Guys. I currently have a Cyrstalio II and am thinking of jumping to the XD. Would any of you who were CII owners and now have an XD care to share your experience with the two units? Is it worth it to move to the XD? I know Bodshal is one who has both units. Would love to hear from him or anyone else in a similar situation. thanks.

Guys. I currently have a Cyrstalio II and am thinking of jumping to the XD. Would any of you who were CII owners and now have an XD care to share your experience with the two units? Is it worth it to move to the XD? I know Bodshal is one who has both units. Would love to hear from him or anyone else in a similar situation. thanks.

I have both units and while I consider the C2 still a strong performer in todays video processor market the support and new features have come to a halt. The C2 does have an unmatched GUI but you will find the Radiance leading in features and performance and getting stronger everyday with its on going updates.

My 2 cents worth:)

I have both units and while I consider the C2 still a strong performer in todays video processor market the support and new features have come to a halt. The C2 does have an unmatched GUI but you will find the Radiance leading in features and performance and getting stronger everyday with its on going updates.

My 2 cents worth:)


Alan,
Thanks for the quick response. Yes I am relatively pleased with the CII but, as you mention, they seem to have stopped supporting it or updating the firmwre, which is disturbing.

What is it about the GUI of the CII that is better than that of the XD?

I recently sold my C2 (actually, pretty much gave it away) and purchased the XD. Though I was leery of spending more coin on ANOTHER (emphasis added by spouse!) video processor, I now look at the change as an “upgrade” which was worth the cost.

My biggest gripes with the C2 did not involve its video processing prowess but the things, such as the CMS and audio, which just did not work as advertized or promised. (I know in regard to one aspect of the audio issue, I could have sent the unit back to Hong Kong to get the EDID update. However, that would have been the second time shipping it to Hong Kong, either all or in part on my nickel, and I was just pissed at the idea, particularly, since I felt that other problems would never be fixed.)

IMHO, the C2 has the superior GUI and is much more user friendly in regard to initial setup and use. At first, I was really disappointed with the XD because of its lack of the macro and macro like features of the C2 (used it for over 1.5 years). However, after getting pass the initially steep (IMO) setup learning curve for the XD, I found that with appropriate utilization of the memory structure of the XD, I could reproduce the setup I had with the C2, just not as conveniently. Mind you, I’m still learning about the XD and, unlike the C2, it’s still getting updates.

Over all, as I noted above, at this point, I am more satisfied with the XD than I ever was with the C2. The CMS works, the CMS patterns are accurate and of reference quality, audio over HDMI works, the scaling and de-interlacing are top notch and it is very flexible.

FWIW.

I recently sold my C2 (actually, pretty much gave it away) and purchased the XD. Though I was leery of spending more coin on ANOTHER (emphasis added by spouse!) video processor, I now look at the change as an “upgrade” which was worth the cost.

My biggest gripes with the C2 did not involve its video processing prowess but the things, such as the CMS and audio, which just did not work as advertized or promised. (I know in regard to one aspect of the audio issue, I could have sent the unit back to Hong Kong to get the EDID update. However, that would have been the second time shipping it to Hong Kong, either all or in part on my nickel, and I was just pissed at the idea, particularly, since I felt that other problems would never be fixed.)

IMHO, the C2 has the superior GUI and is much more user friendly in regard to initial setup and use. At first, I was really disappointed with the XD because of its lack of the macro and macro like features of the C2 (used it for over 1.5 years). However, after getting pass the initially steep (IMO) setup learning curve for the XD, I found that with appropriate utilization of the memory structure of the XD, I could reproduce the setup I had with the C2, just not as conveniently. Mind you, I’m still learning about the XD and, unlike the C2, it’s still getting updates.

Over all, as I noted above, at this point, I am more satisfied with the XD than I ever was with the C2. The CMS works, the CMS patterns are accurate and of reference quality, audio over HDMI works, the scaling and de-interlacing are top notch and it is very flexible.

FWIW.


Thanks. This is helpful. Do you notice any improvements with the second generation gennum chip?

Can someone send me the new 02-07-09 update I just can't seem to save it on my laptop or desktop computer. Gdecent35@aol.com

Do you notice any improvements with the second generation gennum chip?Maybe. At times, I'd swear it's better and, since the change, the wife has commented on the fantastic PQ. But, since I did not have an opportunity to do A/B testing (blind or otherwise), I'm reluctant to say (even to myself) that it's significantly better. Regardless, I like what I see.

All this talk of CMS is it mostly people with projectors? Maybe my eye is not that sophisticated but with my CII and panny plasma I didn't mess with too many color calibrations and it seems fine to me. If/when I get the XD would it really be worth it to mess with CMS for a plasma?

Maybe. At times, I'd swear it's better and, since the change, the wife has commented on the fantastic PQ. But, since I did not have an opportunity to do A/B testing (blind or otherwise), I'm reluctant to say (even to myself) that it's significantly better. Regardless, I like what I see.

I know how that goes with subjective views. The first gen gennum is pretty darn good so perhaps the differences are very subtle. You'd think, however, that the newer chip would be better in some way.

All this talk of CMS is it mostly people with projectors? Maybe my eye is not that sophisticated but with my CII and panny plasma I didn't mess with too many color calibrations and it seems fine to me. If/when I get the XD would it really be worth it to mess with CMS for a plasma?

IMO = Yes. I have a 65" 1080p 600u. The colors are far more accurate and the blacks actully look black after calibration. The sets service menu doesn't allow enough change to fix all the color issues and the Radiance's CMS can be used to fix that. To improve blacks we had to lose some shadow detail but that is the Panny's fault not the XD. I consider it money well spent given that I plan to keep the set for several more years.

IMO = Yes. I have a 65" 1080p 600u. The colors are far more accurate and the blacks actully look black after calibration. The sets service menu doesn't allow enough change to fix all the color issues and the Radiance's CMS can be used to fix that. To improve blacks we had to lose some shadow detail but that is the Panny's fault not the XD. I consider it money well spent given that I plan to keep the set for several more years.


Do you do it entirely from within the XD menu or do you need some other sort of calibration device? thx

Do you do it entirely from within the XD menu or do you need some other sort of calibration device? thx

I had it done professionally. I forget the name of the device and PC software he used but he adjusted the TV service menu color settings to correct as much as they would allow and then moved to the XD CMS and spent most of the 4 hour total time there. Most of the color correction took place within the XD CMS.

I had it done professionally. I forget the name of the device and PC software he used but he adjusted the TV service menu color settings to correct as much as they would allow and then moved to the XD CMS and spent most of the 4 hour total time there. Most of the color correction took place within the XD CMS.

Yeah I should probably get a pro to do it for me too. I suppose I just need to find someone who knows what they are doing in my area.

Yeah I should probably get a pro to do it for me too. I suppose I just need to find someone who knows what they are doing in my area.


Suggest you go the calibration forum...there is a chap there named Tom Huffman who lives not far from you...a call would probably be in order...

Hi ;)
Someone, or Jim, even in PM, please, can give me an idea of the best price and real availability of the Radiance XE PRO ??? :confused:
Thank very much to All ;)

Thought I would post on the RadianceXE Beta.

We are now shipping what I call "late-Beta" on the RadianceXE. If anyone is interested in a Beta unit or upgrading their RadianceXD please email us at sales@lumagen.com, or you can call us at 503-574-2211.

We have offered the upgrade from the RadianceXD to the RadianceXE for $1000 in the US and Canada. We have extended the time limit on this special price through the end of March 2009. Starting in April, the price for the upgrade is going up to $1500 for US and Canada. This is a board swap upgrade, so generally you would return your unit to us for the upgrade.

The only real reason to upgrade would be if you need us to pass the Dolby-Digital True-HD or DTS Master Audio audio in bitstream format. All other features, user interface, and configuration upload/download files are the same.

Hi ;)
Someone, or Jim, even in PM, please, can give me an idea of the best price and real availability of the Radiance XE PRO ??? :confused:
Thank very much to All ;)

I can say I have started preliminary work on the Radiance Pro. No schedule for it though. I'm also keeping the feature set quiet for the time being.

Stay tuned...

Maybe. At times, I'd swear it's better and, since the change, the wife has commented on the fantastic PQ. But, since I did not have an opportunity to do A/B testing (blind or otherwise), I'm reluctant to say (even to myself) that it's significantly better. Regardless, I like what I see.

I would like to point out that with default setting the "Gennum" GF9450 (now Sigma Designs) is used only for deinterlacing. All other processing, such as scaling, is done with proprietary Lumagen design in a large FPGA. If enabled the GF9450 also does noise reduction and edge enhancement functions.

I will say that we declined to use the earlier GF9350 chip due to issues we saw in the deinterlacing. We were pleased with the improvements in the GF9450 and chose it for the RadianceXD/XE/XS.

I can say I have started preliminary work on the Radiance Pro. No schedule for it though. I'm also keeping the feature set quiet for the time being.

Stay tuned...

Thanks Jim ;)
I'll be here !

A question:
What I call radiance XE PRO in what is different from XE or XS ??? :confused:
Thanks again very much ;)

Suggest you go the calibration forum...there is a chap there named Tom Huffman who lives not far from you...a call would probably be in order...


Thanks for the tip.

I've started reading through the XD manual and I noticed that it can be controlled via RS232. I wonder, does anyone have a prontoscript for the XD so that there can be two-way control using a Pronto remote? That would be sweet. I don't think it would be that hard to write the script if you have a background in java which is the basis for prontoscript.

Anyone care to comment on the noise reduction and sharpening features of the XD? I currently use the HDMI Mosquito (from Algolith) to do NR. Anyone who has used a Mosquito and the XD NR care to compare and contrast? Thanks.

IMO = Yes. I have a 65" 1080p 600u. The colors are far more accurate and the blacks actully look black after calibration. The sets service menu doesn't allow enough change to fix all the color issues and the Radiance's CMS can be used to fix that. To improve blacks we had to lose some shadow detail but that is the Panny's fault not the XD. I consider it money well spent given that I plan to keep the set for several more years.


I think your Panny is a 9th gen. So that means you are using a DVI blade. Did your pro mention anything about HDMI-DVI vs straight HDMI connections? I ask because I have a 9th gen Panny as well. AFAIK there is no option to do 1080p via HDMI on these units unless something has changed.

From the XD manual:
"Lumagen recommends against using an HDMI-to-DVI adaptor for this connection, as this extra connection has been known to compromise the video data"

I wonder what this means exactly.

EDIT: Oh you have the consumer version of the 9th gen. I think those actually did have HMDI 1080p input. Correct? The pro line only had a DVI blade that could handle 1080p.

