Not to bug you fred, but this is the wrong forum for that. Anyway PM me as I need to replace mine.

Just wanted to ask you guys what you think about getting an XBR960 calibrated.This is the wrong forum for this question. Try the Display Calibration forum, right next door:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?s=&daysprune=&f=139

We are assuming that the camera's response is quite linear in color response at differing brightness levels. I hope that's not expecting too much!


I performed some experiments, and discovered my camera" "response" apparently isn't quite "linear" enough to provide an accurate representation of a greyscale test pattern(IRE steps/etc) on the screen with one exposure. I believe the screenshot attached to this message as "powershotg1whitebalancelinearity.jpg", along with the description below should demonstrate this.

All 4 greyscale "slices" in attached image are all taken from the same "exposure" but processed differently via software as noted below :

Top - Greyscale (colors completely desaturated)

2nd Down - Custom white balance, "as shot" by the camera -- to calibrate Camera white balance, I used a sheet of roll paper of the type once used in teletype machines sitting on the ground in direct mid-day sunlight.

3rd Down - Camera's "daylight" white balance setting, set using Camera's "RAW" viewer/twain driver.

Bottom - Camera's "auto" white balance setting, set using Camera's RAW format viewer/twain driver.

----------------------------------------------------------------

DO note that the attached graphic is NOT meant to represent what the greyscale actually "looks like" on my screen. Although, the "auto-white balance" slice overall, and the darker IRE bars in the 2nd "slice' downmiddle are closest to what is "on screen" given the RDRV~BCUT, and other various related settings(white level/black levels/etc) used. To be as complete as is reasonably possible, for this image I was using : RDRV~BCUT= 32-17-9-31-16-11 .

------------------------------------------------------

The file attached as "exposureinfo.txt" contains detailed info on the camera exposure settings as saved with Camera's RAW format, as well as info on the TV's user menu sliders used. Note that "custom" white balance as reported in the file is only relevant for the 2nd slice from top as described above(and all slices in file attached to "part II post below). I also changed the file number/serial number to "various" since the file info pertains to 1 exposure described above(for powershotg1whitebalanceliearity.jpg), and for several exposures for Offsetcomparison.jpg, as described andattahced in the next post (part II). Suppose I should have changed the "time" as well to be more accurate for all the shots as well .. Oh well ... You get the idea ....

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thoughts:

In such cases when one cannot easily "move" their PC monitor(assuming a relatively close to 6500K "setting" on the PC monitor) to the same room as the TV :

I do believe it may be possible in some cases to use a digital camera screenshot of the TV screen(or at least part of it/part of a greyscale step pattern), along with a PC monitor with a 6500K color temp setting as a somewhat "seat of pants" tool in order to help one "see" or spot greyscale linearity issues, and perhaps aid in adjustment. But, I think one has to be very careful about drawing any "direct" conclusions from the digital camera screenshots.

At least in my case it seemed to help in this regard - Mainly, it helped me to "see" that something still wasn't quite right with my prior adjustments(mostly "by eye" only) although it did not necessarily show a perfect representation of what I needed to do, adjustment wise.

So, noticing that greyscale seems(from what I can tell) both close to 6500K(given the monitor's 6500K Color Temp setting), AND MOSTLY Linear on one CRT PC monitor I use - I decided to move the PC monitor(and PC), temporarily to the room with the TV so I could use it as a optical comparator of sorts to assist in adjusting the greyscale on the TV.

I also made use of another CRT PC monitor as a 2nd reference for not only the TV greyscale, but also to "sort of" check the other monitor. I assume since the greyscale is extremely similar with each monitor's 6500K setting for 2 completely different monitors from different manufactuers, and seems to match what my "idea" of 6500K is as well as seeminly matching the white of mid-day scattered "puffy" clouds lit directly by the sun, one might assume both monitors are probably both fairly "close" to 6500K, yes?

For completeness, Here's what most closely matches the PC monitor(with 6500K setting) via optical comparision. Note that I also endeavored to set Black/white levels+"gamma" as closely as possible on the PC monitor(s) to match the TV's settings, I used various greyscale patterns via Memory stick/DVD/etc :

RDRV~BCUT - 32-19-7-24-16-7 - Note: May need a bit of improvement "linearity" wise, concerning some slight yellowish "stuff" going on at certian brightness levels.

Either of the below may make for slightly "better", more "linear" greyscale - I haven't decided yet which of the three settings is best :

RDRV~BCUT - 32-19-6-23-17-9 -- Note: This may be VERY slightly +blue, and may very slightly(very very slightly) change the higher IRE's to the "cooler" side) however at this point I think the linearity is the best on this one - looks very neutral grey throughout brightness range ) :

RDRV~BCUT = 32-19-7-23-17-7 : Note: Linearity seems to be better with this one, but at this point, I believe its slightly +green ....

Attached to this message as "offsetcomparison.Jpg" are greyscale slices from 3 different digital camera pics, each "exposure" was captured with digital camera using the exposure settings as detailed in the file "expsoureinfo.txt" as attached to last post(part I). The same static "custom" white balance for the camera was used for all 3 "exposures", which I believe will offer a "correction" of sorts to the screenshots I previously posted in Post #1661 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7821582&&#post7821582). Those previously posted images being images captured using the camera's "auto" white balance, a variable which might have caused some slight, unintended "differences" which I believe do not actually show up on the TV screen.

The custom white balance I set the camera to use for the images attached to this post was from when I was experimenting with using different "sources" for setting a custom white balance. If I recall correctly, for these images I believe I had it set rather arbitrarily from a mostly white screen from a LCD PC monitor, although it's really not relevant to my purposes here other than pertaining to, #1). the camera's white balance being set the same(static) for all 3 images, and #2). all other exposure settings for the camera being set exactly the same for each captured image, #3). All TV settings set the same except as noted below concerning 2170P-1 Greyscale settings.

So --- In no way, shape or form are these images to be considered indicative of what the greyscale "looks like" ON my TV screen, nor are they meant to be. As was my original purpose in Post #1661 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7821582&&#post7821582) , Instead, these screenshots are only meant to support my belief that the same greyscale results on the TV given the 3 "different" settings as described below - or to put it another way, my "belief" that on my set at least, +1/-1 DRV/CUT is the same "scale" as +1/-1 DOF/COF for warm/cool offsetsoffsets. :

Description of Greyscale slices in attached image :

Top - Digital camera "exposure" taken while using the following factory default 2170P-1 settings, with "warm" color temp selected from user menu :

RDRV~BCUT - 32-22-24-32-21-17

Warm Offset :

RDOF~BCOF : 31-26-16-31-27-19
SBOF = 7
DCOL = 0

----------------------------------


Middle - Digital camera "exposure" taken while using the following 2170P1 SM settings, with "Neutral" Color Temp selected from User menu:

RDRV~BCUT = 32-17-9-32-17-5

------------------------------------------------------------------

Bottom - Digital camera "exposure" taken while using the following 2170P1 SM settings, with "Warm" Color Temp selected from User menu:

RDRV~BCUT = 32-17-9-32-16-9

Warm Offset :

RDOF~BCOF = 31-31-31-31-32-27
SBOF=7
DCOL=0

---------------------------------------------

So, I still believe the SAME greyscale results on TV screen from any three of the above described settings as would be the case with "neutral" color temp setting selected from user menu while using RDRV~BCUT=32-17-9-32-17-5(middle example). Or, at least it's the same within my ability to "see" or detect any differences, if there are any. Hopefully, this time the greyscale "slices" in the posted images will better support this "belief" than was the case with my previously posted images with the camera doing auto white balance, although I still wouldn't be surprised if there were some very, very slight differences due to small differences in how the exposure turned out -- such as, for example, due to possible differences in luminance that might have resulted due to the scanning frequencies of the TV when the camera shutter was opened for each exposure(hope that makes sense!). I also have higher resolution seperate images(Tif/Camera's RAW format or JPEG's) for each pic if further, more "detailed" is required ....

Note that another factor that seems to support this "belief" : With BCUT=5 for example -- If I use warm offset, and lower BCOF lower than "26", there seems to be no effect/change on screen for any value lower than BCOF=26. which makes sense if each +1 or -1 offset value is "equal" to +1 or -1 DRV or CUT value, rather than say, .75 RDOF~BCOF vs 1 for RDRV~BCUT ....

I just purchased a sony kd 32fs170 and the blacks are to dark. Night scenes, black clothing and any black objects have no detail.

I have tried adjusting picture and brightness to higher settings but this has no real effect.

How can I fix this problem? I do not know how to access the service menu nor what adjustments should be made, any help would be appreciated or I will have to take the tv back.

Thanks for your time,

John

In no way, shape or form are these images to be considered indicative of what the greyscale "looks like" ON my TV screen, nor are they meant to be. As was my original purpose in Post #1661 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7821582&&#post7821582) , Instead, these screenshots are only meant to support my belief that the same greyscale results on the TV given the 3 "different" settings as described below - or to put it another way, my "belief" that on my set at least, +1/-1 DRV/CUT is the same "scale" as +1/-1 DOF/COF for warm/cool offsetsoffsets.My experiments confirm this, too, and so I have assumed that one notch change in the Cool/Warm offset parameters RDOF~BCOF = one notch in the base parameters RDRV~BCUT. You are using the camera as a comparator, which seems valid to me as long as the camera isn't making any color adjustments on its own.

I am coming to believe that my own Canon G2 is (1) NOT an accurate color-temp (CT) meter (e.g. taking a RAW image, and reading the color temp slider in Photoshop after balancing the color-patch in question to perfect gray). Nor is it (2) linear in grayscale for different exposures -- at least not enough for calibration purposes. On this latter issue, I have yet to run a detailed test, but that's my impression so far.

I have to say: There is no question in my mind that the most difficult task is that of balancing the grayscale (i.e. _DRV vs _CUT settings), as the eye is so accommodating that errors can look mighty fine! I found that, when looking at b/w photographic or movie images onscreen (Color slider set to Min=OFF), I was really happy with slightly cool or magenta shadows for aesthetic reasons, fer Pete's sake! Gray patches were much better for testing, as I couldn't relate to the content. Skipping among the various percent-white patches on the DVE disk is also useful, as you can make a color judgement before the eye has a chance to adapt. The four-patch grayscale-plus-pluge bars pattern is good, too.

I think there is a bigger issue; I'll explain in personal terms: In the context of normal evening TV programming and with ambient lighting set low enough so it doesn't affect the eye's color-adaptation, my eye has a fairly critical and consistent perception of real white. Blown highlights, white text and graphics, cartoon eyeballs -- you name it -- are all perceived consistently and are easily perceived as "cool" or neutral or "pinkish" or "warm."

In my living room in the evening, after watching the screen for a while, I simply want digital/analog white as broadcast and recorded on DVD to appear neutral white. If that is true, all else follows naturally -- bad video color, subtle white variations, a film director's color-balance variations, and truly gorgeous natural video. I know that the CT is 6000-7000K, but I don't know what it is exactly. And I don't care. If a precision 6500K "expert" calibration by one Joe Shmoe would result in my set, under those conditions, showing broadcast or recorded 100% white as anything but perceived white, that calibration would be simply wrong. There is no rational argument that video-white should be calibrated so as to appear anything but white. (What would be valuable, however, is the linear grayscale that would result. Then I would tweak the overall CT.)

The logic is simple. The world as represented in video is encoded using a specific signal level as 100% or saturated white, representing an intended true white. How that is assigned is up to the production company, but I receive it as broadcast or recorded as a specific electrical representation. This 100% white representation must be displayed on my screen as perceived white. I don't know how this varies from person to person (assuming uncrippled color vision), but who else must be satisfied, here? Some external authority? I don't think so!

So, over time, and having made a good attempt to get it right initially, my procedure has been thus: After watching my TV under normal evening circumstances, I ask "How are the whites? Hmmm. Maybe slightly and consistenly yellow." So I drop into service mode, add 1 click of BDRV and BCUT, write the settings, and go back to watching the TV. After these minor tweaks over a few days or weeks, I get a screen that makes me think "Wow, that's beautiful!" when I sit down to watch. And that's what matters! (I do write down and date the changes each time, too.)

It follows from the above that I am really curious if one notch change in _CUT tracks one notch in _DRV. That is, if I have a perfect correspondence among the various grays but their CT is off, can I make equal adjustments to _DRV and _CUT and maintain that precious linearity. There's no particular reason to assume this, although I have done so as a first approximation,

I may use my digital camera as a comparator to see if this is the case. So far I haven't gotten around to it.

I just purchased a sony kd 32fs170 and the blacks are to dark. Night scenes, black clothing and any black objects have no detail. I have tried adjusting picture and brightness to higher settings but this has no real effect.Do you mean that, if you increase the Brightness slider setting, the "blacks" do not turn grayish and begin to glow? If you can't do this, you have a defective set!

The certain way to test for this is to use one of the excellent test DVDs, AVIA or Digital Video Essentials. (Requires a DVD player, of course.) This would prove the point without your having to rely on some broadcast video images that may really NOT have any black detail.

But if you can't bring the black level up to a dim gray with the Brightness control, something must be wrong with the set. (The Picture control won't affect this.)

Kentech,

I realized that although the info from your postings were not about my tv, the sony codes are universal. Although my tv doesn't have all the service codes talked about, my tv does have most, so I adjusted those. I have also bought a service manual for last years model the FS130 (basically exactly the same set) so I now have that to reference.

I am amazed it is much better, the picture is breathtaking and I can see fabric and dark scenes excellent.

The picture is now excellent, and wonder what else should I do. Some stations below channel 20 have a little snow or static in them but I attribute that signal since all other channels and signals are great. Are these the best settings, are there any other settings I can and should adjust to maximize performance?

Although you recommended SBRT 31-33 I found that level too low and could not see dark objects or details in black objects. Can I lower SBRT and adust something else (my tv does not have an SBOF adjustment)?

Is my tv defective because I have to set the SBRT to 54 (max setting of 63)?

Here's what I changed these are my current settings old setting in ().

Under VP1:

SBRT 53 (12)

RDRV 42 (84)
GDRV 28 (81)
BDRV 25 (79)
RCUT 31 (100)
GCUT 18 (51)
BCUT 14 (42)

Under Pallete:

VGMA 2 (1)

Under VP2:

GAMM 2 (1)
BDOF-BCOC 31

and then adjusted for warm and cool setting

Warm

GDOF 31
BDOF 29
GCOF 31
BCOF 29

Cool

GDOF 31
BDOF 33
GCOF 31
BCOF 33

then I repeated the preceding in all inputs (Video1, 2, etc.) and modes (pro, normal, movies) so when I switch I can have close to the same picture.

I plan to buy the Avia disc Home theater setup, to see if that can improve performance any further.

Thanks Kentech for your dedication and excellent usefull info.

I have to say: There is no question in my mind that the most difficult task is that of balancing the grayscale (i.e. _DRV vs _CUT settings), as the eye is so accommodating that errors can look mighty fine!

Funny that you mention this, as I have recently found the same problem. I recently had to redo my greyscale because I discovered the GAMB was jacked up to 3 from zero without me knowing it :mad:. I don't know how this happened, but it did. While trying to redo the greyscale and finding pure white, I went back and forth from too much red to too much green, etc., and noticed that the eyes quickly adjust to perceive white when it is still color tainted. All I can do is go back and forth between too much saturation of blue, green, and red and try to find a compromise, but it's really difficult since the eyes adjust so quickly. One minute I think I'm looking at near pure white, then try to check it by oversaturating one color and then quickly returning back to the previous settings, but it looks different than it did before!

It's too bad colorimeters are so expensive as they would make the whole process so much easier. Are there any consumer grade colorimeters under $500 that are decent?

It's too bad colorimeters are so expensive as they would make the whole process so much easier. Are there any consumer grade colorimeters under $500 that are decent?

I use the SpyderTV with the support mode (reads x,y,Y data).
You can also use raders spreadsheet or the new calman software.
See the calibration thread for details...

