Rethinking The Importance Of Video Calibration - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 10 Old 07-29-2012, 10:46 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
MV349's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I found this article about RayJr (Ray Coronado) he is the calibrator the did my display a few years ago.

Rethinking The Importance Of Video Calibration

Looks like he gives everyone the same video education he gave me.

Mark
MV349 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 10 Old 07-30-2012, 01:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Rayjr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: So. Cal.
Posts: 1,665
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 98
Send a message via AIM to Rayjr Send a message via Yahoo to Rayjr Send a message via Skype™ to Rayjr
Quote:
Originally Posted by MV349 View Post

Looks like he gives everyone the same video education he gave me.
Mark

Mark,

Everyone gets the same education....Customer or Reviewer smile.gif

RayJr
Rayjr is offline  
post #3 of 10 Old 07-31-2012, 04:17 AM
Senior Member
 
Wouter73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Alkmaar, Netherlands
Posts: 324
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 34
One remarkt in this article had been on my mind as well. If you can calibrate a tv close to this SMPTE standard, do you really need to pay the money for a Panasonic VT50 to get better PQ? or does a tv like that offer better PQ after calibration compared to cheaper tv's after calibration? Who cares if out of the box the colors are worse when you can "fix" them with calibration? The only thing I can come up with is deeper blacks and more "steps" between colors and whites for smoother image?
Wouter73 is offline  
post #4 of 10 Old 07-31-2012, 10:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
PlasmaPZ80U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wouter73 View Post

One remarkt in this article had been on my mind as well. If you can calibrate a tv close to this SMPTE standard, do you really need to pay the money for a Panasonic VT50 to get better PQ? or does a tv like that offer better PQ after calibration compared to cheaper tv's after calibration? Who cares if out of the box the colors are worse when you can "fix" them with calibration? The only thing I can come up with is deeper blacks and more "steps" between colors and whites for smoother image?

calibration maximizes the available PQ a TV has (aka it's potential), but certain factors like contrast ratio, black levels, viewing angles, uniformity, motion resolution, etc. also affect PQ and cannot be altered via calibration
PlasmaPZ80U is offline  
post #5 of 10 Old 08-04-2012, 04:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Brian Hampton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 6,728
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Liked: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wouter73 View Post

One remarkt in this article had been on my mind as well. If you can calibrate a tv close to this SMPTE standard, do you really need to pay the money for a Panasonic VT50 to get better PQ? or does a tv like that offer better PQ after calibration compared to cheaper tv's after calibration? Who cares if out of the box the colors are worse when you can "fix" them with calibration? The only thing I can come up with is deeper blacks and more "steps" between colors and whites for smoother image?

Calibration can be difficult on many tvs. Some don't offer greyscale controls and color correction. Others offer multiplle step gamma correction (typically higher end models).

Specs like contrast ratio can be optimized by calibration but will still vary for better or worse on different displays.
Brian Hampton is offline  
post #6 of 10 Old 08-06-2012, 06:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
dsskid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 2,715
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 133
Just for clarity, when you perform a calibration, you strive to bring your display as close to industry standards as possible, within the limitations of your display.

For example. Although many displays have the potential to have a wider color gamut than industry standard REC 709, you'd want to claibrate your display to conform as closely to the REC 709 color gamut standard as possible.

Also, while many LCDs and LED LCDs have the potential to produce a light output of 80 ftls or more, this is not what you want to achieve with calibration, or you most certainly develop a severe case of eyestrain.

ISF Calibrator

Pioneer Kuro Elite Pro-111FD
Pioneer Kuro BDP-320

Displays are like 100% cotton t-shirts. Always buy a size larger than you think you'll need, as they tend to shrink over time.
dsskid is offline  
post #7 of 10 Old 08-06-2012, 09:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Doug Blackburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Francisco - East Bay area
Posts: 3,453
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 226
There are also inherent differences in color response, clarity/sharpness, screen uniformity, "speed", the amount of blur during motion, and a whole host of other performance details that can and will be different from model to model... and those differences won't be anything calibration can improve. Even power supply design/capacity can affect image quality and you know when you spend $500 less on a TV that you're going to get "less" of everything... the power supply will have shortcuts or completely missing elements, features will be cut, the number of controls available for calibration are often cut from lower-cost models. Even things like the coating on the panel will be different as you move down the model range and that can make quite a lot of difference... it can make models with the better coatings (on the more expensive models) have better looking images that are less affected by reflections from light in the room. The quality of the coating on the screen can even improve the perceived black level the panel can achieve.