I would like to point out that with default setting the "Gennum" GF9450 (now Sigma Designs) is used only for deinterlacing. All other processing, such as scaling, is done with proprietary Lumagen design in a large FPGA. If enabled the GF9450 also does noise reduction and edge enhancement functions.

I will say that we declined to use the earlier GF9350 chip due to issues we saw in the deinterlacing. We were pleased with the improvements in the GF9450 and chose it for the RadianceXD/XE/XS.

XS? What's that? The Radiance Pro, or yet another model?

From the XD manual:
"Lumagen recommends against using an HDMI-to-DVI adaptor for this connection, as this extra connection has been known to compromise the video data"

I wonder what this means exactly.

The data rate of the HDMI signal is very high. an HDMI to DVI adaptor adds two additional connections to the connection, verses a cable with HDMI on one side and DVI on the other. These extra connection points disturb the transmission line characteristics of the signal and can (but do not always) negatively impact the signal quality. This degradation would most likely show up as sparkles in the image due to bad reflections causing dropped bits.

XS? What's that? The Radiance Pro, or yet another model?

The RadianceXS is a yet to be announced slightly less expensive version of the RadianceXE. Although we have not announced it, it is slated to have HDMI 1.3, somewhat fewer inputs, no Pip/PoP, be in a 1U high (1.75") case with a similar front panel to the RadianceXD/XE. I will annouce other details in the next couple of months.

The data rate of the HDMI signal is very high. an HDMI to DVI adaptor adds two additional connections to the connection, verses a cable with HDMI on one side and DVI on the other. These extra connection points disturb the transmission line characteristics of the signal and can (but do not always) negatively impact the signal quality. This degradation would most likely show up as sparkles in the image due to bad reflections causing dropped bits.

Jim,
Thanks for the clarification.
I misread it to mean that it was a warning to keep HDMI on both ends.

Thanks Jim ;)
...A question:
What I call radiance XE PRO in what is different from XE or XS ??? :confused:


I don't want to comment on the RadiancePro at this point as it is still a long way off. The units we have discussed from entry level of the Radiance and up are:

RadianceXS (HDMI 1.3)
RadianceXD (HDMI 1.1)
RadianceXE (HDMI 1.3)
RadiancePro (HDMI 1.3 plus "1080p60 HD-SDI" inputs, plus improved processing and calibration)

Sorry that's all the info I have for you for now.

Thanks again Jim ;)
Please keep us informed about the Pro as soon as you'll have infos ;)

You know I follow you and waiting for PRO by the time XD was still in Beta program .... ;)
As you can see I'm not in Hurry ... but consider to didn't go too far in Pro release ... as Marvell and 4k scalings are at the door and the risk to come out with and old technology then will be high ! :o:o
Really wish you'll always stay at the Top :cool:
Best Regards ;)

I think your Panny is a 9th gen. So that means you are using a DVI blade. Did your pro mention anything about HDMI-DVI vs straight HDMI connections? I ask because I have a 9th gen Panny as well. AFAIK there is no option to do 1080p via HDMI on these units unless something has changed.

From the XD manual:
"Lumagen recommends against using an HDMI-to-DVI adaptor for this connection, as this extra connection has been known to compromise the video data"

I wonder what this means exactly.

EDIT: Oh you have the consumer version of the 9th gen. I think those actually did have HMDI 1080p input. Correct? The pro line only had a DVI blade that could handle 1080p.

It is the consumer version released in the Fall of '06. Not sure if it's 9th gen or not.

On my Panny 9th gen plasma when I turn on the pixel map function and send a 1080p signal it leaves a few pixel horizontal noise line. I never understood why this happened. In any case, using my CII I was able to deal with this by sending a 1084x1920 resolution. Using overscan didn't work.

I'm just starting to set up my XD and I assume outputting a custom resolution is simple but it is not immediately obvious to me how. Would someone lend a hand?

Thanks.

EDIT: OK I figured it out. The weird thing is that I set for 1080p and went to the overscan screen to adjust the position as the image was shifted horizontally so I got about a 40 pixel vertical noise line. I adjusted that but in the overscan pattern I noticed a one pixel vertical noise line that I could not remove. I then played around with resolution settings. I seem to have got rid of noise bands with a resolution of 1084x1924. The thing is that when I do a non-standard resolution like that the geometry test screens only fill one half of the screen so they are useless. Anyone have any thoughts about: 1. Why I would have to set a non-standard resolution; and 2. Why a NSR screws up the geometry test patterns?

thanks.

On my Panny 9th gen plasma when I turn on the pixel map function and send a 1080p signal it leaves a few pixel horizontal noise line. I never understood why this happened. In any case, using my CII I was able to deal with this by sending a 1084x1920 resolution. Using overscan didn't work.

I'm just starting to set up my XD and I assume outputting a custom resolution is simple but it is not immediately obvious to me how. Would someone lend a hand?

Thanks.

EDIT: OK I figured it out. The weird thing is that I set for 1080p and went to the overscan screen to adjust the position as the image was shifted horizontally so I got about a 40 pixel vertical noise line. I adjusted that but in the overscan pattern I noticed a one pixel vertical noise line that I could not remove. I then played around with resolution settings. I seem to have got rid of noise bands with a resolution of 1084x1924. The thing is that when I do a non-standard resolution like that the geometry test screens only fill one half of the screen so they are useless. Anyone have any thoughts about: 1. Why I would have to set a non-standard resolution; and 2. Why a NSR screws up the geometry test patterns?

thanks.

I will give this a try. First, I turn off overscan on my 600u so that the XD does all the scaling i.e 1:1 pixel mapping on the 600u. Second after eleminating overscan, I have the same white dashed lines at the top of the screen from my SA 8300 HD even with HD sources. Have to use the XD sizing adjustments to correct this even though it's a broadcaster &/or STB problem. Problem doesn't exist with Blu-ray sources. Note that with my 600u, I had to use the XD shrink command to get perfect 1:1 pixel mapping. the 600u was off by 1-2 pixels on the right and left sides. Finally regarding under sized geometry test patterns, I saw this with 480i and 720p sources 1-2 months ago. 1080i was ok. The recent firmware updates have fixed the problem for all input resolutions.

I will give this a try. First, I turn off overscan on my 600u so that the XD does all the scaling i.e 1:1 pixel mapping on the 600u. Second after eleminating overscan, I have the same white dashed lines at the top of the screen from my SA 8300 HD even with HD sources. Have to use the XD sizing adjustments to correct this even though it's a broadcaster &/or STB problem. Problem doesn't exist with Blu-ray sources. Note that with my 600u, I had to use the XD shrink command to get perfect 1:1 pixel mapping. the 600u was off by 1-2 pixels on the right and left sides. Finally regarding under sized geometry test patterns, I saw this with 480i and 720p sources 1-2 months ago. 1080i was ok. The recent firmware updates have fixed the problem for all input resolutions.

I'm not talking about overscan on the Panny. I have the pro version which has a "pixel mapping" function. It turns off the internal scaler. Does your consumer version have this function as well?

Good point that I only checked this last night with HD TV. I didn't check my other sources. Will have to do that and see what it looks like. As for the calibration patterns, I did update to the latest firmware before I started the setup so if it was corrected in the latest version I'm still left wondering why I'm getting the patterns covering only half the screen. thx

I'm not talking about overscan on the Panny. I have the pro version which has a "pixel mapping" function. It turns off the internal scaler. Does your consumer version have this function as well?

Good point that I only checked this last night with HD TV. I didn't check my other sources. Will have to do that and see what it looks like. As for the calibration patterns, I did update to the latest firmware before I started the setup so if it was corrected in the latest version I'm still left wondering why I'm getting the patterns covering only half the screen. thx

The 600u has two "size" settings one of which is supposed to be 1:1. On both my previous HDP and now the XD 1:1 is off by 1-2 pixels thus the need for shrink. With both my PS3 and Pioneer HD1 there is no overscan using either Sony BD test patterns or the XD. I would post your half screen problem in the Lumagen Users Forum. I don't remember anyone posting this problem recently and the Lumagen folks monitor the site daily.

Folks,

How well do the noise reduction features work on the Radiance?

I'll be getting a JVC RS20 projector which some people have found to exacerbate image noise. I've been considering picking up an Algolith Flea or Mosquito noise reduction unit (on their close out prices) but I've also been considering getting the Lumagen. If the Lumagen Radiance has as good noise reduction maybe I'll pass on the Algolith units and get the Radiance.

Opinions?

Thanks.

Bump for an answer to my question ^^^^

(The Algolith products are going fast so I need someone's input on this, thanks).

Bump for an answer to my question ^^^^

(The Algolith products are going fast so I need someone's input on this, thanks).
Rich -

I look forward to what you find out.
By "...going fast..." are you worried that they won't make more or are you on a time schedule and are concerned about being on a backorder?

Have a great Sunday.
Snowy but sunny here...

Mike

Mike_WI,

The Algolith products have been discontinued so the are clearing out stock. I want to know whether to grab one or if the Radiance will provide equal NR capabilities.

Mike_WI,

The Algolith products have been discontinued so the are clearing out stock. I want to know whether to grab one or if the Radiance will provide equal NR capabilities.

Not sure, but you could send an email to Lumagen or PM Jim. There are upfront and candid.

- Rich

Mike_WI,

The Algolith products have been discontinued so the are clearing out stock. I want to know whether to grab one or if the Radiance will provide equal NR capabilities.

I'm not a Radiance owner, but be advised that both the Mosquito HDMI and Flea HDMI convert to and output PC levels for processing with RGB sources. As long as your sources are YCbCr, there shouldn't be a problem. However, many Sat/Cable boxes output RGB over HDMI. For RGB sources, this means the overall platform is flawed and there will not be a firmware fix since Algolith is out of the business.

Thank you for the replies. It's just that I read one review of the Radiance where the reviewer said he left all the DNR options off because, to paraphrase, "We all know those type of controls suck anyway." So I haven't been able to see any reports on the DNR performance of the Radiance.

Thank you for the replies. It's just that I read one review of the Radiance where the reviewer said he left all the DNR options off because, to paraphrase, "We all know those type of controls suck anyway." So I haven't been able to see any reports on the DNR performance of the Radiance.
The JVC RS20 has _a_ CMS, but if you read the owners and calibration threads it is obvious that it is not a "FULL CMS". :o:rolleyes:
Hence the people looking for VP options.

Links...

Owners thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=15568663#post15568663) - http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=15568663#post15568663 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=15568663#post15568663)
Calibration thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1096981) - http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1096981
Firmware request thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1100236) - http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1100236

Under the calibration thread checkout the review by CraigR about using the RadianceXE and RS20 -- AVS link (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=15820551#post15820551) and CIR link (http://www.cir-engineering.com/rs20.php)

Mike

Yes Mike, that's one reason I'm considering the Radiance.