All I can do is go back and forth between too much saturation of blue, green, and red and try to find a compromise, but it's really difficult since the eyes adjust so quickly. One minute I think I'm looking at near pure white, then try to check it by oversaturating one color and then quickly returning back to the previous settings, but it looks different than it did before!Yep! Unless you practice this, simply looking at a continuous-tone b/w picture (Color=Min) turns out to be a poor test, no matter what I have said before. I now much prefer something like the 4-patch gray plus pluge on DVE. The adjacent gray patches are different enough, and white and dark gray are close enough, that you can much more easily see whether, say, the dark gray is bluer than the white or lightest gray. The dim pluge bars represent a deep "black" if you up the Brightness a little, so you can unify the whole pattern. Then you can check your work by skipping thru channels with Color=Min to see if you're reasonably on-target.

It takes a couple of go-arounds to get it right: approximate a good color temp for white, then balance grays, then watch normal programming and touch up the white (as described a couple of posts above), check the grays, etc. Don't rush it or you'll get frustrated. No matter how badly I have screwed up what were actually decent settings, in serch of "perfection," I have been able to return to near-perfect settings by referring to records of previous settings and touching up the whites while watching real program material.

Note that this does not work unless the TV is dominating your vision and your eyes have not become dark-adapted! An evening's dim ambient light and a suitably bright screen are perfect, not a dark room (hopeless!) or a bright afternoon when the light is colored by the green trees outside your windows (TV looks pink) or the blue sky above (TV looks orangish).It's too bad colorimeters are so expensive as they would make the whole process so much easier. Are there any consumer grade colorimeters under $500 that are decent?Maybe a posh unit would make it easier. Inexpensive units tend to have light vs dark errors, and so they would mislead you on grayscale calibration. I have two such units from different manufacturers, designed for computer screens. Both get me close to 6500K if I request that, but then I have to remove a greenish cast manually by looking out the window at bright clouds (no glass) while tuning the color. Then I have a perfect, white screen, important for Photoshop digital-photo tinkering. Doesn't work on my TV, but I can calibrate a spare CRT-iMac computer, and have it nearby as a reference in the living room.

This is not a one-time process! You will want to re-visit the grayscale and white calibration as the set ages (or as you get smarter). I highly recommend learning how to do it, how to spot light/dark-gray color discrepancies, and to trust your eye while watching programming in a properly dim room. This empowers you, the owner of the set, and you can take pride in its, ahem, perfection! (See DVE or AVIA for appropriate ambient-lighting rerferences.)

TRIED-AND-TRUE SELF-REFERENCING GRAYSCALE CALIBRATION

There is a technique, easy to implement on a computer because of its fine scan lines, that will result in a perfect grayscale linearity. I have experimented with it on my TV using the Memory Stick image-viewing feature and maximum-quality jpeg encoding.

Using a computer and whatever graphics-program skills you have, make up a test pattern of several blocks against a black background. These blocks should be made up of horizontal white lines in various spacings, including zero-spacing (pure white). E.g. all lines white (solid white), every other line, every third line, every fourth line, etc. If these blocks are viewed at a distance with blurred vision, the lines appear to blend into a nearly continuous tone, and the blocks appear to be various shades of gray. But since they are made up of white lines against black, the "color" of each "gray" exactly matches the white. (Warning: Vertical lines or dots will interact with the color-phosphor pattern on the CRT, producing false colors. Use horizintal lines, or long dashes if you must.)

Now position several continuous-tone gray blocks next to the ones made up of white lines. Their gray percentage should match the perceived gray of the lined blocks when blurred by the eye. Bottom line: These blocks' colors are determined by the grayscale accuracy of the display, and the lined blocks are an adjacent perfect reference, linked only to white.

Now one simply adjusts the grayscale calibration until there is no perceivable color differences between the continuous-tone blocks and the adjacent blocks made up of white lines.

On my 36XS955, the MS display is exactly 1440 X 1080i, and so an every-other-line pattern flickers at 30Hz -- very distracting, but you can sorta ignore it. Wider spacings are hard to blur, and you have to walk a ways back from the TV to get adequate blurring from your eyes. (The patters are much coarser than on a computer.) Trying this via still-patterns on a DVD is even more difficult. But I wanted to present the basic idea; maybe creative readers will come up with some new methods that are practical for a TV.

If you can make up a pattern like this, it is a secure and accurate indication of your grayscale linearity, no matter what color you have set for white. I will attempt to clean up my experimental pattern and post it.

UPDATE-1: Zip file has now been attached, native for 1440 X 1080. Extract parts of it or cut it down, as needed. The 50% patch is 2+2 alternating black and white, since 1+1 flickeres so badly.

UPDATE-2: Just tested the file on my 36XS955, and it works perfectly from a memory stick. (The thumbnail is screwed up; full display is fine.) The most useful patterns are those in the lower-right, particularly the next-to-darkest pair. Make sure that the background is pure black, with no background glow. Turn Color all the way to Min.

This pattern should display fine on a 16X9 set, since it's the 1:1 mapping of scan lines that's important, not the horizintal scaling. But I can't test this. Let me know if a 1920 X 1080 version is needed, and I'll make one up.

Although you recommended SBRT 31-33 I found that level too low and could not see dark objects or details in black objects.... Is my tv defective because I have to set the SBRT to 54 (max setting of 63)?
I doubt that recommendation applies to FS170s. And FWIW, I definitely think it's strange that you have SBRT at 54. I have it at 24 on my 27FS170.

Quote:

"And FWIW, I definitely think it's strange that you have SBRT at 54. I have it at 24 on my 27FS170."

1.) what does FWIW mean?

2.) What should I do (is there something I can adjust), are my drv levels too low why is my set soo dark and have to turn up SBRT so high? (the current picute is great)

Thanks for your time MechanicalMan

fwiw = for what it's worth

I can't advise you. But I think I'd be a little nervous if I needed to put my SBRT so high. That doesn't seem normal. As you said, the default is 12. If your TV looks right at 54, it must have looked completely wrong at 12..? So without going into the service menu (which we aren't expected to do), you wouldn't have been able to get a satisfactory picture on your TV? I'd be afraid that something is wrong with the set. I wouldn't want GAMM at 3 on my set either, but that one is subjective. Still, the fact that you have SBRT at 54 and GAMM at 3 makes it sound like you are compensating for a problem. *shrug* Changing your DRV and CUT values won't help.

Once again I will say that I am saying only to use Vivid while gaming, at no other time do I use it. The image that Vivid provides with the right tweaks (and picture and brightness sliders at 31 clicks which is the middle) is unbelievable while gaming, it looks terrible for anything else though. I use pro mode for regular TV watching and Movie mode (tweaked) for DVDs, and Vivid for my PS2 and Xbox 360.

i was under the impression that vivid was bad for the tv, what are these "right" tweaks, and how can it make games look great but everything else crap, cause if you look at my "suggested thread" youd see that i am having black crush problems in pro... anything 480p and above, so that would be what, 1080i conversioned up?

i was under the impression that vivid was bad for the tv, what are these "right" tweaks...
AFAIK, the only thing that could be harmful about using Vivid (with the default settings) is the picture setting. On my Sony, Vivid had picture maxed, and Standard was almost as bad. Bolo said in his post that he has "picture... at 31 clicks which is the middle."

This is not a one-time process! You will want to re-visit the grayscale and white calibration as the set ages (or as you get smarter).


Given my set is used by everyone in the family and is generally on 12~15 hours a day, I wonder how often I should plan on revisiting greyscale(at least checking it to see if I can detirmine anything has changed), once I'm satisfied I have "good greyscale", currently?

I've pretty much decided regarding my current "greyscale revisiting" that I'm going to spend the time, "no matter what" and how long it takes to get it "exactly" how I want it, and I believe I'm very close to achieving that point, now ....

On previous occasions I was more interested in spending time with other improvements via SM such as image processing/etc, I had only been interested in getting the greyscale a little more "in the ballpark" vs. the factory supplied settings. But, as time went on, I also made some seemingly small improvements to those settings when I noticed something about the greyscale that particularly "bothered me".

Hence, since I have occasionally made adjustments from time to time, it's difficult to get any sort of an idea concerning how often I may want to "revisit" the greyscale settings, or whether or not anything has "changed" so far, after a year of useage ...

Perhaps, in the future I should plan to look at greyscale/test patterns at least once a year or so?

There is a technique, easy to implement on a computer because of its fine scan lines, that will result in a perfect grayscale linearity.<snip> .....
Now one simply adjusts the grayscale calibration until there is no perceivable color differences between the continuous-tone blocks and the adjacent blocks made up of white lines.


Excellent! This turns out to be very useful for me. Looked at this a little last night using your attached pattern and this does seem to work very well!


You have to walk a ways back from the TV to get adequate blurring from your eyes.


What seems to work well for me is looking at it with my glasses removed(I'm quite nearsighted --- beyond about 15" away, things are quite blurry without the glasses!) a little closer to the screen, and then doublechecking that with glasses on farther away .... about 10 feet is as far away as I can get without knocking out a wall, and 10 feet didn't quite seem far enough away at first to allow my brain to interpet what my eyes were seeing. I did notice it was probably a good idea for me to closely examine the pattern for very short periods, as it seemed quite a strain on the eyes - especially with my glasses off!

I didn't try it, but I wonder if lowering sharpness slider, adjusting the various EE related image processing SM settings, and/or defocusing with the focus pot on HV transformer may also be beneifical to achieve the necessary blurring if one doesn't "wear glasses", or can't quite move far enough from screen, so to speak?


This pattern should display fine on a 16X9 set, since it's the 1:1 mapping of scan lines that's important, not the horizintal scaling. But I can't test this. Let me know if a 1920 X 1080 version is needed, and I'll make one up.

It works fine on KD34XBR960 at 1440x1080 --- However, I found a 1920x1080 version of it a little easier to work with/look at, given the patterns are a little larger horizontally. I didn't try it, but I wonder if one could utilize the viewers "zoom" feature as well?

All I did was resize your pattern to 1920x1080, which seemed to work fine. I compared it with the 1440x1080 pattern as you sent it(and worked with both images while making greyscale adjustments), and didn't see any differences except the "wider" version was easier to look at/work with. Oh, I also "resaved"(using "save as"/different filename) the file in Photoshop, including the thumbnail before moving it to a memory stick and then the thumbnail(including for the 1440x1080 version) then worked OK.

BTW, OT perhaps since it's not SM related .... Does the MS viewer not work with progressive JPEG encoding? I did notice last night it worked with the version of Photoshop(for PC, just an "LE" version) and it's "optimized" standard JPEG encoding.

I had ran into some problems(big question marks when the viewer couldn't recognize the files - the thumbnails+full images) when I created some JPEG files for looking at various greyscale patterns/grey fields/etc via MS several days ago. Rather than take the time to figure out why some of them weren't working, I "minimized" the time that would have been required to "get it to work" by doing several things at one time .... shortening file names/Making first letter of file names capitalized/removing any spaces/changing 8bit greyscale images to RGB(although of course without adding any "color"), making sure I saved thumbnail along with the file, and switching from progressive encoding to standard/etc, so I'm not sure which one of those "did the trick".

Prior to the last week, it had been quite some time since I'd transferred any images to MS to use with the set's MS viewer, and so I couldn't recall any "weirdness" with JPEG images I may have run into on earlier occasions.


UPDATE-2: Just tested the file on my 36XS955, and it works perfectly from a memory stick. (The thumbnail is screwed up; full display is fine.) The most useful patterns are those in the lower-right, particularly the next-to-darkest pair. Make sure that the background is pure black, with no background glow. Turn Color all the way to Min.


The lower right/next-to-darkest pair -- being bottom right second pattern up from bottom, and the top right, 2nd pattern down from top seem to be the most useful for me at this point, although, even though, I also found all of the patterns useful in some way to see what was "going on".

Still have to spend some more time on this(I've included more info and thoughts concerning how this "relates" to previous greyscale experiements in my next post), but at this point it appears like on my set, and for my eyes, as I've suspected before with other experiments -- a bit of a slight greyscale linearity "compromise" may be in order. With use of this new technique/pattern, however, it seems it will end up involving less of a compromise than I've been able to achieve, so far - although, only recently has it been the case I've spent as much time+effort on "getting good greyscale" as it requires in my case without test equipment, or a "perfect" optical comaprator to use.

With the new pattern, It seems I can 'get' everything except the very bottom lower-right pattern to match perfectly, or almost so. While I can lower RCUT quite a bit and get the lower-right pattern to match, this causes problems elsewhere.

Either that(greyscale linearity "compromise" required), or perhaps there may be a bit of an issue with "my eyes". I have noticed, for instance with only the Red gun turned on via RGBS setting --- while looking at AVIA "color decoder" test, My left eye seems to see a very slightly different shade of red than my right eye.

Sorry for length of below comments, as some(or much) of it is probably more than anyone wanted to know - I do find it difficult in such cases to decide/detirmine which of my comments may be useful for others, and what comments are unnecessary. For example, the actual values for various settings aren't important for others' sets, and are only relevant in some cases+to some extent concerning how they "relate" to other values used on *my* set. So I simply endeavor to "write it down" as I "experienced" it, including at least with the details of seeming importantace for my "endeavors" ....

So, in case anyone is interested thought it might be useful at this point If I not only update my recent posts concerning my recent "greyscale" experiments, but perhaps I should also attempt to explain/summarize and report in hopefully mostly "plain english" my experience so far in attempts to get "good greyscale" on Sony TV, without necessarily going into all the relevant details :

While, in the past it has seemed apparent I can achieve very good greyscale linearity via examining all sorts of various test patterns ------ (for example, the Pluge+Grey pattern, grey fields, step patterns, the window patterns on DVE of varying brightness, using video black and looking for neutral greys with the brightness slider in the higher ranges/etc/etc) :

It's also been the case using those methods to attempt to improve greyscale linearity that I've seemingly(to my eyes at least) often ended up erring a little on the "cool" or +blue side, therefore ending up with a different overall white balance than I had intended. Or, a little less often, ended up with a nice "warmer" "linear" greyscale, but one that was intolerably yellowish/greenish throughout brightness range. Apparent to me not only with white text, but also often during programming(or white text in menu graphics such as my Dish Network receiver) when bright white backgrounds mostly fill the screen. Oddly enough, often not as apparent to me with test patterns, such as the QM "white" or "white+Blue"(the latter #5 or #6 if I redcall correctly) screens, or white fields from the calibration DVD's.

It probably bothers me a tad more if "white" looks more bluish-greyish(or +red and +blue) than if it is slightly yellowish, or slightly yellowish~reddish, although it's better to my eyes if it's a bit cool or, a bit +blue vs. "greenish", especially for B+W content.

Then, when I've went about attempting to correct for the "too cool" or "too blue", or less frequently "too warm" or "too yellowish", but with good greyscale linearity -- I've ended up "upsetting" the linearity somewhat, to some extent there is a bit of annoying reddish or yellowish contamination at certian brightness levels, perhaps especially at the low end(sometimes "upper middle" brightness, say 60~80 IRE with test patterns), or then erred the "opposite" way overall (too cool/too warm/etc). In other words, while it hasn't been difficult to "get in the ballpark" for what I want(and I also don't particularly care it that's 6500K, 6400K, or 6900K CT, although I suspect it's somewhere between 6400K and 6800K), it has been difficult to find the "sweet spot" that wasn't too cool, too warm, and with the best possible Linearity, without any(or at least as minimal as possible) color contamination at certian brightness levels. So, at this point, it Looks as if this new pattern will help greatly with this! Thanks Ken!

As Ken mentioned, granted, while it does not seem very difficult to set for pleasing "warm" whites-* without apparent color contamination ------ Getting a good "linear" greyscale throught the rest of the brightness range(say IRE 0~80) while not "messing up" my nice, warm whites seems much more difficult. Oddly enough, I seem to prefer white being perhaps just very, very slightly yellowish, although, with B+W programming, I'd rather it be a little cool or a bit +blue(probably moreso than the 5400K "look"), which definitely seems to be a "contridiction" of sorts ....