Typically what you see in lower-cost TV models is the same thing you see in lower-cost AVRs... the same circuit boards are used, but there will be empty spaces in the lower cost models where components supporting the "removed" features were not installed. So you can pay less, but you really do get less. The thing is whether the extra cost of the higher-end models is really worth the extra expense or not... that's something each person has to figure out for their own situation. Even then... there may be 4 models priced between, say, $1800 and $2800 and they might ALL have the same image quality, but different features (internet apps, streaming services, etc.), different styling, etc. It's damn near impossible for a consumer to figure out whether paying for the next model up the line includes better image quality or not. Many manufacturers have different "series" of TVs that span different price ranges. It's a fairly safe bet that each series up the line will have better image quality. But within each series if there are 3 different 50" models, those may or may not have differing image quality. Unless you can find a place that reviews TVs (and actually knows what they are talking about... somewhat rare) and they look at ALL the models in a manufacturer's line and evaluate image quality for each, it will be pretty impossible to figure it out on your own.

"Movies is magic..." Van Dyke Parks
THX Certified Professional Video Calibration
ISF -- HAA -- www.dBtheatrical.com
Widescreen Review -- Home Theater & Sound
Doug Blackburn is offline  
post #8 of 10 Old 08-06-2012, 12:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PlasmaPZ80U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 197
I have found ConsumerReports.org and CNET.com to be two good sites for TV reviews. Not perfect, but better than most other reviews sites. Often the top-of-the-line sets and mid-range sets can have very similar picture quality, but considerably better than the entry-level sets. For example, the Panasonic ST50, GT50, and VT50 plasmas are more alike in terms of PQ than different, as are the Samsung E6500, E7000, and E8000 plasmas. However, these models are all much better than the entry-level plasma offerings from the two brands.
PlasmaPZ80U is offline  
post #9 of 10 Old 08-07-2012, 01:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Doug Blackburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Francisco - East Bay area
Posts: 3,453
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 226
I find Cnet and Consumer Reports to be highly unreliable in their assessment of image quality. They show no particular expertise in finding the best modes and settings to optimize image quality and their evaluations often make no sense at all. Cnet notoriously misses major issues with displays that take them completely off my "recommend" list... and that has happened for a very long time without ever improving. Both sources enumerate features and capabilities fairly well, but they are very unreliable when it comes to image quality. I suspect Cnet's issue is that they probably spend 1 day in actual evaluation, then spend 1 day writing the evaluation, then they move on to the next TV... they HAVE to do it that way to cover as many TVs as they "review". Consumer Reports issue is that they just aren't critical enough in their evaluations... much like their evaluations of speakers.... they do OK at finding the stinkers, but the middle of the pack and top picks just seem rather arbitrary compared to what the displays are really capable of doing when properly setup and when properly calibrated.

"Movies is magic..." Van Dyke Parks
THX Certified Professional Video Calibration
ISF -- HAA -- www.dBtheatrical.com
Widescreen Review -- Home Theater & Sound
Doug Blackburn is offline  
post #10 of 10 Old 08-07-2012, 01:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PlasmaPZ80U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Blackburn View Post

I find Cnet and Consumer Reports to be highly unreliable in their assessment of image quality. They show no particular expertise in finding the best modes and settings to optimize image quality and their evaluations often make no sense at all. Cnet notoriously misses major issues with displays that take them completely off my "recommend" list... and that has happened for a very long time without ever improving. Both sources enumerate features and capabilities fairly well, but they are very unreliable when it comes to image quality. I suspect Cnet's issue is that they probably spend 1 day in actual evaluation, then spend 1 day writing the evaluation, then they move on to the next TV... they HAVE to do it that way to cover as many TVs as they "review". Consumer Reports issue is that they just aren't critical enough in their evaluations... much like their evaluations of speakers.... they do OK at finding the stinkers, but the middle of the pack and top picks just seem rather arbitrary compared to what the displays are really capable of doing when properly setup and when properly calibrated.

Well, I haven't seen any better sites for TV reviews (and I have seen many much worse sites), so I'll take what I can get. Are you aware of any better sites?
PlasmaPZ80U is offline  
Reply Display Calibration

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off