Yes Mike, that's one reason I'm considering the Radiance.
Rich -

Oops.:o
That wasn't meant for you.
I must have moved between threads or the post was deleted.
There was a post saying that the RS20 had a "full CMS" so a VP might not be needed.

I realize you know all this.
Sorry.

Mike

The Lumagen scaling includes mosquito noise reduction. We haven't done a direct comparison between our mosquito noise reduction and the mosquito noise reduction using the Flea. Lumagen has many features including mosquito noise reduction, "no-ring" scaling and extensive calibration capabilities.

Randy Freeman
support@lumagen.com

Thanks Randy.

I'm aware of the Radiance features. Just looking for feedback on how well they work. I know people have been very impressed with the no-ring scaling (and don't the sharpening controls also work with a "no-ringing" method?).

I just haven't seen any feedback on the noise reduction features. Noise reduction could come in handy with the projector I'm going to buy.

You're seeing this with recent versions of the Radiance fimrware?

I had this exact problem for a long time with (in particular) the TiVo Series 3 in "native" mode, i.e. HDMI audio was always lost when the source changed resolution. But the problem vanished with one of the software updates a few months ago. Now audio is lost for only a few seconds after a resolution change, and it always returns.



Which software version was this?

I notice this when BD menus play and then it switched to the main movie or right off the bat when the disc is played.

I have had issues with losing all audio with some audio on some BD discs. Occasionally, just the center and rears cut out. I use HDMI2 out for audio. I send multichannel LPCM. I decided to route my audio to my surround processor first as it was exasperating not knowing if I'd have an issue everytime i'd fire up.

I'm confident Lumagen will fix it, but it is an issue..

Has anyone noticed any increased audio issues with the latest software?


Production 021109 Firmware

Directv HR20-700 and HR20-100. Both have no audio via HDMI into Sony HDTV. I did get audio ONCE on the Newsmix Channel and once when changing channels. But not repeatable.

Scientific Atlanta DVR via same HDMI cable/input/settings has no issues.

Any solution for this as its a showstopper?

The last post seems to be about 6 months ago.

Does stepping down to an earlier firmware give you audio back?

Does stepping down to an earlier firmware give you audio back?

Actually - searching thread for "Directv", states booting Lumagen fixes it (at least until next resolution change). That did work - no idea for how long though.

Mike_WI,

The Algolith products have been discontinued so the are clearing out stock. I want to know whether to grab one or if the Radiance will provide equal NR capabilities.

I cannot speak for the Flea, but I have a Mosquito (Non-HDMI) and the Radiance is superior from the limited amount of time I have compared the two.

Thanks BeachComber. Can you tell me what was better about the Radiance noise reduction performance over your Mosquito?

Thanks

Thanks BeachComber. Can you tell me what was better about the Radiance noise reduction performance over your Mosquito?

Thanks

Rich H,

Your PM box is full and I can't respond.:eek:

Latest Observations: Using Lumagen Radiance XD/XE with DLP Projector

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

I have a Lumagen Radiance, just upgraded from XD to XE version (XE has new HDMI 1.3 board). Sim2 C3X 1080 3 chip DLP projector. Stewart Cine-V
curved 1.3 gain 128" wide 2:35 screen (96" wide for 16:9), 54" high.
ISFed by Michael Hamilton. Almost 1100 hours on bulb and still plenty of brightness and never use projector more than 230 (settings from 200 to 250) watts.

Recently with my Radiance out for upgrade, I used the projector's built-in scaling/video processing. How do they compare?

The projector's built in processing does a very nice job. But not as good a job as in combination with the Radiance. I find this particularly on DirecTV including HD channels (that's pretty much all I watch), but even with
Blu Ray or HD DVD. For DirecTV in particular, HD just seems - more HD, less noise, clearer.

For subtitled Blu Rays, HD DVDs or Blu Ray discs, its easy to set up a special aspect ratio to include the subtitles, which will shorten the width of the picture a bit. But this handles subtitles correctly. The Lumagen website has instructions how to set this up.

Using the Radiance, lets say a channel broadcasts a program in 720p or 1080i but the picture is centered in the middle of the screen - shrunken 16:9 picture, well, the Radiance allows you to increase the size

What's interesting is how to interface settings of the projector vs the Radiance. The Radiance has a "scale bias" setting:

From the Radiance manual: "Scaling is normally on in order to adjust the source to exactly fit the output resolution. If the bias is set to “On”, scaling is enabled unless the input and output resolution match exactly. If the scale bias is set to “Off” scaling is disabled if the input and output resolutions are close. Scaling is disabled/enabled independently for horizontal and vertical. When the bias is off there can be small borders on the edges of the image. The second page of on-screen status information indicates whether scaling is enabled."

"MENU → Input → Video Setup → [Resolution] → Size → [Aspect ratio] → Scale Bias → OK"

From the Sim C3X 1080 Manual:

"Normal: projects the image occupying the full height of
the screen while maintaining the aspect ratio of the input
signal. When the input signal aspect ratio is 4:3 black vertical
bands are displayed on each side of the picture.

Anamorphic: correctly displays a 16:9 image.

Pixel to Pixel: performs pixel to pixel mapping of any image,
without adapting to the screen. The image is projected in
the centre of the screen and if it’s horizontal and/or vertical
dimensions are smaller than the display, it is bordered by
vertical and/or horizontal black bands."

I find that the best picture is with "scale bias" set to "Off" for all HD sources;
and with the projector's picture mode set to "Normal". One might think that using "Pixel-to-Picture" mode for the projector would be better, but there is something magic about using this Lumagen-Sim2 combination, with the "Normal" picture having more 3D, natural and more natural blacks than the "Pixel to Pixel". The latter looks nice, but the "Normal" just is a WOW!

For ten days I used the "Normal" setting direct from video source to projector, without the Radiance - let me tell you the Radiance is a winner and clearly improves the picture across the board!!!

Other Radiance & Sim2 C3X 1080 owners out there - your thoughts and observations!!!
__________________
Steve

I find this particularly on DirecTV including HD channels (that's pretty much all I watch), but even with
Blu Ray or HD DVD. For DirecTV in particular, HD just seems - more HD, less noise, clearer.

Curious what settings you use for Enhancements w/ Directv?

Curious what settings you use for Enhancements w/ Directv?

I have options of:
(1) Radiance XE scale bias on or off
(2) Using Radiance XE three different "Enhancement" noise reduction settings
(3) Setting projector picture to "Normal" or "Pixel-to-Pixel".

Recently with DirecTV including local OTA HD programming, I find my liking
#1 with scale bias on (still experimenting based on program), #2 often all three noise reduction settings at 0 but on occasion at 3 for each of three settings, and #3 at "Pixel-to-Pixel".

Tonight with bunch of OTA HD programs on I'll experiment more. Last week,
I found different settings than above to work best, #1 with scale bias off, #2
with all three noise reduction settings at 0, and #3 with projector at "normal". I really saw a picture difference vs "pixel-to-Pixel". So tonight I'll watch the same shows and see what gives.

A week ago, I had just got the Radiance XE back after upgrade, so its possible the board burning in some could make a pictorial difference. Tonight I'll find out what I "see".

Ha! I just switched to Directv... I gotta check it out. Haven't made any adjustments yet..

But, I get annoying hash in the top of the picture during commercials.. I know I can fix that via the Radiance..

Ha! I just switched to Directv... I gotta check it out. Haven't made any adjustments yet..

But, I get annoying hash in the top of the picture during commercials.. I know I can fix that via the Radiance..

Crop the picture.

To set input cropping on the Radiance press "Menu, Input, Video Setup, [resolution], Size, [aspect], (Crop TopLeft, Crop BotRght), Ok". Make sure that you "Save" the new settings.

Randy Freeman
support@hotmail.com

I know this is a ways off (if at all), but with the GF9452 supporting dual simultaneous processing of 2 1080p signals, would a Radiance updated with the new chip be able to output 2 different sources to 2 different displays simultaneously? Or is there a restriction somewhere else in the pipeline that would prevent this?

I know this is a ways off (if at all), but with the GF9452 supporting dual simultaneous processing of 2 1080p signals, would a Radiance updated with the new chip be able to output 2 different sources to 2 different displays simultaneously? Or is there a restriction somewhere else in the pipeline that would prevent this?

I'm going to take a wild guess and say that would involve a complete redesign of the XD - probably something they'd consider only for a different model.

There's two pipelines in the XD - the Gennum, and Lumagen's. They're not parallel, of course, the second one relays the first. That's an oversimplification, but the bottom line is this; adding a Gennum pipeline won't change the fact that's there's only one Lumagen FPGA.

Also, most of the software would have to be rewritten, unless they were super smart about it and planned for something like this from the beginning. Doubtful - not that they aren't super smart, but that they would plan for it. It's a lot of extra, non-trivial work for... a chip that didn't exist even on paper at the time?

That said nothing would make me happier than being contradicted about this by Jim Pat or Randy :)

I'm going to take a wild guess and say that would involve a complete redesign of the XD - probably something they'd consider only for a different model.

There's two pipelines in the XD - the Gennum, and Lumagen's. They're not parallel, of course, the second one relays the first. That's an oversimplification, but the bottom line is this; adding a Gennum pipeline won't change the fact that's there's only one Lumagen FPGA.

Also, most of the software would have to be rewritten, unless they were super smart about it and planned for something like this from the beginning. Doubtful - not that they aren't super smart, but that they would plan for it. It's a lot of extra, non-trivial work for... a chip that didn't exist even on paper at the time?

That said nothing would make me happier than being contradicted about this by Jim Pat or Randy :)

I figured as much, and everything you said makes perfect sense.

Of course in this case I wouldn't mind if any of those gentlemen contradicted you either!

We are looking at producing a RadiancePro model which would have a dual image processing pipeline. There is no schedule, at this time, for when this product would be released.

Randy Freeman
support@lumagen.com

We are looking at producing a RadiancePro model which would have a dual image processing pipeline. There is no schedule, at this time, for when this product would be released.

Randy Freeman
support@lumagen.com
Stupid question, but why would you need a dual image processing pipeline?

For output to an LCD (for daylight, etc) and a projector (night/movies)?

Thanks

Mike

Stupid question, but why would you need a dual image processing pipeline?

For output to an LCD (for daylight, etc) and a projector (night/movies)?

Thanks

Mike

You can already drive two different displays with the XD, just not at the same time, in fact that's exactly how I use it. You can even have night/day settings for each. The two pipelines would make it possible to watch both displays at the same time, with different sources - something that is clearly not possible right now. At best you can watch the same source on both displays, but since you can use only one output configuration at a time, one of the displays would be out of whack calibration wise. That is, if both displays even accept the same resolution.