*- In addition to RDRV~BCUT, I think the "related" various White level settings are a factor here as well - In my case, white levels have to be set such that they do not give me that "burning your eyeballs out" feeling, and also can't be "too dim" in a dim room with appropriate ambient lightning - If I can't watch the TV in a Dim/Dark room for hours on end without my eyes becoming noticably fatigued, it's just not acceptable to me, and my eyes do seem rather sensitive in this regard -- Of course, OTOH, If it's "too dim", it's not good either, so,he white levels have to be just right for my eyes, it seems, for all input sources -- Just at the point where moving from a dark scene to a brightly lit scene is very close to what happens when you, say, leave a movie theatre on a sunny day.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Concerning The experiments I had been doing with the #1), digital cameras and #2). the PC monitors(with some somewhat "unknown" factors, such as their actual CT) as optical comparators --- Really, the main reason I was doing those experiments were to use those as additional "references" of sorts, or perhaps, more specifically, more "data points" in hopes they would help my "eyes" try to see a little more "closely" what was actually going on with the Sony TV's greyscale, in hopes it would allow me to adjust its greyscale to get closer to what I want to see -- As mentioned earlier -- I do believe those experiments were of use, in short, for lack of a better way to say it, at least in a "intuitive" way, and to help me get a better idea of whether slight adjustments erred "one way or another"(plus blue, plus red/plus green, too cool,too warm/etc) ...

Also An update on that concerning my previous posts -- the optical comparisions using the PC monitors seemingly turned out, in generaly to result in something a little "too warm", and/or on the "greenish or Yellowish/reddish or +red - **(see bottom of post for more details concerning some more detailed notes concerning the PC monitors+related hardware)

So, the next thing I did was to go through through to find the "best"(to my "eyes" and from a linearity standpoint) of the set of values for RDRV~BCUT from the experiment with the PC monitor(s) as optical comparator. The values I had listed in an earlier post from that experiment all turned out to be slightly "worse" than the first set of values I'd come up with using one particular PC monitor, and those "best" values I had came up with were :

RDRV~BCUT = 32-18-6-26-16-7

Then, from those values I worked on making improvements in linearity and getting rid of "yellowish/Greenish" appearance to whites which resulted from above values, and "best of" what I could come up with using the monitor as an optical comparator -- while at the same time being as careful as possible not to go +blue or "too cool". I had thought I'd gotten about "as close" as I could with the following values, and indeed, I've been living with the following values the past several days and have generally been very pleased, and believe it was an improvement(best greyscale I've seen on the set so far), and I believe it was worth the effort :

RDRV~BCUT = 32-17-9-24-17-8

So, after much examination, I thought I did a fairly good job of it to find a good "compromise" between CT and linearity concerning what my eyes "like to see", with those settings. White's were nice and white, and *almost" nothing looked "too cool", although it was apparent at times the greyscale linearity wasn't quite "perfect".

For instance, I did notice that when I had video black up using higher brightness slider(color slider at 0) settings, there was a bit of yellowish/greenish tint going on, especially noticable with brightness slider betwen about 47 and 55. OTOH, I *thought* at times the generally white text in user menu's had a slight "bluish" tint to it, and at times, it appeared a bit "reddish/pinkish" -- I pretty much chalked that up to something mentioned earlier by Ken+RWhetmore -- the "biological" white balance adjustment being "done" by eyes+brain --- I also noticed much the same thing(although either reddish/pinkish or slightly yellowish, never "bluish") with programming with quite a bit of white(but not a "full" white screen), or a menu display with mostly white background from my Dish network receiver ....

I believe I was also able to detirmine the following was "really happening" and was not something due to my "eyes" adjusting ---- This was, a bit of "yellowishness or pinkishness"(seemingly +red) mostly apparent in low~low middle brightness levels with various test patterns/grey fields --- So, I set up "cool" offset with RDOF~BCOF = 31-31-31-30-31-32 - And, this seemed to improve the linearity to being quite close to neutral grey throughout brightness range - but, also seemed to perhaps push things just a very tad too far to the "cool" side, including for higher brightness levels ... I hadn't gotten to the point of deciding whether or not that was really happening or if my eyes were just "adjusting", and to try to make other slight improvments, when I looked at the new test pattern ...

Then, last night, I looked at the new greyscale "linearity" pattern Ken provided in his last post, and came up with the following values :

RDRV~BCUT = 33-17-9-22-17-11

Except for a slight difference in perceived "color" for the darkest pair of boxes in the very bottom lower right - according to the pattern+matching the "color" between left+right sides of each pair --- this seems to provide very near perfect greyscale linearity, including with various other test patterns. When I was doing this last night, I *thought* it might also be pushing things a little too much on the "cool" or "blue" side, and, that may very well be the case, but looking at it today so far(albeit in daytime with too much light being reflected around), it appears like it *may* not be too cool. If it is, I'll just have to try adjusting for a "warmer" white+readjust for linearity accordingly -- although, I have a feeling that I won't be able to achieve much improvement while keeping good linearity and without ending up with things ending up a little "too warm" or "yellowish/reddish", I do believe it is going to allow for some improvement vs. what I've been able to do without this nice tool!

Gamma/Black level notes: I didn't check this(or look very closely at the changes in Gamma - also note I have GAMM=0/GAMR~GAMB=0 set up for all but one Pic mode, GAMM=1/GAMR~GAMB=3 for "movie" pic mode for a lower gamma) yet, but I expect It is possible I may need to lower SBRT to 28 from it's current value of 29, or lower brightness slider one click, or lower SBRT to 28+raise brightness slider one click.

I had raised SBRT to 29 from previously used 28 given my combined CUT values had decreased by -5~-10 or so from previous values(occasionally a change of 1 or 2 for the combined DRV values also resulted for my experiments). Specifically, for various experimental values during my recent revisiting of attempting to improve greyscale from my previously(generally) long used values of RDRV~BCUT 32-17-9-32-16-9 (=58 DRV/57 CUT), which were I believe was at least more in the ballpark compared to the factory "greenscale"(as I call it) warm offset values equating(I believe) to RDRV~BCUT 32-17-9-32-17-5 (=58DRV/54 CUT). Although I haven't compared it directly to the "new values" yet, or checked those with the new test pattern for linearity I believe those long used "adjusted" values were a bit +blue and +red(more +red, and perhaps slightly on the "cool" side), with the factory warm offset values I believe being quite a bit +red and a bit -blue.

Right now, adding up the DRV/CUT values for the lastest set of values after seeing Ken's test pattern for greyscale linearity, I'm -3 from the factory warm offset for combined DRV/CUT's(-4 for the cuts specifically), and -3~-6 or so from most of the values I've experimented with on previous occasions previously, so I'll have to look at black levels+gamma closely(best I can check gamma is with various gamma charts I have on MS) to see if I may need to change anything, slightly. I did do a check of white levels, (picture slider/etc), and don't think I'll need/want to be changing it unless perhaps I end up with different DRV values than current, or much more difference than +/- 2 or 3 or so.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


** - Add'l PC monitor info from earlier "experiments" - Note: Probably should have included this in the earlier post about PC monitors --- "one of these days" -- I now know I need to work on at least one(probably two) of those PC monitors "of particular importance" a bit as well - particularly perhaps linearity wise. One of them is also a little on the +red side, maybe a bit "warm" as well - It sure does look nice though, especially with greyscale images.

Luckily, that particular monitor actually has R/G/B (drive?) controls accessable via it's "settings" menu. Another perhaps odd thing I ran into during these experiments when hooking up monitor to external "VGA" port on a notebook PC, and another PC as well, was that the output of the graphics controller(even concerning greyscale) seems to vary a bit with this differing PC hardware(IBM using Windows) as well - even though I also made sure to use a "driver" for the monitors in question as supplied by the hardware manufacturer, which also includes a color management profile specific to the monitor(s) used.

I do have "gamma" controls available(individual R/G/B sliders can be locked together or adjusted independantly) with the driver for the video controllers in 3 of my PC's(including the notebook), perhaps those can be useful in this regard as well. The best color/greyscale output I can seem to "detect" from the PC hardware I have currently, seems to come from a 10 year old(or more?) Matrox video card installed in a server(which would be very inconvienient to move! I didn't move that next to the TV!) I have sitting in an attic hallway, go figure .....


---------------------------------------------------------------------

Shew! I do believe that is about all I'm going to have to offer concerning my experience getting good "greyscale" without test equipment or a extremely good optical comparator! Can't thank Ken+everyone else who has contributed here on this issue enough, everyone's comments+the discussion on this was really of great help !

I made the sorry mistake of resetting 30XS955 to the factory/newborn state. I know I'm an idiot but there's no taking it back now.

Anyway, I'm trying to get the TV back to a watchable state and I'm having some trouble. I've copied in as many of the defaults as possible. The problem is that my menus are a bit different from those in the spreadsheet attached in this forum. Other people have listed the same issue. Notably, my MID3 is entirely different, and I think this is key to why I can't get things to look right.

My mid3 is as follows: And I realize that my settings for several of these are probably totally wrong as I haven't been able to attempt to calibrate them yet with the starting far out of whack.

0 YCPO 40
1 CCPO 40
2 PRPB 1
3 DOSA 0
4 YCWD 1
5 MYCD 0
6 PSTP 136
7 PSTT 0
8 VHSC 50
9 VHSL 1
10 PLHC 100
11 PLHL 2
12 MDTC 2
13 MFRV 0

Question 1: Can anyone with the same MID3 menu share their values with me? Also, what do you have as your ID7 setting, and will changing mine make any difference? Mine is set at 11.

Question2: I'm under the impression that its possible to copy the firmware/user data from one tv to another via memory stick. Does anyone know how to do this and/or is willing to copy their data for me in the bay area if I provide the memory stick?

MEASURING SCREEN BRIGHTNESS WITH A PHOTO LIGHT METER

If you have a hand-held light meter that has an “EV” scale, you have a very easy way to measure screen brightness. If there is no EV scale, you will have to convert from shutter and f-stop settings, but that’s only one more step. Even if you have only a film camera whose light meter you trust, you can do quite well — it’s just more cumbersome. (Maybe you have a friend with a light meter he no longer uses, having purchased an automatic/digital camera. That’s was my source!)

You’ll want to know what area you are metering, and so the light meter should indicate somehow what its coverage is. A “spot” meter is best, or a camera with a defined-area spot-metering feature.

Using an EV (Exposure Value) scale is easiest. You set your film speed to DIN 100 (or ASA 100), and read the brightness of an area in EV. Or, with that same DIN 100, set the shutter at 1/15 and note the f-stop readout. (See chart below.)

There is an attached chart that relates EV at DIN 100 to brightness in either the older system of foot-Lamberts (ft-L) or candelas/square-meter (cd/sq.m), a more modern brightness-unit. On the chart, the black diagonal line is foot-Lamberts and the red line is candelas/square-meter. Simply note on the chart where a measured EV vertically intersects the red line, then look horizontally to the scale at the left to get the cd/sq.m value. Same with the black line and ft-L. (Sorry for the hand-drawn look. I did it on old semi-log graph paper with pens and pencil.)

Example: Put up a white test pattern that covers only about the middle 20-30% of the screen, and measure the EV. Suppose you measure 9.0. That values intersects the black line at 21 ft-L or the red line at 72 cd/sq.m.

(A caution: Whole-screen or half-screen white will activate the brightness-limiting feature on the Sony DA-4 TVs we have, and so your measurement will be erroneously low! Further, all of these CRT-TVs have a bright spot dead-center, and so you may wish to use a pattern that has an off-center white patch, such as the gray-steps-plus-pluge screen on DVE. Don’t use the TV’s built-in white block test pattern — it’s not 100% white.)

The gray-shaded boxes represent certain accepted standard brightness levels: the larger box for direct-view and otherwise bright televisions (like our Sonys), and the smaller box the THX certification standard for movie theaters.

Here are the equivalent f-stops for a shutter of 1/15 second at DIN 100. As you can see, an EV difference of 1 = 1 f-stop = a factor of 2 in shutter speed. I chose 1/15 because it results in reasonable f-stop values:

EV 10.0 = f8.0
EV 9.0 = f5.6
EV 8.0 = f4.0
EV 7.0 = f2.8
EV 6.0 = f2.0

Now, working to a brightness “target” value, suppose you want your TV to have a bright-white level of about 30 ft-L (= 100cd/sq.m), a good viewing brightness for usual evening TV-watching. Colors are bright, the TV isn’t overstressed, the electron beam probably bloats a bit on white, but not enough to matter. Here’s how to proceed.

Put up a part-screen white box from one of the test DVDs. Set your Brightness slider for a decent black level and increase Contrast until you get a measurement of EV 9.6 on your meter or the equivalent of 1/15th second shutter at halfway between f5.6 and f8. That’s it. That is very close to 30ft-L — no need to split hairs.)

If you are in service mode 2170P-1, trying to establish a reasonable relationship among the _DRV, _CUT, and SBRT settings, here is a good target method: Set the Contrast slider to, say, 31 (midpoint), the Brightness slider to 31, and set SBRT to 31. Now use whatever _CUT settings give you an approximately correct black level and neutral color. Red will likely be 15-25 points higher than green or blue. (There’s no “magic range” for SBRT; I set mine, and the charts suggest, somewhere near the middle of the 0-63 range. My _CUT settings ended up at 43-21-23 with SBRT at 28 after some weeks of tinkering.)

Finally, increase the _DRV settings to get you 30ft-L on that white test patch. I finally got the _DRV settings right for my TV at about 44-26-23, with a really neutral white point. No question that there was much tinkering over the weeks getting the color and grayscale right. But as long as my _DRV, _CUT, and SBRT are close to the original rough settings, I know that Contrast = 31 gives me an accepable 30ft-L screen brightness. I can then routinely adjust Contrast to suit the video material and the room conditions on-the-fly.

A reminder: Different models of the DA-4 chassis and different copies of the same model will end up with different settings, so anyone’s suggestions are very rough! Those “midpoint” settings aren’t magic, either. They’re just sensible places to start, and calibrating the different sliders to the 31 midpoint makes it much easier to remember when returning your set to its “normal” settings after changing them.

Here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7046048&&#post7046048)again is the location of the chart I previously uploaded that consolidates in one place the service-menu parameters that affect black level, white-brightness, color, etc.

Yep! Unless you practice this, simply looking at a continuous-tone b/w picture (Color=Min) turns out to be a poor test, no matter what I have said before. I now much prefer something like the 4-patch gray plus pluge on DVE. The adjacent gray patches are different enough, and white and dark gray are close enough, that you can much more easily see whether, say, the dark gray is bluer than the white or lightest gray. The dim pluge bars represent a deep "black" if you up the Brightness a little, so you can unify the whole pattern. Then you can check your work by skipping thru channels with Color=Min to see if you're reasonably on-target.

I tried this, and did help - thanks. I guess this is about all we can do without a colorimeter. I have gotten mine acceptable now....how accurate it is, I don't know.

Color temperature aside, my set looks better than ever with the high _DRV and _CUT values. I did some more tests and found virtually no correlation between SBRT and the _CUT settings. No matter how high I have the _CUT settings it does not require a reduction in SBRT according to my black level test patterns. The image I have now is amazingly 3 dimensional with awesome shadow detail and deep blacks.

Did you ever figure out why this is (or why I'm perceiving it is)???

Even if you have only a film camera whose light meter you trust, you can do quite well -


Great idea! It also occurs to me this would likely be a good method to use to "double check" and perhaps improve my white level "balancing" among different inputs/soures with SPIC/etc, and make any adjustments as necessary. Given of course a suitable level of white on screen from test pattern(easy enough to do for MS, and for inputs I can hook up a DVD player).

Anyhow -- Ok -- I found this to be easy enough, except for documenting my results in this post! I tried this with the light meter on my trusty Canon FTb SLR, using 50mm Canon FD lens(note to self - although it's fine now, need to get a new battery for the light meter soon!). In this application, It's light meter(uses CdS photocell/coupled to shutter speed, f-stop+film speed) uses Full aperature Metering, but with a central area metering system, which measures the center 12% of the frame or "picture area". You can see the 12% area of measurement directly in the viewfinder. As suggested, to take the measurements I used 1/15 shutter speed, ASA 100 film speed setting.

For the test pattern, I used DVE chapter 12, #12 "window" pattern, which is labeled "100% amplitude"(100 IRE I presume), and set the camera such that the entire metered area was "covered" with the white from the test pattern, with the TV set for "full" mode(test pattern(including all the black in the test pattern uses the entire 16x9 screen). I believe this results in somewhat close to about 20~30% or so of the screen area. I didn't double check it to make sure, but I hope it wasn't too big of an area of the screen to the extent ABL kicked in. *Update 02:45UTC Mon* : I just confirmed the below measurements with "Pluge+grey" pattern from DVE.

