Originally Posted by dvwjr
So after the initial product launch of the HP LP2480zx DreamColor
monitor, some feedback from post-production houses and others must have led the design team to 'tweek' the reference Rec.709 2.2 gamma. So if Sony stated that calibrated native CRT gamma is 2.2 and the HP LP2480zx came out of the chute at a Rec.709 calibrated gamma of 2.2, then what exactly was the gamma of the Sony BVMs used as a real-world model to modify the gamma response curve to be 'slightly'
higher on the HP LP2480zx?
The world wonders...
Measurements from ARIB TR-B28v1.1
, taken with an SR-UL1
puts them around 2.4 gamma. The EBU's testing has them recommending 2.35.
For people asking what the VideoEQ can do, here's a few examples from my CRT.
Another from Fight Club, over-exposed a bit though. (not this bright onscreen)
Pitch Black. (also over-exposed from the look of things)
Camera settings are the same for both shots.
The shots on the left are when my CRT is set so that video black = black, with no consideration made for shadow detail the only way to make it more visible is to raise the black level. (and it is still not well defined when you do this)
There is also no real control over the low end of the greyscale on this CRT so you can see that it's strongly discoloured.
The shots on the right are with brightness set to zero on the CRT (lower than the shots on the left) and my custom LUT. (incidentally, it turned out that I was
better just using one point at 4%stim, one at 100% and then calculating a straight line between them from 1-109%)
The CRT is not normally as bad without the VideoEQ as it looks in the photographs (the shadow detail is still there, just very dark) but in comparison it is a huge difference.
These are particularly dark scenes thoughthere's not as much of a difference in brighter scenes as the CRT was fine on its own there.
As good as these results are though, I'm still not sure about it. The posterisation really does bother me. If you are used to flat panels/digital projectors it probably won't, or you may not even notice it. Going from nothing (other than what is in the source itself) to the amount the VideoEQ introduces is quite obvious though.EDIT:
Originally Posted by Kelvin1965S
Not wishing to fire up the whole >8 bits thing again, but I picked up a secondhand DVDO Edge today on the UK forums. Although it might not be as flexible as my Lumagen HDQ it will at least allow direct connection using HDMI cables (rather than DVI>HDMI) and if I understand correctly, it will at least allow me to try feeding my VideoEQ Pro with 10 or 12 bit signal to see for myself if it looks any better doing that. I hope to be able to sell the HDQ otherwise I'll have 3 VP/CMS devices and the total cost would be well on the way to the used price of a Radience I saw a while ago...
In order to know if I've got the settings correct it is just a matter of looking at the 'info' screen on my HD350 as it currently shows 8 bit under the 'deep colour' part on the menu?
It's annoying, because I sold my EDGE to pay for the VideoEQ, and it now turns out that it would probably be best if I had both. That said though, I had a lot of problems with Deep Color on the EDGE. On any of the displays I tried, it would only output 8-bit. Some people did get it working, but it seems that it didn't on quite a lot of displays.
For what it's worth, I had a Radiance and did not find it acceptable. Even without using the greyscale/CMS correction, it was introducing posterisation into the image if I remember correctly. (and as far as I am aware, they still haven't implemented some of the features I had bought it for)