Other use would be using two projectors for blending or stacking. Because of variations between units (even if you use the same models) you would ideally need independent image processing for each.

I have options of:
(1) Radiance XE scale bias on or off
(2) Using Radiance XE three different "Enhancement" noise reduction settings
(3) Setting projector picture to "Normal" or "Pixel-to-Pixel".

Recently with DirecTV including local OTA HD programming, I find my liking
#1 with scale bias on (still experimenting based on program), #2 often all three noise reduction settings at 0 but on occasion at 3 for each of three settings, and #3 at "Pixel-to-Pixel".

Tonight with bunch of OTA HD programs on I'll experiment more. Last week,
I found different settings than above to work best, #1 with scale bias off, #2
with all three noise reduction settings at 0, and #3 with projector at "normal". I really saw a picture difference vs "pixel-to-Pixel". So tonight I'll watch the same shows and see what gives.

A week ago, I had just got the Radiance XE back after upgrade, so its possible the board burning in some could make a pictorial difference. Tonight I'll find out what I "see".

Maybe its my eye brain or maybe the new HDMI 1.3 board on the Radiance XE needed some burn in, but now I'm finding that I am always setting the projector at "Pixel-to-Pixel" (although it may be difficult to discern any difference compared to the projector at "Normal"). As for Radiance XE,
for DirecTV stuff, I leave scale bias set to "On" and only a small part of the time find that the video Enhancement settings are of additional benefit (and if I use them, such as mosquito noise reduction, I go no higher than 3). For
Blu Ray or HD DVD, I will generally set scale bias to "Off" and not use any Enhancement.


Other nite watched the HD DVD of "In The Wild". What a beautiful scenic
cinemascope picture througout!!!!

You can already drive two different displays with the XD, just not at the same time, in fact that's exactly how I use it. You can even have night/day settings for each. The two pipelines would make it possible to watch both displays at the same time, with different sources - something that is clearly not possible right now. At best you can watch the same source on both displays, but since you can use only one output configuration at a time, one of the displays would be out of whack calibration wise. That is, if both displays even accept the same resolution.

Other use would be using two projectors for blending or stacking. Because of variations between units (even if you use the same models) you would ideally need independent image processing for each.
Dave -

Thanks.

I saw a 3D (2 projector, passive glasses) display at CES.
I guess you might need/want it for that sort of application.
Also, the Miller Brewery tour uses a wall of 3 screens and 3 projectors -- but I doubt they are worried about high level calibration with that crowd.:D

Mike

Stupid question, but why would you need a dual image processing pipeline?

For output to an LCD (for daylight, etc) and a projector (night/movies)?

Thanks

MikeI'd like to feed a very small monitor in the "control room" with what's on the screen. That way, I know what's being presented from a place where I can't see. Can't do that now, right?

I'd like to feed a very small monitor in the "control room" with what's on the screen. That way, I know what's being presented from a place where I can't see. Can't do that now, right?

If your monitor accepts the same input resolution as your main display, then yes it's possible. If you need to downscale, then no.

If I'm not mistaken Lumagen is planning a third mode for the second output - pass-through. That still wouldn't help you though :(.

If your monitor accepts the same input resolution as your main display, then yes it's possible. If you need to downscale, then no.

If I'm not mistaken Lumagen is planning a third mode for the second output - pass-through. That still wouldn't help you though :(.
Anybody know of a tiny monitor that accepts 720 and 1080?

We are looking at producing a RadiancePro model which would have a dual image processing pipeline. There is no schedule, at this time, for when this product would be released.

Randy Freeman
support@lumagen.com

The more I hear about the Pro, the more I have to keep thinking of excuses to give my fiancee when I plunk down the cash for one - thanks for the info!

Stupid question, but why would you need a dual image processing pipeline?

For output to an LCD (for daylight, etc) and a projector (night/movies)?

Thanks

Mike

I was thinking more along the lines of 2 separate rooms, but that's another possibility.

Not sure if this is the right place to ask- but I have the Sim2 HT5000- Do you think the Rad. would be an upgrade over the internal processing of the HT5000???= thanks,gary

Anybody know of a tiny monitor that accepts 720 and 1080?
Scott -

Here is one link (http://www.fullcompass.com/product/341134.html).


http://www.fullcompass.com/common/products/lg/39350.jpg (http://javascript<b></b>:load_image(39350))

ToteVision LCD703HD

Features:



HD compatible (480p/i, 576p/i, 720p,1080p/i)
Displays 16:9
LED backlight
Component, RS-232
No audio
350 Nit brightness
300:1 Contrast
800 x 480 resolution


Also, there are some dual (http://www.fullcompass.com/product/348435.html) (+link (http://www.fullcompass.com/product/330906.html)) and triple (http://www.fullcompass.com/product/359779.html) rack mount industrial monitors -- but price goes up.

http://www.fullcompass.com/common/products/lg/59220.jpg (http://javascript<b></b>:load_image(59220))

That would be a cool idea for just navigating a BR or DVD menu before projector warms up or if you don't need a projector for music only.


Mike

Not sure if this is the right place to ask- but I have the Sim2 HT5000- Do you think the Rad. would be an upgrade over the internal processing of the HT5000???= thanks,gary

Yes at least in terms of scaling, and the CMS.

Scott -

Here is one link (http://www.fullcompass.com/product/341134.html).Thanks Mike. They are proud of that monitor hugh :). A common need right now without having my equipment in the other room yet is the ability to navigate a TIVO selection/record/etc without having to fire up the PJ. Kids say "we cant go, that's a new episode coming on..." So I have to fire up the PJ so I can press record in the right place on the "big" TV. Of course a second TIVO woudl solve that problem, but the little monitor would be handy.

For adding a "monitoring" monitor withe the Radiance, would it work to use a HDMI to Composite converter like this one (http://www.gefen.com/gefentv/gtvproduct.jsp?prod_id=5280) from Gefen, then add any small, cheap LCD that accepts composite NTSC input? markertek.com has a ton of them to pick from

ittybity (http://www.markertek.com/Product.asp?baseItem=V2500E&cat=DVPROD&subcat=VIDMON&prodClass=LCDMON&mfg=&search=0&off=)

ittybity stick on (http://www.markertek.com/Product.asp?baseItem=V2500&cat=DVPROD&subcat=VIDMON&prodClass=LCDMON&mfg=&search=0&off=)

bigger (http://www.markertek.com/Product.asp?baseItem=DELV%2DPRO56&cat=DVPROD&subcat=VIDMON&prodClass=LCDMON&mfg=&search=0&off=)

would it work to use a HDMI to Composite converter
you'll run into problems (no picture) once you're switching to a HDCP protected source.

guys, you can get a cheap LCD at Wally that will accept 1080p I think, less than 200$

how about a Pioneer SC-09TX? ;)

-Gary

guys, you can get a cheap LCD at Wally that will accept 1080p I think, less than 200$

how about a Pioneer SC-09TX? ;)

-GaryWell, with some humor in my mind, the problem is to get a small one :) A chengsheng 20"'er will "work", and it's apparently less than a 7"er. :)

I needed a monitor for my Lumagen.. I bought a 17" Element Electronics monitor at CC for $160. It accepts 1080i / 720P and works great. When running 1080P24, I have HDMI2 set to NoVideo (1080i). Finishes the HDCP handshake.

I am sure BB sells these, too.

GetGray -

Are you looking for something rack mounted or not?

Mike

does anyone use their radiance with a pioneer elite? i have a 141 and was wondering what kind of benefits the radiance will add, i think an isf calibrator can dial the 141 in pretty well, pardon me for probably a pretty dumb question, but what other benefits are there with the radiance? improved sd scaling for one, what else?
thanks!

does anyone use their radiance with a pioneer elite? i have a 141 and was wondering what kind of benefits the radiance will add, i think an isf calibrator can dial the 141 in pretty well, pardon me for probably a pretty dumb question, but what other benefits are there with the radiance? improved sd scaling for one, what else?
thanks!

There are no controls on Pioneers that make primary and complimentary color luminance settings correct - the Radiance has one luminance setting for each color. While there are CMS controls on Elites, they are unusable because they badly mess up grayscale if you use more than about 2 clicks on any CMS adjustment. So the Radiance will allow making the xy coordinates just about perfect as well as having an accurate luminance (I prefer to set luminance at 75% stim so it is being set in the middle of the luminance range rather than all the way at one end of the range (i.e. 100%). The 10% grayscale adjustment can be troublesome on the Pioneer, the Radiance almost always allows that to be dialed in better than what is possible with Pioneer adjustments alone.

With the right software (like CalMAN), you can set a "perfect" gamma at any value you like without being restricted to the 3 choices Pioneer has for Gamma in the user menu.

Pre-Radiance, I thought the Elite images were a definite 9.95 on a 10 scale, but having seen a properly setup Radiance in front of an Elite, I have to admit the Elite's images were probably really a 9.1 without the Radiance and a 9.95 with the Radiance. Is that enough to justify the cost of a Radiance? If you want perfection, the Elite/Radiance combo is the closest thing to perfect images I've ever seen. Only you can decide if that result is worth the expense. I ended up with grayscale dEs below 1 (many below 0.5) for 10% to 100%. Primaries and complimentaries were nearly perfect with the Radince... for xy AND luminance.

agree with doug ...i use my radiance with a pioneer front projector and the radiance fixes the horrible colorimetry in the pioneer extremely well.

the difference in the PQ with and without the radiance can be noticed easily.
IMO the radiance/pioneer projector combo is the best value that probably delivers performance not found in systems that cost 3 times as much.

If someone has set up their XD with an RS2/FPJ1, would you mind posting your settings?

Cheers, Ian

If someone has set up their XD with an RS2/FPJ1, would you mind posting your settings?

Cheers, Ian

Not trying to be a wiseguy, but what could you POSSIBLY learn from somebody else's settings? Different lamp, different screen, quite posibly a different gamma target, more than likely different settings in the projector before doing cal with the Radiance... the variables are staggering. It's not like the settings could be shared.

Not trying to be a wiseguy, but what could you POSSIBLY learn from somebody else's settings? Different lamp, different screen, quite posibly a different gamma target, more than likely different settings in the projector before doing cal with the Radiance... the variables are staggering. It's not like the settings could be shared.

Exactly. You are completely defeating the purpose of having such a high end video processor to begin with.

I always say: If there was only one 'right' set of settings for a device, they'd be built in by the manufacturers. They wouldn't be adjustable. Adjustments exist because (a) every setup is different and (b) things change or drift over time.

Kal

FYI.

There is a review of the RadianceXD in the latest Widescreen Review (Mar/Apr).
I just started to read it this morning, but didn't finish.

Mike

GetGray -

Are you looking for something rack mounted or not?