TV settings used: Other than the differences in Picture slider noted farther below, The following relevant settings were used for TV : 2170P-1 - RDRV~BCUT 33-17-9-22-17-11, Brightness slider at 31. SBRT=29(factory adjusted default was SBRT=28). 2170P-4 SPIO at factory default value of 10. Since I was using 480p via component video input from DVD player, I have 2170P-3 UBOF=0 for this source(note: I have UBOF settings ranging from 0~5 to balance black levels among different sources/inputs/etc, just so happens 480p from my DVD player needs the lowest setting). I have 2170P-4 SPIC=6 for this source, SPIC ranges from 0~6 to balance white levels among all different sources/inputs. This DVD player at 480p just happens to need the highest SPIC value, for 480i from the same player to "match" this it needs/is set at SPIC=0, as do most other sources. Also, of some slight relevance here are my following current settings for CBGN~YGN, which I adjusted necessarily to correct for a color imbalance for 480p/720p+1080i vs. everything else as discussed earlier in this thread, as well as to lower luminance slightly for 720p/1080i from ATSC tuner, given that I "need" SPIC=0 for those to balance among sources, and can't go any "lower" with SPIC!. Current settings at left, factory defaults in parenteses :


CBGN = 4 (4)
CRGN = 4 (5)
YGN = 4 (5)

GAMM was set at 0, GAMR~GAMB also all at 0, the default for GAMM=0. BLK also at 0. ABL settings for all pic modes were adjusted per Ken Tech's recommendations early in this thread for "customizing" pic modes involving related ABL settings, without looking it up in my notes If I recall correctly, those are the pro pic mode ABL defaults. Any other relevant settings involved for Black/white levels match service manual listing for "pro" Picture mode defaults.

------------------------------------------

Light meter measurements - assuming the measurements are actually quite close to "reality", what I'm measuring seems very much to match what I "expect" I've noticed with my eyes ..... :

Follows is what I measured, listed by "picture slider" setting, unless otherwise notided, the below F-stop readings denote the f-stop setting on the lens required so light meter needle is directly in the middle(or more or less) of the ring, which is "attached" via a apeture signal level+pin to the FD lens, and "moves" inside the viewfinder accordingly with different F-stop settings :

KD34XBR960 -- Current, preferred settings, as noted above, and with picture slider at 23 :

f/4.8~5.2(note there is no label on the lens for this f stop setting - it's in between f4.0 and f5.6 - perhaps the "notch" is a little closer to F 5.6) - According to the info you provided, that would seem to put EV in the range of about 8.4 to 8.8 or so. and, according to your notes and the chart, EV 8.4~8.8 is considered "THX standard" for movie theatres. This setting for "screen brightness" is preferred by me in the sense my eyes *do* seem to like it ....

Honestly, anything brighter given a dim room(with ambient light source behind the TV matched to around the ambient light reference from DVE, mostly being reflected off the walls) Is quite fatiguing to my eyes after more than a few minutes of viewing. Anything dimmer appears "too dim". In fact, even in the daytime with "too much" ambient light of the wrong kind involved, it's more than bright enough, to the point of actually being a bit surprising(to me anyway) given what I've experienced in the past with direct-view CRT's in this regard.

Picture slider at "31" :

f5.6/EV 9.0/~20FL per your chart/Info. It seems a little too bright for my preferences on this TV.


Picture slider at "44" :

Approx f6.8(in between F5.6+F8.0 - there is no label for the actual value on the lens) - This is the target value you suggest for EV around 9.6, as you suggest something around 30FT lamberts -- but, to my eyes, this is just way too bright for me .... but, I suppose to a certian extent it's a matter of preference more than anything else ....

Picture slider at "53" :

f8.0, EV of 10 per your info. Certianly way, way too bright.

Additional measurement on another TV : Note I measured with the same test pattern via the camera's light meter on another set I use(Toshiba 34HF84 - also 34" "HD" 16x9 direct View CRT) with my preferred settings set up for that TV. This measurement resulted in f-stop of somewhere right between about f4.8~5.2(again no label on the lens for that one - I probably have documentation on the lens somewhere which would tell exactly what it is) and 5.6, so, the "needle" for the meter would be "closer" to "in the middle of the ring" given say a ~f5.2~F5.4 setting - Which I'd think should be in the range of 8.6~8.8 EV or so. Not surprisingly, very much along the lines of what I prefer "screen brightness" wise on the Sony .....


----------------------------------


, I know that Contrast = 31 gives me an accepable 30ft-L screen brightness.


Well, not meaning to be "contrary"(at all, so please don't take this the wrong way!) here, as each to his own, and what is preferred by YOU is of course the important thing in your circumstance ... However, just to comment on this from my "perspective" ---- according to my "measurements" as noted above(if correct, and I suspect they probably are, or are close enough given the results I've been consistantly getting from exposures with this camera+light meter for many, many years, although I've never actually compared it with another light meter ) : I don't think with this set(or any other) there is any way anything that bright would be acceptable to my eyes, they would become easily, and quickly fatigued with that much "brightness".

I can also just as easily remember Pic slider="44"=30FT lamberts as I can "31" for EV 9.0, or "23" for my preferred settings -- Which again, evidently are right along the lines of the "THX standard" per your chart - which, although as you say it applies as a standard for movie theatres(presumably not necessarily Direct View CRT's), I find it interesting, perhaps especially as it also seems to "match" my results from the THX optimizer "contrast" setting screen - which is admittedly, not a "precise" way to the "picture slider", and is only one of many other references I've used to set "white levels" and/or "contrast".

Of Most importantance to me is not conforming to any sort of standard for screen brightness in "foot lamberts" - Instead, for me is that white level/screen "brightness" are such that 1). an excellent picture results(a film-like, very "detailed" pic or whatever you want to call it) and #2). that watching a few hours of TV doesn't become fatiguing on the eyes in a "dim" room enviornment because it is "too bright", But, OTOH, not so "dim" that the pic appears "dim" or "lifeless". Generally, seemingly equivilent to striving for a similar effect "on the eyes"(but not quite as pronounced) when going from a very dark scene to a very bright scene as one gets when they go outside on a bright day after being in a darkened room(such as a movie theatre).

I could of course redefine the DRV values for a mid-range slider setting of "31" to be the "same" as my current preferred "23" setting(EV ~8.4~8.8), although I suspect I'd probably be getting awfully close to "0" for BCUT, which wouldn't work very well for experimentation purposes, including using the Offsets ... And again, I really don't see any reason for me to do this ....



A reminder: Different models of the DA-4 chassis and different copies of the same model will end up with different settings, so anyone's suggestions are very rough!


Definitely! VERY rough! Especially perhaps as it seems what some of us prefer "screen brightness" wise apparently differs. Black levels OTOH are easy to "talk about", and in my experience, fairly easily to set "properly" with a pluge pattern(such as the DVE Pluge+grey or white, or THX optimizer black level test with the "drop shadow").

AFAIK, the only thing that could be harmful about using Vivid (with the default settings) is the picture setting. On my Sony, Vivid had picture maxed, and Standard was almost as bad. Bolo said in his post that he has "picture... at 31 clicks which is the middle."

anyone else have any say

I tried this with the light meter on my trusty Canon FTb SLR, using 50mm Canon FD lens(note to self - although it's fine now, need to get a new battery for the light meter soon!). In this application, It's light meter(uses CdS photocell/coupled to shutter speed, f-stop+film speed) uses Full aperature Metering, but with a central area metering system, which measures the center 12% of the frame or "picture area". You can see the 12% area of measurement directly in the viewfinder.I have intimate familiarity with this camera, having owned two FTb and one F1 (brass!) bodies. IMHO, all of them had inacurate light meters, and they disagreed with each other! The F1 was closest, and I generally compensated with a 1/3-stop change in ASA. The other two consistently overexposed slide film, as I recall, and I recalibrated them to some good independent standard (adjusters under the top case). Then they were fine.

They may be under-reading the brightness of your TV: You think it's 20 ft-L, but it's actually 30-ish. Maybe the reverse. Moreover, make sure that you way over-cover the spot-metering area with the white patch on the TV -- i.e. the known boundary of the spot should be smaller than the white patch as seen in the viewfinder.

My point about the "31" settings was not to recommend a specific value for them but that they were convenient reference points for whatever settings you want them to represent. For you, that should be a comfortable "normal" viewing brightness. My Minolta digital Spotmeter-F sees my "comfortable brightness" as about 30 ft-L for white. Of course, YMMV.

I did some more tests and found virtually no correlation between SBRT and the _CUT settings. No matter how high I have the _CUT settings it does not require a reduction in SBRT according to my black level test patterns. The image I have now is amazingly 3 dimensional with awesome shadow detail and deep blacks.

Did you ever figure out why this is (or why I'm perceiving it is)???Your statements challenge my assumptions about how the _CUT parameters work in these TVs, and I'm really grateful that you posted your comments!

My experience is from years of dealing with the physical "cutoff" controls for the red, green, and blue CRT guns. These establish a "turn-on" threshold for each color so that, for a small video signal, say 2 IRE, all the guns begin firing at the same time, preserving correct color balance at the black end of the grayscale. If you crank each one by a bit, you can significantly increase the black level without affecting color.

But it looks to me, too, that the Sony _CUT settings seem to affect the "black-end" color without affecting the brightness of those tones much -- very counterintuitive for me! I've run a couple of brief experiments and I mostly concur with your observations: I jacked my _CUT settings temporarily by 15 points each, pushing red to 61. Increasing each color by the same amount resulted in virtually identical color balance. (At least these parameters seem to track!) Then, while observing a full-range broadcast picture with large dark areas, and with the Color set to Min, I performed a READ on the remote (0 - Enter), which instantly restores the previous settings. The picture did get a bit darker in the shadows, but the color remained the same. So there is some modification of black-level brightness with these _CUT settings, but not much. The color changes brought about by differentially changing the three parameters seem much more obviious than any black-level change. And it seems that the three color settings do track well: equal increments in each of the R, G, and BCUT settings keeps grayscale balance very much the same.

My observations are preliminary, and I have no opinion on what quality changes I may see in the video image, as you have mentioned. I will spend some time investigating this. But my initial tests show that there is an apparent small increase in black level with a large change in all three parameters, and I wonder if this also represents a change in the way video is presented on-screen, not just a level increase.

Next experiment: Use one of the Cool/Warm offsets to replicate those +15 offsets (make each 46) and maybe a compensatory black-level tweak with SBOF. Then, with a simple flick of the remote, I could invoke this series of "new" cutoff settings and check for an image-quality change, too.

I just wanted to validate what you are seeing, RW, and now I must re-think the role that the _CUT settings (and their offsets in _COF) play in setting the dark-end color of the grayscale. (If black-level brightness is little affected, it makes it easier for us to tweak these _CUT settings!)

OUTRAGEOUSLY LOW SCREEN BRIGHTNESS IN THEATERS!

I know this is slightly OT, but since we are discussing target brightness levels for our TVs, some perspective . . .

A-V "experts" seem to agree that a reasonable brightness for direct-view TVs is 30-40 ft-L for 100% white. Personal preferences and ambient lighting make this a broad target, but there's a number, at least.

THX certified theaters must achieve 16 ft-L for white. That also seems to be a good target for projection-TV home systems, but not so easy to attain for the bigger screens.

Here is a quote from the Runco home page:

About foot-Lamberts:

The method of measurement known as foot-Lamberts, is a measurement related to the brightness of a particular image and is equal to 1 lumen per sq. foot of screen surface. A Spectral Radiometer is required to perform this measurement. The SMPTE (Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers) specification for a film-type movie theater is a minimum of 16 foot-Lamberts of brightness.

As research by Lucasfilm Ltd’s, Theater Alignment Program has determined, movie theaters typically struggle or fail to achieve this brightness specification, even with the high wattage lamps in their film projectors. Since the screen size is generally much smaller for Home Theater™, it is possible to consistently achieve 16 foot-Lamberts and most of the time much higher brightness with Runco projectors.
Experts bemoan that some theaters don'e even reach 10 ft-L, trying for economy of projection equipment. Some may be as low as 6-9 ft-L, they say.

So I took my trusty Minolta Spotmeter-F to a fairly new Regal Cinemas multiplex with stadium seating, to watch Cars. (An absolute delight! Story suitable for kids, but lots of things for adults to appreciate, especially those who love older cars and state-of-the-art computer animation. Lots of sly cultural references!)

The highest reading I could find near screen center in blown whites, highlights, white reflections from objects -- lots of opportunities to measure! -- was EV 5.6. 5.6! At least it wasn't greenish, as is another theater I know.

Let's see -- that's almost off the bottom of the chart I posted! EV 5.6 = 2 ft-L.

Now I am wondering where I can go to experience even a 10 ft-L screen! No wonder movies look so much more vivid at home, where I can get the same subtended viewing angle by sitting close to the TV. The "theater experience" is becoming a downer for me, except for (maybe) the sound.

Sorry for the rant, but I wonder if there's any question why the home-theater market seems to be growing so rapidly! It means to me that the time and bucks I have invested in tweaking my excellent TV are very much worth it! Cheers for all of us! Boo, Hiss to Regal!

Afternoon, everyone.

DSperber - Thank you for your tips. I tried responding twice before but my power went out both times.
The settings you mentioned on page 51 did help me to tweak the screen, allowing me to get the image into the screen more, and get it to look as close to possible as a pro job. Tho the problem with adjusting the 1080i/720p horizontal and vertical settings, still seems to make the 480i/p modes look like an off center (to the left) bubble.

KenTech - This thread has become my addiction. Thank you for this and the many posters here as well.
You mention turning off the shutters on pg. 54 i believe,?, I'm not too sure yet if that allows me to adjust the picture in 1080i/720p, but turning them off still doesn't seem to stop the affects on 480i/p modes. Could there be something I'm missing, or is my model (kv30hs420) just not that flexible in service menu?

If it just can't be fixed in my model, then I'll adjust the settings to look as incredible as I can til a HiDef DVE disc is released. And purchase myself something for 480i/p viewing/gameplay.

Also - Is there anyone here who has adjust the different viewing modes 480i/p, 720p, 1080i separately in (kv30hs420), and can you lend a few tips?

Thank you.

Your statements challenge my assumptions about how the _CUT parameters work in these TVs, and I'm really grateful that you posted your comments!

My experience is from years of dealing with the physical "cutoff" controls for the red, green, and blue CRT guns. These establish a "turn-on" threshold for each color so that, for a small video signal, say 2 IRE, all the guns begin firing at the same time, preserving correct color balance at the black end of the grayscale. If you crank each one by a bit, you can significantly increase the black level without affecting color.

But it looks to me, too, that the Sony _CUT settings seem to affect the "black-end" color without affecting the brightness of those tones much -- very counterintuitive for me! I've run a couple of brief experiments and I mostly concur with your observations: I jacked my _CUT settings temporarily by 15 points each, pushing red to 61. Increasing each color by the same amount resulted in virtually identical color balance. (At least these parameters seem to track!) Then, while observing a full-range broadcast picture with large dark areas, and with the Color set to Min, I performed a READ on the remote (0 - Enter), which instantly restores the previous settings. The picture did get a bit darker in the shadows, but the color remained the same. So there is some modification of black-level brightness with these _CUT settings, but not much. The color changes brought about by differentially changing the three parameters seem much more obviious than any black-level change. And it seems that the three color settings do track well: equal increments in each of the R, G, and BCUT settings keeps grayscale balance very much the same.

My observations are preliminary, and I have no opinion on what quality changes I may see in the video image, as you have mentioned. I will spend some time investigating this. But my initial tests show that there is an apparent small increase in black level with a large change in all three parameters, and I wonder if this also represents a change in the way video is presented on-screen, not just a level increase.

Next experiment: Use one of the Cool/Warm offsets to replicate those +15 offsets (make each 46) and maybe a compensatory black-level tweak with SBOF. Then, with a simple flick of the remote, I could invoke this series of "new" cutoff settings and check for an image-quality change, too.

I just wanted to validate what you are seeing, RW, and now I must re-think the role that the _CUT settings (and their offsets in _COF) play in setting the dark-end color of the grayscale. (If black-level brightness is little affected, it makes it easier for us to tweak these _CUT settings!)

I'm glad to hear this. As I have said, the depth of my image is now stunning, yet it still has great shadow detail and deep blacks. I was able to lower SBRT/Brightness to its true point on the test pattern as I previously had it two notches above because I felt I needed more shadow detail, but this resulted in a little bit of undesirable washout, which is now completely gone. I hope you will experiment with it more, and try to get a good grey scale with the highest _DRV and _CUT settings possible.

I also found a similar effect with the _DRV settings, which also appear to be somewhat different adjustments than the regular "Picture" adjustment from the main menu. I tested this by having significantly higher _CUT values than _DRV values figuring I could just raise "Picture" to get an equal result, but it didn't materialize. The balance of the white level to black level still looked off not matter how high I raised the contrast! Interestingly enough, raising _DRV settings will require a lowering of overall contrast from the main menu.....hmmmmmmmm????? Weird. Any explanation?

Did you also try and test my perceived difference in keeping the coresponding _DRV and _CUT values the same or very nearly the same? For some reason, this just seems to provide the most natural balance of contrast and showdow detail. I'm very curious why. I managed to get my greyscale with not more than +1 or -1 difference between the corresponding colors, and I believe the image is significantly improved because of this.

The color changes brought about by differentially changing the three parameters seem much more obviious than any black-level change. And it seems that the three color settings do track well: equal increments in each of the R, G, and BCUT settings keeps grayscale balance very much the same.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. I have found that increasing the _CUTs by themselves will not only throw greyscale off, but will distort the appearance of the image. A corresponding color increase in the _DRVs is necessary when raising any of the _CUT adjustments. I have found that every 2 increases in _DRV is about equivalent to 5 increases in _CUT for the purposes of color/greyscale. But more so, I have found that the image gets distorted if the _CUT values stray too far from the corresponding _DRV values. The closer they are in number to one another, the better the image looks (assuming accurate greyscale); with the most improved image quality the higher the settings are.

For example my settings currently are:

RDRV = 63
GDRV = 31
BDRV = 36

RCUT = 63
GCUT = 32
BCUT = 37

In terms of greyscale - compared to the percentages of green to blue that you posted (based on a 2 _DRV = 5 _CUT), mine would seem to be plus blue, but it doesn't appear at all plus blue to me. Raising green any higher yields a slight greenish push, and setting blue any lower makes for a slight reddish push. I wonder how much these sets vary from one another???

Also, my color decoder settings are:

RYR = 15
RYB = 15
GYR = 3
GYB = 7

I know they don't effect greyscale, but this was the best compromise I could come up with without there being too much green or too much red.

I don't understand some of your words:

I'm not sure what you mean by this. I have found that increasing the _CUTs by themselves will not only throw greyscale off, but will distort the appearance of the image.What do you mean by "distort"?A corresponding color increase in the _DRVs is necessary when raising any of the _CUT adjustments. I have found that every 2 increases in _DRV is about equivalent to 5 increases in _CUT for the purposes of color/greyscale. But more so, I have found that the image gets distorted if the _CUT values stray too far from the corresponding _DRV values.Again, I don't get your meaning of "distort." Do you mean some kind of brightness-range compression, as though the lighter tones are blocking or shadow detail is running together?In terms of greyscale - compared to the percentages of green to blue that you posted (based on a 2 _DRV = 5 _CUT), mine would seem to be plus blue, but it doesn't appear at all plus blue to me. Raising green any higher yields a slight greenish push, and setting blue any lower makes for a slight reddish push. I wonder how much these sets vary from one another???I don't understand your numbers and "percentages" comments and the "green to blue" reference. Could you explain in different terms or something?

I hope you aren't using my exact numbers to judge anything about yours, as they are likely to be different. The incremental effects are built-in to the programming and electronics, but the absolute amounts depend on so much on what varies in manufacturing.

*********
So you would say, for purposes of color adjustment, if I change a _DRV settings by 2, it takes about 5 clicks of _CUT to straighten out color again? (I've never figured out this ratio.)

When I mentioned "differential" adjustments of _CUT, I meant that the sensitivity of onscreen shadow tint to changes in one or two of the _CUT parameters seems to me disproportionate to the change in brightness if I change all of them by a specific amount, e.g. raise them all equally by 5. But this may be my misinterpretation of their effect based on my experience with analog monitor adjustments. No one should attribute great imporrtance to this! I'm confessing my personal history's effect on my cuirrent observations, that's all.

If this 5:2 _CUT:_DRV ratio holds, then my tweaking of _CUT by the same offset as I tweak _DRV to get a color-temp change is somewhat in error. And yet, it seems to work! This is why I think for the moment that the color differences effected by differetial _CUT adjustent is a more-sensitive adjustment than any black-level change effected by changing them all by the same amount. Again, this may be an illusion, and I remain open to that possibility.

I can't imagine how this would be implemented in the circuitry, but anything is possible with the electronics being as complex and computational as it is.

Did you also try and test my perceived difference in keeping the coresponding _DRV and _CUT values the same or very nearly the same? For some reason, this just seems to provide the most natural balance of contrast and showdow detail.I've always done this by default, I suppose for reasons only an engineer can appreciate. (The values are "centered" in the range -- very elegant!) Example: 45-25-23 -- 45-18-22 for _DRV and _CUT, SBRT at 28 and Brightness and Contrast sliders at 31.

I will also try your "jack 'em all up to the max" method to see if some quality of the image changes. I have no preconceptions of what to expect, and you've made me very curious.

Interestingly enough, raising _DRV settings will require a lowering of overall contrast from the main menu.....hmmmmmmmm????? Weird. Any explanation?Well, yes. Raising all _DRV settings by the same amount is equivalent to turning up the "volume" of each color by the same amount, which is equivalent to raising the "volume" of the video's luminance -- which is what Contrast does with one control. Black level stays nearly the same, depending on the circuit.

Cutoff and Drive is a classic offset-plus-gain amplifier situation. Cutoff is really a voltage pedestal on which the video of each color is lifted, and then Drive is how much it increases as video goes from 0 to 100 IRE (black to white) for each color. Bottom line: A change in Cutoff adds a fixed amount to each color's amplitude, and Drive changes the multiplier (gain) of the intensity of each color. So a fixed _CUT increment of 5 adds much more to the color shift at the "black" end of the brightness range than it does to white because that 5 is a much greater proportion of the actual signal driving the color gun when it's just starting to fire, as opposed to when it's already firing nearly 100%.

Again, I don't get your meaning of "distort." Do you mean some kind of brightness-range compression, as though the lighter tones are blocking or shadow detail is running together?

I'm sorry for the confusion...distort is probably a poor word usage. What I mean is that the balance of white level/contrast to shadow detail/black level becomes unnaturally skewed regardless of the balance between Brightness and "Picture" (contrast) from the main menu.

So you would say, for purposes of color adjustment, if I change a _DRV settings by 2, it takes about 5 clicks of _CUT to straighten out color again? (I've never figured out this ratio.)

["A corresponding color increase in the _DRVs is necessary when raising any of the _CUT adjustments. I have found that every 2 increases in _DRV is about equivalent to 5 increases in _CUT for the purposes of color/greyscale. But more so, I have found that the image gets distorted if the _CUT values stray too far from the corresponding _DRV values."]

I meant to say that a corresponding decrease (not increase) in _DRV is necessary when raising any of _CUT adjustments for the purposes of getting the values for each color close to one another. For example, if you raise BCUT by 5, to keep the color temperature about the same, I have found you need to decrease BDRV by about 2.

I hope you aren't using my exact numbers to judge anything about yours, as they are likely to be different. The incremental effects are built-in to the programming and electronics, but the absolute amounts depend on so much on what varies in manufacturing.

I was only using your numbers to ball park mine, and doing so seemed to indicate that my color temperate would be a little plus blue compared to yours, which I hope can be attributed to manufacturing variation.

When I mentioned "differential" adjustments of _CUT, I meant that the sensitivity of onscreen shadow tint to changes in one or two of the _CUT parameters seems to me disproportionate to the change in brightness if I change all of them by a specific amount, e.g. raise them all equally by 5. But this may be my misinterpretation of their effect based on my experience with analog monitor adjustments. No one should attribute great imporrtance to this! I'm confessing my personal history's effect on my cuirrent observations, that's all.

If this 5:2 _CUT:_DRV ratio holds, then my tweaking of _CUT by the same offset as I tweak _DRV to get a color-temp change is somewhat in error. And yet, it seems to work! This is why I think for the moment that the color differences effected by differetial _CUT adjustent is a more-sensitive adjustment than any black-level change effected by changing them all by the same amount. Again, this may be an illusion, and I remain open to that possibility.

I haven't experimented with this, so I don't know.

I've always done this by default, I suppose for reasons only an engineer can appreciate. (The values are "centered" in the range -- very elegant!) Example: 45-25-23 -- 45-18-22 for _DRV and _CUT, SBRT at 28 and Brightness and Contrast sliders at 31.

I will also try your "jack 'em all up to the max" method to see if some quality of the image changes. I have no preconceptions of what to expect, and you've made me very curious.

Try proceeding this way:

Use the 5:2 ratio to make your greens closer to one another. In this case GDRV = 23 (-2 from 25) and GCUT = 23 (+5 from 18). Your reds are the same, and your blues are only different by 1 value. Next try to find the highest possible values with about same ratios:

45-23-23 DRV = about 63-32-32, and 45-23-22 CUT = about a 63-32-31. This would just be rough starting point, but it should keep your color temperature somewhere near where it is now. In the end, you will probably have to fine tune it some more for an accurate greyscale, but I believe you should be able see the increase in image quality (depth and shadow detail) I'm experiencing.

Be sure to recalibrate SBRT as well, keeping it as low as possible but still accurate according to the test pattern.

You guys are going a little stray with your cut/drv relationships. A video signal 255/255/255 or 100/100/100 produces white/gray. Phosphor drive is a little different because you don’t use equal amounts of R/G/B to make white. For reference, my CRT projector, uses R=34%, G=100%, B=9% for white (Red - 380 ftL, Green - 1117 ftL, Blue - 100.7 ftL).

When you talk about making changes in cut/drv, a step of 1 for blue may have more of an effect on white than a step of 1 on green or red.

Adjusting _CUT levels can and should affect Black level, gamma, and _DRV settings. A change in BCUT generally will affect BDRV, but not 1:1.

IThe other two consistently overexposed slide film, as I recall,


Certianly there have been some little "quirks" I have worked out "along the way"(some of which I've probably forgotten!), with the Ftb, but, I do know I've never ran into anything quite like that. In fact, I've allways been very pleased with how the light meter on it has worked out, given the results I've experienced while shooting with all sorts of light conditions.

If anything, as I recall in some, "specific" cases exposures have turned out slightly "darker" than I expected, but also as I recall there were other reasons likely involved besides any sort of inaccracy from the light meter. Such, as situations which required me to "average" light meter readings for bright/dark areas in scene+ any added slight compensations I made for exposure settings to try to "get what I wanted". For example, think dark forest with a few bright spots of sunlight making it through the canopy, when I want to preserve some fine details in the shadows while at the same time not overexposing the bright spots too much or getting a "washed out" effect.

One thing is certian, *I* certianly am(or at least was when I was using the camera in such situations much more often) *calibrated* to it's light meter when such manual *compensation* was required, given I knew what to "expect" after many experiments in similar situations <g>

I certianly can't vouch for the light meter's accuracy to any "specific" degree, however.

Even recall being a bit stunned at just how GOOD some of the scans of negatives from film exposed in the Ftb looked when I first got my 35mm film scanner, without any corrections via software of any kind. Surely any "artifacts" introduced by the scanner couldn't exactly "reverse" any problems with the exposures!


They may be under-reading the brightness of your TV: You think it's 20 ft-L, but it's actually 30-ish. Maybe the reverse.


Certianly. I suppose I should have worded some of my last post a little differently. Although it might be interesting to know an accurate measurement of the screen(as it relates to your recent movie theatre screen brightness post, for example), all that is really important is what it looks like to my eyes, and I don't need a meter for that.

For my purposes, there are however, several quite useful applications for the Ftb's light meter I can think of. For example, using the light-meter readings as a comparator between screen brightness levels from different sources(where possible), and as a reference -- Such as for "redefining" the _DRV~_CUT for a different pic slider setting while easily ensuring I keep my preferred screen brightness level, or for looking at changes in screen brightness levels as the set ages/phospor's wear, and adjusting accordingly. As slow as that happens, it probably goes unnoticed until a certian "dimness" is reached.

In fact, I've already used it to verify, and in some cases slightly improve upon my previous "by eye only" "balancing" of screen brightness levels among different sources with 2170P-4 SPIC and other relevant settings. In one case involving MS viewer, as described farther below, I came across(seemingly at this point) quite a difference I hadn't noticed before ... I was also a bit surprised to notice changes in brightness as small as resulted from a one value change of the picture slider were detectable with the Ftb's light meter -- Certianly, the needle didn't change much with one click of pic slider, but given the references available "in the viewfinder" with the apeture ring indicator, it seemed to work quite well in detecting "small" changes.

Note that while sometimes it might be desirable to "tweak" the pic slider due to differences in programming, I generally don't "mess with it" and just live with such differences. I also noticed last night that in *some* circumstances It turns out I need slightly different Pic slider values from "23" set for different inputs in cases where white level can't be balanced out for those inputs/sources with SPIC(or anything else I can find) :

For example, ALL 480i DRC processed signals use the SAME SPIC value - which doesn't work for perfect balance for screen brightness between, for example, in my case 480i DVD via component V5 input AND 480i ATSC from internal tuner. And of course, 2103-1 "SCON" doesn't apply to those as it does "seperately" for 480i DRC processed signals from NTSC signal sources via RF or CV/YC inputs. Note I'm also a bit wary about adjusting factory SCON values given the the "set with a scope" info for SCON from the manual.

So, In this case, what is needed for the same pic slider setting for ATSC 480i(via "RF" input from "ANT") and for 480i DVD via V5 is only a difference of "1" for SPIC. If I could do it, SPIC=0 for 480i ATSC and SPIC=1 for 480i via V5 would work perfectly, but I can only use SPIC=0 for both. And, SPIC=0 is what I have it set at for DRC, given 480i ATSC is my "brightest" source. And, I want everything which uses "RF" input to match as closely as possible as I don't want to be twiddling the pic slider unnecessarily for different scan rates used with a single "input". In this case, NTSC+ATSC 480i/p/720p/1080i from Internal ATSC/NTSC or QAM "tuners".

So, even though it's a very slight difference, I'm striving for "perfection" as much as possible here! So, what I did in this case was leave SPIC at "0" for 480i DRC signals, and, for my preferred screen brightness setting, raise my Pic slider to "24" for 480i DVD via component 5, and then lower by one value my setting for 480p component(used with same DVD player) to "match" that new 24 pic slider value used with V5.

Info on The BIGGEST, and unexpected oddity(from what I can tell at this point) I came across follows -- Note: I do need to look at this closer, and attempt to better verify+make sure the test pattern I was using for MS is working "right" via the viewer. It's the pluge+extreme Grey pattern you've posted. In which case, shouldn't the top greyscale step be a reference for white (100 IRE) when viewed via MS, and therefore be a viable reference ? :

ATSC 1080i/720p/480p and MS share the same "SPIC" value === but it looks like at this point I need about 4~5 clicks of Pic slider higher for the MS viewer to "balance it" with everything else, which is using either PIC slider=23(everything else except V5 for DVD) or pic slider=24(V5 for DVD) ! ...

BTW, I'm not positive, and can't say for sure yet(and may never be able to), and the following seems to contridict and earlier comment of yours on this .... But, at this point, on my set at least, I do believe the QM PATN white box window pattern(#3? or thearabouts in each "series" of 1080i/480i/480p/720p ATSC patterns) seems to be at or close to a repressentation of 100IRE "white", as I believe is the full "white screen"/field ~#5 in each "series" of patterns(well, other than any ABL effects that might be involved) ... I can say the somewhat "white" full screen patterns at the end of the series(#15~19 or so?) are definitely NOT representation of 100IRE/white ...