MikeSorry, missed post. Rack mounted would be good, but not required. I can stick it o a shelf, fabricate a mount as required...

Exactly. You are completely defeating the purpose of having such a high end video processor to begin with.

I always say: If there was only one 'right' set of settings for a device, they'd be built in by the manufacturers. They wouldn't be adjustable. Adjustments exist because (a) every setup is different and (b) things change or drift over time.

Kal

Well, at least someone's existing settings can help get close to a good calibration. Or, at least it may help just to get someone in the right direction. And they do have one with settings built in, JVC offers one which is (to my knowledge) not adjustable, designed to go with RS1/RS2. I'm not saying it's ideal, but one has to wonder just how far off these devices can vary if the manufacturer offers a processor which "fixes" the default calibration.

IMO, the real reason people tend not to share this info is that the ones who have made really good calibrations probably do it for a living and don't want to share that data. Nothing wrong with that either.

Agree, it would at least get you in the ballpark

Agree, it would at least get you in the ballpark

You don't know that. RS1's were supposed to be pretty close to 6500k. I don't know what applying someone else's numbers would have done to it, but I'm guessing it wouldn't have been an improvement.

RS1's were supposed to be pretty close to 6500k. I don't know what applying someone else's numbers would have done to it, but I'm guessing it wouldn't have been an improvement.

That was not my experience. I copied someone else's calibration results for my RS1 initially to get me going, and their correction was pretty close for my unit. Its not just greyscale, having the colors corrected is a huge win on the RS1.

Its not just greyscale, having the colors corrected is a huge win on the RS1.

No one's disputing that :) But taking someone else's numbers won't work. Or it might, if by some miracle of chance all of the criteria listed above by Doug are the exact same between the two setups. But they won't be.

Seriously, it's a bad, bad idea - that's not really up for debate. It won't get you 'closer' or 'give you a starting point' - it'll get you somewhere, which is where you are right now.

(And yes, JVC has a vp that does just that - the very existence of this device baffles the mind.)

Dave,

"It won't get you 'closer' or 'give you a starting point' - it'll get you somewhere, which is where you are right now."

The RS-1s factory colors are so far out of wack that another RS-1s gamut numbers will almost certainly get you closer then stock. By closer I mean a lower dE.

Shawn

Dave,

"It won't get you 'closer' or 'give you a starting point' - it'll get you somewhere, which is where you are right now."

The RS-1s factory colors are so far out of wack that another RS-1s gamut numbers will almost certainly get you closer then stock. By closer I mean a lower dE.

Shawn

From my understanding of the workflow, I just wouldn't do it - it'll be just as fast to start from scratch, since invariably you'll have to check and finish the work.

The primaries and secondaries are corrected relative to 100% white. If the latter is not right (aka 6500k), I'm not sure applying someone else's settings will do you much good. The RS1's lamp is infamous for losing red pretty fast, so chances are - you're not at 6500k.

If you want to get closer to green and red, add some arbitrary values in the matrix to the opposing primaries before going into the color screens. You don't need someone else's values.

Maybe it is because I have a conflict of interest, but paying several thousand dollars for a projector and then several thousand dollars for an external processor and then insisting on saving 3-4 hundred bucks by simply copying someone else's settings rather than getting it custom calibrated is, well, really weird.

Maybe it is because I have a conflict of interest, but paying several thousand dollars for a projector and then several thousand dollars for an external processor and then insisting on saving 3-4 hundred bucks by simply copying someone else's settings rather than getting it custom calibrated is, well, really weird.

No, it wasn't like that. I said "I used it to get started". Not I set it once based on someone else then forgot it forever.

I used it to tone down the colors right off the bat, then worked on getting the gear and understanding the workflow for calibration. My rationale was that it was better to get close than to use out of the box defaults. And I did get close, my dE was much better with someone else's settings than default.

Once I got my head around the process, I ran my own calibration, and still do.

Now if you wanted to know why I didn't get an ISF person in to do it in the first place, instead of doing it myself, well, it was beta software, constantly changing, noone else I talked to knew how to drive the XD either and I didn't want to pay by the hour for someone else to learn it. Probably now I might be able to find someone who can walk in and turnkey it, but then I couldn't.

From my understanding of the workflow, I just wouldn't do it - it'll be just as fast to start from scratch, since invariably you'll have to check and finish the work.

The primaries and secondaries are corrected relative to 100% white. If the latter is not right (aka 6500k), I'm not sure applying someone else's settings will do you much good. The RS1's lamp is infamous for losing red pretty fast, so chances are - you're not at 6500k.

If you want to get closer to green and red, add some arbitrary values in the matrix to the opposing primaries before going into the color screens. You don't need someone else's values.

I would agree with the OP that it would get you closer and here's why.

In a brand new unit you will have the defaults. With someone else's settings you will be in the right direction (Again, I am not saying CORRECT). As I just went through a Radiance from scratch again yesterday, one can forget how poorly some of the menu setting are for changing numbers in the grey scale and how you wait incredibly long periods of time to move things as there is no direct input.

Even on the color gamut, especially with the abundance of Wide Gamut sets these days, someone's presets on the same type of set will get you alot closer to the ballpark than starting from scratch.

And again......I didn't say correct - but certainly closer to the ballpark - which clearly saves time when you are going through all the different settings.

With all due respect to Tom, every ISF or THX person that calibrates knows the ballpark of what works with certain sets and brings those settings in his brain which he starts off with. I have seen some of the best name calibrators in action and never have I seen 1 check which setting had the gamut closer to REC 709 for example - or DRC controls on a Sony for example. Furthermore, they know which sets have a Red Crush, which sets will not clip etc and though the do check their work, they start off with these settings that also came from other sets.

Thus, I agree that presets arent a bad thing to get one into the neighborhood in the beginning.

Using a preset or some generic settings as an initial step is fine, so long as a full custom calibration is at the end of the line. However, why not just do that right away? I guess I don't get the value of the initial half measure as a preparation for doing it right. And, BTW, I have no problem at all with people buying their own equipment and doing the calibration themselves, so long as they know what they are doing. That's how I started.

Dave,

"It won't get you 'closer' or 'give you a starting point' - it'll get you somewhere, which is where you are right now."

The RS-1s factory colors are so far out of wack that another RS-1s gamut numbers will almost certainly get you closer then stock. By closer I mean a lower dE.

Shawn

Not too long ago, I calibrated a $15K projector and Radiance that had been mail ordered from AVScience. As part of the package deal, AVScience put 50 hours on the lamp and calibrated the projector and Radiance as a pair. When I measured the setup, which had 500 hours on the lamp by then, there was NOTHING about the measurements that looked calibrated in any way. It was "off" in many ways that were quite easy to see by eye without even doing measurements. Sharing those pre-calibration settings with anybody else with the same projector would have been completely worthless. I don't think out-of-box settings could have looked any worse as long as you used a DVE disc to set the basic controls. After calibration, the image quality was sensational. But that setup in a different room with different carpet, walls, & ceiling, different screen, different lamp, different lens, I don't think there's a starting point hidden in there anywhere. I can tell you one thing for certain. Even though I have written-down the settings for that projector/Radiance and even though they are saved on my laptop, if I encounter the same combination of projector/Radiance 3 weeks from now... I will NOT bother to copy the settings from the previous calibration. That would just waste my time. Better to simply record the settings currently being used, do the "before calibration" measurements, and jump in and start calibrating.

Has anyone used their Radiance with a Meridian HD621? If so, any sync problems? thx

Has anyone used their Radiance with a Meridian HD621? If so, any sync problems? thx

Same as Jack D's question but...

How about Radiance with Denon 5308CI?

Thanks.

Mike

HD621 with ProHDP = RGB PC video only.

HD621 with Radiance = correct.

I get the odd handshake issue but generally it's stable with the Radiance.

Cheers,

Mark

HD621 with ProHDP = RGB PC video only.

HD621 with Radiance = correct.

I get the odd handshake issue but generally it's stable with the Radiance.

Cheers,

Mark

Thanks. Is the ProHDP such a different beast than the Radiance?

ProHDP is DVI input which currently seems to cause the HD621 to think there is no receiver connected and it then forces the source to output RGB PC.

Cheers,

Mark

ProHDP is DVI input which currently seems to cause the HD621 to think there is no receiver connected and it then forces the source to output RGB PC.

Cheers,

Mark

Interesting but glad I won't have to deal with that. thx

Same as Jack D's question but...

How about Radiance with Denon 5308CI?

Thanks.

Mike

I used the Radiance with the Denon for several months. No problems... you do need to go into the Denon's menu system for EACH INPUT and be sure the Realta HQV options are all turned off - and oddly, Denon chose not to put all the HQV settings in 1 place. The chroma, hue, sharpness, DNR, etc. adjustments are in 1 place because they are "universal" for all inputs. Then each individual input has it's own upconversion/scaling and format settings so you have to check all of them to be sure none uses the HQV for anything.

There may be 1 possible problem that's not necessarily Denon-specific (but it may have to do with Denon's unhelpful automatic surround mode selection)... this didn't happen to me, heard it from a third party. The XD is HDMI 1.1 compliant... I THINK this means it cannot pass any of the advanced audio codecs in bitstream mode (DD Plus, TrueHD, DTS-HD). I only have had players that would decode all of those formats internally and send them out as PCM. The XD does that just fine. However, this third party wanted to bitstream audio so the Denon would allow it to reproduce just as encoded on the disc without adding channels (7.1 setup, but he wanted to hear 5.1 movies in 5.1 and 7.1 movies in 7.1). If you bitstream to the Denon, that works fine. But if you send uncompressed PCM to the Denon, the "Automatic Crap" features in the Denon take over, and if the Denon knows you have a 7.1 system, you are going to get ONLY surround modes that will add the surround back channels to 5.1 soundtracks. I was never able to find a way to stop the Denon from doing that so that a 5.1 uncompressed PCM track (from TrueHD or whatever) would playback as 5.1 without disabling the surround back speakers manually in the Denon menu. This issue forced this third party to connect the disc player directly to the Denon. That allowed using Bitstream mode from the player - and that way, the Denon would allow 5.1 from 5.1 movies even though the system was 7.1.

I believe, the XE model being HDMI 1.3a compatible should allow bitstream advanced audio codecs to pass thought to the AVR so disc players could connect to the Radiance rather than the AVR to get the audio format flexibility you may need or want (if using an XD model).

I used the Radiance with the Denon for several months. No problems... you do need to go into the Denon's menu system for EACH INPUT and be sure the Realta HQV options are all turned off - and oddly, Denon chose not to put all the HQV settings in 1 place. The chroma, hue, sharpness, DNR, etc. adjustments are in 1 place because they are "universal" for all inputs. Then each individual input has it's own upconversion/scaling and format settings so you have to check all of them to be sure none uses the HQV for anything.