Moreover, make sure that you way over-cover the spot-metering area with the white patch on the TV -- i.e. the known boundary of the spot should be smaller than the white patch as seen in the viewfinder.


It was easy to move the camera back from the TV(hence the "white patch" became too small to fill enough "area" in and around the light-metering area) and see the point where the reading changed.

As you may recall, on Ftb there is a small "darker" rectangular area shown in the viewfinder which directly indicates the light-metering area. The small circle in center of the rectangle, and center of the viewfinder is for focusing. -- This rectangular area made for a good reference to note how much "white area" from the test pattern(such as the 100IRE white "box" on the Pluge w/grey scale pattern on DVE) on the TV had to be outside of that rectangular area before the reading changed as I moved the camera(on tripod) back from set. I tested it several times with a few different test patterns(including comparisons to the entire viewfinder covered with white which was possible with AVIA or DVE window patterns with the camera quite close to TV), and I found that, actually, only a very, very small area "outside" of that little rectangle was needed for the same reading as occured with the entire viewfinder filled with white.


My point about the "31" settings was not to recommend a specific value for them but that they were convenient reference points for whatever settings you want them to represent. For you, that should be a comfortable "normal" viewing brightness. My Minolta digital Spotmeter-F sees my "comfortable brightness" as about 30 ft-L for white. Of course, YMMV.

Certianly agree such a mid-point value reference is a great idea when possible, again, perhaps I should have worded part of my post a bit differently --- However -- I'm just saying in some cases(such as with my set and my "eyes" and the screen brightness which Is best and comformtable), using "31" Pic slider may not be easily "acheivable", or "preferred" as the reference point for preferred screen brightness level.

For instance ... I certianly have black levels set/balanced so I use brightness slider="31" for all inputs/devices, same thing for having related SM settings adjusted as much as possible so the "sharpness" slider is at/near mid point values ... But, concerning the "picture" slider, in my case :

#1). With my TV's current settings, with some exceptions(depending on programming and inputs/sources that can't be balanced with 2170P-4/SPIC, or 2103-1/SCON or anything else I can find as mentioned earlier in post) --- Pic slider "31" does NOT result in a comfortable normal viewing, it's TOO bright/fatiging on my eyes after a relatively short period.

Even in the Daytime when there is plenty of amibient light, using a 31 setting it's noticably(slightly) too "bright"(except for MS viewer), no matter what the FL may actually be. And, I'm not the ONLY one who has noticed this, I asked everyone who watches the set this afternoon while adjusting the pic slider a bit, and heard the same thing from the rest of family. Pic slider =23 is NOT too dim even during the day with lots of light in the room(and at night it's "perfect"), 31 is just at the point of getting "too bright" in the Daytime, and is very noticably past that point by several clicks at night .. Pic slider=18 for instance, certianly IS too dim however, although you wouldn't know it if you were watching the set in a completely dark room.

#2), So, OK -- Pic slider "23" is perfect(more or less), which works for me :

But, perhaps I can "redefine" _DRV to bring that "up" to Pic slider='31" for a mid-point value instead -- Well, maybe I can, and perhaps that is preferrable to using "23" as the reference point for the preferred screen brightness levels, and perhaps I might do/try that someday --- However -- Keep in mind, for example, I have SPIC values as low as 0 for my "brightest" sources, and RDRV~BCUT have allways ranged with values between 33~5, including for all my greyscale experiments(well, except a brief experiment with higher values for RDRV up in the 40's -- I needed a much lower PIC slider value for that!) .... which are in the general range of the factory "warm offset" values ....

Again, haven't tried it yet, but If I LOWER the _DRV values to redefine things so my preferred screen brightness is "set" for "pic slider=31"(given that I can't for example lower "SPIC" any more) -- I suspect "in range" Settings for BDRV are going to be getting awfully close, at, or near the range of "ZERO" value! And that would NOT work very well, even if it did end up at say as high a reading as "BDRV=3", given what I might want to experiment with via the warm/cool offsets to the point it might drop below zero, or perhaps after the set changes significantly lower values would also be needed ...

So, I'd really like to make sure BDRV or BCUT will not, or will never potientially be concievably any lower than "5", in which case the maximum amount I would currently consider lowering _DRV values would be by about, well ZERO, Since the factory warm offsets equate(or so I "believe") to RDRV~BCUT = 32-17-9-32-17-5, and the XBR960 service manual chart listing equating for warm offset would equate to BDRV=5 ....

But perhaps I'm missing something, here? I am also intrigued, and also thought about trying RWhetmore's suggestion at some point concerning cranking up _DRV+_CUts, but I expect that would certianly require a low pic slider value. Nothing wrong with that I suppose, however, as long as it is at least as high as 5 or 6, in case I do need or desire to lower it in certian circumstances!

At one time, I did experiment with lowering 2170P-4/SPIO from it's factory adjusted value of 10 in order to attempt to achieve a mid-point "31" Picture slider value for my preferred reference -- However - It might have been just me(and just knowing the manual says "set it with a 'scope"), but it looked like there may have been something else that may have been going on rather than just SPIO being a global "contrast" adjustment which does the exact "same thing" as the Picture silder .... So, Not being sure about that, and having spent more time on it than I wanted several months ago, I decided to return SPIO it to factory default and just be happy with Pic slider "23" for my preferred setting .... Which really, I am perfectly happy with :)

I've messed with many of my service menus because I did the dreaded reset. I set up mostly alright again, however, every time I turn the TV on it asks me to input the language and input the vertical and horizontal business. Is there some setting that I could have flipped that is causing this? I've read the entire forum, but can't seem to get this to stop. It still remembers the time I have set, and it isn't going back to "vivid" when I turn the TV, it just always asks for those initial settings.

Edit: I just needed to let it run the autoprogram.

One more question though, in the charts, what is the meaning of VGA? I'm a bit confused trying to figure out the default values for mid1 as don't really understand the meaning of VGA ,single, index, and favorites in this context. Specifically, for MID1:MDHP, with 480i input on video 5, i think it says 174 is the default value here, but this is WAY outside of my scan range, and the image just goes to garbage if I raise it that high, I'm set at 57.


Are my posts being ignored because I reset my TV? :o :confused:

fwiw = for what it's worth

I can't advise you. But I think I'd be a little nervous if I needed to put my SBRT so high. That doesn't seem normal. As you said, the default is 12. If your TV looks right at 54, it must have looked completely wrong at 12..? So without going into the service menu (which we aren't expected to do), you wouldn't have been able to get a satisfactory picture on your TV? I'd be afraid that something is wrong with the set. I wouldn't want GAMM at 3 on my set either, but that one is subjective. Still, the fact that you have SBRT at 54 and GAMM at 3 makes it sound like you are compensating for a problem. *shrug* Changing your DRV and CUT values won't help.

I have messing around with my tv and raising the DRV and CUT do help, I have raised the settings and now have SBRT at 33 and the picture is about the same as a high SBRT and low Drv and Cut settings.

I ordered an Avia disc and am waiting till it comes to callibrate. I adjust and adjust but can't get the picture perfect. I have also reduced GAMM to 2 as it was too bright before. I still don't fully understand DRV and CUT settings, the whites are still a little to bright and blacks I believe could have more detail.

Adjusting _CUT levels can and should affect Black level, gamma, and _DRV settings. A change in BCUT generally will affect BDRV, but not 1:1.

Glenn, how would adjusting the _CUT settings affect gamma?

Adjusting _CUT levels can and should affect Black level, gamma, and _DRV settings.That's technically true, but at the time you are adjusting the _CUT settings to get correct grayscale, it doesn't matter. Your task is to get the three colors to balance near the beam-cutoff point. When that happens, you have color neutrality -- or, stated another way, the color of near-black matches the color of white.

NOW, one re-adjusts the black level with SBRT + Brightness (and the other usual input-dependent tweaks) to calibrate it to normal standards using, say, the AVIA or DVE disks. When black level is correct, gamma is restored to what it was before.

Bottom line: Black level affects gamma (as measured, but not necessarily as perceived in the mid-grays). But when we are adjusting the cutoffs for red, green, and blue, we don't care. We are adjusting color, not black level. Having perfected color, we can then re-adjust black level.

I have messing around with my tv and raising the DRV and CUT do help, I have raised the settings and now have SBRT at 33 and the picture is about the same as a high SBRT and low Drv and Cut settings.

I ordered an Avia disc and am waiting till it comes to callibrate. I adjust and adjust but can't get the picture perfect. I have also reduced GAMM to 2 as it was too bright before. I still don't fully understand DRV and CUT settings, the whites are still a little to bright and blacks I believe could have more detail.
Use the black and white Avia screens to help you set DRV and CUT. If you think whites are too bright, you probably need to lower the picture setting. I think the best way to set white level on this TV is to just experiement during normal viewing until you find the picture setting that you are happiest with.

I've messed with many of my service menus because I did the dreaded reset...

One more question though, in the charts, what is the meaning of VGA???

Are my posts being ignored because I reset my TV? :o :confused:
I believe you have unfortunately posted in the midst of a very, very interesting exchange between a few of this threads "best and brightest." I am, for one, am reading their exchanges very closely, since I'm learning a boatload of new info as they learn from one-another. I hope it isn't because of your unfortunate "reset."

I must acknowledge, though, that after many instances of trying to help those who've made your mistake, I find they tend to continue to dis-respect the SM, the need to record values and the need to be very methodical in their approach to the SM.

You appear to have learned from your mistake and I'll try to help you as much as I can. After all, we're both from the SF Bay Area, right? Those "best and brightest" I mentioned earlier are definitely more qualified to answer your more difficult questions and I hope they'll chime in at the appropriate time, but I'll help as much as I can. I'm temporarily on leave and very far from my HD set, so, for now, I can't share values (setting numbers).

VGA refers to one of many levels of resolutions, display formats, ports and cabling layouts (pins). Here's a definition from Webopedia:

"Abbreviation of video graphics array, a graphics display system for PCs developed by IBM. VGA has become one of the de facto standards for PCs. In text mode, VGA systems provide a resolution of 720 by 400 pixels. In graphics mode, the resolution is either 640 by 480 (with 16 colors) or 320 by 200 (with 256 colors). The total palette of colors is 262,144.
Unlike earlier graphics standards for PCs -- MDA, CGA, and EGA -- VGA uses analog signals rather than digital signals. Consequently, a monitor designed for one of the older standards will not be able to use VGA.

Since its introduction in 1987, several other standards have been developed that offer greater resolution and more colors (see SVGA , 8514/A graphics standard, and XGA), but VGA remains the lowest common denominator. All PCs made today support VGA, and possibly some other more advanced standard."

I hope this helps. And good luck with bringing your set "back." ;)

Are my posts being ignored because I reset my TV?:

No, not by me anyway, and I expect not by anyone else here either, although I must agree with JustSc's comments, above. If I had some useful info relating to your questions/comments, I would do my best to answer, but unfortunetly up until now I have not had anything to contribute in that regard. For instance, I've never had My TV require that I input the time, including before I first "autoscanned" for any channels, as I recall, and I had no idea what you were talking about concerning the "vertical and horizontal "stuff" ...
I do have one thing to offer :


One more question though, in the charts, what is the meaning of VGA? I'm a bit confused trying to figure out the default values for mid1 as don't really understand the meaning of VGA ,single, index, and favorites in this context.


I can tell you "Single"/Index" and "favorites" relates to different features or to put it another way certian "screen formatting modes" which some models of sets(such as my KD34XBR960 concerning Index, favorites/twin view/etc) support. For instance, "Single" refers to when using only a single source input to "fill the screen" - for example, as opposed to using "Twin View" on sets so equipped( A "PIP" like functions which divides the screen into 2 windows, where you can use two sources (say a DVD player in right window, and signals from internal tuner in left window). "index" is a feature that puts a larger window with the input source you are currently watching on left side of screen, and, in a small portion of right side of screen, a scrolling set of small windows appears, in those windows are the content of channels from the NTSC(from antenna or cable) internal tuner. "Favorites" produces a somewhat similar screen mode. your "favorites" but I'm not sure.

Other than per justsc's expanation --- Not sure about "VGA" -- perhaps it may involve when a TV is used as a Output device for a PC/VGA graphics controller via the DVI/HDMI input?, Or perhaps it's for any set models in the past which have used this firmware(or a earlier or different version?) and have had 15-pin VGA/RGB port?

EQUIVALENCE OF VARIOUS BLACK-LEVEL ADJUSTMENTS, OFFSETS, AND COLOR CUTOFFS

I have just run a few careful experiments that confirm the following (all in 2170P-1):

(1) The Brightness slider, SBRT, and SBOF all have equivalent increments. E.g. raising Brightness by 20 is exactly canceled by decreasing SBRT by 20. Increasing SBRT by 5 exactly cancels decreasing SBOF by 5.

(2) The black-level increase observed by raising all _CUT settings by 16 is canceled by reducing SBRT by 4, very closely. Thus, there is approximately a 4:1 ratio between clicks of an overall _CUT change and a compensatory change in SBRT.

(3) Raising all _CUT settings by 16 (RCUT now at 61) results in a small minus-red shift in overall color, even though grayscale still seems fairly linear. Thus there appears to be a nonlinearity in the red channel near the top of its range, maybe in other colors.

(4) Raising all _CUT settings by 16 for Neutral color is exactly equivalent to leaving them alone and raising, say, the Cool cutoff offsets by 16 (31-31-31 -- 47-47-47) and switching to Cool. Further, if the SBOF for Cool is also reduced by 4 (7 --> 3), the effect is that black level is preserved -- but there is still that slight minus-red shift overall.

(5) It might occur to someone that you could configure high _CUT settings and high _COF settings, and that might force the total for one color to be higher than 63. But this doesn't work: The limit seems to be that the sum of the _CUT and _COF settings saturate or top out at 63. If you set them so one color totals 63, then make further increases in that color, no color shift is observed. I.e. RCUT=50 + RCOF=51 (offset=20) does NOT = an RCUT equivalent of 70. It stops at 63.

(This makes sense if the internal digital representation and storage of these values has a hard limit.)

CONCLUSIONS: Knowing the above makes it easier to fiddle with the various black-level parameters, knowing some are directly equivalent (Brightness, SBRT, and SBOF).

It also seems as though I could drop my _CUT values by 4 each if they had crept up during experimentation, and then add 1 to SBRT.

I sense that there are nonlinearities or other anomalies at the range-extremes of some of these parameters, and that an adjustment nightmare might ensue. (See #3, above.) Sony's own chart numbers uniformly stay away from those extremes. I think I will keep my settings near the center of each range, since nothing forces me to do otherwise, and the incremental changes track so well that one can experiment fairly intuitively.

As for RWetmore's observation of better shadow detail with his settings so high or with some _CUT and _DRV settings "matching," I think there may be another explanation for that. I'll post a separate opinion. For my part, I am going to avoid those extremes.

I hope this data helps out some folks.

Specifically, for MID1:MDHP, with 480i input on video 5, i think it says 174 is the default value here, but this is WAY outside of my scan range, and the image just goes to garbage if I raise it that high, I'm set at 57.According to the MID1 data chart, (charts are frequently cryptic), the column that applies to 480i seem to be Single - Others - Others, and the default value is 0! I checked my TV with a 480i feed from a DVD on V5, and MDHP is, indeed, set to 0.

At the column level, I don't quite get the "Normal" / "Others" distinction. "Single" does seem to refer to a screen-filling main display, and VGA is for a computer-generated video source connected thru HDMI, as far as I can tell from several charts.

In the MID1-3 groups, be sure to get the values for width and especially height exactly right, as these values control (as I have discovered) the precise sampling of the video for display. Get the vertical ones wrong, and the image quality will be compromised! There are exact ratios between the particular video-line count and the internal digital representation of that video that have to be maintained.

The critical values are DHAR, DVAR, MDHS, and MDVS in MID1; in MID2, DRHS and DRVS (if relevant); and in MID3, VDHS and VDVS. The correct numbers are the ones in the data tables.

I would copy all other numbers exactly as listed in the MID1-3 tables, especially MID3 #4-11. The ones associated with "phase" or "pos" (position) can be tweaked a little to balance the centering of a video frame between inputs; but don't mess with these without first getting the positioning right in the 2170D groups.

The data charts are found here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=5531661&&#post5531661).

At the column level, I don't quite get the "Normal" / "Others" distinction. "


Definitely understandable, as sometimes it doesn't even seem to make "sense" ....

As one example of the use of "others" --- where the columns listed in the chart for CXA2171 CBGN~YGN are "PT", "Others", and "HDMI". Note that In this case, only 480p, 720p+1080i signals are involved/"effected" by the 2171CXA settings, including CBGN~YGN :

PT refers to 1080i pass through "mode"(By pass MID processing).

HDMI refers to (you guessed it, HDMI!)

"Others" - refers to Component video from either V5/V6 component inputs OR from Internal ATSC/QAM tuner(s) +anything else I suppose, although I have no idea what that "anything else" might be(if anything) !

As another example, 2170-D1 "others" column for 2170D-1/ZOOM should/may apply to"screen formatting modes other than "widezoom, Zoom and E-Zoom/Zoom-V ... Such as the "normal" screen mode on 16x9 sets which places a 4x3 signal, with proper aspect ratio "inside" the 16x9 picture area with bars on the sides(black bars unless you've adjusted MID1/BCOL to higher values than 0(black).

In some cases, "others"(and some other columns in the chart) does indeed seem even more "cryptic", in which cases it is sometimes difficult to figure out WHAT they are talking about, or what it applies to ... It is not as if a "others" message appears in the Green text at top of screen when you are working in SM as do as other info on the signal source, such as "ATSC, "480i"/"480p" ....

(3) Raising all _CUT settings by 16 (RCUT now at 61) results in a small minus-red shift in overall color, even though grayscale still seems fairly linear. Thus there appears to be a nonlinearity in the red channel near the top of its range, maybe in other colors......<snip>

I sense that there are nonlinearities or other anomalies at the range-extremes of some of these parameters, and that an adjustment nightmare might ensue. (See #3, above.) Sony's own chart numbers uniformly stay away from those extremes. I think I will keep my settings near the center of each range, since nothing forces me to do otherwise, and the incremental changes track so well that one can experiment fairly intuitively.



What I'm wondering is, if this non-linearity in color could #1). Be present to some small extent without going into the extreme upper or lower ranges, and, 2). if it be used in a benefical way in some circumstances, and 3). if anything similar happens with _DRV. Especially as I may have reason to experiment a bit with it, which is also why I was interested in RWhetmore's observations. I just have not had the time yet, to do so.

For example - I think I've arrived at the best "relationship" I can find with the following RDRV~BCUT settings, as related to Greyscale linearity and CT. The ONLY problem is, no matter what I do to try to "tweak" these farther, I cannot seem to get rid of what I *perceive* as a very, very slight overall "greenishness" to the greyscale without causing a "worse" problem linearity wise(+red or +blue, -red or -blue/etc/et) or CT wise(too "cool" or too "warm"), etc/etc.

RDRV~BCUT = 32-18-8-22-17-14

As if it was very, very slightly +green overall, and I needed RDRV~BCUT to "work" on a scale from 1-100 instead of 0-63, with, in other words, smaller "increments" for each value. Or, I find myself wishing I could try something along the lines of the following :

RDRV~BCUT = 32-17.75-8.3-22.25-16.85-14.25

If it would even be worthwhile, I just wonder which "way" I should go when I start experimenting, Up or down, and whether I should try to see if I can make improvements increasing/decreasing the _DRV's(and adjusting Pic slider accordingly per using my Camera's Light meter reference for current preferred brightness levels), first, or start with the _CUT's and adjustment of SBRT as necessary. As noted before, I can't go too much lower, with the DRV's especially, and I'd prefer keeping BDRV above "5" for reasons mentioned earlier, which would only allow for a decrease of "3" for each _DRV value. That would also be in the "extreme" lower range for BDRV, which I'd also like to avoid as well for the reasons you mention ...

In any case, I'm Hoping that perhaps I can find something that will get rid of that bit of extra "greenishness" throughout greyscale(and although it seems near perfect, there may be some room for some very slight improvement in greyscale linearity as well), realizing that it might still get quite confusing as, if say, I raise the _CUT values by say, "10", in order to see if it is useful or not, additional individual adjustment of RCUT/GCUT/BCUT may be(I'm guessing likely WILL be) in order.

The ONLY problem is, no matter what I do to try to "tweak" these farther, I cannot seem to get rid of what I *perceive* as a very, very slight overall "greenishness" to the greyscale without causing a "worse" problem linearity wise(+red or +blue, -red or -blue/etc/et) or CT wise(too "cool" or too "warm"), etc/etc. . . . As if it was very, very slightly +green overall, and I needed RDRV~BCUT to "work" on a scale from 1-100 instead of 0-63, with, in other words, smaller "increments" for each value.I have thought for quite a while that there was an intractable greenishness about the mid-tones. I thought that I had white right and that I had adjusted the "black" end correctly. But here's where an accurate spectrophotometer would be a godsend! I have come to the conclusion that my perception of my "white" based on bright patches in b/w test patterns is not correct. I have been "tuning" the grays and somehow allowing the very brightest tone to be a bit different, probably slightly red. Then when I look at an integrated picture of all b/w tones, something is really "off." Usually greenish, or yellowish-green. Very annoying.

But, having pulled no special tricks at all, I have cured the "greenies" completely. It now seems that my ratio of RCUT to the other colors was much too low. Here I was, tweaking _DRV by one notch at a time to eliminate the slightest trace of off-color, and what I was really observing overall were the mid tones: they're the ones that gave me the color perception for b/w patterns and real b/w images. So I impulsively made some big changes in _CUT for blue and green -- and something magic happened! I stumbled on a nearly perfect grayscale. True, my _DRV was still a little cool, but everything matched in color. No greenies! So I tweaked _DRV by -2 red and +1 blue (good color-temp increments) a couple of times and got a white that was just perfect on real color video material. Watched an evening of TV, really satidfied with the neutral whites. Then I killed color with the Color slider, and . . . no greenies! Just really impressive b/w.

So I am current running _DRV and _CUT settings of 45-25-23 -- 46-18-22. (The old settings, normalized for the above red: 45-30-26 -- 46-27-25.) If I had a color-temp (CT) meter that was accurate over a wide range of brightnesses, I would use it in an instant to linearize the grayscale: (a) measure the white CT I have arrived at, according to my eyes and preferences; then (b) duplicate that same CT down the brightness range. One could set up the Warm and Cool offsets to give three different choices, obviously.

***********
Now . . . a new theoretical question: A perfect video driver circuit would allow you to set the _CUT values so all three color guns would start illuminating the screen at once, say at a 0 IRE (black). So why would that setting ever need to be changed? In this perfect processing environment, the video-signal drive would begin at that zero (colorless) "pivot" point, scaling each of the three colors to match their screen-phosphor requirements, so that IRE 100 (or 100% white) would be just a perfect white CT. If the color guns resemble each other in turn-on characteristics, only _DRV would have to be adjusted to alter the CT of white and gray. As the video signal increases from 0 to 5 to 10 IRE, the three drive signals would still be in perfect proportion, and even shadows would be okay. In a less perfect world, _CUT would be only for eliminating small anomalies in the way the particular CRT works.

Theoretically, this could be the way these settings are processed internally in our DA-4 TVs. Are they? Well, I'm not sure. My experience with most CRT displays has been that the "pivot" point for the three video-drive curves is below black, and so offset and drive interact -- you have to tweak both, going back and forth. But that doesn't mean that a sophisticated signal-processing system as we have in our TVs has to do it that way. It would be a pleasure to discover that _DRV and _CUT don't really interact. I've been suspecting that they interact a lot less than I have assumed -- and so I will do some experiments now to see if I can nail this down.

ADDENDUM: See results of test six messages down. Above description is wishful thinking!

. . . I needed RDRV~BCUT to "work" on a scale from 1-100 instead of 0-63, with, in other words, smaller "increments" for each value.In my opinion, the _CUT increments are plenty small enough. I can't imagine wanting more sensitivity in the _CUT adjustments.

Non-linearity in the CRT guns, phosphor and electronic circuits and components is a good example of the benefit of being able to measure grayscale at all points. Cuts and Drives interact with each other, using various combinations that produce a uniform grayscale. Making adjustments to compensate for all the “non-linearity” in the combined circuits is in part a function of a calibration. If the gamma curve is “off”, sometimes adjusting cuts, drives, brightness and contrast can make improvements. These circuits are all interrelated and cannot all function with the same linearity throughout their range. Some settings will be better than others. One could spend a lot of time, with test equipment, setting grayscale. It is common for me to go back and forth between cuts and drives 5 to 10 times, then measure the grayscale in 10 IRE steps then repeat the cuts and drives again a few times to achieve a flat grayscale. While doing this, checking to see that the gamma curve is close to 2.2 for each step and overall.

Do you need to do it this way? NO, but it makes things easy when you know it is right.

Non-linearity in the CRT guns, phosphor and electronic circuits and components is a good example of the benefit of being able to measure grayscale at all points. Cuts and Drives interact with each other, using various combinations that produce a uniform grayscale. Making adjustments to compensate for all the “non-linearity” in the combined circuits is in part a function of a calibration. If the gamma curve is “off”, sometimes adjusting cuts, drives, brightness and contrast can make improvements.<snip>Isn't that what we've been saying all along? Glad you agree.

BTW, I'm not positive, and can't say for sure yet(and may never be able to), and the following seems to contridict and earlier comment of yours on this .... But, at this point, on my set at least, I do believe the QM PATN white box window pattern(#3? or thearabouts in each "series" of 1080i/480i/480p/720p ATSC patterns) seems to be at or close to a repressentation of 100IRE "white", as I believe is the full "white screen"/field ~#5 in each "series" of patterns(well, other than any ABL effects that might be involved) ... I can say the somewhat "white" full screen patterns at the end of the series(#15~19 or so?) are definitely NOT representation of 100IRE/white.All you say is true. It was my mistake underestimating the brightness of pattern #3. I had examined it in 1080i mode, and had measured it as lower than expected, compared to #23. But on my 4:3 TV, the 1080i patterns 1-20 are presented full screen, not 16:9. When I forced proper 16:9 mode by setting 2170P-4/IDSW to a 16:9 aspect ratio (=3, I think), the brightness was what I expected (more white lines per inch, duh!). And, yes, the beam-current limiter kicks in for those full-white screens, lowering the brightness by about half at what would be 30-35 ft-L.

Those small white patches are dead-center, however, and don't represent the average or perceived brightness of the screen, due to the CRT's hot-spot effect. I prefer one that is off-center, such as the grayscale + pluge on DVE or a corner of the larger patch on AVIA.

Use the black and white Avia screens to help you set DRV and CUT. If you think whites are too bright, you probably need to lower the picture setting. I think the best way to set white level on this TV is to just experiement during normal viewing until you find the picture setting that you are happiest with.

Thanks mechanical Man for the usefull info I greatly appreciate the time you take to answer my questions.

I have been fooling around and have gotten the picture pretty good by just flipping channels and getting it to where it is comfortable to watch, I will try what you recommend when my avia disc comes.

thanks

jjtv

In this perfect processing environment, the video-signal drive would begin at that zero (colorless) "pivot" point, scaling each of the three colors to match their screen-phosphor requirements, so that IRE 100 (or 100% white) would be just a perfect white CT. If the color guns resemble each other in turn-on characteristics, only _DRV would have to be adjusted to alter the CT of white and gray. <snip> I've been suspecting that they interact a lot less than I have assumed -- and so I will do some experiments now to see if I can nail this down.Did that test in a very dark room last evening. No, the "perfect processing environment" isn't to be found in our Sony DA-4 TVs. So sad. The cutoff and drive settings interact heavily, and if you adjust _DRV to get a diferent color-temp, you have to adjust _CUT as well to keep grayscale aligned. End of short-lived fantasy!

The good news: For small changes, at least, Sony seems to have scaled the two _DRV and _CUT groups so that they seem to track fairly well. It's very hard to test for large color changes because the eye gets distracted by the appearance of obvious color, but for small changes, such as a small warm CT change (+2 red, -1 blue), you can change the _DRV and _CUT by the same amount, and come out fine. Hence my original (and still reasonable) recommendation to, for example, set Warm offsets at, say, 33-31-30 -- 33-31-30, and Cool at 29-31-32 -- 29-31-32. I presume reader-experimenters will report on any refinements on this, and I will, too.

(2) The black-level increase observed by raising all _CUT settings by 16 is canceled by reducing SBRT by 4, very closely. Thus, there is approximately a 4:1 ratio between clicks of an overall _CUT change and a compensatory change in SBRT.

Ken,

I am wondering how you tested for this? Raising the _CUT settings to where I have them now had zero effect on SBRT/Brightness using the AVIA black level test pattern on my HD-A1 (1080i). Is there a logical explanation for this? It seems very inconsistent with your results, which concern me.

I'm also curious if you found the effect on washout equal with this 4:1 ratio? In other words, does raising _CUT settings by 4, equal the same amount of image "washout" as raising SBRT by 1?

Furthermore, did you find the increase in shadow detail also to be 4:1??? Just curious.

Finally, are you using a 1080i signal when running your test patterns???


As for RWetmore's observation of better shadow detail with his settings so high or with some _CUT and _DRV settings "matching," I think there may be another explanation for that. I'll post a separate opinion. For my part, I am going to avoid those extremes.

I'm curious why my set appears to look so good with the guidelines I'm following. I'm sensing, however, that you are not going to agree.

I tried the following test last night in order to do good(hopefully) A/B comparisons :

I set up the following for several needed inputs with *identically* configured Pic modes(per the info on "customizing pic modes" earlier in this thread), and with the aid of "Mode memory:On" setting. Then, I did A/B comparisions between the two "pic modes" using various 1080i greyscale test patterns from MS, as well as "video black" from a "non-present" 1080i signal via ATSC internal tuner. I also compared a bit with real programming material --- but with color slider at "31" as well as "0" -- specifically, the episode of "NOVA" about the Concorde running on PBS HD channel last night, and HD Letterman/HD tonight show) :

RDRV~BCUT set at my current, preferred settings : 32-18-8-23-17-14

Cool offset RDOF~BCOF = 31-31-31-40-40-40

Relevant Pic mode # 1("Vivid" pic mode for reference) settings :

brightness slider=31
Color Temp= Neutral

Relevant Pic mode #2("standard" pic mode for reference) settings:

Brightness Slider=28 = Note - this was set as closely as possible to match Black level in Pic Mode #1 - which was a bit difficult to set precisely as Gamma apparently was effected by this experiment as well. For instance, 29 also seemed close to being the right value.

Color Temp=COOL

NOTE - EVERYTHING else was set the same for either pic mode(including all relevant SM settings) except the above settings. Also note, that when looking at test patterns and "video black", Color Slider=0 for both pic modes. Also, note of course, With both "customized" pic modes set with brightness slider=31, and "color temp" neutral(or one pic mode set with "neutral" and the other at "cool" with RDOF~BCOF 31-31-31-31-31-31 ) -- The EXACT same results appear on screen for either pic mode when switching between them. Easy to see, as these two are right "next" to each other when you press the button on the remote.

Results I noticed, or seemingly "perceived" at least :

I did not look closely enough at changes in Greyscale linearity to report confidently, or accurately about it in detail. I can report :

#1). With a video black signal and PIC mode 1, a neutral grey(s) resulted throughout brightness slider range ~35~63. With Pic Mode #2 in comparsion to pic #1, while it appeared linear in color while raising brightness slider, it was perhaps "sort of aqua-marine greenish-bluish - what color is it really"?

#2). Although I didn't spend much time looking at the brighter areas in test patterns, I believe I saw a change in higher IRE's as well. Can't help but notice it when looking at a white concorde flying through a sky with bright clouds, or, higher IRE's in a greyscale step pattern while comparing between the two pic modes. Along the lines "color" wise of what I noted in above paragraph concerning Pic mode #2/lower brightness levels and the "greenish-bluish "what color is it?" deal, although not seemingly as significant as with lower IRE's, as you might expect ... In fact, if this makes sense -- as it might sound contrictdory to that but it isn't : the greyscale "linearity" seemed to "track" quite well between Pic mode #1+2 - which I believe is much as Ken experienced with it going minus red, overall when he raised all _CUT significantly. I just was not expecting quite as much change as I seemed to have noticed by raising it by 8, in my case resulting in more "mid-range" values.