There may be 1 possible problem that's not necessarily Denon-specific (but it may have to do with Denon's unhelpful automatic surround mode selection)... this didn't happen to me, heard it from a third party. The XD is HDMI 1.1 compliant... I THINK this means it cannot pass any of the advanced audio codecs in bitstream mode (DD Plus, TrueHD, DTS-HD). I only have had players that would decode all of those formats internally and send them out as PCM. The XD does that just fine. However, this third party wanted to bitstream audio so the Denon would allow it to reproduce just as encoded on the disc without adding channels (7.1 setup, but he wanted to hear 5.1 movies in 5.1 and 7.1 movies in 7.1). If you bitstream to the Denon, that works fine. But if you send uncompressed PCM to the Denon, the "Automatic Crap" features in the Denon take over, and if the Denon knows you have a 7.1 system, you are going to get ONLY surround modes that will add the surround back channels to 5.1 soundtracks. I was never able to find a way to stop the Denon from doing that so that a 5.1 uncompressed PCM track (from TrueHD or whatever) would playback as 5.1 without disabling the surround back speakers manually in the Denon menu. This issue forced this third party to connect the disc player directly to the Denon. That allowed using Bitstream mode from the player - and that way, the Denon would allow 5.1 from 5.1 movies even though the system was 7.1.

I believe, the XE model being HDMI 1.3a compatible should allow bitstream advanced audio codecs to pass thought to the AVR so disc players could connect to the Radiance rather than the AVR to get the audio format flexibility you may need or want (if using an XD model).
Doug -

Thanks.

Mike

I finally got my HD621 this weekend. I set it up after the Radiance. I'm running a BR player, TIVO, both via HDMI, and a music server (via coax) into the Radiance. I am only using HDMI 1 out of the Radiance. So then HDMI out of the 621 to my plasma for video. No problems with switching.

Today I used MEMB in the Radiance to create a profile in which the video is from the TIVO but the audio is from the music server. I'm getting switching problems. I have to switch from MEMB back to MEMA and then back to MEMB to get the audio to come up from the music server while the video from the TIVO is up.

I upgraded to the latest Radiance firmware (I had been using the February 2009 version) but still the same problem.

I suspect it is something with HDMI implementation in the 621. Even the manual states that sometimes you have to toggle inputs to get a proper connection and that this is normal. I don't think it should be normal.

Any thoughts?

Thanks.

This is an unusual application where you have a HDMI video source and are switching between HDMI audio and coax audio on the same input.

Part of the issue might be your system configuration with HDMI1 output on the Radiance connected to your receiver and then the HDMI output on the receiver connected to the display. Try moving the display to HDMI2 output on the Radiance. You might have better results by using HDMI1 output on the Radiance for audio and the HDMI2 output for video. Please let us know your results.

Randy Freeman
support@lumagen.com

The latest rev of the RadianceXD/XE manual is available on our website. It has been updated to include all the new commands and features that have been added in the last few months.
http://www.lumagen.com/testindex.php?module=manuals

Randy Freeman
support@lumagen.com

The latest rev of the RadianceXD/XE manual is available on our website. It has been updated to include all the new commands and features that have been added in the last few months.
http://www.lumagen.com/testindex.php?module=manuals

Randy Freeman
support@lumagen.com
Thanks!

Did I read it (cursorily) correctly that the XE supports 5.1 (not 7.1) audio?

Mike

The RadianceXD and XE support the same audio modes up to 7.1. The RadianceXE, with HDMI 1.3 inputs and outputs, also supports DD True-HD and DTS Master Audio.

Randy Freeman
support@hotmail.com

The RadianceXD and XE support the same audio modes up to 7.1. The RadianceXE, with HDMI 1.3 inputs and outputs, also supports DD True-HD and DTS Master Audio.

Randy Freeman
support@hotmail.com
Ok.
I misread on p.7 Key Features
" - Eight channel audio up to 96 kHz (XE adds DD HD 5.1, DTS HD 5.1)"

Thank you for clarifying.

Mike

This is an unusual application where you have a HDMI video source and are switching between HDMI audio and coax audio on the same input.

Part of the issue might be your system configuration with HDMI1 output on the Radiance connected to your receiver and then the HDMI output on the receiver connected to the display. Try moving the display to HDMI2 output on the Radiance. You might have better results by using HDMI1 output on the Radiance for audio and the HDMI2 output for video. Please let us know your results.

Randy Freeman
support@lumagen.com
Randy,
I tried it with HDMI1 out to Meridian and HDMI2 out to the monitor. Now I can't get any audio at all. I do not have any HDMI out of the Meridian but as far as I understand that shouldn't be a cause for no audio passing through it. Ideas?
thx.

The RadianceXD and XE support the same audio modes up to 7.1. The RadianceXE, with HDMI 1.3 inputs and outputs, also supports DD True-HD and DTS Master Audio.

Randy Freeman
support@hotmail.com

Randy:

The above is great news...that said, the issue still remains as to whatEDID settings one should be using within the RadianceXD/XE for DD True-HD and dts Master-Audio that have been decoded into 8 channel LPCM as there are no LPCM EDID settings...

Would appreciate a response to the abive inclusing futur plans to add this capability...

Thanks...

Adding some more audio modes to the Radiance audio EDID is on our list. It is presently a low priority. The priority could go up if we receive more requests for this.

You could try passing back the EDID from your receiver. The audio EDID in the receiver might include PCM 7.1.

Randy Freeman
support@lumagen.com

Adding some more audio modes to the Radiance audio EDID is on our list. It is presently a low priority. The priority could go up if we receive more requests for this.

You could try passing back the EDID from your receiver. The audio EDID in the receiver might include PCM 7.1.

Randy Freeman
support@lumagen.com

Randy, appreciate the response and, to that end, this is exactly what I am going to try and see whether or not it works; that said, I do believe that the addition of audio most will ultimately be necessary when more lossless material becomes available but, as we all know, most DD-TH and dts-MA are lossless 5.1 with the additional hannel being derived meaning, worst case scenario, PCM 5.1 should work...

Thanks so much..

Agree, it would at least get you in the ballpark

Actually it has just as much chance of making it worse as it does better. I calibrate tons of setups (often projectors with Radiance processors). I have NEVER had 2 alike, and often they are all over the board.

Actually it has just as much chance of making it worse as it does better. I calibrate tons of setups (often projectors with Radiance processors). I have NEVER had 2 alike, and often they are all over the board.

Again, if one re-reads the posts, it was never meant as an end all. It was meant as a starting point.

To prove this point, over this past weekend, I went through both processes. Using the settings from 1 TV with a TV of the same brand and model.

First I cloned the settings and used that as a starting point and went through the entire process. This put, for example, the color points for primary and secondaries close to x and y points.

The next day, I returned all settings to the factory reset and started the process all over again. As noted above, for example, the set had a VERY wide gamut and it took MUCH longer to get the color points accurate.

All told, once after I was already 60 minutes longer on the second day than the first and still not complete, I called it a day.

So, from my experience, as well as talking to several dealers at the Sencore Calibration Session at EHX who admit they do the same thing and it is a tremendous time saver, I (and others) in real life find that using previously calibrated settings of a TV of same make and model saves a considerable amount of time to get the Radiance set up properly.

Bottom line - both need adjusting to optimize.

Both should end up with the identical results.

It just depends on how many extra hours you want to waste getting to the final point.

Lumagen has stated that they intend to increase the GrayScale from 11 points to 21 points.

As you are aware, 11 is really 9 as 0 and 100 are not able to be moved to a different point on the scale.

Obviously, the 21 points allow you to finetune the unit even more precisely (especially in the Low IRE area and if you have a set that has a strange bump between 90IRE and 100IRE).

However, Jim says this is a lower priority to things such as PIP and Audio Delay as it seems not many are requesting the 21 point scale.

I agree 100% I want PIP, however, as this has been promised for years and still no ETA, I don't want to wait another 18 months for any other items like this to take place, especially where the 21 point scale takes very little coding increasing the number of points from 11 to 21 (in fact copying subroutines and changing 11 to 21 could probably be done in less than 60 minutes, imho - then just a matter of testing it to see if there are any unforeseen side effect).

But again, because people are not asking for it, they do not have it as a big priority.

Bottom line, do others see this as a benefit, because unless other speak up, I suspect this will not see the light of day any time in the near future.

If always find it useful to look at somebody else's calibration settings for a display that I'm going to calibrate. Normally I don't use their settings as a starting point for my calibration, but it helps to see their solution. I especially like to see before and after graphs of the display response.

Randy Freeman
support@lumagen.com

Beachcomber's experiment sounds to me to validate the potential benefit of knowing the results of another calibration on that model of display. If people were willing to share there results along with model of display or projector/screen, it would be possible to see how much variation exists in practice as well.

Cheers, Ian

Yes, I'd like 21 point grey scale calibration too

Blackjack!

Mike

Blackjack!

Mike

Took me a few seconds to get it :)

Yes, I'd like 21 point grey scale calibration too

Ditto.

You know guys, I'm going to be the party poopper here and suggest that the 21-point grayscale shouldn't be a high priority. 11 point calibration already gives results that are nothing short of amazing. And the points can be moved on the scale! So you can zero in on problematic areas. It won't hurt, but I'm not sure there's going to be a day-and-night difference between an 11-point calibrated grayscale, and a 21-point calibrated one. In fact, I'm going to unscientifically guess that it's only going to help for highly problematic displays. Do you have one of these?

There are literally TONS of features and fixes that I'd like Lumagen to address before they tackle the really exotic stuff. A luma control in the color screens comes to mind (now THAT would help calibrations, big time). A complete list of of audio modes for the custom audio EDID. Audio information in the info screens. Menu tweaks for usability, shortcuts, etc.

Not mentionning stuff that I don't care about, but I know other people do - more so than 21 point grayscale. For example 2nd output video passthrough, or audio and video delay.

Lumagen has stated that they intend to increase the GrayScale from 11 points to 21 points.......

Bottom line, do others see this as a benefit, because unless other speak up, I suspect this will not see the light of day any time in the near future.

I also asked about this feature a while back on the Lumagen forum and was told it was "low" priority. Personally I would like to see its priority increased as I would see benefit from this.

D

Unless your projector has a big gray scale problem, I doubt you would be able to notice any improvement doing a 21 vs 11. You might be able to measure some small difference but I don't think it would be noticeable at all Breaking down the lower IREs into smaller segments could introduce error because most calibration instruments are very inaccurate at low levels. Of course if you have a $27K latest and greatest and let the thing read foreever . . . .

Hear, hear.

Unless your projector has a big gray scale problem, I doubt you would be able to notice any improvement doing a 21 vs 11. You might be able to measure some small difference but I don't think it would be noticeable at all Breaking down the lower IREs into smaller segments could introduce error because most calibration instruments are very inaccurate at low levels. Of course if you have a $27K latest and greatest and let the thing read foreever . . . .

I am in a situation now where I need more control < 10IRE and because of non-linearity within the set, I will have to make another 20 IRE Range suffer if I choose to address this issue with the 11 point scale.

Anyone who can afford $5k for a Radiance should have no issue spending a few hundred for a calibrator with a unit that CAN accuracy measure lower IREs, imo. Otherwise, no reason to buy a Ferrari and complain about the price of gasoline...

Lumagen obviously felt 21 point greyscale was important enough to include as a part of the specification of the Radiance when the product was introduced.

D

I have noticed some different readings using an Accupel Test Pattern Generator and the Lumagen Patterns. There were some pretty significant differences in the IRE patterns, so before I started to work on a monitor yesterday, I measured RGB at 100IRE from the Accupel and the Radiance. I did a full factory reset on the Radiance as well fwiw.

The Accupel was feeding the Radiance - and the Radiance was set to 1080p60. There are more differences than I would like to see - and the difference on the y axis in the Green is 10%....the blue isn't exactly comforting either.

The fL on the green was significantly different as well.

Accupel Red/Radiance Red
http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/5415/accupelred.jpg (http://img99.imageshack.us/my.php?image=accupelred.jpg)http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/1589/radiancered.jpg (http://img24.imageshack.us/my.php?image=radiancered.jpg)

Accupel Green/Radiance Green
http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/3262/accupelgreen.jpg (http://img24.imageshack.us/my.php?image=accupelgreen.jpg)http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/8152/radiancegreen.jpg (http://img99.imageshack.us/my.php?image=radiancegreen.jpg)


Accupel Blue/Radiance Blue
http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/3749/accupelblue.jpg (http://img24.imageshack.us/my.php?image=accupelblue.jpg)http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/3373/radianceblue.jpg (http://img259.imageshack.us/my.php?image=radianceblue.jpg)


To put it bluntly, I am more than a little concerned.

I am in a situation now where I need more control < 10IRE and because of non-linearity within the set, I will have to make another 20 IRE Range suffer if I choose to address this issue with the 11 point scale.

Anyone who can afford $5k for a Radiance should have no issue spending a few hundred for a calibrator with a unit that CAN accuracy measure lower IREs, imo. Otherwise, no reason to buy a Ferrari and complain about the price of gasoline...

Hi! What meter are you using?
thanks

Anyone who can afford $5k for a Radiance should have no issue spending a few hundred for a calibrator with a unit that CAN accuracy measure lower IREs, imo. Otherwise, no reason to buy a Ferrari and complain about the price of gasoline...

Some of us didn't pay anywhere close to 5k, and even if you did, "a few hundred" represents a significant sum, even when compared to that price. Comparing that to gasoline vs the price a ferrari is silly.

And that's just not how things work for many of us anyway. If you have extra cash after buying a 5k toy, good for you - and I mean that. But I budget each of my purchases carefully, waiting and saving up to get a nice piece of equipment, and then... I'm on my own. So yes, even though I have a 5k toy, I can't afford a pro to calibrate my display. Instead, I do it myself. Surely I'm not the only HT hobbyist operating this way.

Besides, there are plenty of reasons to want to perform calibration yourself, casting aside money issues. The DIY mentality is one of them. Regular touch ups are another.

Anyway - we were talking about the usefulness of 21 point grayscale. Nobody who has said they really want it has indicated why exactly they want it. As Mark pointed out, it won't make a bit of difference unless you have a really problematic display.

Instead, I do it myself. Surely I'm not the only HT hobbyist operating this way.

Besides, there are plenty of reasons to want to perform calibration yourself, casting aside money issues. The DIY mentality is one of them. Regular touch ups are another. I fall into the same category. Instead of paying for a calibation, I bought myself a license for CalMAN and an i1 Pro spectrocolorimeter. A large portion of my pleasure from this hobby is learning how to do it better than most of the professionals. There's definitely some control freakery in there somewhere too!

I fall into the same category. Instead of paying for a calibation, I bought myself a license for CalMAN and an i1 Pro spectrocolorimeter. A large portion of my pleasure from this hobby is learning how to do it better than most of the professionals. There's definitely some control freakery in there somewhere too!


I think most of us paid less than $3K for our Radiances, and the few hundred dollars for a professional calibration is an easy expense. No matter how much time I spent educating myself, I would never be able to use all the tools in a Radiance. A good professional does. Calibration is not a black and white exercise... that said, there is a certain amount of black and white but a good part of the best calibrations are subjective adjustments after getting the best objective data.. a skill you cannot acquire working on your own projector and not having the experience of calibrating others...

While some parts of the hobby I like to tackle myself, calibration is not one of them. There is too much sophistication, required experience of calibrating hundreds if not thousands of displays and equipment costs for the very best stuff . particularly when some of the most sophisticated instruments are many thousands of dollars..

Time is also a factor. My time is valuable and some services are money well spent.

I have my PJ tweaked each year for a few hundred dollars and it always looks great.

I am a specialist in my field and if you have the professional training and formal background, very few, no matter how they self educate, will be able to learn their way up to the level of true professionals.. Notice their is no 'Open Heart Surgery for Dummies' books floating around. It might seem cuttng a few vessels, bones and muscles is something anyone with hands can do or learn, but it takes brains, experience, and a formal education to accomplish such at a high level of precision. Though not a life threatening procedure, a top calibration is best done by an expert with a large amount of experience and the very best equipment. And with all the dough I've invested in my equipment - trying to buy the best stuff I can afford - it would be down right blasphemy not to use an expert to get my picture to the best it can be..

The Lumagen is a major tool best manipulated by a true professional for the best results IMO.

I think most of us paid less than $3K for our Radiances

3k was the preorder price before the beta started. How did you end up paying less than that? Unless you mean $2999 or $2990. Then yes I suppose technically you're right :)

Time is also a factor. My time is valuable and some services are money well spent.
Absolutely, couldn't agree more! To each their own though - I want, and enjoy, doing my own calibration. Other things I leave to a pro. I tried my hands at home improvement, and let's just say I've been hiring pros for all my home projects ever since. :D

Notice their is no 'Open Heart Surgery for Dummies' books floating around.
What is this, bad analogy day at AVS? Sorry, but we're talking calibration, not exactly the same playing field in terms of technicality or learned skills. It takes a little while to wrap your head around the concepts involved in a calibration, but to compare it to surgery... give me a break.

What is this, bad analogy day at AVS? Sorry, but we're talking calibration, not exactly the same playing field in terms of technicality or learned skills. It takes a little while to wrap your head around the concepts involved in a calibration, but to compare it to surgery... give me a break.

I think the true experts would disagree that the playing field between technicality and learnd experience to a surgeon is not too far off... It belittle's their expertise to say such..

Analogy or not, no DIYer will ever surpass or equal a seasoned veteran in terms of experience, abilities or their sophisticated / expensive equipment. All pieces of the puzzle being equally important.. Ken Whitcomb, William Phelps, Dan Francis, Chris Collins, have made a career of it.. The aforementioned characteristics that make for an excellent calibrator are equally applicable to a top end surgeon as well. That was the analogy's premise. Simply buying an eye, understanding the concepts of calibration are not enough to get to perfection.

But it's a hobby and who says the calibration has to be the most accurate anyways?? So have at it!!!:)

Mostly agreed, again. I don't think my own calibration would be as good as a seasoned pro, but how worse off is the real question. The little knowledge that I have makes me feel that any money I'd spend on calibration would be a waste, because of the law of diminishing returns. At some point, you just get close enough, expensive probes or not. Shaving another .1 in the dE will not yield any detectable, real world improvement. If you want to pay for that, more power to you.

I maintain that these two fields require vastly different amounts of study, experience, and skills. The comparison between a surgeon and an ISF calibrator does belittle one of them, just not the one you think. This isn't to say the folks you quote aren't a talented bunch. But come on...

I think the true experts would disagree that the playing field between technicality and learnd experience to a surgeon is not too far off... It belittle's their expertise to say such..

Analogy or not, no DIYer will ever surpass or equal a seasoned veteran in terms of experience, abilities or their sophisticated / expensive equipment. All pieces of the puzzle being equally important.. Ken Whitcomb, William Phelps, Dan Francis, Chris Collins, have made a career of it.. The aforementioned characteristics that make for an excellent calibrator are equally applicable to a top end surgeon as well. That was the analogy's premise. Simply buying an eye, understanding the concepts of calibration are not enough to get to perfection.

But it's a hobby and who says the calibration has to be the most accurate anyways?? So have at it!!!:)

I have noticed some different readings using an Accupel Test Pattern Generator and the Lumagen Patterns. There were some pretty significant differences in the IRE patterns, so before I started to work on a monitor yesterday, I measured RGB at 100IRE from the Accupel and the Radiance. I did a full factory reset on the Radiance as well fwiw.

The Accupel was feeding the Radiance - and the Radiance was set to 1080p60. There are more differences than I would like to see - and the difference on the y axis in the Green is 10%....the blue isn't exactly comforting either.

The fL on the green was significantly different as well.

Accupel Red/Radiance Red
http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/5415/accupelred.jpg (http://img99.imageshack.us/my.php?image=accupelred.jpg)http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/1589/radiancered.jpg (http://img24.imageshack.us/my.php?image=radiancered.jpg)

Accupel Green/Radiance Green
http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/3262/accupelgreen.jpg (http://img24.imageshack.us/my.php?image=accupelgreen.jpg)http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/8152/radiancegreen.jpg (http://img99.imageshack.us/my.php?image=radiancegreen.jpg)


Accupel Blue/Radiance Blue
http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/3749/accupelblue.jpg (http://img24.imageshack.us/my.php?image=accupelblue.jpg)http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/3373/radianceblue.jpg (http://img259.imageshack.us/my.php?image=radianceblue.jpg)


To put it bluntly, I am more than a little concerned.I can't reproduce this.

Accupel x y Y cd/m2
White 0.312 0.328 1.000 53.1
Red 0.644 0.333 0.207 11.0
Green 0.300 0.608 0.708 37.6
Blue 0.147 0.058 0.068 3.6
Radiance
White 0.312 0.327 1.000 52.3
Red 0.647 0.333 0.202 10.6
Green 0.299 0.608 0.712 37.2
Blue 0.147 0.059 0.068 3.5


The only thing I can suggest is ensure that your aim point remains constant and that the test patterns are the adjustable types, which are affected by the configuration's color management settings.

I can't reproduce this.

Accupel x y Y cd/m2
White 0.312 0.328 1.000 53.1
Red 0.644 0.333 0.207 11.0
Green 0.300 0.608 0.708 37.6
Blue 0.147 0.058 0.068 3.6
Radiance
White 0.312 0.327 1.000 52.3
Red 0.647 0.333 0.202 10.6
Green 0.299 0.608 0.712 37.2
Blue 0.147 0.059 0.068 3.5


The only thing I can suggest is ensure that your aim point remains constant and that the test patterns are the adjustable types, which are affected by the configuration's color management settings.


Hmmm.... I wonder if one of the units has gone bad.

Hmmm.... I wonder if one of the units has gone bad.

I didn't measure any (significant) differences between an AccuPel 4000 and a Radiance XD either.

If you are using an AccuPel 4000, keep in mind that if you select YCbCr, the device you are sending it to could very well NOT recognize it as YCbCr and you get very messed up color. So be sure to set the AccuPel to RGB-Video to insure you aren't sending a signal the Radiance isn't recognizing as YCbCr. The AccuPel sends YCbCr but the destination component thinks it is RGB so you get very wrong color (probably worse than what you measured).

I don't remember if I ever checked to see whether the Radiance recognizes the AccuPel's YCbCr as YCbCr or RGB (don't have a Radiance here right now so can't check it). I habitually use RGB-Video for the output mode for the AccuPel so I may not have tried the YCbCr mode before.

AccuPel was supposed to be working on a DVI to HDMI adapter that contains an extra circuit that would send what the destination device needs to see in order to switch to YCbCr mode but I haven't heard anything about that becoming available in a long time.

I don't know if this applies to the AccuPel 3000 or not.

I didn't measure any (significant) differences between an AccuPel 4000 and a Radiance XD either.

If you are using an AccuPel 4000, keep in mind that if you select YCbCr, the device you are sending it to could very well NOT recognize it as YCbCr and you get very messed up color. So be sure to set the AccuPel to RGB-Video to insure you aren't sending a signal the Radiance isn't recognizing as YCbCr. The AccuPel sends YCbCr but the destination component thinks it is RGB so you get very wrong color (probably worse than what you measured).

I don't remember if I ever checked to see whether the Radiance recognizes the AccuPel's YCbCr as YCbCr or RGB (don't have a Radiance here right now so can't check it). I habitually use RGB-Video for the output mode for the AccuPel so I may not have tried the YCbCr mode before.

AccuPel was supposed to be working on a DVI to HDMI adapter that contains an extra circuit that would send what the destination device needs to see in order to switch to YCbCr mode but I haven't heard anything about that becoming available in a long time.

I don't know if this applies to the AccuPel 3000 or not.

Thanks.

I unplugged both the Accupel and the Lumagen, restarting both. At that point, I could not get the dramatic difference that I have seen at some points, so I am not exactly sure what is going on.

I would state that I did stumble in the settings from a Directv HD DVR (HR2x series via HDMI), for some reason the Lumagen seems to see it as PC instead of Video Color Space. I am still trying to figure out what is going on with that one.

Anybody in the San Antonio, TX area own a Radiance? If so, please pm me. Thanks

Thanks.

...
I would state that I did stumble in the settings from a Directv HD DVR (HR2x series via HDMI), for some reason the Lumagen seems to see it as PC instead of Video Color Space. I am still trying to figure out what is going on with that one.

Do you mean RGB video werses RGB PC level? This is a manual setting in the Radiance.

YCbCr is always video level for HDMI.

Do you mean RGB video werses RGB PC level? This is a manual setting in the Radiance.

YCbCr is always video level for HDMI.

Why would some of the setting go to RGB PC and others RGB Video after a Factory Reset :confused:

Why would some of the setting go to RGB PC and others RGB Video after a Factory Reset :confused:

It's been a long time since I saw the Factory Reset settings, but I think the default is RGB PC. My SA 8300 HD input over HDMI is seen as RGB by the XD and I have to set the XD manually to see it as video to get acceptable PQ. If I remember correctly, the XD menu for that setting says something about being needed for some STBs. Don't know whether this is unique to a SA 8300 with Navigator software but the STB when changing from component to HDMI (i.e after plugging in the HDMI cable and switching XD inputs) says it sees the XD as DVI not HDMI although audio is sent over HDMI.

I would state that I did stumble in the settings from a Directv HD DVR (HR2x series via HDMI), for some reason the Lumagen seems to see it as PC instead of Video Color Space. I am still trying to figure out what is going on with that one.

More than likely, DirecTV cheaped out and took their DVI DVR box, removed the DVI connector (which is RGB output), added an HDMI output, but simply fed the RGB from the old DVI connector to the HDMI without adding a YCbCr conversion (which would require adding Color Matrix processing to convert the RGB to YCbCr.

That said, the DVR should be outputting 16-235 RGB and NOT 0-255 RGB - it is fairly easy to tell - not sure if the Radiance Info function for the input signal will tell you whether it is receiving 16-235 or 0-255... but it sounds for sure like the DirecTV box is definitely outputting RGB... which should not be a problem of any kind, especially if it is 16-235 RGB.

My DirecTV HR2x series all output YCbCr 4:4:4, and I have had 3 different versions. Have you checked the video EDID settings?

My DirecTV HR2x series all output YCbCr 4:4:4, and I have had 3 different versions. Have you checked the video EDID settings?

I have 2 HD2x DVRs and 1 H2x STB - The Radiance has them marked as PC, not Video. It also has the a Dish ViP 2k VIP as PC.

It does however, have have a Motorola DVR and a SA 8300HD as Video, not PC.

Again, I did a factory reset just prior, so I certainly did not change any of the settings to PC (actually at any time with the Radiance).

Why would some of the setting go to RGB PC and others RGB Video after a Factory Reset :confused:

I just did a factory reset and HDMI inputs are RGB video level as well as RGB outputs at video level. Note: If you have an early box (that would have had PC level for RGB] and have not done a factory reset, the PC-level setting would still be there.

We did change this some time ago due to test pattern generators outputting RGB video levels. The problem was some calibrators had the (then) default RGB PC levels and did not change the setting, and calibrating with a RGB video level pattern generator gave inaccurate results.

It's been a long time since I saw the Factory Reset settings, but I think the default is RGB PC. My SA 8300 HD input over HDMI is seen as RGB by the XD and I have to set the XD manually to see it as video to get acceptable PQ. If I remember correctly, the XD menu for that setting says something about being needed for some STBs. Don't know whether this is unique to a SA 8300 with Navigator software but the STB when changing from component to HDMI (i.e after plugging in the HDMI cable and switching XD inputs) says it sees the XD as DVI not HDMI although audio is sent over HDMI.

I suspect this is just a status screen issue with thier box as they would not be sending audio if they truely though we were a DVI device.

Hello, well I did search for "comb filter" on this thread and nothing came up, so hopefully my question hasn't come up before (I dislike people who ask questions in forums without searching beforehand).

Anyway, a topic in another thread got me thinking about the quality of the comb filter in the RadianceXD. I know this is a bit "old school", but if I ran a composite out from my LD player to the RadianceXD would I get the same level of quality vs. having something like a Entech SVSI-1 taking the composite out of the LD player and providing the RadianceXD an S-video signal?

I know the Entech SVSI-1 is considered to have one of the best comb filters out there, but if one didn't want to have to track one down would the RadianceXD perform as well or perhaps even better?

What are your thoughts?

For those that are wondering, although I don't have an extensive LD collection my 100+ or so do contain movies that either haven't come out on DVD or the version that has come out on DVD was altered to the point where I prefer the version on my LD.

Is a "Pro" Radiance ith SDI still planned?

My understand is NO, that idea was canned, or put so far down on the priority list it will never happen. I offered the Black Magic SDI to HDMI adapter at cost for those anyone to try out HD-SDI into a radiance. I think there were 3 people who identified themselves as having a real interest in using HD-SDI, there were no takers on the offer. With that kind of interest, and the lack of HD-SDI sources or companies to do the mods to existing players, I don't see them doing the development. Consider the relatively much much higher number that would want HDMI 1.3, and it's only in beta still. I don't see HD-SDI happening on this box, as much as I personally would love to see it.

I agree on the lack of source products that offer HD-SDI. They seem to mostly exist as expensive mods that only hardcore enthusiasts would spend the money on. I also believe that the lack of education to the benefits is also part of the problem. If you were to ask any 20 people randomly walking in or out of best buy what HD-SDI is and what were the benefits, I'd bet all 20 would not know the answer.

I for one would like to see HD-SDI source products and HD-SDI video processors to grab the purest video right out of the decoder.

My understand is NO, that idea was canned, or put so far down on the priority list it will never happen. I offered the Black Magic SDI to HDMI adapter at cost for those anyone to try out HD-SDI into a radiance. I think there were 3 people who identified themselves as having a real interest in using HD-SDI, there were no takers on the offer. With that kind of interest, and the lack of HD-SDI sources or companies to do the mods to existing players, I don't see them doing the development. Consider the relatively much much higher number that would want HDMI 1.3, and it's only in beta still. I don't see HD-SDI happening on this box, as much as I personally would love to see it.

They're probably going to do the XS model first, and then maybe the Pro model. It's still hypothetical at this point, but it hasn't been canned that I know of. Note that HD-SDI is not the only feature the Pro would offer over the current model. In particular, a bigger FPGA (processor) would allow for more complex picture processing. See FAQ link in my sig.

I only want 2 SD-SDI actually, just trying to avoid converters nad minatain the superb pics I get from my Sat and Freeview factory fitted SDI sources..

HD-SDI is backward compatible with the SD variety.

Hello, well I did search for "comb filter" on this thread and nothing came up, so hopefully my question hasn't come up before (I dislike people who ask questions in forums without searching beforehand).

Anyway, a topic in another thread got me thinking about the quality of the comb filter in the RadianceXD. I know this is a bit "old school", but if I ran a composite out from my LD player to the RadianceXD would I get the same level of quality vs. having something like a Entech SVSI-1 taking the composite out of the LD player and providing the RadianceXD an S-video signal?

I know the Entech SVSI-1 is considered to have one of the best comb filters out there, but if one didn't want to have to track one down would the RadianceXD perform as well or perhaps even better?

What are your thoughts?

The Radiance series has a good, but not a 3D, comb filter. If the player has an exceptiona SVideo output, use it rather than the composite input to the Radiance. Note that the VisionHDQ has an excellent 3D comb filter, but we did not think that composite was as important with the latest Radiance generation and so it uses a "2D" comb filter..

Is a "Pro" Radiance ith SDI still planned?

A Pro Radiance model is still planned. It is a long way off though.

Currently it is still planned to have an SD/HD-SDI input or two.