#3). Also, apparently, Gamma changed as well, which made it somewhat difficult to precisely detirmine the matching brightness slider setting for Pic Mode #2. Pic Mode #2 apparently had higher gamma(slightly more "washed out") than Pic mode #1.

I am wondering how you tested for [the _CUT/SBRT ratio]? Raising the _CUT settings to where I have them now had zero effect on SBRT/Brightness using the AVIA black level test pattern on my HD-A1 (1080i).I put up a grayscale + pluge pattern from AVIA and froze it. There is a background and two faint dark bars on the left side of the gray patches. Their absolute and relative visibility was how I restored correct black level by lowering SBRT after raising the _CUT settings. The grayscale patches showed me that there was a color shift.I'm also curious if you found the effect on washout equal with this 4:1 ratio? In other words, does raising _CUT settings by 4, equal the same amount of image "washout" as raising SBRT by 1?I tried to be sensitive to the "shadow" contrast as I ran these tests, and to the apparent brightness ratios of the gray patches. The apparent brightness differences among the two bars and background did not seem to change after the _CUT +16 plus SBRT -4. The two dark bars were still equally distinct from each other and from the background, no more or less so than before the adjustment, and also when I went back instantly with 0-Enter on the remote.Furthermore, did you find the increase in shadow detail also to be 4:1??? Just curious.I consider shadow "detail" to be a contrast factor, and so I don't understand how a ratio can apply without careful photometric measurement. I observe: Are the shadowed items distinct from each other? Are the folds in the dark fabric visible? Etc. If you were graphing this shadow area, screen brightness vs. video voltage, there would be a "toe" or slight tapering right at black, and how drawn-out this "toe" is determines how snappy the shadows look. (Less toe = higher slope = more, snappier detail, and more-distinct blacks.)Finally, are you using a 1080i signal when running your test patterns???No, I generally ignore upscaling. I'm letting my Panasonic S97 feed the TV with component 480i for these tests thru input V5. I could also use HDMI/480p with similar results. I have the two inputs tuned to look nearly identical.I'm curious why my set appears to look so good with the guidelines I'm following. I'm sensing, however, that you are not going to agree.No, don't get me wrong. I don't dispute your observations and pleasure at the results, although you run the risk of confirming your optimistic expectations when you don't run single-blind tests or some kind of objective measurements. I will propose an alternate explanation, that's all. And I have to say, I sincerely doubt that the internal programming of the two completely unrelated offset and drive parameters makes for any magic results when the numbers happen to agree on, say, green. That really could be an artifact of your expectations. (Not a severe criticism, BTW! I've been the victim of this during the running of audio-listening tests when I was in manufacturing in that rarified market.)

I put up a grayscale + pluge pattern from AVIA and froze it. There is a background and two faint dark bars on the left side of the gray patches. Their absolute and relative visibility was how I restored correct black level by lowering SBRT after raising the _CUT settings. The grayscale patches showed me that there was a color shift.

This is essentially what I did. I'm still puzzled as to why I don't get even similar results??? There must be a reason.

I tried to be sensitive to the "shadow" contrast as I ran these tests, and to the apparent brightness ratios of the gray patches. The apparent brightness differences among the two bars and background did not seem to change after the _CUT +16 plus SBRT -4. The two dark bars were still equally distinct from each other and from the background, no more or less so than before the adjustment, and also when I went back instantly with 0-Enter on the remote.

Hmmmm. Did you sample any 1080i program material or upconverted 1080i DVDs to see if the results materialized with practical viewing as the test patterns indicated??? If so, did the effect on washout seem equal to your eyes?

I consider shadow "detail" to be a contrast factor, and so I don't understand how a ratio can apply without careful photometric measurement. I observe: Are the shadowed items distinct from each other? Are the folds in the dark fabric visible? Etc. If you were graphing this shadow area, screen brightness vs. video voltage, there would be a "toe" or slight tapering right at black, and how drawn-out this "toe" is determines how snappy the shadows look. (Less toe = higher slope = more, snappier detail, and more-distinct blacks.)

What I mean by shadow detail is the part of the picture than can be "lost as black" when the brightness is set too low or gamma set too high.

No, I generally ignore upscaling. I'm letting my Panasonic S97 feed the TV with component 480i for these tests thru input V5. I could also use HDMI/480p with similar results. I have the two inputs tuned to look nearly identical.

Can you run some quick tests using 1080i to see if you get similar results? I always thought it makes the most sense to run these patterns with the set's native resolution, no? I'm always watching 1080i HD programming, 1080i HD-DVD, or 1080i upconverted DVDs, which is why I felt it made the most sense to calibrate using this resolution.

No, don't get me wrong. I don't dispute your observations and pleasure at the results, although you run the risk of confirming your optimistic expectations when you don't run single-blind tests or some kind of objective measurements. I will propose an alternate explanation, that's all. And I have to say, I sincerely doubt that the internal programming of the two completely unrelated offset and drive parameters makes for any magic results when the numbers happen to agree on, say, green. That really could be an artifact of your expectations. (Not a severe criticism, BTW! I've been the victim of this during the running of audio-listening tests when I was in manufacturing in that rarified market.)

Perhaps your right, but I'm still sensing there is a chance we are doing something a little different and not quite comparing an equal result.

hi, just have to give you guys props! I see more depth in my image after raising my CUTS and DRIVES to their highest values while still attempting to get a level grey scale. However, there is a slight lack of red color as mentioned... I do not trust my eye and I know that if I kept my CUT or DRIVE settings so that they are not default or not professionally calibrated, I will constantly second guess the sets color. Anyhow, here are my new settings...

RDRV = 32 to 63
GDRV = 27 to 49
BDRV = 26 to 44
RCUT = 32 to 61
GCUT = 20 to 43
BCUT = 32 to 60
SBRT = 28 to 29
SBOF = 7 to 4
LRGB = 4 to 1

thx again for such great info guys

hi, just have to give you guys props! I see more depth in my image after raising my CUTS and DRIVES to their highest values while still attempting to get a level grey scale. However, there is a slight lack of red color as mentioned... I do not trust my eye and I know that if I kept my CUT or DRIVE settings so that they are not default or not professionally calibrated, I will constantly second guess the sets color. Anyhow, here are my new settings...

RDRV = 32 to 63
GDRV = 27 to 49
BDRV = 26 to 44
RCUT = 32 to 61
GCUT = 20 to 43
BCUT = 32 to 60
SBRT = 28 to 29
SBOF = 7 to 4
LRGB = 4 to 1

thx again for such great info guys

Joe,

It's nice to see someone else is seeing the increased depth; however, your green and blue settings seem way too high for anywhere near an accurate greyscale.

Try something more in this range:

RDRV = 60-63
GDRV = 30-35
BDRV = 30-35
RCUT = 60-63
GCUT = 30-35
BCUT = 30-35

I'm using:

RDRV = 63
GDRV = 32
BDRV = 35
RCUT = 63
GCUT = 33
BCUT = 36

If you don't have a calibration disc, you can use the contrast check with any DVD that has the THX Optimizer. Pure white is displayed in the upper left and lower right of the contrast test pattern.

Tried some more experiments last night via comparing the pic modes and using the offsets in the same manner I noted in last post, but this time, I :

A). First Raised both _DOF/_COF for "cool" offset so that the "equivilent" RDRV was ~ 45. (RDOF~BCOF=44-44-44-44-44-44, or +13 for each from RDRV~BCUT values. Thought I'd try this, since it would result in "mid-range" average for the "equivilent" RDRV~BCUT values, even though it also resulted in relativiely low "PIC" slider settings. Adjusted Pic slider and brigtness slider for my "pic mode #2" new "cool offset" values. Observed what occured, including concerning greyscale as noted farther below.

B). Using the Cool offset, and values as noted in (A) as a "base" to work from, I attempted to then adjust RDOF~BCOF to first "match" greyscale as closely as possible, and/or "improve upon my "Pic mode #1 with "neutral"(RDRV~BCUT) settings. Note that I did not spend as much time on this as it probably deserves, however I believe I spent enough time to get a "good enough" idea, as noted farther below.

Concerning A), and Pic Mode #2 comparision to Pic mode #1 -- I noticed that, unlike when I just raised the _COF(equivilent to _CUT values) as described in last post -- this time If I needed to change the "brightness" slider at all(using the Pluge+Grey pattern from DVE, or the same(or similar pattern from MS) in the same manner as Ken noted in his last post), It was(suprisingly I thought) "UP" a click or two. Although, again it was difficult to say, given the (again) apparent change in gamma which also occured. Note that I had to Lower PIC slider by about 6~8 - Which resulted in Pic slider 15~17 for pic mode #2 vs. Pic slider="23" for my preferred screen brightness level for pic mode 1. Note that I only used my "eyes" to balance white level between pic mode #1 and 2, and I did not take the time to compare between the two and adjust PIC slider setting for Pic mode #2 by using the Canon Ftb's light meter as compartor for the most accurate results.

Note that the greyscale which resulted from (A). was Very much heavily "Pinkish" throughout brightness range. I did not take the time to look closely at the "linearity" of it.

Concerning (B) -- I did not meet with success concerning improving upon my current values for "neutral" - but I may not have spent "enough" time on it -- However, oddly enough I noticed that what I ended up with(which in any case would be "close" to what I'd need I'd think but with a little further tweaking perhaps required) would generally equate to being close to the same values as "neutral" for the GCUT+BCUT, although _RCUT seemed to still need to be up at 44(which would allow for the same value for RDRV and RCUT(45) ! -- Update to that - Oops! That was a little wrong! --- Looking at it a little more, settings equivilent to RDRV~BCUT= 46-31--20-46-27-23 seem very "close" to my currently preferred neutral settings, but with pic slider reduced by about 7, and Brightness slider redueced by about 1 (gamma still appears slightly different). In the lower, lower mid brightness range, while it produces in general very neutral grey, It's a little on the "red" side perhaps, compared to a little on the "green" side with my currently preferred neutral settings(which may be desireable), but also perhaps a tad bit on the cooler side CT wise ... Perhaps I might want to try the same general method, but starting from a point with RDRV at about "40" or "42" ....

At this point, on my particular set I'm skeptical that I'll be able to "improve" my greyscale by using a significantly different "range" for my RDRV~BCUT values than my current values of 32-18-8-23-17-14. (note that the Factory settings for Warm offset would(I believe) equate to 32-17-9-32-17-5). I wonder if mainly, regarding the folks who are apparently getting some "different" results with this sort of thing, that we are just seeing differences in non-linearity in the circuits for different individual sets, or perhaps in some cases differences in set "models" or manufacturing differences, or something along those lines.

And, the experiments last night helped me to see the RDRV~BCUT values I'm currently using *do* seem to be producing excellent greyscale, including linearity wise, but it may be perhaps a slight bit "cool" CT. And, apparently "in-range" preferred Gamma as well. I believe somewhere in the range of 2.20~2.36 or so from what I can tell by eye looking at the charts I've looked at, although I haven't checked it closely since my latest changes to RDRV~BCUT. And, It looks like the very slight "greenies" I referred to earlier *may* not really be there, and may be more a "figment" of something I thought I saw, as even light(or dark) tones in B*W content looks *very good* and doesn't seem to suffer from "greenies", or from +Red or +Blue/etc ....

By the way, my experiments last night did also seem to suggest that it does look like it would be fairly easily for me to redefine greyscale for a different preferred LOWER Picutre slider setting without causing any problems, generally by raising _DRV settings by the same amount and then making small adjustments.

Given a change of +13 for all _DRV resulted in ~ -7 for pic slider setting, and given it's necessary for SPIC=0 for some inputs such as 480i DRC -- I don't see how lowering the _DRV's would be desirable in order to raise my picture slider setting to a mid-point "31" for preferred screen brightness, given that this would likely result in BDRV setting of "0" or less in my case ... Only way I could perhaps accomplish that would be if I lower "SPIO" from it's factory "10" value, but as mentioned before, I'm a bit wary of doing that given the SM code listing chart says that should be adjusted with test equipment, as I'm not sure what all it might effect. I have tried it, and it looked to me that changing SPIO might do something a little "different" than adjusting the "picture slider, but I could be wrong, It's so difficult(and unwise) to depend upon your "eyes" when looking for such differences - I certianly wish I knew what such differences might be, however. Also, Given that my Black level adjustments are already "mid-range"(SBRT=28, 2170P-3 SBOF 1~5, Brightness slider=31), and Gamma that results from current settings seems desireable, I see no need to adjust _CUT to change that.

This morning I ran more experiments investigating just one simple question: what is the effect of large changes in _DRV on near-black screen brightness. And at this point I have to fly the yellow flag of Unintended Consequences. Underneath these nice, simple numbers we change digitally are analog systems trying hard to cope with the problems of getting a CRT's guns to fire so that the colors balance at all brightnesses. In all cases of CRTs attempting to attain a neutral white of, say, 6500K, the red gun has the most work to do because that phosphor is the least sensitive to the beam. So any CRT monitor has to push the red gun much harder, as it were. Further, there are hidden nonlinearities we can't control -- only work around. Okay, that said . . .

I put up AVIA's "black bars" + gray steps again and also used the next pattern, black bars alone -- very valuable, it turns out. This time, I was in a fairly dark room.

(1) There is an unexpected, paradoxical effect of changing _DRV. When I reduced my RDRV from 45 to 0 on the black bars alone (nothing bright on-screen), a red glow appeared in the darkest areas, as if I had increased RCUT. Yikes! It happens with all three colors: Run that color's _DRV down to zero, and _CUT is somehow raised! Is this just a shifting of the cutoff point, or is it a black contamination? An alteration of the video-response curve?

(2) I compared over and over again two situations: (a) RDRV raised 18 notches to 63 and other colors raised to get roughly the same white CT as before. (They require only about 10 notches.) Reduced Picture about 5 points to cancel the extra white intensity. And (b) used my standard settings and normal Picture. On both, I used SBRT to vary black level up and down on the black-bars pattern, trying to see where the screen began glowing overall and when the bars each became visible.

Tentative result: As SBRT is increased from a jet-black screen, there seems to be more "black glow" appearing before the bars are clearly visible with the standard settings (b). With the elevated _DRVs of (a), the bars become visible against what appears to be a blacker background. This would support RWetmore's assertion of "blacker blacks," etc. and better shadow detail. This seems like a desirable situation, no?

But is there a cost to this? There are new questions to be answered, now. What is the effect on bright-area contrast? Is the red gun/amplifier starting to "top out" as it is cranked so high? Do these high _DRV settings result in blocked or washed-out highlights (never a problem with this TV!) or a cyan color shift from, say, 70% to 100% white? It's the Unintended Consequences monster, and we have to make sure we aren't concentrating on one attractive benefit (better shadows and blacks) and ignoring a decrease in quality elsewhere.

So . . . it really does appear that raising _DRV somehow suppresses the "toe" region of the overall video-response curve. It looks superficially like a lowering of _CUT, but it may, in fact, be a suppression of a background glow, a glow that compromises the black level. Yikes, are we getting obsessive about this, or what?

To be continued (obviously) . . .

Underneath these nice, simple numbers we change digitally are analog systems trying hard to cope with the problems of getting a CRT's guns to fire so that the colors balance at all brightnesses. Glad to see you are starting to get the picture……. BTW, I can get a pretty flat grayscale form 10 IRE to 100 IRE for 480i/p, 720p and 1080i in a couple hours.

There is a reason tri-stimulus color analyzers exist and why most calibrators use them.

You haven’t researched G-2 voltages yet?

BTW, I can get a pretty flat grayscale form 10 IRE to 100 IRE for 480i/p, 720p and 1080i in a couple hours.

There is a reason tri-stimulus color analyzers exist and why most calibrators use them.

You haven’t researched G-2 voltages yet?And this contributes to this DIY forum how, exactly?

And this contributes to this DIY forum how, exactly?Just a reality check, some may be interested to know you have been tweaking your TV for over a year now and you still don't have the gray scale done......... :cool: